Login

russian armor

The recent Infantry Sections nerf

10 Dec 2019, 13:34 PM
#61
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Dec 2019, 13:22 PMVipper

Full fuel tech cost mean little without MP cost also and starting resources.

It mean even less when some faction do full tech and others do not.


Way to try and deflect the point with waffle.
10 Dec 2019, 13:38 PM
#62
avatar of Pereat

Posts: 56

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Dec 2019, 12:55 PMKatitof
Would you look at that!
It seems like Ost does -NOT- pay a single drop of fuel for any upgrade they get and OKW is rewarded with super heavy for full tech.


Yeah, I have proven to stuglife that UKFs tech is the most expensive using his own numbers but he continues to lie in forums saying otherwise.

By HIS OWN NUMBERS:

OKW: 1100/265
OH: 1070/235
UKF: 1360/270

10 Dec 2019, 13:43 PM
#63
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Way to try and deflect the point with waffle.

And what is the point? That Ostheer have an advantage due to tech cost?

Then why most people avoid T4 and go for Tiger instead?
10 Dec 2019, 14:15 PM
#64
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

BIG IQ move: now analyse what each faction pays at different timings for getting similar results.

Start with support weapons/healing > weapon upgrades > light tank > medium tanks.

Then you have the complete picture.
10 Dec 2019, 14:16 PM
#65
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Universal Carrier durability upgrade? That would be super awkward and weird considering it's size and design. I don't see how this could be done.


Smoke canisters (locked behind the Platoon Command Post) would go a long way. It'd allow it to flame out MGs without getting snared.
10 Dec 2019, 14:21 PM
#66
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

BIG IQ move: now analyse what each faction pays at different timings for getting similar results.

Start with support weapons/healing > weapon upgrades > light tank > medium tanks.

Then you have the complete picture.

What'd also help is quantifying the net gain of tech, because UKF and USF for example get better weapon upgrades compared to the Axis. Or placing the costs within the faction's economy. Raw comparisons mean very little.
10 Dec 2019, 14:56 PM
#67
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Dec 2019, 14:16 PMLago


Smoke canisters (locked behind the Platoon Command Post) would go a long way. It'd allow it to flame out MGs without getting snared.


I was suggesting this for month, and if can be done, it will solve the problem of lacking mobile smoke dispenser of UKF, pairing perfectly with pyro section for garrison clearing and make the Universal carrier more "Universal". Still, it should lock out flame upgrade at leat.
10 Dec 2019, 15:05 PM
#68
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833

I witnessed the most depressing example of how terrible IS are dragging the faction down today

Tightrope as UKF vs some no name 100 or so Chinese players OKW. Tightrope made some great plays with his AEC taking out luch and even a P4 but it basically just meant nothing because the OKW player could frontally charge squads into British infantry and walk all over them winning every engagement with brainless micro. Tightrope tried going for extra sappers for extra CQB punch and snares for the sniper but they were just vet pinatas for StG volks

So the result was basically no map control as his sniper and MG was zoned out and swarmed by multiple (superior) infantry squads.

If top players getting rolled over like this by noobs and the likes of Hans saying Brits are unplayable then I'm not sure what warrants some serious buffs to infantry options or at least a rollback of the changes that have broken a faction in 1vs1.

The initial changes didn't work, and the 10mp decrease and vet change accomplished nothing. Something else needs to budge or Brits are basically limbless at this point
10 Dec 2019, 15:42 PM
#69
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Suggestion for bren carrier:

Wasp:
Reduce the cost Wasp upgrade (upgrade comes to late to pay for itself)

Wasp now immune to engine damage critical (wasp needs to close is to fire and many times that means engine damage)

Remove DOT fire damage move to an ability maybe increase the range of the ability.

