Login

russian armor

Remove capping ability from all support weapons?

19 May 2014, 14:19 PM
#61
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 05:55 AMDerBaer



In CoH2? Don't get me wrong, I play both CoH and CoH2 and I like them both. But this statement made me "lol".


I think you may have misunderstood me. I wasn't trying to say that CoH 2 requires the player to make more decisions than vCoH - I was making a general statement that when games require players to make more decisions, it almost always adds skill to the game.
19 May 2014, 14:51 PM
#62
avatar of Ātman

Posts: 37

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 04:48 AMCieZ


Also, build order *IS* considered, and honestly probably more so than in vCoH. It's actually pretty humorous that you seem to think that vCoH had deeper build orders or some crap. Yeah rifle spam into BARS or M8. Wow. Much strategy. Such deep. So vCoH.


Just out of curiosity, how much you have actually played coh1?
19 May 2014, 17:30 PM
#63
avatar of m00nch1ld
Donator 11

Posts: 641 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 01:01 AMCieZ
This thread is funny...

No, just no.

Maxim spam is mostly a problem in team games, but still very counterable. The capping system in CoH 2 is one of the best improvements from CoH 1.

WTF you didnt even play coh1!!! how can you say this is an improvement? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-XgvHPt1cg

im not saying its not and honestly i dont have opinion about it but your not in the position to make such comparisons.
19 May 2014, 17:57 PM
#64
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 14:51 PMĀtman


Just out of curiosity, how much you have actually played coh1?


Well, I am in a position to make the comparison and he's right. All these fools with their rose-tinted john lennon glasses on I swear. The fact that maxim spam is playable (and according to some people even OP) proves his point, there are way more viable builds. You can go t0 conscript spam, you can go t1, you can go t2, you can do both if you want. In vCoH you couldn't start out with WSC unless your opponent sucked, and you built t1 only for the sniper and only after 3 rifles or very late game.

@Porygon: Yes, because you can attack move to the edge of a point and cap it without the enemy knowing whats there, and get a free retreat on a conscript. Ofc you cant do it in the mid or late game with vehicles around, but you couldn't do it at all in vCoH. The fact that you nit-picked that instead of responding to the meat of the post makes me think you agree with me otherwise, so I'm glad we understand each other.
19 May 2014, 18:06 PM
#65
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

I like the new capping system personally, and I like the new reinforcement system. Those were 2 things in CoH2 I was most pleased with honestly. I don't feel like the attitude of "the more micro, the better" is always the best. Yes it's good, but I fail to see the benefit of reinforcing all units vs painstakingly clicking through them one by one and reinforcing them that way. Same goes for capping, I didn't like the old system because it promoted both static warfare and blob tactics. It was also annoying as hell with OP's on points because you had to literally micro the destruction of the OP or you wouldn't get the territory.
19 May 2014, 18:43 PM
#66
avatar of Ātman

Posts: 37

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 17:57 PMDanielD


Well, I am in a position to make the comparison and he's right. All these fools with their rose-tinted john lennon glasses on I swear. The fact that maxim spam is playable (and according to some people even OP) proves his point, there are way more viable builds. You can go t0 conscript spam, you can go t1, you can go t2, you can do both if you want. In vCoH you couldn't start out with WSC unless your opponent sucked, and you built t1 only for the sniper and only after 3 rifles or very late game.


Of course there is more viable builds. T0-T2 you have 8 units as Soviets, with Barracks and WSC you have 5-6 (depends if you count the Jeep as a whole unit). So it's only natural that you have more variety. Relatively compared some could argue otherwise. However this wasn't my point.

19 May 2014, 19:34 PM
#67
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 14:51 PMĀtman


Just out of curiosity, how much you have actually played coh1?


I didn't play enough vCoH to comment on the finer details of the game's mechanics or give any sort of constructive feedback regarding balance - but I'm not doing either of these things. I played and observed enough vCoH to recognize plenty of things that I prefer in CoH 2 - and one of these is the capping system. I'll also be the first to admit that vCoH did do some things better than CoH 2 does (namely early game combat before this most recent patch but now early game/mid game infantry combat is amazing) and the increased variety of upgrade choices - and Wehr vet was cool - but I like CoH 2 vet as well so I guess that's a tie.

Anyways, Soviet definitely have a lot more viable openings than Americans did - you don't have to be a vCoH pro to realize that. Ostheer is, unfortunately, pretty narrow in terms of openings in CoH 2.
19 May 2014, 19:36 PM
#68
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 19:34 PMCieZ

Anyways, Soviet definitely have a lot more viable openings than Americans did - you don't have to be a vCoH pro to realize that. Ostheer is, unfortunately, pretty narrow in terms of openings in CoH 2.


Exactly. And the biggest difference between ost and wehr is wehr had to make 3 volks and 2 MGs(usually and mostly) before grenspam and ost can just do grenspam.

