Login

russian armor

Walking Stuka

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (18)down
7 Jul 2014, 07:38 AM
#61
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

my problem with walking stuka is that it outright kills support weapons itself most of the times.
7 Jul 2014, 07:38 AM
#62
avatar of bämbabäm

Posts: 246

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Jul 2014, 18:33 PMwongtp
yo fool, its destroying weapon teams in a barrage that is the problem, it happens. fuck decrews, that is fine. i lost a 320mp unit without a chance of salvaging it by someone who has to point and click into the fog of war?


Well, with its ROF it's more balanced than ISU ;)
7 Jul 2014, 07:50 AM
#63
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

Stuka beyond op and one of the main reasons why 3v3 and 4v4 imbalanced as hell atm. It disposes perfect accuracy, amazing range, it wipes support weapons in 1 shot, devastates blobs, annihilates buildings in same 1 shot, and kills artillery pieces in same freaking 1 shot. Also it comes in good 6-7m with t2 after core units (pio+3volks/2pios and double volks) and fuel conversion.

And if it is not bad enough, you can multiply this by 2-3 okw players and see current okw artyparty 3v3 and 4v4 dominance.
7 Jul 2014, 08:06 AM
#64
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

Mmmm, I personally think the stuka is balanced for it's price and execution. Considering most OKW and Ostheer fanbois whine about huge derpy US and Soviet inf blobs they finally have a weapon effective enough to counter this. So, what are the Allies to do? After being used to blobbing so much people become confused, angry, blinded, madness tends to set in, threads screaming to nerf that which has stopped their precious hordes from moving about begin multiplying in number on the official and fan-site forums, a council of elder Allied fanbois decide that a change is indefinetely in order. However, their wishes will be ignored. Why? Because there is another way to fight. Maybe...if they try not blobbing up everything? I know it's hard to wrap their heads around it, but it could be a solution.

-I enjoyed writing this up.
-On a more serious note, I honestly think the stuka is fine as is considering OKW has 2/3 resources and an early investment in the stuka will considerably hinder their ability to bring out heavier tanks. So, if the allies are unable to use that extra 100 fuel to their adv, tis be their fault.



Also you, you you you. Been lookin' for ya bud. I wont start anything serious as dem mods will get angry but for everyone else please ignore the obvious fanboi.(Who I might add throws childish insults in-game to those he loses to)
7 Jul 2014, 08:23 AM
#65
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

But Von, in 3v3+ (thread about 3v3 and 4v4 anyway) its near to impossible to push okw no-tank play due to cheap and effective at guns supported by mines, their flak building and shrecks. t34/m5s/shermans will die in frontal attack and only good at gaining some map control. And then true breakthrough tanks such as sherman dozer and kv8 will face pak 43 (which cost 0 fuel) at the time they finally arrive.
7 Jul 2014, 08:29 AM
#66
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

But Von, in 3v3+ (thread about 3v3 and 4v4 anyway) its near to impossible to push okw no-tank play anyway due to cheap and effective at guns supported by mines, their flak building and shrecks. t34/m5s/shermans will die in frontal attack and only good at gaining some map control. And then true breakthrough tanks such as sherman dozer and kv8 will face pak 43 (which cost 0 fuel) at the time they finally arrive.


True, but have you ever tried using a B-4 to counter their hfs? Maybe AT partisans out of a building nearby? Possibly saving up a horde of 3-4 t-34s, or maybe going for a hard corner of the map flank and taking out the hf while your other soviet teammates push with you in the same sector temporarily? As well as considering it requires t2 and an 100 fuel investement for the OKW, which the earliest possible stuka would most likely be at 9-10 minutes you should be able to have enough time to spam mortars(120s) and minesweepers to help beat back their units, as well as AA spam for the U.S. to easily clear those pak guns.
7 Jul 2014, 09:16 AM
#67
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

Well, i wont say i tried all counters, or have complete understanding of 3v3 or 4v4 after expansion release (not even close, lol), but Stuka zu Fuss just feels unfairly powerful compared to everything else (even mighty sturmtiger).

It comes too early - from 6to7 minutes on maps with fuel near base and 8 minutes on maps with contested fuel at the middle, ofc if it rushed with fast t2 and fuel conversion.

Then counters. Partisans close to worthless since skilled players will always drive stuka all the way back after barrage. B-4 sure is an option, but it needs vet1 to hit anything and, again, could be decrewed or even completely destroyed with 1 barrage from stuka.

So i think minor nerf (unlike volley fire) will be good.
7 Jul 2014, 09:22 AM
#68
avatar of FestiveLongJohns
Patrion 15

Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2

I think the walking stuka is in a good spot. Its a significant fuel investment, and its the only reliable indirect fire that the OKW has access too. The simple counter is be aware, get your retreat off early, and don't blob. Seems fair enough to me.
7 Jul 2014, 11:50 AM
#69
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647

I think the walking stuka is in a good spot. Its a significant fuel investment, and its the only reliable indirect fire that the OKW has access too. The simple counter is be aware, get your retreat off early, and don't blob. Seems fair enough to me.


blob blob blob, i hear this word a few times, what actually constitutes to a blob, 4 squads moving together? or is it a single 6 man squad moving on its own?

look, im sick and tired of people saying not to blob. arty punishes blobbing, that is a good mechanic. but stuka is a arty piece that focuses all its rounds into a small area. that does not punish blobbing, that basically fucks anything off the face of the earth that is in its strike zone.

tldr, it has a good chance of 1 shotting squads and support teams, just like the isu.

the stuka, needs to be affected by scatter, it is as simple as that.

also to those saying stuka has a sound. yes they sure do, also the shells lands as fast as it is fired and here's a replay to show.

http://www.coh2.org/replay/19918/just-to-make-a-point.

you can bitch about how badly we played and stuff like that but thats not the point. they were good players and we got mashed, but stuka, god damn. almost immediate reaction, still couldn't save anything.
7 Jul 2014, 15:38 PM
#70
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jul 2014, 11:50 AMwongtp


blob blob blob, i hear this word a few times, what actually constitutes to a blob, 4 squads moving together? or is it a single 6 man squad moving on its own?

look, im sick and tired of people saying not to blob. arty punishes blobbing, that is a good mechanic. but stuka is a arty piece that focuses all its rounds into a small area. that does not punish blobbing, that basically fucks anything off the face of the earth that is in its strike zone.

...


+1

I think walking stuka's effectiveness is in a good spot but the way it is effective is a bit off to me. it has a chance to annihilate a whole line of blob or defense completely if barraged correctly which i do not feel fair at all. at least in 3v3 and 4v4.

11 Jul 2014, 01:24 AM
#71
avatar of TheMightyCthulu

Posts: 127

It'll be changed/nerfed. I'd almost put money on it.
11 Jul 2014, 01:54 AM
#72
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476


19:55 (Can I embedd a video with a startingpoint?)

We should really add knockback onto the stukas creeping barrage, which kicks the enemys caught in it into the next hit, even during retreat. (Shameless DoW2 Elite advertisment here btw.)


But honestly for 1v1 the Stuka is definitly fine (fuel cost + 120 seconds reload time), but for teamgames I guess it could deal less damage to retreating units.
11 Jul 2014, 02:43 AM
#73
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

But Von, in 3v3+ (thread about 3v3 and 4v4 anyway) its near to impossible to push okw no-tank play due to cheap and effective at guns supported by mines, their flak building and shrecks. t34/m5s/shermans will die in frontal attack and only good at gaining some map control. And then true breakthrough tanks such as sherman dozer and kv8 will face pak 43 (which cost 0 fuel) at the time they finally arrive.


I'm sorry but what tanks are you speaking of? The very expensive Panther, or the ultra expensive Tiger II? Both of which are not only the most expensive in their own respective class, but even more expensive comparatively with OKW's 2/3 resource income?

OKW is designed for "no-tank play". If OKW were supposed to make heavy or even moderate use of Tanks, they would be given cheaper more generalist tanks like the Panzer IV, instead of expensive niche tanks like the Panther tank-destroyer or Tiger II heavy tank.
raw
11 Jul 2014, 03:14 AM
#74
avatar of raw

Posts: 644



It's not just a blob punihsher, it's outright point and click blanket retreat or lose at least one squad. Total overkill.


That's not the only unit that is total overkill on OKW~

Overkill seems to be Relics new design paradigm for ze germans.
11 Jul 2014, 03:45 AM
#75
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jul 2014, 03:14 AMraw


That's not the only unit that is total overkill on OKW~

Overkill seems to be Relics new design paradigm for ze germans.


Someone here does not remember soviet mines, the IS-2, and the ISU-152...
raw
11 Jul 2014, 03:48 AM
#76
avatar of raw

Posts: 644



Someone here does not remember soviet mines, the IS-2, and the ISU-152...


The IS-2 was never overkill, the ISU-152 still is overkill and soviet mines are mines.

11 Jul 2014, 04:08 AM
#77
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Jul 2014, 03:48 AMraw
The IS-2 was never overkill.


I guess you don't remember that time before the Armour rebalance where the IS-2 one-shotted squads just the same as the ISU. Just because it couldn't 1v1 a Tiger doesn't mean it was useless.
raw
11 Jul 2014, 04:14 AM
#78
avatar of raw

Posts: 644



I guess you don't remember that time before the Armour rebalance where the IS-2 one-shotted squads just the same as the ISU. Just because it couldn't 1v1 a Tiger doesn't mean it was useless.


But it was. What's the point of getting an IS-2 to wipe Infantry? I get an ISU-152 for that. Or T34.

The IS-2 was for victory parading, not for contributing to the actual game.
11 Jul 2014, 04:56 AM
#79
avatar of ZombieRommel

Posts: 91

It really is a mobile nuke carrier. I love the visual and audio effects as it's probably the closest thing we're going to see in a CoH game to a nuclear strike. But the damage it can do in such a short amount of time and from such safety does make it a little OP.

Something about it needs to be adjusted. Maybe give it paper thin armor so that the splash from a counter-barrage can kill it. Or decrease its range slightly so that it has to get closer to drop its payload.

Something. It needs a change.
11 Jul 2014, 05:23 AM
#80
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

Maybe give it paper thin armor so that the splash from a counter-barrage can kill it.


yea, give it like 11 armor so even small arms can hurt it. oh wait...
PAGES (18)down
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

955 users are online: 955 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49106
Welcome our newest member, nohuvin
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM