Hi Everyone. After winter patch, I aware of the dramatic changing of Indirect fire (mortar, Howie, M8 Scott) make USF become more manpower bleed and forced to pick Calliope nor mechanize company.
I spend most of the time in 1v1, 2v2 and feel useless against heavy turrle play from high level axis....
Any solution for that problems or we just leave the game until they Hotfix this ?
Post Winter balance patch - USF indirect fire problem
5 Mar 2021, 01:26 AM
#1
Posts: 307
5 Mar 2021, 07:04 AM
#2
Posts: 999 | Subs: 1
haven't run any tests/calculations on the new scott as of yet, but as far as the other stock indirect options are concerned there haven't been any overly dramatic changes with the new patch. the mortar even got a slight buff and the AoE changes didn't impact the performance of the pack howie too much, either.
so i guess the solution would be to keep on playing as usual, because if you are waiting for any hotfix to address a problem where there is none, you won't be playing the game for a pretty long time.
so i guess the solution would be to keep on playing as usual, because if you are waiting for any hotfix to address a problem where there is none, you won't be playing the game for a pretty long time.
||| ScatterThis! - Tank AI calculation made easy ||| CoH2 Pen Calc - Tank vs tank... who wins against who and by what margin? |||
5 Mar 2021, 07:28 AM
#3
Posts: 307
haven't run any tests/calculations on the new scott as of yet, but as far as the other stock indirect options are concerned there haven't been any overly dramatic changes with the new patch. the mortar even got a slight buff and the AoE changes didn't impact the performance of the pack howie too much, either.
so i guess the solution would be to keep on playing as usual, because if you are waiting for any hotfix to address a problem where there is none, you won't be playing the game for a pretty long time.
for now, my exp is Howie and scott cant properly hit target and even the barrage. 50 range Scott always mess his pathfinding.
Mortar and mortar halftrack is kinda solid choice than expensive howie, M8 scott in term of autofire and barrage.
5 Mar 2021, 09:04 AM
#4
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
On 2vs2 instead of 2 Scotts I see people building 3 
obviously since the balance team isn't willing to tackle USF late game issue with Scott and Pakhw, nothing is going to change.
I had mixed results with the Scott (I don't build more than one), can go from useless to good but it still entirely RNG
Pak follows the same way, too RNG and good luck to vet it.
Mortar buff is welcome, and yes I feel it is better to build 2 of them than a Pak.
Calliope remains the only solid late game choice for USF in teamgame.
obviously since the balance team isn't willing to tackle USF late game issue with Scott and Pakhw, nothing is going to change.I had mixed results with the Scott (I don't build more than one), can go from useless to good but it still entirely RNG
Pak follows the same way, too RNG and good luck to vet it.
Mortar buff is welcome, and yes I feel it is better to build 2 of them than a Pak.
Calliope remains the only solid late game choice for USF in teamgame.
7 Mar 2021, 05:55 AM
#5
Posts: 1158
I don't really understand the needs to make the scott trash. The main complaint I've heard is that it kills the infantry too fast or wipes squads entirely. Would be fair, if it wasn't for comparable terrors like the brumbar. Sure, it costs more, but the damned thing is incredibly resilient. It can sit in front of at guns and destroy the crew. We can't do that with the scott, we can kite, but we don't have the accuracy to kill the crew as fast. It's cheap, so we can get multiples, if pop cap allows. Fuel cost is similar to a brumbar at that point, 150f for 2 scotts. It's just weird to me, if the brumbar is going to be effective, the scott should be too.
29 Jul 2014, 12:16 PM by siuking666:
T34/76 is NOT a joke on my hands; Maybe on your hands you make it suck shit? but on me, No. I can kill a stug with a little micro, go toe to toe with a Panzer 4. Is it a joke? LOL T34/85 is apparently a very good tank. But no one says it "one hit wipe" or elefant penetration; up to a point i think this little medium tank just have too much health and too much firepower with that fuel cost.
17 Mar 2021, 13:42 PM
#6
Posts: 103
Has the Scott received any changes other than the barrage and auto fire range? The patch notes are so vague it seems like those were the only changes being done but it feels so incredibly weak I have a feeling like those absolutely dumb auto fire changes were pushed through too.
17 Mar 2021, 14:00 PM
#7
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
I don't really understand the needs to make the scott trash. The main complaint I've heard is that it kills the infantry too fast or wipes squads entirely. Would be fair, if it wasn't for comparable terrors like the brumbar.
You probably never saw how USF abused it in team games. Wiping every living shit out of inf in seconds, without any counter play and ability to kill it (because its being protected by teammates). At least brummbar has to be in range of AT weaponary in order to attack.
18 Mar 2021, 18:24 PM
#8
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
You probably never saw how USF abused it in team games. Wiping every living shit out of inf in seconds, without any counter play and ability to kill it (because its being protected by teammates). At least brummbar has to be in range of AT weaponary in order to attack.
You mean like for more or less the same cost of two rocket arty?
18 Mar 2021, 18:49 PM
#9
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
You mean like for more or less the same cost of two rocket arty?
Except you shoudnt compare auto-fire, mobile and not counterable with your own inderect fire unit, to a glass cannon, fire on CD and most importanly dodgeable unit.
18 Mar 2021, 19:21 PM
#10
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Except you shoudnt compare auto-fire, mobile and not counterable with your own inderect fire unit, to a glass cannon, fire on CD and most importanly dodgeable unit.
Too bad USF doesn't have stock rocket arty.
18 Mar 2021, 19:49 PM
#11
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
Too bad USF doesn't have stock rocket arty.
This was brought up multiple times already, and main question is. Does USF\UKF need stock rocket arty, besides the fact that other factions have it? You can give reasoning why soviets need it, why ost\okw need it, but what USF\UKF cant accomplish or what is that gap that only rocket arty can fill for them.
18 Mar 2021, 20:25 PM
#12
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
This was brought up multiple times already, and main question is. Does USF\UKF need stock rocket arty, besides the fact that other factions have it? You can give reasoning why soviets need it, why ost\okw need it, but what USF\UKF cant accomplish or what is that gap that only rocket arty can fill for them.
Do you see spam Scott spam in 1vs1 or a lot of rocket arty usage? No because there isn't such stale metagame, on 2v2 and above rocket arty is pretty much mandatory on the late game. I'll say UKF at least get durable tank on the late game USF is still stuck in flank&smoke meme.
19 Mar 2021, 10:37 AM
#13
Posts: 103
This was brought up multiple times already, and main question is. Does USF\UKF need stock rocket arty, besides the fact that other factions have it? You can give reasoning why soviets need it, why ost\okw need it, but what USF\UKF cant accomplish or what is that gap that only rocket arty can fill for them.
And why not give UK and US stock rocket artillery or any kind of heavy artillery? This is completely ignoring the fact they do need heavy artillery in team games to dislodge camping germans.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
18 | ||
 |
|
|
8 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.35258.859+1
- 4.939410.696+5
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265
Board Info
833 users are online:
833 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49989
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM