eaw units

[Kratas]

isnt it annoying how many units eaw created  

[Corey]

I have no problem with new units, it's was just the unnecesary ones that made me mad. The tartan could just as easily been the Lancer/Carrack, and was even supposed to be. The TIE Interceptor should have been in instead of the TIE Scout, and the Assualt Frigate Mk. 2 should have been the Dreadnaught or Assault Frigate...

[Darth Dino]

I don't think that any of them were unnecasary, the units make it feel more like the faction in game.

[Corey]

They made up units for roles that were already filled instead of putting the already established units in. I call that unecessary....

[insanegolfer]

I agree that it was unnesessary, but it rounded out some factions.  They made the ISD's way underpowered and the MCC's way overpowered.

[Meyer]

I don't say MCCs were overpowered, but I do say ISDs were underpowered.

[Kratas]

well i never lost a isd against a mon cal

it just annoys me why they made the tie mauler instead of tie crawler and tartan pat cruiser was used instead of lancer and no dreadnaughts

-Zer Teron
Don't double post. There's an edit button, use it.

[STORM GENERAL]

Agreed!!

[Noret]

i thought the mauler and crawler were the same thing?

[Meyer]

they were little different in terms of forms but essentially they were quite the same vehicle.

[grandadmiralbeck]

the crawler was real, the mauler was not, the crawler was a heavy vehicle, while eaw made the mauler a gay, useless infantry suppresor. the ISD was way underpowered, and the moncal was i agree to overpowered, there was no way that a mc could ever even compare to an ISd that's why rebs always retreated when an ISd came

[Isamu]

umm mauler was not a heavy. it was designed as the mauler was only less cool.

[GrndAdmrlPellaeon]

Why do you revive these topics!?

[Slornie]

Grandadmiralbeck is a new member, so we have to give him some leeway.

That said, there really isnt anything more to discuss in this thread.  Locked.