76mm Sherman and M4C's AP shell needs a small buff I think
Posts: 109
Ground pounded a whole doctrine because of competive meta is toxic move.
Posts: 109
- Give back bulldozer.
- recall ROF nerf, If not, buff MG hull, AP shell anti inf power.
WC-51 completely nerfed, cal rifleman balanced, combine arm rework which is harder to work in 1v1 and teamgame.
Like everyone said, why bother a m4 76mm when it cant be unity ?. Why bother M4 75mm when it cant update bulldozer. Why bother picking mechanize because in the end M36 is still best solution.
Posts: 321
Posts: 1197
Swap the 76mm with the E8 and keep the M4C for soviets only.
M4C is pretty underrated for SOVs. Decent tank in all aspects, more pricey, and you get the smoke. All in all, good.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Mechanize would be OK IF:
- Give back bulldozer.
- recall ROF nerf, If not, buff MG hull, AP shell anti inf power.
WC-51 completely nerfed, cal rifleman balanced, combine arm rework which is harder to work in 1v1 and teamgame.
Like everyone said, why bother a m4 76mm when it cant be unity ?. Why bother M4 75mm when it cant update bulldozer. Why bother picking mechanize because in the end M36 is still best solution.
I think WC51 is still great actually. Cav Rifles are overtuned and should be 2CP, not 1CP.
Now, the 76mm should be better than it is now. I think something like a penetration buff would be all it needs actually.
Dozer should absolutely be given back to mechanized.
The mortar HT is just sad, wish it was better.
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
Cav Rifles are overtuned and should be 2CP, not 1CP.
I want to know further about your opinion about cav rifle. I think they are pretty lacking. Compare to ass secction, their weaponry and upgrade are very close, i'm not sure how M3 vs sten is like but i believe both gain two paratrooper thompsons via upgrade. With that, cav is having wosre timing than a.section while having less utilities.
What do you want to give them if they are pu at 2 cp ?
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
I want to know further about your opinion about cav rifle. I think they are pretty lacking. Compare to ass secction, their weaponry and upgrade are very close, i'm not sure how M3 vs sten is like but i believe both gain two paratrooper thompsons via upgrade. With that, cav is having wosre timing than a.section while having less utilities.
What do you want to give them if they are pu at 2 cp ?
Assault sections are also too powerful in this patch, not a good comparison at all for Cav Rifles.
They are too much for their timing at the moment, they get thompsons without needing racks and you can snowball hard as USF with wc51 2 rifles LT Cav Rifle Stuart Ambu .50
They should be moved back to 2CP.
Posts: 63
Posts: 1197
Why have so many stock variants of the 76 chassis? Why not give the vanilla unit for, say, 100 fuel and limit its AI/AT capabilities and then pay as you go to upgrade either for specialization in AI, AT etc.
Again, I am not expecting any changes in COH2, it just baffles me how many variants of the same tank exist in game in places where an actual creative contribution could have been made.
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
Swap the 76mm with the E8 and keep the M4C for soviets only.
I wouldn't be sad if this happened. Eliminates all of the "OP with radio net" concerns and lets you maybe slightly buff ROF as well as an option if you give it a new Vet 1. HVAP 76MMM is a lot more attractive for Soviets given the bigger gap with T34 Pen and turretless TDs. (Even if 85s are probably still better overall).
Posts: 206
More of a philosophical question than an actual contribution: why not make USF a "build your custom tank" kind of faction like they were in COH1?
Why have so many stock variants of the 76 chassis? Why not give the vanilla unit for, say, 100 fuel and limit its AI/AT capabilities and then pay as you go to upgrade either for specialization in AI, AT etc.
Again, I am not expecting any changes in COH2, it just baffles me how many variants of the same tank exist in game in places where an actual creative contribution could have been made.
I do undestand your idea, but changing a tank gun is not just remove the actual gun and replace with another, its a hole different tank with differents sights, turrets and etc.
Now the bulldozer upgrade, just add a dozer and armor to the tank, which doesn't need to change nothing else about the tank
Posts: 1096
There is literally no good use for it beyond niche 1v1 situations.
Posts: 570 | Subs: 1
Theoretically, if you were targeting buffs for USF in general i would look at the faction itself and the core rooster since its overall kind of mediocre and currently relies on broken units to carry it (ez8 and greyhound)
Posts: 1197
The doctrine itself is fine, its more the overall faction that falters. If baseline USF was more MP efficient and had access to consistent mp (that doesn't require 500 mp essentially to get) then most of the doctrines would be fine.
Theoretically, if you were targeting buffs for USF in general i would look at the faction itself and the core rooster since its overall kind of mediocre and currently relies on broken units to carry it (ez8 and greyhound)
welcome to 2017 mate
Livestreams
2 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.921405.695+5
- 5.634229.735+8
- 6.276108.719+27
- 7.306114.729+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.1045675.608+3
- 10.722440.621+4
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Dreufritt
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM