Months later, still no adjustment to the Forward HQ

I made a thread a few months back about how the Forward HQ was in a broken state in team games.

I thought I would post another example on how most maps allow this ability to be used and abused by a Soviet player into giving them a very quick win.

The Mortar Halftrack is not a reliable counter, as some buildings take too long to burn down, and the shots can often miss the building completely.

The Stuka IS a viable counter, but by the time it comes out in team games, it is often too late to help out your team.

Changes that must be made in order to balance this ability in my opinion;

1) It can only be set up in allied controlled / connected territory.
2) It needs to be pushed up to 1 CP at least, 1CP already comes fast and it will prevent the Soviets from just rushing up to the first, crucial building and setting it up instantly.
3) You should be able to decapture a forward HQ, but it will take a fair amount of time to do so (30-45 seconds perhaps) That way, if the soviets have to retreat you can decap their HQ to make it useless instead of forcing you to use munitions to destroy it.

I often see this strategy, and the people that use it can even admit it themselves it's cheap and not balanced. Please, don't give me the excuse that "Oh well there's nothing else good about that commander so why change it!" It's still a broken ability that needs to be looked at by Relic.

For example, take this replay I just got out of:

http://www.coh2.org/replay/24907/forward-hq-is-still-broken.

What are your opinions on this? I believe it is something that definitely requires a little bit of attention. It is very prominent on 3v3 and 4v4 games.

What if I told you it was very easy for me to counter. I start with 2 sturmpios and chase off any squad that wants to come close to the FHQ before i get volks to come reinforce my sturmpios cause as we all know they're not amazing at range anymore.

In team games I can get out a Stuka in close to 8 minutes easy. Set up your mech truck as early as possible. For me...I build 1 unit and then set it up with only 2 units total. As soon as its up, I do a fuel transfer and wait. Unless you have been completely pushed off the map, you can build a Stuka very quickly and say goodnite HQ.

Edit: I've also seen pros just burn the building down with flamers and incendiary rounds from Mortar Halftracks.

The feel doing HQ start in team games

It's not cheap you bummer, it costs 60 fuel, leaving me nothing but unupgraded Cons. It is also very map dependent.

It costs 60 fuel, quite an investment imo since it's always gonna be destroyed sooner or later.
Using two mortar squads as Ostheer to bring it down in a reasonable amount of time.
A rushed stuka can be out at minute 6 or 7 and nullifies the whole commander so.
I once even destroyed one with a sWS truck by crushing the building.

Actually I can't remember a team game I lost against this commander.

early sturmpios can also deny the FHQ's usefulness to the enemy. 2x sturmpios going close range and then volks coming to support long range combat will help crush it down.

I made a thread a few months back about how the Forward HQ was in a broken state in team games.

I thought I would post another example on how most maps allow this ability to be used and abused by a Soviet player into giving them a very quick win.

The Mortar Halftrack is not a reliable counter, as some buildings take too long to burn down, and the shots can often miss the building completely.

The Stuka IS a viable counter, but by the time it comes out in team games, it is often too late to help out your team.

Changes that must be made in order to balance this ability in my opinion;

1) It can only be set up in allied controlled / connected territory.
2) It needs to be pushed up to 1 CP at least, 1CP already comes fast and it will prevent the Soviets from just rushing up to the first, crucial building and setting it up instantly.
3) You should be able to decapture a forward HQ, but it will take a fair amount of time to do so (30-45 seconds perhaps) That way, if the soviets have to retreat you can decap their HQ to make it useless instead of forcing you to use munitions to destroy it.

I often see this strategy, and the people that use it can even admit it themselves it's cheap and not balanced. Please, don't give me the excuse that "Oh well there's nothing else good about that commander so why change it!" It's still a broken ability that needs to be looked at by Relic.

For example, take this replay I just got out of:

http://www.coh2.org/replay/24907/forward-hq-is-still-broken.

What are your opinions on this? I believe it is something that definitely requires a little bit of attention. It is very prominent on 3v3 and 4v4 games.

If everyone here who plays 4v4 can easily counter it then I think it is a l2p issue with you.

It's not cheap you bummer, it costs 60 fuel, leaving me nothing but unupgraded Cons. It is also very map dependent.

Oh ok, so because something like 25% of maps it isn't that useful on means it doesn't need to be looked at. I guess because it is a commander that you have to select that makes it a non issue. Oh boy, with logic like that no wonder you think it's not a problem.

I guess from now on if some ability isn't useful in one aspect of the game, we can completely rule out balancing it. That's your logic apparently.

The majority of maps have buildings on them. The majority of maps have buildings at crucial map locations perfect for FHQ abuse. These are simply facts of Relic's map design. This ability continues to be used and abused by you and your teammates specifically.

I'm sorry that your biased opinion is irrelevant in this matter, you cannot even come up with a counterargument besides "L2P," and posting some silly images / .gifs. I'm sorry but those aren't valid counterpoints or arguments against what I've said.

It could probably do with having its performance normalized- less effective in the situations where it currently would absolutely dominate (vs ostheer without a mortar halftrack, or on the semois summer building next to north cutoff) and less terrible in all other scenarios (vs stuka, vs flame mortar rounds, vs truck crush)- since it is very much an all or nothing ability right now.

I'd suggest making it-

-repairable
-cheaper (200/25 or so)
-truck-proof
-resistant to flame rounds. I don't think it would be possible to make it stukaproof as long as the stuka kills all buildings in one rocket, but with the huge cost drop it wouldn't be such an issue anyway.

but

-not deployable in enemy or neutral territory
-not instantly deployed
-decappable
-not give huge aura bonuses, especially so that countermortars can work without being without being wiped by mortars next to the FHQ

Oh ok, so because something like 25% of maps it isn't that useful on means it doesn't need to be looked at. I guess because it is a commander that you have to select that makes it a non issue. Oh boy, with logic like that no wonder you think it's not a problem.

I guess from now on if some ability isn't useful in one aspect of the game, we can completely rule out balancing it. That's your logic apparently.

The majority of maps have buildings on them. The majority of maps have buildings at crucial map locations perfect for FHQ abuse. These are simply facts of Relic's map design. This ability continues to be used and abused by you and your teammates specifically.

I'm sorry that your biased opinion is irrelevant in this matter, you cannot even come up with a counterargument besides "L2P," and posting some silly images / .gifs. I'm sorry but those aren't valid counterpoints or arguments against what I've said.

1. It is expensive, 300MP and 60 fuel leaves me with nothing but two unupgraded Conscripts for the first five minutes. At 8 minutes you can have a maximum of 3 FHQs since it is impossible for you to get enough fuel for even more. At 8 minutes the Axis team should have at least one Stuka, one MHT and several normal mortars. If you see that anyone in the Allied team have Urban Defense equiped and you are going up against them on either Ettebrück or City 17, you must rush and hold the vital buildings before the Soviets grab them.

2. It is in fact extremely map dependant. You usually don't go with this commander other than on Ettelbrück or right side of City 17. I would like to see you use this commander and not lose on maps like Steppes, Lienne Forest, Rhzev, Hill 331, Lazur Factory and Lanzerath Ambush just to name a few. If you want to proove me wrong, feel free to add me on Steam and muster up a team so you can use Urban Defense on these maps against me and my team. I can tell you right now that you will lose hard.

3. The reason why I wrote that where you uploaded the replay is because of what you wrote ingame:

[00:06:35] Admiral Adama: cunts like you that abuse that commander are such scumbags
[00:06:42] Admiral Adama: truly the worst of the worst type of players
[00:07:01] Admiral Adama: A sincere fuck you for being such a gigantic cunt

Should I flame you for playing the second most OP faction after OKW? This is not a statement but fact, I have another thread that clearly shows that OKW and Ostheer obviously overperforms in 3v3 and 4v4. But why would I need arguments against a lowlifer like you who have never left his basement? It is sufficient to say that you honestly need to learn to play and not shout "OP" to everything that beats you like the noob you are.

1. It is expensive, 300MP and 60 fuel leaves me with nothing but two unupgraded Conscripts for the first five minutes. At 8 minutes you can have a maximum of 3 FHQs since it is impossible for you to get enough fuel for even more. At 8 minutes the Axis team should have at least one Stuka, one MHT and several normal mortars. If you see that anyone in the Allied team have Urban Defense equiped and you are going up against them on either Ettebrück or City 17, you must rush and hold the vital buildings before the Soviets grab them.

2. It is in fact extremely map dependant. You usually don't go with this commander other than on Ettelbrück or right side of City 17. I would like to see you use this commander and not lose on maps like Steppes, Lienne Forest, Rhzev, Hill 331, Lazur Factory and Lanzerath Ambush just to name a few. If you want to proove me wrong, feel free to add me on Steam and muster up a team so you can use Urban Defense on these maps against me and my team. I can tell you right now that you will lose hard.

3. The reason why I wrote that where you uploaded the replay is because of what you wrote ingame:

[00:06:35] Admiral Adama: cunts like you that abuse that commander are such scumbags
[00:06:42] Admiral Adama: truly the worst of the worst type of players
[00:07:01] Admiral Adama: A sincere fuck you for being such a gigantic cunt

Should I flame you for playing the second most OP faction after OKW? This is not a statement but fact, I have another thread that clearly shows that OKW and Ostheer obviously overperforms in 3v3 and 4v4. But why would I need arguments against a lowlifer like you who have never left his basement? It is sufficient to say that you honestly need to learn to play and not shout "OP" to everything that beats you like the noob you are.

Aww, looks like someone's so angry about a little internet trash talk. Looks like all you can resort to is personal attacks. Nothing you said changes any of my points. The forward HQ should NOT be able to be built in enemy controlled or neutral territory.

300 MP and 60 Fuel is not expensive at all considering all the buffs the building gets and that is unlocks at... wait for it 0 CP! This ability is broken, and your failure to understand that just shows how stubborn and biased you yourself are.

But whatever, continue to resort to personal attacks when you have nothing but the same rhetoric to back up your arguments.

Aww, looks like someone's so angry about a little internet trash talk. Looks like all you can resort to is personal attacks. Nothing you said changes any of my points. The forward HQ should NOT be able to be built in enemy controlled or neutral territory.

300 MP and 60 Fuel is not expensive at all considering all the buffs the building gets and that is unlocks at... wait for it 0 CP! This ability is broken, and your failure to understand that just shows how stubborn and biased you yourself are.

But whatever, continue to resort to personal attacks when you have nothing but the same rhetoric to back up your arguments.

Personal attacks like what you wrote in the game? I never said you were a cunt and you called me one before I even said anything to you. You are clearly the one who is frustrated since you got incredibly outplayed and are trying to show us that something is OP by uploading replay in which you got base rushed after 7 minutes.

I am offering you an opportunity to show me how OP this commander is. As I said, add me on Steam and proove it. Hell, I can even buy any commander/skin/faceplate to you of your choosing if you manage to beat us with Urban Defense on any of the maps I suggested earlier.

300MP and 60 fuel is cheap? The opponent have nothing but double Cons and his starting Engineer while you have numerous other units to simply overwhelm that player, unless everyone do what you did, spend 750 manpower on caches and bunkers and only have 2-3 units when the opponents are knocking on the door to your base.

l2p


USE A STUKA

The 60 fuel price tag makes it a one-trick pony. Either you hold it, cut your opponent off and win within 10-15 minutes, or you don't and your entire doctrine is worthless, with no late-game whatsoever and you lose.

Personally, I'd make it take time to build (with the process cancelled by the squad inside leaving/dying) and be available in neutral or friendly territory. In exchange, lower its fuel cost (to, say, 30) so that, instead of the doctrine relying on getting one fortress on your opponent's cutoff, you can maybe build a few of them to act as strong points all over the map. Strummingbird's ideas could also work, he just takes the concept further I suppose.

The goal, really, is not to nerf it but to make it less of an all-in semi-cheese doctrine. You really either win with your FHQ, or lose it and then you're absolutely fucked. I would prefer if it offered the Soviet player the option to seize and keep map control. The doctrine not even having something as basic as the PPSh for scaling doesn't help either.

I wonder if I could convince Ami to make me a mod.

I wonder if I could convince Ami to make me a mod.

Reason for this?

If there's feedback for current mods, feel free to create thread with these feelings / send message for current moderators and tell them how you feel.

Considering this thread, I find ludd3emm's first post more or less constructive (atleast he's giving opinions). There is a little teaser for the last part, clearly wanted to give something back from really abusive chat from the game. Then it's only fair to allow second party to respond (if it doesn't go too long).

This being said, next one who will continue personal attacks in this thread, is going to get some consequences.

It is map dependent and expensive. Expensive does not equal "worth it". It might be worth its price, yes, but that's still 60 fuel, which means you bet on the FHQ at the cost of teching up.

And on top of that, you also have to consider the commander that includes it: it has no call-in infantry, no upgrades to conscripts and no call-in tanks. As you should know, soviet game relies heavily on commander call-ins.

So, even if the FHQ can be strong if used correctly in team games (which I agree), it relegates the soviet player to a support role. When playing against it, the moment you see an FHQ you know now that your opponent will not have shocks, nor guards, nor PPSHs, nor anything heavier than the Soviet T4 tanks. It's a strong trade-off that you, as an opponent, has to exploit.

Reason for this?

If there's feedback for current mods, feel free to create thread with these feelings / send message for current moderators and tell them how you feel.

Considering this thread, I find ludd3emm's first post more or less constructive (atleast he's giving opinions). There is a little teaser for the last part, clearly wanted to give something back from really abusive chat from the game. Then it's only fair to allow second party to respond (if it doesn't go too long).

This being said, next one who will continue personal attacks in this thread, is going to get some consequences.

This is what I like about coh2.org. It gives you some room to write what you want but nothing excessive. Generally good moderators.

I know a few ghost stories from the offical forums and the beta forums where a very prominent shoutcaster used to lock/delete threads he simply did not agree with.

Stuka, it will wipe out multiple squads and the HQ