Delay 222 increase power level of unit
Reintroduce 221 designed as a counter to car relatively low DPS but high enough penetration to counter them
10 Dec 2019, 16:46 PM
#70
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

to address the 3 trolls here, kat blv and pereat here https://www.coh2.org/topic/96750/redirect-thread-faction-teching-and-timing/page/2 just add 5 starting fuel to okw

1) the list was not made by me, i copy pasted it by elechino7 and added extra build order

2) OH and SU both pay much less for tech , let u guess why they have to build techs AND have no free stuff like ALL DLC factions (KT,emplacment, 25 pounders, vehicle crew,etc)

3) u can literally see ukf full tech cost is almost the same (255 vs 250) but okw can't double upgrade or give more HP to sturm pio, etc

4) kat must be terrible at math cause last time i checked 225 > 220 , or would u like to argue that okw pays more than SU too ?

5) starting fuel guys i know it's easy to forget by u need to count it

so there is not FREE UPGRADE AXISS BIASSSSS !1!1!!!!! (unless u count SU as axis in that case yes but that would be post ww 2)

and sice some people here haven't passed elementary school i will do the math for u by removing starting fuel

okw 255

ukf 250

usf 250

ost 205 edit

su 200 edit

so unless KT is free stuff but major vehicle crews 25 pounders, etc are not they have similar tech cost unless " but OPW pays more for KT, i mean it's not like major is free or 17 pounder is free or vehicle crews are free"
10 Dec 2019, 17:24 PM
#71
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1



and sice some people here haven't passed elementary school i will do the math for u by removing starting fuel

okw 255

ukf 250

usf 250

ost 225

su 220



Can you at the very very least try to get the numbers right? I mean I already posted them earlier today and it's pretty simple maths.

I don't even want to answer to the rest of this incoherent rant because none of it makes any sense. Just makes me shake my head.
10 Dec 2019, 17:27 PM
#72
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

Ok I will help you as you would just post made-up fantasy numbers again. Here are the actual numbers:


UKF full tech: 270 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 250 Fuel

Ost full tech: 225 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 205 Fuel

OKW full tech: 265 Fuel - 10 starting fuel = 255 Fuel

Soviet full tech: 220 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 200 fuel

USF full tech: 270 fuel - 20 starting fuel = 250 Fuel
10 Dec 2019, 17:29 PM
#73
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

Ok I will help you as you would just post made-up fantasy numbers again. Here are the actual numbers:


UKF full tech: 270 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 250 Fuel

Ost full tech: 225 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 205 Fuel

OKW full tech: 260 Fuel - 10 starting fuel = 250 Fuel

Soviet full tech: 220 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 200 fuel

USF full tech: 270 fuel - 20 starting fuel = 250 Fuel
can i ask u why u removed 5 fuel from okw ? medic should still cost 15 fu righ ?

and still this proves my point, okw is balanced with dlc factions, ost is balanced with su

unless okw get's even more free stuff and same for osther but last time i check all seem normal to me
10 Dec 2019, 17:37 PM
#74
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

can i ask u why u removed 5 fuel from okw ? medic should still cost 15 fu righ ?

and still this proves my point, okw is balanced with dlc factions, ost is balanced with su

unless okw get's even more free stuff and same for osther but last time i check all seem normal to me


Yes it costs 15, I corrected that.

I really don't know what your point is anymore though. First you said UKF pays less for more. Now all of a sudden your point is that Ostheer and Soviets are balanced towards each other and the DLC factions are to be looked at separately. But then why did you claim Ost pays more for tech than UKF but gets less? I am confused.

10 Dec 2019, 17:39 PM
#75
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Yes it costs 15, I corrected that.

I really don't know what your point is anymore though. First you said UKF pays less for more. Now all of a sudden your point is that Ostheer and Soviets are balanced towards each other and the DLC factions are to be looked at separately. But then why did you claim Ost pays more for tech than UKF but gets less? I am confused.

no i literally said axis does not get free upgrade, i did mention okw pays pays more for less is some aspect (stg are 1 bar , 1 sherck etc) , i did not say ost (that's why i added okw in the ()) pays more, ost pays same as su
10 Dec 2019, 18:20 PM
#76
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

no i literally said axis does not get free upgrade, i did mention okw pays pays more for less is some aspect (stg are 1 bar , 1 sherck etc) , i did not say ost (that's why i added okw in the ()) pays more, ost pays same as su


Okw used to be the biggest offender in "free" stuff. Medics repair station and point denail included with tech. No extra cost no upgrading needed just tech. Now of course the dont just get them. Usf crews medic and retreat point at least require micro and are quite vunerable so their is higher risk involved, this balances out the benefits mostly.
Something okw did not have to worry about mostly if at all.

Free might not be the right term for axis upgrades. But they do pretty much get a bargain. Its all included. You get your upgrade with natural tech, you will always get acces to them. It does not delay tech however slightly that may be. You also get abilities such as riflenade inc nade next to new units.

So the stg,s for volks not being as strong as 2 bars seems fair.

10 Dec 2019, 19:24 PM
#77
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2



Snip

And I apologize if I was antagonistic or hostile towards you. Its always appreciated when people outline their own proposals instead of complaining about something. Just because I have to take an opposing stance against a proposal doesnt mean the effort wasnt appreciated.

Anyway, the issue with reworking the bren to be limited to one but keeping the vickers as it is now is that I dont believe you would have a way to prevent sections from getting their one bren from racks, then picking up a vickers too. My understanding is that 1919s are currently limited to one by having the rack itself check if the squad has a 1919 already, and not allowing a squad to pick up another if it does. Because of this, riflemen squads can pick up one 1919 from racks, then still pick up another off of the ground if one of your other 1919 squads dropped one. This matters for ukf because the halftrack drops vickers onto the ground, making it as if they were any other dropped weapon. This means you cannot (to my understanding) make special pick up conditions for vickers+bren combos. This is why I only brought up 1 weapon slot sections or each weapon taking up both weapon slots (again, not sure if even this is possible) as options.
10 Dec 2019, 19:34 PM
#78
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

but it basically just meant nothing because the OKW player could frontally charge squads into British infantry and walk all over them winning every engagement with brainless micro.

I've been told this is actually intended. Despite their costs and limitations Tommies are NOT supposed to win even when dug in and being charged frontally. They are not supposed to hold the ground they are supposed to knock out a model or 2 and then retreat, ceding ground and resources. I was told that if other units can't mindlessless charge head on into dug in infantry and win then the assault infantry is UP. The ONLY metric that matters is resources not role. Volks + stgs > investment than Tommies so the volks need to win no matter what. Same with sturms. Of course they will win even harder if used properly or employ any of their buildings but their cost alone means the NEED to win. Even closing across no cover. Head long into defensive infantry in the best cover they can muster. I have this from a credible source
10 Dec 2019, 19:48 PM
#79
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...

The weapon half-truck only creates problems, there is very little reason to be able to drop weapons on the ground. Simply remove it.

Same goes for the SVT air-drop that server as uncounterable munition transfer.
10 Dec 2019, 19:59 PM
#80
avatar of Musti

Posts: 203


I've been told this is actually intended. Despite their costs and limitations Tommies are NOT supposed to win even when dug in and being charged frontally. They are not supposed to hold the ground they are supposed to knock out a model or 2 and then retreat, ceding ground and resources. I was told that if other units can't mindlessless charge head on into dug in infantry and win then the assault infantry is UP. The ONLY metric that matters is resources not role. Volks + stgs > investment than Tommies so the volks need to win no matter what. Same with sturms. Of course they will win even harder if used properly or employ any of their buildings but their cost alone means the NEED to win. Even closing across no cover. Head long into defensive infantry in the best cover they can muster. I have this from a credible source


Neat, can we just make them cost 360mp and buff them so they wipe the floor with everything?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

391 users are online: 391 guests
1 post in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49973
Welcome our newest member, iasexam
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM