The Cancer That Is Soviet Field HQ

They both do 80 damage per shot. Even if the little mortar does half the damage in one hit than the the 120mm it's still got the next one coming quicker. It's a zook v Shrek style scenario. The Shrek is undeniably better, but the zook has more potential dps. Because it shoots more. And hits more.

They both do 80 damage per shot. Even if the little mortar does half the damage in one hit than the the 120mm it's still got the next one coming quicker. It's a zook v Shrek style scenario. The Shrek is undeniably better, but the zook has more potential dps. Because it shoots more. And hits more.

Ok since here are the in game test both mortar at range 80 firing without FOW (less scatter) (couldn't see damage)

PM-41 3 barrages 30 secs each 12 rounds average damage 49.33 (including 2 misses)
HM-38 2 barrages 50 sec each 12 rounds average damage 70 (no misses)

Average DPS
PM-41 0.59
HM-38 0.7

HM-38 119% better.

Notes for real game scenario:
1) results would be even better for HM-38 if it was firing into FOW and there was more scatter
2) HM-38 would be far more dangerous for any unit trying to repair the truck
3) HM-38 could fire from greater range making even harder for OKW to counterattack
4) HM-38 fire more rounds per barrage requiring less micro

This this test is a good indication that HM-38 superior to PM-41 vs Trucks. (Anyone interested can conduct a similar test and share his results)

Now can we please move on?

20% better at 50% more cost and the additional pop. And a doctrine choice... My money is still on the 82mm but yes, let's move on

I did test it previously and what i gathered was that they were dead even.
But i can't remember if they were both vet 3 and using non FoW.


So i did retest them.

120mm vs 82mm against Flak HQ
Notes:
-The xp value requirements are 960 and 480 respectively for vet1 and they double at each vet level. Therefore by the time the 120mm is vet 1, the 82mm will be vet 2. By the time it takes to get to vet2 the 82mm will be vet 3.

Test 1:
FoW, Barrage, range 75 (enough that the circle isn't outside the maximum range or dead center of truck is at 75)
Vet 0
82mm wins by 10-5% remaining HP left on Flak HQ.
82mm wins by 5%
Vet 3 vs vet 2
82mm wins by 10%

Test2:
Barrage Without FoW
Vet0
82mm wins by 10-5%
Vet2 vs vet 1
82mm wins by 10-5%

Test 3:
AA, FoW
Vet0
82mm wins by >5%
120mm wins by >5%
82mm wins by 10-5%
82mm wins 10%

Test 4:
AA, Non Fow
82mm by 10%
82mm by 10-5%

Test 5:
3 82mm vs 2 120mm (roughly equivalent mp/popcap cost. 240mp/6p vs 340mp/9p) 720mp/18p vs 680mp/18p
FoW
82mm by 50-40%
82mm by 40%

PD: i bias slightly towards the 120mm by starting to set order first (control group and hotkey usage made it less than 1-2s) and let any shot mid air count once any truck was killed.

I don't think field HQ is OP at all. It would be OP if we could also set retreat point for the HQ. Right now it can be easily be countered by stukas zu fess. and attack ground by AT guns. Not to mention flamer hT, flame hetzer, sturmtiger, stuka bombing strike etc etc. One should also keep in mimd that soviet player looses alot more mp with his troops nearby the building because of constant indirect fire and constant reinforcing the squads all because trooos usually bunch up when defending a point.


(talking from a 4 v 4 perspective here)

Cant believe its my first forum post now.
Can you pls move the mortar discussion to another thread? Its horrible to follow the actual conversation here now that a full page is wasted...

Also: okw trucks can be re-deployed?

Why is de-capping not possible in this engine? A well balanced setting for that would change a lot imo

Was the test done with auto-fire, attack ground or barrage?

Unless mortar performance vs Soviet HQ, go to this thread.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/103343/82mm-vs-120mm-mortar

How many shots does it take an AT gun to destroy a battle group HQ? How many shots does it take the same AT gun to destroy the church on Lost Glider?

How many shots does it take an AT gun to destroy a battle group HQ? How many shots does it take the same AT gun to destroy the church on Lost Glider?

Is that the only factor?
How much does the church in lost glider unlock for the Soviet when converted?
How many units/upgrades does the BGHQ unlock?
How many units can spawn FROM the FHQ?
BGHQ?
How long does it take to repair the FHQ from 1hp? BGHQ?

How much of a teching delay does FHQ require? How much does the BGHQ delay teching?

Asking loaded questions is below you.

How many shots does it take an AT gun to destroy a battle group HQ? How many shots does it take the same AT gun to destroy the church on Lost Glider?

12 shots for Battle HQ
+110 shots for Lost Glider Church, hitting from the same side, on the side.

Is that the only factor?
How much does the church in lost glider unlock for the Soviet when converted?
How many units/upgrades does the BGHQ unlock?
How many units can spawn FROM the FHQ?
BGHQ?
How long does it take to repair the FHQ from 1hp? BGHQ?

How much of a teching delay does FHQ require? How much does the BGHQ delay teching?

Asking loaded questions is below you.

The durability of the FHQ is stupid when applied to a large stone building, that is the point. As far as I'm concerned, you could just simply make stone buildings incompatible with the ability and that would help a lot.

Yes, selecting an FHQ does delay tech, but on some maps such as Lost Glider, Vilshanka, crossing in the woods and Nexus, there are stone buildings so close to(or even overlooking)fuel points that you can literally lock down one fuel point with a pair of engineers and send the rest of your army to threaten the other fuel.

Other maps such as Arnhem, Angoville have stone structures that greatly impede exiting your base if taken which translates to a similar problem.

And on top of that, normally this would lead to an issue of being down manpower or fuel making it hard to counter a light vehicle rush. But not to worry, if you don't have the MP for a Zis and didn't bother with penals, you hit your panic button and grab yourself an M42 which has no build time.


Its not something that can't be overcome, but dear lord its really freaking hard. And the fact that there is no build time to the FHQ makes it really hard to respond to. Most of this comes from my experience PLAYING WITH the commander as opposed to playing against it.


So make stone buildings incompatible and reduce the cost of the ability from 40 fuel to 25 or something to compensate.

Most people focus on the building itself and not the surrounding army is the issue imo. Since it's buff isn't constant anymore the surrounding army is vulnerable as ever aside from the ability to reinforce so bleeding them is the trick and then taking the time to work on the FHQ as needed. People always forget this. Large stone buildings are definitely an issue, but generally it's a map design issue more than anything. We have already learned that a single dominant garrison is hugely problematic because of unreliable and ununiform capacity to dig them out.

But anyways, if a single bundled made is capable of knocking it down idk if even 25 fuel is acceptable to be honest...

Most people focus on the building itself and not the surrounding army is the issue imo.

Most people also seem to have forgotten that it no longer is a stronghold of potent infantry defending it, but outside of short time, a funny looking reinforcement bunker.

Instead of exploiting the fact that there is a lot of inf around it(from these unicorn tales supported by a total of zero replays) and using indirect weapons, they just prefer to REEEEE that the building is hard to destroy when you have no idea how to do it.

Most people also seem to have forgotten that it no longer is a stronghold of potent infantry defending it, but outside of short time, a funny looking reinforcement bunker.

Instead of exploiting the fact that there is a lot of inf around it(from these unicorn tales supported by a total of zero replays) and using indirect weapons, they just prefer to REEEEE that the building is hard to destroy when you have no idea how to do it.

If I say its too difficult to counter it, and you say its easy enough to counter it, the onus is on BOTH of us to provide replays since we are both making claims. Where are YOUR replays?

There doesn't need to be a lot of infantry around it for it to be useful. Its plenty powerful as a place to soft retreat to, and the buff they get from Rally Defenses is the second most powerful timed infantry stat buff in the game(after the UKF officer charge).

As far as the buff duration goes, you don't need it to be omnipresent, you just need it to last long enough for critical engagements. And since it doesn't cost any munitions, there is no penalty for spamming it whenever its off cool-down and your troops are engaged.

If I say its too difficult to counter it, and you say its easy enough to counter it, the onus is on BOTH of us to provide replays since we are both making claims. Where are YOUR replays?

Inactive for years due to patches, because the methods on how to counter it are unchanged since day 1 it was introduced.

Stuka for OKW, FHT or pair or mortars for ost, if building seems too sturdy, focus on what's standing near it and cause attrition.

Alternatively, engage, make them pop buff, retreat for 30 secs, engage again and stomp.

If all forces are concentrated there, cap empty map.

I think we should buff the forward HQ. At its current state its only good for the player who has it. Or is it even good? Is it a retreat point? If not halftrack can do the same (reinforcing).
Let it function as a retreat point for all soviet team mates. Its quite unrealistic, how 2 soviet player cant retreat to same building, it's one and the same faction.

Inactive for years due to patches, because the methods on how to counter it are unchanged since day 1 it was introduced.

Stuka for OKW, FHT or pair or mortars for ost.

Alternatively, engage, make them pop buff, retreat for 30 secs, engage again and stomp.

If all forces are concentrated there, cap empty map.

The methods on how to counter it? You mean like flamethrowers or fire in general? Don't get me wrong, it used to be stupid easy to set buildings on fire with a flamethrower but now its a real pain in the butt.

In case you've forgotten, it was ALWAYS annoying to fight against, but the commander it was in was absolute trash. Now that urban defense has been buffed,its a meta commander that is actually viable, so we see FHQs a lot more-and the issues with them have become more obvious.


FHT is the best option you listed primarily because it will fit somewhat organically into an ostheer build. Just like double flamer pios would have been a counter once upon a time.
Double mortars will completely throw off your build order as ostheer.

Stuka is a counter sure, but that's only if you opted for mechanized, and you are investing far far more resources into the counter then the cost of what you are actually countering.

To be honest, I have a harder time dealing with this commander as OKW then I do with Wehrmacht. The 250 is non doctrinal and flame upgrades on pios are helpful while OKW has to rely on a commander.

I do understand you have to pick a commander to counter another one but Wehrmacht has more of non-doctrinal advantages.

Thing about the FHQ is it's putting a lot of eggs in a very small basket. You are spending fuel and need to cluster around it to make the most out of it. So delaying your teching and reducing map control in exchange for having a strong point. Keeping in mind that retreat does not cycle back to the FHQ so attention must be kept at this spot to risk loses and no reinforcements are to come from across the map. The fact that it disrupts a BO isn't really an balance issue imo because it's an off beat way to play so throwing your opponent of balance is fair game.

All that said, perhaps a small modifier for the leig vs buildings could be in order. Might make the leig too strong against emplacements but frankly I doubt anybody cares much about that...