Easy Eight

Soon: KT appearing significantly before IS2, Tiger, ISU, etc. MVGame

The AT of the AM is not lacking. In fact they have the best TD's in the game.

The Jackson is amazing... if you have room to micro it against an enemy that doesn't have a PaK screen and can clean up the shrecks it faces. If you can't manage this, it can get very fiddly and his very micro intensive; one misclick or pathing brainfart = dead Jackson.

And apart from the Jackson and E8, they got... the worst non-doctrinal AT gun in the game (that you need to spend ammo on to get similar performance to normal AT guns), Bazookas that cost fuel to get and can hardly pen anything bigger than a P4 even in the rear, Stuart which needs to get in danger to use its abilities and has a piddly main gun, the Sherman is an unremarkable medium tank that does its job I guess, and... that's pretty much it. The Jackson is a massive crutch on the US AT; they have basically no other solid options apart from it.

People really need to stop making 1:1 comparisons of the Easy8 to P4's or other tanks. Can the Easy8 have a Pak covering its flank? Or double faust PGs on its side? US armor needs all the help it can get.

The US have at guns covering their flanks with rifleman or captain equipped with bazookas.
But the easy 8 doesn't need that as it kills the p4 without dropping sweat.
The comparisons are completely justified because the units have the exactly same role in the game. A medium tank that provides AT & AI. yet the easy 8 is by far superior and dramatically exceeding the p4 in that role. Although they nearly cost the same(if you include the teaching costs the easy 8 is even cheaper).

The easy 8 has to be bound to the major to solve that problem.

Probably because the call-in system has not changed ever and the only statements made on the subject have been in the line of "we want to keep no-tech call-ins a viable strategy".

Call Ins used to be tech bound in the alpha/closed beta of coh2. But some genius people didn't like it and now we have to live with this legacy

Call Ins used to be tech bound in the alpha/closed beta of coh2. But some genius people didn't like it and now we have to live with this legacy

didnt it replace stock units at that time?

didnt it replace stock units at that time?

It also heavily dictated what buildings sovs could go for. A few doctrines could only be fully used when you had 3 different tech buildings (shock rifle frontline).

I am failing to understand how Jackson=E8 nerf

It is delusional (willingly or otherwise) to claim that the American's have a great TD and thus a DOCTRINAL general purpose tank that costs 10 more fuel shouldn't be able to handle an unsupported P4.

The fact of the matter is that paks and shreks (not to mention fausts) are available well before enough CP's are accumulated to call in an E8, if your p4 is unsupported and gets chewed up by an E8, that is not a problem with the game, or a problem with the call-in system.

I feel like tying call-ins to tech nullifies their purpose and would limit the versatility of the (already limited) Soviets. If I am going to call in T34/85s, why should I be required to tech to T3? Am I supposed to supplement them with T34/76s? (I do believe this is the manner in which it was originally implemented and subsequently scrapped early on)

TL;DR - Support your shit.

Support your shit.

If people weren't stuck in delusion of "OMG SUPERIUR GERMUN STEELZ IZ IMMORTAL" and actually did, we'd have 90% less "balance" threads.

Sadly, people believe firmly that all skirmishes are 1v1 with no other unit involved-ever.

I am failing to understand how Jackson=E8 nerf

i dont even know what that means

It is delusional (willingly or otherwise) to claim that the American's have a great TD and thus a DOCTRINAL general purpose tank that costs 10 more fuel shouldn't be able to handle an unsupported P4.

thats not the complaint. the complaint is, for 10 fuel it has 20% better armor, about 50% better penetration and considerably less scatter (though it does have 20% less AOE). thats a hell of a bargain for 10 fuel.

The fact of the matter is that paks and shreks (not to mention fausts) are available well before enough CP's are accumulated to call in an E8, if your p4 is unsupported and gets chewed up by an E8, that is not a problem with the game, or a problem with the call-in system.

not sure what this has to do with anything. all AT weapons are available before tanks.

I feel like tying call-ins to tech nullifies their purpose and would limit the versatility of the (already limited) Soviets. If I am going to call in T34/85s, why should I be required to tech to T3? Am I supposed to supplement them with T34/76s? (I do believe this is the manner in which it was originally implemented and subsequently scrapped early on)

soviets are hardly limited, particularly because they are able to rely on call ins so heavily. t1 and t2 builds are viable thanks to call in tanks. if you go t1, you can rely on guards for AT. if you go t2, you can rely on shocks for AI. no matter what you build, you can always rely on is2, isu152 and t34/85. i really dont see a lack of versatility. compare that to the wehrmacht options.

even if they tied tanks to teching, they could allow both t3 or t4 to unlock call in tanks. then youre still able to build any combination you want, or still rely completely on call ins. the only difference would be you have to spend fuel on teching costs just like everyone else.

and katitof, stop trying to start shit. thats a pointless post

thats not the complaint. the complaint is, for 10 fuel it has 20% better armor, about 50% better penetration and considerably less scatter (though it does have 20% less AOE). thats a hell of a bargain for 10 fuel.

In a vacuum, It absolutely is a bargain, but as I am sure you are aware, this game doesn't work like that. p4 isn't tied to a doctrine first of all. More relevant I believe is the point that you so cleverly dismissed.

not sure what this has to do with anything. all AT weapons are available before tanks.

What this has to do with anything is the fact that the US's AT capabilities are gimped when compared to their nazi counterparts. The E8 is the ONLY US tank that can take a hit (and I cannot stress enough the fact that it is doctrinal) This, combined with the fact that german AT is superior to the US's AT capabilities is why I don't think this issue is as cut and dry as a simple stats comparison.

soviets are hardly limited, particularly because they are able to rely on call ins so heavily. t1 and t2 builds are viable thanks to call in tanks. if you go t1, you can rely on guards for AT. if you go t2, you can rely on shocks for AI. no matter what you build, you can always rely on is2, isu152 and t34/85. I really don't see a lack of versatility. compare that to the wehrmacht options.

The wehrmacht options I see are the ability to build a well rounded army with a couple of buildings and not relying on call-ins (try doing that with soviets). You say they are able to rely on call-ins so heavily, I would say that they HAVE to rely on call-ins so heavily to compete.

even if they tied tanks to teching, they could allow both t3 or t4 to unlock call in tanks. then youre still able to build any combination you want, or still rely completely on call ins. the only difference would be you have to spend fuel on teching costs just like everyone else.

Sounds like using a sledgehammer to drive a nail. Why open up a whole new can of those pesky balance worms when your percieved problem could be solved by: A. supporting your units or B. Minor tweaking a single unit's cost?

In a vacuum, It absolutely is a bargain, but as I am sure you are aware, this game doesn't work like that. p4 isn't tied to a doctrine first of all. More relevant I believe is the point that you so cleverly dismissed.

being a doctrinal call in MIGHT mean it should be more powerful than non doctrinal units. it does not mean it should be more cost effective. thats why relic is looking into call ins.

What this has to do with anything is the fact that the US's AT capabilities are gimped when compared to their nazi counterparts. The E8 is the ONLY US tank that can take a hit (and I cannot stress enough the fact that it is doctrinal) This, combined with the fact that german AT is superior to the US's AT capabilities is why I don't think this issue is as cut and dry as a simple stats comparison.

i never suggested the easy eight should be weaker. it is simply too cost effective. as for US tanks being squishy, thats by design. same reason relic has repeatedly said theyre not releasing pershings. they are the exact opposite of okw

The wehrmacht options I see are the ability to build a well rounded army with a couple of buildings and not relying on call-ins (try doing that with soviets). You say they are able to rely on call-ins so heavily, I would say that they HAVE to rely on call-ins so heavily to compete.

looks like youve figured out the big secret to soviet design. 9 out of 19 german doctrines dont even have a call in unit. only 2 (3 if you dont count the AT gun in urban defense) of the 19 soviet doctrines lack a call in unit. think thats a coincidence? soviets are MEANT to rely on call ins and that makes them very versatile.

germans on the other hand have been forced to rely almost entirely on the tiger for a long time now. you get heavy t1 to heavy t2 to p4 and/or tiger. i wouldnt call that versatility.

Sounds like using a sledgehammer to drive a nail. Why open up a whole new can of those pesky balance worms when your percieved problem could be solved by: A. supporting your units or B. Minor tweaking a single unit's cost?

A. supporting units has absolutely nothing to do with the call in issue.
B. even though this thread is about easy eight, this is an issue with all call ins. this was an issue before WFA was even released.

You do realize that can happen only if all models decide to go conga line?
Easy 8 doesn't have AoE to one shot german squads if they aren't humping each other.

Sorry I haven't figured out how to make the models stand further apart...

Sorry I haven't figured out how to make the models stand further apart...

Avoiding crater cover(or other cover that makes models bunch up), retreating when tanks start to push you around ect.

Its AI thing and only relic can reprogram it so entities spread better, all you can do is mitigate effects of bunching up by taking care of units positioning personally.

I still can't understand people who argue that doctrinal units should be stronger, because there are no "base" units who are worth it. Doesn't that mean that you can only pick this commander, or else you are underpowered?

I still can't understand people who argue that doctrinal units should be stronger, because there are no "base" units who are worth it. Doesn't that mean that you can only pick this commander, or else you are underpowered?

Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying when it comes to the Soviets.

In my opinion this is the best USF commander.

-Elite riflemen - can't really spam them but they are much better than vet 0 riflemen in mid to late game as they come with the AT nade.

-Willy pete smoke - great ability to punish roving blobs. Kind of functions like the old Wehrmacht terror leaflets. It's good at forcing retreats.

-Easy 8 - Maybe the best medium tank in the game.

As to the topic, I don't think Easy 8 is OP by any means. It's just that the default Sherman is pretty bad by comparison. Easy 8 gets rid of the hassle of toggling between AP and AI and adds in some nice penetration. It's simply better than the default Sherman in just about every way.

In my opinion these are not overpowered but they do put USF on more equal footing late game with Axis, as this is a tank USF can reliably kill stuff with. They are still fragile, but your odds of actually killing whatever you're shooting at are better.

I like to get 2-3 of them and execute backyard flank assaults on isolated walking stukas that are hiding... hit and run tactics on OKW trucks... and then when an angry panther shows up, I pop smoke in front of me and behind me and book it.

It's still not a slugfest tank like a Panther or Tiger or IS2. You have to use flanking and maneuverability against armor.

Against infantry they are good but you have to retreat every so often to repair as schrecks will chip away.

To sum up, I don't think they are overpowered. I just think they are catching Axis players off guard because they don't expect USF to have any kind of decent medium tank that can kill their armor if micro'd well.

No one is complaining about E8's performance..its the cost for which that performance is recieved...and comapre that with pz 4 at just 10 fuel less and panther at 40 fuel more plus insane teching and still sucks balls to the point of being extinct.The only reason u don't see evry usf commander using rifle company is because its not accesible to everybody..as it becomes so by pay or war spoils..eventually only this doctrine will be used.E8 spam will cost effectively destroy any counter armor buildup.Panther barely beats 1,and it'll always face 2 or more.

The t34 also heavily underperforms compared to the panzer iv. Price structure and role are absolutely similar though. And that doesn't even have the excuse of being doctrinal. If doctrinal units are not allowed to outperform the panzer 4 than the panzer 4 should not that radically dominate the t34. Since the same argument applies.

The t34 also heavily underperforms compared to the panzer iv. Price structure and role are absolutely similar though. And that doesn't even have the excuse of being doctrinal. If doctrinal units are not allowed to outperform the panzer 4 than the panzer 4 should not that radically dominate the t34. Since the same argument applies.

The panzer 4 usually survives a direct engagement against a t34 with about 20 %. Taken into account that it costs 25 % more fuel I think the balance with these units is fine. The t34 has still the better ai capabilities.

Nobody is asking to nerf the stats of the Easy8 . Players just have the feeling that it's to cheap when being compared with its german counterparts. Either a price increase or a tech binding to the major would solve that problem.

+1 AchtAchter, couldn't have said it better myself.