On 1v1 no.
Glad to see we agree. And that was my point all along.
On teamgames it's close to be.
I suspect you mean 3vs3, 4vs4
I you opinion is it less cost efficient in those mods then the Cromwell, Sherman, PzIV?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
On 1v1 no.
On teamgames it's close to be.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Glad to see we agree. And that was my point all along.
I suspect you mean 3vs3, 4vs4
I you opinion is it less cost efficient in those mods then the Cromwell, Sherman, PzIV?
Posts: 195
The game would be in a much better state if ISU/ELE/JT were removed from the game
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I disagree. These units are very interesting to play with and fight against. The more static battles that they encourage is a welcome break from the "run and gun" of 1v1.
Posts: 1979
Lets stop playing gmaes here and you can answer a simply question:
In your opinion do you agree with the claim that T-34/76 is useless without ram.
I suspect you mean 3vs3, 4vs4
I you opinion is it less cost efficient in those mods then the Cromwell, Sherman, PzIV?
Posts: 1289
Ram used to destroy the enemy gun and it was op/frustrating. This feels like the rant about Sherman's HE shells, Ram is an extra ability T-34/76 gets it does not have to be a great option in all cases.
The simply do not use the ability is you do not think you will get an advantage out of it.
Posts: 105
Posts: 195
These units should never have been implemented into the game, because they create very unhealthy dynamics and pretty much always require doctrinal counters or incomparably larger army push to even stand a chance of destroying one.
Consider yourself lucky if you lose less then 3 T34s while trying to take down JT.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
I suspect you mean 3vs3, 4vs4
I you opinion is it less cost efficient in those mods then the Cromwell, Sherman, PzIV?
I disagree. These units are very interesting to play with and fight against. The more static battles that they encourage is a welcome break from the "run and gun" of 1v1.
Posts: 1220
The ISU152 is getting nerfed and i wouldn't mind even reducing the range of the AT shell to 60 as well. If this means that say both the ELE and JT get their range reduced to 60 and have them need to be "deployed" with heavily reduced speed and only retaining some rotation to gain back that extra range.
IF this is the case, it would still keep your mantra of "static" battles.
Posts: 195
The ISU152 is getting nerfed and i wouldn't mind even reducing the range of the AT shell to 60 as well. If this means that say both the ELE and JT get their range reduced to 60 and have them need to be "deployed" with heavily reduced speed and only retaining some rotation to gain back that extra range.
IF this is the case, it would still keep your mantra of "static" battles.
ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
...
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Teamgames include 2v2.
The worth of fuel/muni is inversely proportional to the amount of players been added, while manpower is a variable which becomes constant regardless of mode.
If the nerfs to ram goes through, i think all 3 of those tanks brings way more to the table, vanilla or doctrinaly, even if they cost more. At least in what matters and how team games are been played.
Not sure why you always try to reduce everything to a 1on1 comparison of units when the units which supports them around are completely different.
In a world where the ELE/ISU/JT doesn't exist, the Su85 is more than enough to deal with everything else and the T34-76 change is perfectly fine.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Comparatively static battles (to other RTS games) based on the interplay between weapon teams, infantry and vehicles are the core of CoH2, they are not a bad thing. There's Blobcraft 2 and Age of Blobs 2 for the alternative.
For example, it's not a good sign that mortar-type units are considered undesirable in top level play.
By Miragefla on the topic of ISU-152 Anti-Infantry:
Posts: 195
I've already made a thread regarding late game MG + Infantry + Mortar relationship.
Posts: 570 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1979
7 men arrive way to early
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
I do not "always try to reduce everything to a 1on1 comparison" and I certainly did not in this case.
The only think I have pointed out is that, contrary to claims T-34/76, does not suck a point you agree (at least in small modes)
Why in your opinion T-34/76 any different than Cromwell or Sherman when a Ele/ISU/JT exist?
Posts: 5279
Posts: 570 | Subs: 1
no they dont... 7 man takes more fuel/more time than any other weapon upgrade for any mainline ingame bar none....
34 | |||||
1 | |||||
70 | |||||
47 | |||||
35 | |||||
6 |