And thanks to commanders, even ost have much more options to start the game with then wehr ever had, while having more mid and late game options as well.
19 May 2014, 20:37 PM
#69
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987

jump backJump back to quoted post19 May 2014, 04:48 AMCieZ


There are already tons of drawbacks to going a 4x MG start(or any heavy support weapon start). As I said before you're less mobile, you give up map control, you have no protection against light vehicles (no faust/AT nade) you're highly vulnerable to flanks, you are extremely vulnerable to indirect fire, you have no combat-boosting weapon upgrades (LMG/PPSh/Dp/G43/etc), they can't chase/wipe retreating squads, they don't bleed your opponent as much as normal infantry, you risk giving your opponent the weapon if your squad dies - I think you get the point. Also, build order *IS* considered, and honestly probably more so than in vCoH. It's actually pretty humorous that you seem to think that vCoH had deeper build orders or some crap. Yeah rifle spam into BARS or M8. Wow. Much strategy. Such deep. So vCoH.

Finally - @Porygon - suggesting that a 4 Maxim start will give you as much map control as a 4 Con start is bullshit. Maxims hit the map slower, have to pack up/set up, and don't bleed at all. Please tell me how that's capping the map as fast as cons... =/




You say no AT nades means no protection against light vehicles. Ostheer has no light vehicles until t2.

By this time there will be a considerable resource imbalance, mines everywhere and AT guns behind the MGs.



The light vehicle "hard counter" is hard countered by the same tier as the Maxim. T2 hard counters its own hard counter.


You can't argue that you're giving up AT abilities when you clearly get excellent AT abilities with th same tier.



So the MG spammer is rewarded with both map control and fast access to the hard counter to his spam.


Please explain if you think AT guns are inferior to AT nades in taking out light vehicles.




And Maxims are just as vulnerable to indirect fire as any other unit. They can move quickly and are just relocated when the mortar rounds start going. The long mortar cooldown and mobility of the Maxim (along with the squad size) mean that it is NOT very vulnerable to indirect fire.



(Most of all I just hate boring, static games. I lose to conspam too but I can enjoy those games because I'm not constantly running off the map.)

19 May 2014, 21:14 PM
#70
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4





You say no AT nades means no protection against light vehicles. Ostheer has no light vehicles until t2.

By this time there will be a considerable resource imbalance, mines everywhere and AT guns behind the MGs.



The light vehicle "hard counter" is hard countered by the same tier as the Maxim. T2 hard counters its own hard counter.


You can't argue that you're giving up AT abilities when you clearly get excellent AT abilities with th same tier.



So the MG spammer is rewarded with both map control and fast access to the hard counter to his spam.


Please explain if you think AT guns are inferior to AT nades in taking out light vehicles.




And Maxims are just as vulnerable to indirect fire as any other unit. They can move quickly and are just relocated when the mortar rounds start going. The long mortar cooldown and mobility of the Maxim (along with the squad size) mean that it is NOT very vulnerable to indirect fire.



(Most of all I just hate boring, static games. I lose to conspam too but I can enjoy those games because I'm not constantly running off the map.)



ZiS guns do not kill 221s/222s/251 in a single shot - it's actually really easy to avoid them and just run around the map killing everything else. AT grenades (or guard M3) are a lot more reliable because the engine damage means that they're probably not going to get away. (Especially if you combine an AT grenade with a ZiS, or a guard M3 which a more standard build can easily do)

Moreover the 222 does WAY more damage up close than at range - AT grenades force it to stay at range. You can just drive straight into a Maxim, vehicle block the retreat and wipe it extremely easily.

Basically without AT grenades the 222 gets to run around the map unchecked, while also bleeding you harder than if you had Conscripts around with AT nades - and god forbid it flanks your ZiS gun while you have nothing but 6x Maxims on the field - you just gave your opponent a free AT gun.

Additionally, without AT grenades your ZiS gun is going to be worthless against tanks. They'll be able to just drive straight at the gun and circle strafe it without fear.

Maxims are more vulnerable to mortar fire because of the way in which mortar mechanics work in this game. Basically what happens is the mortar shoots, at this point in time it places a marker on the squad that it is shooting at(or barrage circle). The shot then "scatters" away from that marker based on the distance traveled, vet, bulletins, etc. A deployed Maxim is stationary, meaning it will get hit a lot more often than say a Conscript squad that is walking around - and could easily walk outside the scatter AoE without even realizing that it is getting shot at, simply because Cons are almost always going to be on the move. You don't even have to use the barrage on the Maxim, you can just keep right clicking with your mortar selected, or attack ground where the maxim is meaning the maxim squad is going to have to relocate constantly. So yeah, long story short, all set-up teams are more vulnerable to indirect fire than normal infantry squads.
25 May 2014, 06:57 AM
#71
avatar of Erguvan

Posts: 273

SO u wanna see %100 gren spam vs %100 cons spam?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

488 users are online: 488 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48783
Welcome our newest member, Coyuuhbffs
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM