Login

russian armor

My proposal to making USF more appealing

8 Aug 2014, 03:06 AM
#21
avatar of Rogers

Posts: 1210 | Subs: 1

Pershing for the last time is a no, and will not and should not happen. Here is one of the small reasons why. Imagine. M26 pershing in front, Jacksons in the back with HVAP. Guess what? Axis lose every single game, ever. Axis heavy tanks already get raped and rightfully so by vet jacksons even their front armor is no match. There is a reason the Pershing will never be in Western Fronts because it has no place in the Army design. Relic has said there will never be a pershing and I fully agree with them. There are other avenues to take.
8 Aug 2014, 03:28 AM
#22
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

Could you post the official statement where they said there will never be a Pershing?

"Imagine M26 Pershing in front, Jackson behind" is no different than saying "Imagine IS2 in front, Jackson behind". Which is already extremely possible in 2v2s and beyond, yet manages to not result in overwhelming allied victories every time. The idea that this is impossible to balance, or even particularly difficult, seems highly suspect. The Pershing would theoretically be in the same league as Tiger and IS2 stat wise, it could be better or worse against infantry or tanks depending on how they felt the need to balance it. Jacksons remain extremely fragile, Pak 40s continue to be the best AT gun in the game, Panzershreks continue to be the best infantry AT in the game, and the range of Axis heavies (including the Elefant, which may wind up being the perfect counter to Jacksons and Pershing combo) will still outclass it.

It may or may not be included in the game, that is up to relic. However conceptually it will not ruin the balance permanently. Maybe when it first comes out they'll need to tweak it, or buff it, but that's normal with any new addition.
8 Aug 2014, 05:16 AM
#23
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2014, 03:06 AMRogers
Pershing for the last time is a no, and will not and should not happen. Here is one of the small reasons why. Imagine. M26 pershing in front, Jacksons in the back with HVAP. Guess what? Axis lose every single game, ever. Axis heavy tanks already get raped and rightfully so by vet jacksons even their front armor is no match. There is a reason the Pershing will never be in Western Fronts because it has no place in the Army design. Relic has said there will never be a pershing and I fully agree with them. There are other avenues to take.


Yea ok, USF have no late game because USF have no Pershing

You've got a 20 minute time limit before the overblown nazi armor starts attack-moving to victory
8 Aug 2014, 05:23 AM
#24
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13



Yea ok, USF have no late game because USF have no Pershing

You've got a 20 minute time limit before the overblown nazi armor starts attack-moving to victory


You don't need a heavy tank to have a late-game.

A strong composition of units fits this category which is why Ost can be quite powerful since they'll have Paks, upgraded grens, support crews and medium armour support if you don't go for things like Tigers.

8 Aug 2014, 05:23 AM
#25
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2014, 03:06 AMRogers
Pershing for the last time is a no, and will not and should not happen. Here is one of the small reasons why. Imagine. M26 pershing in front, Jacksons in the back with HVAP. Guess what? Axis lose every single game, ever. Axis heavy tanks already get raped and rightfully so by vet jacksons even their front armor is no match. There is a reason the Pershing will never be in Western Fronts because it has no place in the Army design. Relic has said there will never be a pershing and I fully agree with them. There are other avenues to take.



Its no different from having an is2 in front and su85's in the back! Relic said they will give the usf a heavy tank in the future. i dont know what the tank will be but it wont be game breaking.

The argument of saying it goes against the faction design. I dont buy that one. OKW isnt suppost to have medium tanks. Yet they have a commander that grant them to option of deploying 2 panzer 4's. THIS IS AGAINST THE FACTION DESIGN. yet not game breaking.

Lastley there is soo many way to counter usf tanks. shreks, pak wall, pak 43, elephant, jagtiger, tiger rushes. King TIGER

I mean com'on a faction without at least ONE heavy tanks seam silly. And relic would be foolish to not put a heavy USF tank commander for sail. Its one of the most demanded units in coh2 right now! I swear i hope they dont add the jumbo sherman, another sherman would be soo boreing and the EZ8 is more advanced.

Im tiered of USF being a 20min faction
8 Aug 2014, 05:36 AM
#26
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293



Yea ok, USF have no late game because USF have no Pershing

You've got a 20 minute time limit before the overblown nazi armor starts attack-moving to victory


you have never used a jackson have you?
8 Aug 2014, 05:42 AM
#27
avatar of reefermadness

Posts: 43

I know all the axis player hate long outmatch time due to the lack of players playing allies lately....

So here is my propsosal to make USF more appealing.

1. Add m26 Pershing ( i know this idea is hated by axis players, many say it would be OP due to the fact that the pershing will sit in front while the jacksons hit from range. My argument to this is that the russians already use this tactic with IS-2's in front and SU-85's firing from range) If this idea is too much to deal with then i propose that the commander would replace the m36 jackson with a build-able m18 hellcat or m10. The m26 would really help in team games.

2. More infantry variety. I think adding more infantry types my be silly. So, i simply propose that relic allow USF player to build more Multiple captain and lieutenant squads. I realize that axis player are getting tired of "Rifle Spam". This will allow the faction to be more enjoyable.

3. Lastely a complete separate commander from the Pershing one it would be interesting. If the commander allowed the replacement of the 1919 gun rack for a Thomson gun rack. this would really help in close maps. I know axis player hate this idea also. My argument against that is that cons can use ppsh guns for some commanders.

These are my proposals to making the USF faction more fun! I hope you guys agree with some of my points. ATM When i log on to play, auto match constantly shows 80% axis and 20% allies. Im guessing people are kinda used to russians but wont properly give the USF a good run time.

I really hope players are open to changing thier minds :)


How does more Lieutenants and Captains not fall under the category "Rifle Spam", they're riflemen just with a free weapon upgrade.

To the faction design thing,

GameSpot: So tell me about the two new factions coming in The Western Front Armies.

Quinn Duffy: We have two new armies that have designed from the ground up, the US Forces and German OberKommando West, so a new American army and a new German army. The American army is very flexible, versatile, and focuses on mobility. They don’t have anything too hard-hitting, but they do have a lot of gameplay elements built around their versatility and mobility. The OKW, on the other hand, are extremely hard-hitting with a lot of veteran infantry units, super heavy tanks, and technological advances--but they're also a hard army to sustain because their economy was under a lot of pressure at this point in the war.

That was our starting point for these armies in terms of making them feel unique compared to the other armies in the game.
8 Aug 2014, 05:56 AM
#28
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
How does more Lieutenants and Captains not fall under the category "Rifle Spam", they're riflemen just with a free weapon upgrade.


Thanks for proposing ur striking ideas / sarcasm

Its not rifle spam because they are different units. Would u prefer that the usf have more variety in infantry?
8 Aug 2014, 07:55 AM
#29
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381



Thanks for proposing ur striking ideas / sarcasm

Its not rifle spam because they are different units. Would u prefer that the usf have more variety in infantry?

wtf calm down. captains are pretty much riflemen.
8 Aug 2014, 09:00 AM
#30
avatar of GustavGans

Posts: 747

The last thing this game needs is another heavy call-in tank. There simply is noo need for it, Jacksons can deal with every axis tank there is, it's just a matter of micro.

I agree that USF's infantry based AT is a bit lackluster but their armored arsenal really is far from being useless.
8 Aug 2014, 09:38 AM
#31
avatar of Steiner500

Posts: 183

I know all the axis player hate long outmatch time due to the lack of players playing allies lately....

So here is my propsosal to make USF more appealing.

1. Add m26 Pershing ( i know this idea is hated by axis players, many say it would be OP due to the fact that the pershing will sit in front while the jacksons hit from range. My argument to this is that the russians already use this tactic with IS-2's in front and SU-85's firing from range) If this idea is too much to deal with then i propose that the commander would replace the m36 jackson with a build-able m18 hellcat or m10. The m26 would really help in team games.

2. More infantry variety. I think adding more infantry types my be silly. So, i simply propose that relic allow USF player to build more Multiple captain and lieutenant squads. I realize that axis player are getting tired of "Rifle Spam". This will allow the faction to be more enjoyable.

3. Lastely a complete separate commander from the Pershing one it would be interesting. If the commander allowed the replacement of the 1919 gun rack for a Thomson gun rack. this would really help in close maps. I know axis player hate this idea also. My argument against that is that cons can use ppsh guns for some commanders.

These are my proposals to making the USF faction more fun! I hope you guys agree with some of my points. ATM When i log on to play, auto match constantly shows 80% axis and 20% allies. Im guessing people are kinda used to russians but wont properly give the USF a good run time.

I really hope players are open to changing thier minds :)

It is no point if Germans say that Pershing would be op.
The Point is, what do some Players want? FUN. Thats the game. Let them cry, this are kids in the School. Still learning.
They can't play.
Tiger ACE was at beginning OP too.
8 Aug 2014, 09:42 AM
#32
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2014, 03:06 AMRogers
Pershing for the last time is a no, and will not and should not happen. Here is one of the small reasons why. Imagine. M26 pershing in front, Jacksons in the back with HVAP. Guess what? Axis lose every single game, ever. Axis heavy tanks already get raped and rightfully so by vet jacksons even their front armor is no match. There is a reason the Pershing will never be in Western Fronts because it has no place in the Army design. Relic has said there will never be a pershing and I fully agree with them. There are other avenues to take.



Except that that is allready possible. IS 2 with jacksons behind. IS2 with su-85s behind. Oh noes, how horrible!
8 Aug 2014, 15:14 PM
#33
avatar of MilkaCow

Posts: 577

USF has a great lategame, possibly actually one of the best ones in the game. The major problem is that it requires comparably much skill, something only a minor part of the community possesses. This is not meant in an insulting or derogatory way or a pat on the back for others, it actually is a problem.

Lategame it's mostly about cost-effectiveness and about the Alpha strike (i.e. the ability to just almost instantly wipe on opposing unit). Jackson is the most cost-effective AT weapon there is, same for the American ATG and Rifles or Paras with upgrades (especially M1919A6). Jackson additionally has one of the best Alpha strikes in the game, since it deals 240 damage. Additionally USF has a great hardcounter to infantry lategame, the M8A1 Scott. Now the big "But" - most of these units are mostly glass cannons. They are extremely cost-effective because they trade hitpoints and resilience for a stronger gun. That means you need to watch them closely and micro them well, which causes limitations on the usefulness of their weaponry simply due to requiring a lot of player time. Even the best players can only put so much time into microing those units, so they are capped to a degree there. Players with less micro, experience or a more casual playstyle will most likely have an even harder time with those units. So theoretically USF has actually an awesome lategame, but few people can actually use it in a great way. A heavy tank that can take a lot of damage and deal it is not as cost-effective, but requires actually less player interaction in many cases. Now what is the problem with adding a heavy tank? It is exactly what USF is atm lacking and would work superb in combination with Jacksons. I think it would be the go-to doctrine and super hard to balance. Countering Jacksons is already hard, imagine if there is some tank that can scout for them and take quite a few shots - I cannot really see what you'd do against that on a competitive level.
8 Aug 2014, 17:18 PM
#34
avatar of Jinseual

Posts: 598

I have to agree with milkacow, the American faction is not an underpowered faction, it's late game is effective, but it's not as easy to control as other factions late game. Since the American doesn't have heavy tanks it is harder for many players to micro multiple tanks around. It's because you have to micro two medium tanks to get the same effect as one heavy tank. Like microing your sherman to wipe infantry squads while the jackson handles the armor.

I think people are just very used to using heavy tanks, and using very simple tactics like moving the tank in, if the attack isn't going well just back up repair and try again later. It's not like people send scouts first. It's like going to swimming pool you touch the water to see if it's cold then decide to come later when it's warm, instead the CoH2 mentality is like you jump into the pool before knowing the temperature then jump out and dry yourself before you freeze to death.

You can't do that with the Americans because there can't adsorb damage like that, so when you find out the enemy has too much defenses you would normally lose a tank before you retreat. Dampening your combat effectiveness unlike a heavy tank which you can simply repair without suffering any losses.

Another thing which is probably the main big thing is that the Americans don't have a non doctrine mobile artillery to break the stalemate. The Ostheer has the Panzerwerfer, the OKW has the Stuka and the Soviets have the Katyusha. Another simple strategy players tend to do is just pack a bunch of soldiers and equipment then sit back and shell the enemy to create a gap in the defences then attack.

The Americans well.... you just hope or scout out till there is an opening then attack. You don't have the kind of heavily artillery like the Soviets and Germans.
8 Aug 2014, 18:03 PM
#35
avatar of Kallipolan

Posts: 196

I agree with Jinseual and MilkaCow, but also I want to add that in my opinion, "well, the other factions have it" is a really bad justification for giving a faction a particular unit or ability. Currently, one aspect of USF as a faction is that they lack a late-game heavy tank. Since WFA launched, people have been calling for the Persching to be added, but I feel that factions are defined by what they lack just as much as by what they have. The lack of a heavy tank leads to nuanced, asymmetric play near the end of the match, and asymmetry of factions is one of my favourite features in the Company of Heroes franchise. If every faction was given every other factions' best unit just because "well, the other guy has it," they game would be far less interesting than it currently is. IMO, the lack of a Persching is a challenge to be enjoyed, not a balance flaw to complain about.
8 Aug 2014, 21:51 PM
#36
avatar of varunax

Posts: 210

To make the USF more appealing? First off... fix their god damn cluster fuck base.
9 Aug 2014, 00:18 AM
#37
avatar of Durabo
Donator 11

Posts: 24

I dont get people who still insist on pershing. Time and again people told them it would be a bad idea but noooooooooo, since soviets have the is-2, germans have the tiger and okw has the king tiger, us "should" get a pershing. Problem with that is, lack of a heavy tank is the only handicap us have.

OKW and USF are designed differently than other factions as in they are very strong in some aspects, terrible at others. US have very strong early game with their riflemans, aaht's and whatnot. OKW has very strong late game with all their heavy armor and veterancy. But usf doesnt have any heavy units or elite infantry while okw gets less fuel on top of their enemies strong early game, so they're usually on the back foot early game hence most of the time you see okw playing defensively. By giving americans pershing, you are fixing their only weakness while keeping their early game advantages. Surely you can see the problem with that.

And you are still insisting on a pershing for nostalgia purposes or you just really like the damn thing, it has to be designed that no one will actually gets them in competetive games. Like making it roughly equal to panther but putting it at 12 cp and 800mp 300 fuel. Or lets say you get the pershing you want at the price you want. Fine, if usf gets armor doctrine, okw should get a doctrine which gets %100 fuel income at 0-1 cp. There you go, you just created two generals who will make all others obsolete.
9 Aug 2014, 00:35 AM
#38
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

I don't want pershing actually. I want SUPER PERSHING.
9 Aug 2014, 02:46 AM
#39
avatar of Part time commie

Posts: 99

I agree with CoH2player! No but seriously, part of the american doctrine on tank engagements was to find the enemy and let the tank destroyers engage from a safe position. I think this is what relic tried to mimic and it's a good idea. It gives the US their own gameplay. As long as they get good TDs and recon options, this can works and this makes a for a much more interestting playstyle than just copypasting the one of the other factions.
9 Aug 2014, 03:28 AM
#40
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1

I agree with CoH2player! No but seriously, part of the american doctrine on tank engagements was to find the enemy and let the tank destroyers engage from a safe position. I think this is what relic tried to mimic and it's a good idea. It gives the US their own gameplay. As long as they get good TDs and recon options, this can works and this makes a for a much more interestting playstyle than just copypasting the one of the other factions.
Well said commie (no sarcasm)
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

772 users are online: 772 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49150
Welcome our newest member, Bohanan
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM