Login

russian armor

Balance vCoH Trolololo

PAGES (11)down
15 Jan 2013, 10:25 AM
#21
avatar of OllyL

Posts: 30

Finally had chance to watch this week's SNF and was really great to see two of the best duking it out.

It's a shame the US got trounced but I think it only proved that slow WSC into delayed Sherman is not a good counter to anything. DevM's brief but illustrious jeep micro on Semois looked promising until he suicided his jeep and we didn't really see anyone giving the M8 a good run for it's money.

Looking forward to next week

Olly
15 Jan 2013, 10:36 AM
#22
avatar of S73v0

Posts: 522

Wehr is not OP, US is still strong at exploiting any small mistake the wehr player makes. At higher levels though US is much harder to play as the wehr player does not offer many mistakes to capitalise on. However US can still easily overwhelm the wehr player in the early stages of the game, and correct tech can force a wehr player to make mistakes. The wehr sniper is very strong but extremely delicate so the slightest mistake for the wehr player can throw away the advantage.

In those games we saw underprepared US from both players. First game with a 1 engy start improperly microed rifles were forced off by mgs, losing any advantage gained by the start and allowing wehr to dig in. Bad teching in the second game going for the sherman instead of the m8. Third game DevM was off to a great start then mismicroed and promptly lost his advantage. Going 4 rifles then WSC is a very bad build order as the rifles bleed alot of manpower delaying the sniper. When you get the sniper you must get the countersnipe and get alot of kills to turn the tide. Unfortunately they played passively with their sniper once they countersniped and the sniper then didn't have much impact on the battlefield. The most you should get is 3 rifles then WSC. Just poor US play from both players against almost impeccable wehr play.
15 Jan 2013, 21:52 PM
#23
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

Yes, the US play was poor from both sides. Note, however, that the (imo) most accurate criticism was lack of any major flanks. So why was that?

I reckon it's because good players have lost too many games because one flank fails, all your rifles lose 3-4 men, and now you're behind hundreds of manpower and are at best even on map control. It generally feels much safer to simply stall and stall and stall until you can get a unit that doesn't die to fausts or the sniper. While it's not ideal play, the alternative is basically an all-in.

The M8 can be great, but it relies on good dice (or you won't do even close to 280mp/100muni/30fuel worth of damage) and having a very strong early game. Now, how do you have a strong early game against a competent wehr player without going BARs? If you rush the m8, you'll have less territory to defend, and going into enemy sectors with the m8 is asking to lose it. If you get BARs first, pumas are out when the m8 is out, and you've probably lost the game due to failing a flank or two anyway.
15 Jan 2013, 21:57 PM
#24
avatar of GreenDevil

Posts: 394

Perhaps the reason why when both players were playing USA, they didn't attempt a major flank or be super aggressive is because the USA game is that much on a knifes edge early that if they screw the flank up or it's beaten back with heavy losses, it's pretty much gg right there, because they will be bleeding manpower like a stuck pig all game. The US has no choice but to gain some sort of advantage early by the way of a flank or capitilizing on a WM mistake, if they don't then they will always push shit up hill to win.

Also imo, all three maps are heavily in the WM favour. Bois has choke points everywhere that can be made to be easily unflankable with use of wire and mines, Semois has always been WM favoured due to it's positioning of houses, choke points and cover. Langres has always been WM favoured due to its choke points that can be wired off and mined to make a flank attempt futile and cause heavy losses.
15 Jan 2013, 23:12 PM
#25
16 Jan 2013, 05:31 AM
#26
avatar of MVGame

Posts: 429

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Jan 2013, 05:51 AMRandy
Its the WM sniper thats the problem. Its now present in almost all WM builds and good players will protect it with mines.
i can solve that. they shouldnt allow WM players to build mines if they have snipers on the field.
16 Jan 2013, 05:50 AM
#27
avatar of Randy

Posts: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Jan 2013, 05:31 AMMVGame
i can solve that. they shouldnt allow WM players to build mines if they have snipers on the field.


really ? really??
16 Jan 2013, 05:58 AM
#28
avatar of MaraudingRiflemen

Posts: 5

No matter, real US players will just have to up their game and adapt. I wonder if we will see a resurgence of 4 Rifles BAR with an additional Jeep to put pressure on the Sniper. Looking forward to the next semi-final, there will surely be US wins there.
16 Jan 2013, 06:16 AM
#29
avatar of MVGame

Posts: 429

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Jan 2013, 05:50 AMRandy


really ? really??

i dont know if your serious or not. which concerns me.
16 Jan 2013, 06:18 AM
#30
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

No matter, real US players will just have to up their game and adapt. I wonder if we will see a resurgence of 4 Rifles BAR with an additional Jeep to put pressure on the Sniper. Looking forward to the next semi-final, there will surely be US wins there.


This seems like the only fool-proof strat to me, as the Jeep (assuming you get it 2nd) allows you to see where mines are placed, and allows your flank to be as well-executed as possible by letting you properly scout before your big push.
16 Jan 2013, 16:11 PM
#32
avatar of TychoCelchuuu
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2

OF blows.
16 Jan 2013, 17:29 PM
#33
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

No matter, real US players will just have to up their game and adapt. I wonder if we will see a resurgence of 4 Rifles BAR with an additional Jeep to put pressure on the Sniper. Looking forward to the next semi-final, there will surely be US wins there.


4 rifles adn jeep.... epic, one mine and your jeep is dead, all good players lays mines everywhere
16 Jan 2013, 20:01 PM
#34
avatar of MaraudingRiflemen

Posts: 5



4 rifles adn jeep.... epic, one mine and your jeep is dead, all good players lays mines everywhere


It's all about execution... mines on paper counter everything.
16 Jan 2013, 20:20 PM
#35
avatar of GhOuLiSh

Posts: 108

Useless topic, they're not going to change it anymore. In my opinion: no snipers. I really rofl at people who think snipers will be less used on CoH2.
17 Jan 2013, 02:30 AM
#36
avatar of crazyguy

Posts: 331

Useless topic, they're not going to change it anymore. In my opinion: no snipers. I really rofl at people who think snipers will be less used on CoH2.

well soviets wont use it too much, since their snipers only camo in cover(i think didnt play alpha) and if wher sniper snipes the 2 man soviet squad second man counter snipes (again i think i read that it is possible somewhere)
17 Jan 2013, 03:22 AM
#37
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3



4 rifles adn jeep.... epic, one mine and your jeep is dead, all good players lays mines everywhere


My point was that if you use the jeep well you can see where the mines are being laid. Just don't drive the jeep anywhere you haven't been keeping an eye on, and during the flank drive it in with your minesweeper.
17 Jan 2013, 03:43 AM
#38
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

I always thought snipers could reload slightly slower. It might help but I don't know if that would make it hard to make up the 340MP cost of the sniper.
17 Jan 2013, 04:44 AM
#39
avatar of Guderian

Posts: 155

Perhaps the reason why when both players were playing USA, they didn't attempt a major flank or be super aggressive is because the USA game is that much on a knifes edge early that if they screw the flank up or it's beaten back with heavy losses, it's pretty much gg right there, because they will be bleeding manpower like a stuck pig all game. The US has no choice but to gain some sort of advantage early by the way of a flank or capitilizing on a WM mistake, if they don't then they will always push shit up hill to win.

Also imo, all three maps are heavily in the WM favour. Bois has choke points everywhere that can be made to be easily unflankable with use of wire and mines, Semois has always been WM favoured due to it's positioning of houses, choke points and cover. Langres has always been WM favoured due to its choke points that can be wired off and mined to make a flank attempt futile and cause heavy losses.


Absolute nonsense. Semois hasn't been WM favored ever since wire cutters became available from the beginning.

They just both played bad as US, its simple. An unconvincing nades to tank depot, 4 rifles sniper, very poorly executed 3es start... The only little ray of sunshine was DevM jeep on semois, up to the point where he suicided it for no reason.

This Sunday should see some US wins I'm sure.
17 Jan 2013, 06:45 AM
#40
avatar of RsvT

Posts: 117

Well 12azor and Guderian said it all. I hope we will see some good US play this sunday :)
PAGES (11)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Livestreams

unknown 11
United States 171
New Zealand 16
unknown 4

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

983 users are online: 983 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49128
Welcome our newest member, GrantdbLyons
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM