Ostheer - MG42

''Ostheer is the most balanced faction imo''.If he didn't mean 'balanced' he could have just said 'best designed'.Balanced means its fine and needs no changes which is not the case.So perhaps his choice of words was off,or perhaps he really think ost is fine.I can't say for sure.

Balanced is a word you do not understand and probably won't. You're still persisting in your little personal whiner quote war - as if it would change anything to Relic decision about design and gameplay.

You should rename as Victim since anything you touch in this game becomes automatically underpowered that you can't stand a chance vs anybody.

''Ostheer is the most balanced faction imo''.If he didn't mean 'balanced' he could have just said 'best designed'.Balanced means its fine and needs no changes which is not the case.So perhaps his choice of words was off,or perhaps he really think ost is fine.I can't say for sure.

I'd say that EVERY OTHER FACTION except Wermacht need changes.
Especially WFA factions, especially their teching.

You excuse away every thing I explain to you...pios Engineers who cares they all do the same thing. And s mines are for area denial and flank protection.

they don't lose to rifles that horribly until double bars come out.If the rifles try to close in, they lose, if they stay at long range, they lose,at mid range rifles take decent casualties and usually cannot afford to fight another battle. A close range rifles do stomp grens. Get an MG42 to prevent that, or veto city maps like every normal ostheer player would.

I told you why pgrens are fragile. You ignore that and say it's cheap and lame that you can't blob a 240 ALPHA DAMAGE Infantry squad, because when they USED to not be so fragile they were OP. I told you to use them in a supportive role, not like folks. If pgrens could just ignore the combined arms rule of Ost, they'd be OP. As proven by earlier versions of coh2. That's why ost doesn't have good elite infantry, it's not some huge oversight. It's their design,

I told you what units are good and useful which was about half of them,, including that amazing tier 1 from ost. I told you why A certain unit or tier was underperforming, and it was like you didn't read it.

search a fix for blobs thread, many include things like reducing nade range when suppressed, debuff on grouped units, more received accuracy in general towards mobbed infantry,MG buffs have been suggested and I told you many times in this thread why that wouldn't work..

1.Not excuse,just another reality of a small disadvantage for ost.Cruzz fixed this in kappatch.S-mines are still far less effective than multipurpose 1-shot soviet mines with that silly signboard.

2.Are we even playing same game?Rifles can close with impunity,grens can't stop them.Even at long range its very situational and RNG dependant,mid and close range rifles asswipe.As for not afford to fight another battle..plz don't try to be foolish.US field presence is far superior with ambulance both healing and reinforcing available right from start and also free units.Forget buying BArs,lieutenant comes with free BAR.Wake up.

3.No you gave a totally biased reason.IF I'M GOING TO PAY 340 MP AND 120 MUNI FOR A INFANTRY SQUAD,I BETTER EXPECT ALPHA DMG.I'm not asking them to be invulnerable i just don't want that enormous investment not to be one shotted..3 members lost ..even that is ok...1 shot..UNACCEPTABLE.340 MP AND 120 MUNI doesn't grow on a tree.It costs a pair and a leg.
And none of this changes the fact..that the 'design' makes ost completely helpless vs enemy elite infantry,because pzgrens AI is only good for cosn and vanilla rifles.

4.That amazing tier 1-all 4 of its amazing units is outperformed by single american unit.So what good is it?
When blob fix is implemented u won't see me asking for mg42 buff,till then i will.

Now stop sidestepping and making false accusations .Even aside tech costs,
1.Sniper-survivability issue
2.Mg42 - Unreliability issue(mix of survivability,unreliable suppression performance)
3.222 halftrack - Surviavbility issue.Dmg needs to kill snipers consistently at least,which pathetically it doesn't.
4.Pzgrens -Survivability issue.
5.Stug - Good for nothing,neither here nor there.Lack of defined role issue.
8.Panzerwerfer -Damage and accesibility problem.

Of the above....asking for buff of which is crying or whining?They are all justified requests against genuinely underperforming units.
But usf fanboys like you cry whiner at slightest ost buff sop u can enjoy ur autowins,its u who is the whiner.Or answer point by point which is whining.

I'd say that EVERY OTHER FACTION except Wermacht need changes.
Especially WFA factions, especially their teching.

So you would rebalance 3 factions rather than one,great idea genius.

Balanced is a word you do not understand and probably won't. You're still persisting in your little personal whiner quote war - as if it would change anything to Relic decision about design and gameplay.

You should rename as Victim since anything you touch in this game becomes automatically underpowered that you can't stand a chance vs anybody.

Point out which of my demands are unreasonable/whining or stop barking uselessly to save ur usf autowins.

Point out which of my demands are unreasonable/whining or stop barking uselessly to save ur usf autowins.

Why don't you add me on steam and we can play some games. I will show you how to use Whermact properly and you can use SU or USF.

I will ask you this austerlitz, tell me what do you think about one shotting 340mp units that won't have any chance to react.

(yes, this is my trap card activated here)

So you would rebalance 3 factions rather than one,great idea genius.

I'd say otherwise:
I'd rather fix 3 other factions than break one which ain't broken.

At this point aust I think you're a troll.

You CANNOT HAVE a ton of rifles(3-4),a blob of paras, a forward ambulance, bars, smoke, AA HT, whatever, and expect to be ahead of the ost on in such a way that they are helpless and have no counter.
That's impossible. Grenadiers do NOT get stomped by rifles as badly as you're putting it, especially with an MG supporting, so no we don't play the same game.

Please post a replay or watch your own so someone can help you, or my god actually play the game and get better.

I'm not a fanboy. I told you I agree with those units being underpowered. I want the ost competitive and rewarding good combined arms. Not some easy mode bs.

Senseless Crying and trolling this forum is not going to get you anywhere, and until you start posting sense and showing me you have decent reading comprehension I'm done arguing with you, and if I see another tear post from you lets just say I won't see any more of your posts after that.

I will ask you this austerlitz, tell me what do you think about one shotting 340mp units that won't have any chance to react.

(yes, this is my trap card activated here)

If it also has 120 munitions on it,which would put the total equivalent price to 550 mp plus i would say bullshit.When u make a trap,make a good one.

At this point aust I think you're a troll.

You CANNOT HAVE a ton of rifles(3-4),a blob of paras, a forward ambulance, bars, smoke, AA HT, whatever, and expect to be ahead of the ost on in such a way that they are helpless and have no counter.
That's impossible. Grenadiers do NOT get stomped by rifles as badly as you're putting it, especially with an MG supporting, so no we don't play the same game.

Please post a replay or watch your own so someone can help you, or my god actually play the game and get better.

I'm not a fanboy. I told you I agree with those units being underpowered. I want the ost competitive and rewarding good combined arms. Not some easy mode bs.

Senseless Crying and trolling this forum is not going to get you anywhere, and until you start posting sense and showing me you have decent reading comprehension I'm done arguing with you, and if I see another tear post from you lets just say I won't see any more of your posts after that.

U can have 3-4 rifles early on easy.Lategame u can ad 2-3 paras if u lost a squad or 2.Ambulance is common usually after they have 4-5 inf units.Manpower early on is not a problem for usf due to free units,muni is.Latgame rifle bleed may cause MP issues.You get a free Bar On ur way to AA ht.Need no muni to spend on bunker(healing) or mines.Only nades(if u went for it) and BARS.
Grenadiers can only hold back rifles if they outnumber them..this is my experience.And that won't happen due to tech and free BAR thompson lieutenant.

Now stop trying to divert the issue,calling me fanboy endlessly proves nothing....answer with fact.

1.Sniper-survivability issue
2.Mg42 - Unreliability issue(mix of survivability,unreliable suppression performance)
3.222 halftrack - Surviavbility issue.Dmg needs to kill snipers consistently at least,which pathetically it doesn't.
4.Pzgrens -Survivability issue.
5.Stug - Good for nothing,neither here nor there.Lack of defined role issue.
8.Panzerwerfer -Damage and accesibility problem.

Of the above....asking for buff of which is crying or whining?They are all justified requests against genuinely underperforming units.

Answer with logic and to the point,every point u just call me whiner/L2P without any proper answer.Which one of these units getting buffs is whining.None,given their current performance.None of you or katitof & co can actually refute this,so u attack me personally.

If it also has 120 munitions on it,which would put the total equivalent price to 550 mp plus i would say bullshit.When u make a trap,make a good one.

I'm not asking about potential side munition costs although they are possible.
And 340 mp unit with upgrade is still 340 mp unit, it doesn't suddenly become tank, 340 mp unit still is as survivable as 340 mp unit, weapon upgrade or not.

There are only 3 units in game that directly gain suitability from muni upgrade.

The 3v3 and 4v4 heroes would like you to know that Alex does not speak for us.

lol

MG42 is the best MG in the game

To bad it's the most fragile alongside the .50 cal

Pz4: Best Medium tank in the game (Although it has trouble vs. Jackson).

This prize goes to the Easy Eight, M4C, or T34/85. Axis doesn't have much medium armor by design, so the PIV has to be good or else Axis wouldn't have a medium MBT to speak of at all.

Panther: Expensive, but still a heavy armored unit that can be used in conjunction with any doctrine.

If your going for call in's Ostheer can't afford to tech to 4.

Maxim doesn't feel like something I can defend with unless it's in a building. It's arc is too narrow otherwise, it's not something you can setup and hold territory with. This is especially problematic as Sov is the only faction without field defences (Bunkers, FPs, etc).

If you pay attention you can easily reposition a maxim to hit an enemy while they are pushing you, something you cannot do with the MG42. This is by design.

You excuse away every thing I explain to you...pios Engineers who cares they all do the same thing. And s mines are for area denial and flank protection

No, they don't. Pio's aren't very useful unless you use them to spam mines, and with Ostheers lack of munitions thanks to the LMG42 being mandatory for your grens to not get owned brutally as the game progresses as well as need for upgrading bunkers for medics and nades your not going to be able to spam mines.

CE's are far more useful since Soviets don't really need to worry about muni income, and I can just spam demo's everywhere.

I told you why pgrens are fragile. You ignore that and say it's cheap and lame that you can't blob a 240 ALPHA DAMAGE Infantry squad, because when they USED to not be so fragile they were OP. I told you to use them in a supportive role, not like folks. If pgrens could just ignore the combined arms rule of Ost, they'd be OP. As proven by earlier versions of coh2. That's why ost doesn't have good elite infantry, it's not some huge oversight. It's their design,

This is assuming a lot of things; first, that you had the munitions to give them shreks; second, you hit with both shreks; and thirds, that you didn't die to the infantry supporting said tank.

If Pgrens didn't die to a stiff breeze they might actually become more useful in an AT roll, but right now I'm not paying 120 munitions to get 1 shot by a T34 or die in 5 seconds to 2 1919'd riflemen. When I use Pgrens I always use them to deal with enemy infantry on close range maps, or maybe get a shrek support squad if I'm playing with Oustruppen or CAS.

I'd rather fix 3 other factions than break one which ain't broken.

Relic isn't going to radically redesign the factions, if you want balance we have to work with what we got.

I'm not asking about potential side munition costs although they are possible.
And 340 mp unit with upgrade is still 340 mp unit, it doesn't suddenly become tank, 340 mp unit still is as survivable as 340 mp unit, weapon upgrade or not.

There are only 3 units in game that directly gain suitability from muni upgrade.

The problem is that Ostheer is stretched very thing for MP, so 340 is a fairly huge investment. On top of that when Pgrens come in they are already at a disadvantage thanks to the fact that LMG's own them and they are quite fragile against infantry.

It would be nice if they had a special modifier like they used to that allow them to still fire accurately on the move so they had more use against enemy infantry when they came in.

1.Not excuse,just another reality of a small disadvantage for ost.Cruzz fixed this in kappatch.S-mines are still far less effective than multipurpose 1-shot soviet mines with that silly signboard.

2.Are we even playing same game?Rifles can close with impunity,grens can't stop them.Even at long range its very situational and RNG dependant,mid and close range rifles asswipe.As for not afford to fight another battle..plz don't try to be foolish.US field presence is far superior with ambulance both healing and reinforcing available right from start and also free units.Forget buying BArs,lieutenant comes with free BAR.Wake up.

3.No you gave a totally biased reason.IF I'M GOING TO PAY 340 MP AND 120 MUNI FOR A INFANTRY SQUAD,I BETTER EXPECT ALPHA DMG.I'm not asking them to be invulnerable i just don't want that enormous investment not to be one shotted..3 members lost ..even that is ok...1 shot..UNACCEPTABLE.340 MP AND 120 MUNI doesn't grow on a tree.It costs a pair and a leg.
And none of this changes the fact..that the 'design' makes ost completely helpless vs enemy elite infantry,because pzgrens AI is only good for cosn and vanilla rifles.

4.That amazing tier 1-all 4 of its amazing units is outperformed by single american unit.So what good is it?
When blob fix is implemented u won't see me asking for mg42 buff,till then i will.

Now stop sidestepping and making false accusations .Even aside tech costs,
1.Sniper-survivability issue
2.Mg42 - Unreliability issue(mix of survivability,unreliable suppression performance)
3.222 halftrack - Surviavbility issue.Dmg needs to kill snipers consistently at least,which pathetically it doesn't.
4.Pzgrens -Survivability issue.
5.Stug - Good for nothing,neither here nor there.Lack of defined role issue.
8.Panzerwerfer -Damage and accesibility problem.

Of the above....asking for buff of which is crying or whining?They are all justified requests against genuinely underperforming units.
But usf fanboys like you cry whiner at slightest ost buff sop u can enjoy ur autowins,its u who is the whiner.Or answer point by point which is whining.

i totally disagree with everything, i am currently playing a nom meta gamestyle as wehrmacht in random 2v2s and it works pretty well, using no tigers, but sniper, pgrens, stugs etc. ofc it's hard as wehrmacht, but not due it being weak, but rather all the cheese of allies and fucking RNG wipe units/tools, which they are forced to use to deal with OPW.

This thread has become such a cluster fuck. Too much pointless arguing about nothing. Everything that is wrong with Internet forums

It would be nice if they had a special modifier like they used to that allow them to still fire accurately on the move so they had more use against enemy infantry when they came in.

They still have 75% accuracy on the move, they just don't have 100% accuracy like they used to.

They still have 75% accuracy on the move, they just don't have 100% accuracy like they used to.

Sure, but they aren't nearly as spammable as they used to be and would still be fragile. They should get the 100% accuracy on the move back again.

Sure, but they aren't nearly as spammable as they used to be and would still be fragile. They should get the 100% accuracy on the move back again.

They cost less than they used to at that point. They were 360.

I'd prefer they be improved without being able to dodge everything because they have no movement penalty. They'd get pretty silly in a crater-heavy area with 100% accuracy on the move. Also because it's silly in general (though it was hilarious to use, for sure). Bring em' back to 360 MP, improve their damage appropriately so they can then be useful against BAR-ed Rifles while they now have no chance once Rifles get a BAR. Don't mess with the survivability, last year's March Deployment happened for a reason and I rather like how infantry fights make even engineers able to do something (if not much)[REs don't count, unfortunately] against elite infantry out of their range-element against them.

They cost less than they used to at that point. They were 360.

I'd prefer they be improved without being able to dodge everything because they have no movement penalty. They'd get pretty silly in a crater-heavy area with 100% accuracy on the move. Also because it's silly in general (though it was hilarious to use, for sure). Bring em' back to 360 MP, improve their damage appropriately so they can then be useful against BAR-ed Rifles while they now have no chance once Rifles get a BAR. Don't mess with the survivability, last year's March Deployment happened for a reason and I rather like how infantry fights make even engineers able to do something (if not much)[REs don't count, unfortunately] against elite infantry out of their range-element against them.

Disagree pzgrens don't need more DPS or accuracy at all but survivability,they lose 1/4 dps with first member loss which is quick.Their cost-effectiveness is horrendous which is why u won't see them as AI in competitive matches.

i totally disagree with everything, i am currently playing a nom meta gamestyle as wehrmacht in random 2v2s and it works pretty well, using no tigers, but sniper, pgrens, stugs etc. ofc it's hard as wehrmacht, but not due it being weak, but rather all the cheese of allies and fucking RNG wipe units/tools, which they are forced to use to deal with OPW.

What happens in 1 vs 1?Are the poor oppressed allies still 'forced' to use cheese against wehr to deal with OPW.Lol .Talk abt a lame excuse.If ost is fine,OKW is fine as well and needs buff vs maxim.