Login

russian armor

reasoning for putting a flak gun on the OKW base building?

PAGES (11)down
4 Mar 2015, 14:55 PM
#141
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484



they can with airborne. in 2v2s and higher youll want your teammate(s) to help you as well, since the flak HQ is big objective that you and your team should try very hard to destroy.

if you dont go airborne, and LT tier, a jackson replaces the AT gun. obviously your attack on the flak HQ will be delayed since the jackson comes out later than an AT gun. if you go captain tier, fighting pits + enough riflemen in green cover are a big enough deterrent in dealing with enemy infantry.

in addition its helpful to have stolen paks or mg42s obviously.


See how much effort it takes to destroy this building? Not to mention, the map has a huge influence on how Allied players can handle this situation. Add this to compounding problem of committing 25% of your troops for this task while Axis player is free to roam the map and do all kinds of damage (map control, ambulance hunt & flanks). Lastly, the areal denial on this truck makes it difficult to pull off mid game (he/she can sit on a fuel point until then). The whole point of this truck is to keep opponents from cutting off OKW (slap in the face for COH2 tactical play).
4 Mar 2015, 15:28 PM
#142
avatar of kamk
Donator 11

Posts: 764

Think about it the other way around: kill it, and there will be no Obers, no Luchs, no Panthers, and the OKW player just wasted 80 / 120 fuel.
Using a necessary Tier building for a defensive task can be quite a high risk.

A single mortar can easily wreck it with some time, same goes for any medium+ tank, AT, offmap arty (!). If the OKW guy repairs it he has to commit a squishy 320mp SPio unit, which he will most likely lose to indirect fire.
4 Mar 2015, 15:43 PM
#143
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1



See how much effort it takes to destroy this building? Not to mention, the map has a huge influence on how Allied players can handle this situation. Add this to compounding problem of committing 25% of your troops for this task while Axis player is free to roam the map and do all kinds of damage (map control, ambulance hunt & flanks). Lastly, the areal denial on this truck makes it difficult to pull off mid game (he/she can sit on a fuel point until then). The whole point of this truck is to keep opponents from cutting off OKW (slap in the face for COH2 tactical play).


Then do what you should and kill it's T2 (meaning jagdpz building) before he even tries to establish his T4. Coordination it's a sweet thing in team games and it's not so hard to catch a T2 deployment or a T2 advanced building with a united push. While being OKW, your other mate won't stay there for ever to protect you untill you get stronger. I lost my T2 while playing OKW several times due to good coordination and tactics of allied players. Then things became worst for me of course. That's all about allied game in early stage: harass and push, especially when there is an OKW player on map.
Again: it's not hard to destroy OKW t4 for reasons i explained in my previous posts. In fact, it's quite hard to efficiently place the t4 because you should cover 2 things:
1. put it somewhere where it will mean something (where it can be usefull);
2. deployed it in a place where is not to exposed in order not to lose it or lose it to quiclky while it can STILL provide support.

I studied these problems from USF, OKW and Soviet perspective and it's not easier in anybody's shoes.
4 Mar 2015, 15:56 PM
#144
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7



See how much effort it takes to destroy this building? Not to mention, the map has a huge influence on how Allied players can handle this situation. Add this to compounding problem of committing 25% of your troops for this task while Axis player is free to roam the map and do all kinds of damage (map control, ambulance hunt & flanks). Lastly, the areal denial on this truck makes it difficult to pull off mid game (he/she can sit on a fuel point until then). The whole point of this truck is to keep opponents from cutting off OKW (slap in the face for COH2 tactical play).


the effort is pretty much justified IMO cause youre basically hamstringing OKWs mid game by destroying it. you are not committing 25% of your troops. i would commit 80 to even a 100% to destroying this one structure. why? because the axis player will send everything to defend it once they realize their flak hq is in very real danger. the flak hq is the cornerstone of OKW midgame play, destroying it cripples them especially if they havent produced that many obers or a panther.
4 Mar 2015, 16:10 PM
#145
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

I still can't get over the fact people don't understand that with out it you can't make Panthers or Obers, which is what 99% of the people who bitch about OKW cry about.

It's an important building which is why it has defenses. If you adjust the fuel cost for the OKW fuel penalty it's 104 fuel, which is only 16 less than the soviet t3-t4 buildings.
4 Mar 2015, 16:20 PM
#146
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

I just wonder how you can defend this buliding which was designed to cover point from which OKW get 200% income, while this feature no longer exists. It was designed for something which we don't have in game anymore.
It's like, let give USF Pershing so they can deal with King Tiger. King Tiger is removed from the game but Pershing is still here. It would be quite similar.

It's pure assholness in 1v1. 1v1 is about capping, but you can't cap because of this unit building.

Soviets have plenty options but USF? You can't do anything until Sherman, and even then it will be pretty hard.


I still can't get over the fact people don't understand that with out it you can't make Panthers or Obers, which is what 99% of the people who bitch about OKW cry about.

It's an important building which is why it has defenses. If you adjust the fuel cost for the OKW fuel penalty it's 104 fuel, which is only 16 less than the soviet t3-t4 buildings.


Can't? I saw plenty 1v1 where OKW has lost T4, yes still was able to make second and Panther without big problems.
4 Mar 2015, 16:23 PM
#147
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

It's not like USF doesn't have the longest range AT gun in the game.
4 Mar 2015, 16:25 PM
#148
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1


Can't? I saw plenty 1v1 where OKW has lost T4, yes still was able to make second and Panther without big problems.


That person was probably already winning pretty hard, or was using Spec Ops to call in a command Panther.

The loss of the Schwer is pretty devastating since when you lose it you need to push up and lock down an area long enough for it to set up, which is MUCH harder late game due to the increased amount of infantry and tanks on the field.
4 Mar 2015, 16:25 PM
#149
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

It's not like USF doesn't have the longest range AT gun in the game.


It's not like you can't have Lt and Cpt and Mjr or T4 cannot be built behind shot blockers.

You will say, go for Cpt. Cool, but how I can get mines or HMG then?




That person was probably already winning pretty hard, or was using Spec Ops to call in a command Panther.

The loss of the Schwer is pretty devastating since when you lose it you need to push up and lock down an area long enough for it to set up, which is MUCH harder late game due to the increased amount of infantry and tanks on the field.


No he did not have advantage. It was really high level game. OKW player was loosing. Losts 2 Schweres and was able to make THIRD one.


Go airborne. USF has shit commanders, more at 11.


Really? Im force to go for doctrine to counter BUILDING?
4 Mar 2015, 16:26 PM
#150
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

Go airborne. USF has shit commanders, more at 11.
4 Mar 2015, 16:32 PM
#151
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

I just wonder how you can defend this buliding which was designed to cover point from which OKW get 200% income, while this feature no longer exists. It was designed for something which we don't have in game anymore.
It's like, let give USF Pershing so they can deal with King Tiger. King Tiger is removed from the game but Pershing is still here. It would be quite similar.

It's pure assholness in 1v1. 1v1 is about capping, but you can't cap because of this unit building.

Soviets have plenty options but USF? You can't do anything until Sherman, and even then it will be pretty hard.




Can't? I saw plenty 1v1 where OKW has lost T4, yes still was able to make second and Panther without big problems.


Not to mention, this building can damage ALL (even skill planes) but heavy armor on the field. You are right about 1 v 1, this building completely negates cut off game play.
4 Mar 2015, 16:41 PM
#152
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353



In recet patch (correct if Im not wrong) there was a change that no matter who picks up lmg34 CANT shoot on the move. So why Obers can?



Because Relic set Ober can use any LMG (MG42 DP-28 M1919A6) fire no prone and moving
And Paratrooper can fire on moving but prone when standing fire

you believe that ? if not open spoil

4 Mar 2015, 16:49 PM
#153
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



Because Relic set Ober can use any LMG (MG42 DP-28 M1919A6) fire no prone and moving
And Paratrooper can fire on moving but prone when standing fire

you believe that ? if not open spoil



But Obers have 0,75 dps on move while Paras only 0,25. #ProAxis
4 Mar 2015, 16:52 PM
#154
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



It's not like you can't have Lt and Cpt and Mjr or T4 cannot be built behind shot blockers.

You will say, go for Cpt. Cool, but how I can get mines or HMG then?




No he did not have advantage. It was really high level game. OKW player was loosing. Losts 2 Schweres and was able to make THIRD one.




Really? Im force to go for doctrine to counter BUILDING?


Then the other player must be broken in the head because 3 Schwers is over 300 fuel and a single Panther on top of that is 227.5! Did this game like over an hour?

And yes you need to take a commander to beat a unit. Either quit bitching about it or stop playing the game because commanders exist for a reason. Soviets are entirely designed around them, and USF commanders are mostly shit, but some are very good (Aiborne/Recon/Infantry).
4 Mar 2015, 16:53 PM
#155
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353



But Obers have 0,75 dps on move while Paras only 0,25. #ProAxis


other lmg dp-28 and mg42 0.75 dps on move too
4 Mar 2015, 16:58 PM
#156
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



But Obers have 0,75 dps on move while Paras only 0,25. #ProAxis


If Obers didn't have the LMG34 they would be worse than Para's in every way despite costing more.
4 Mar 2015, 17:04 PM
#157
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353



If Obers didn't have the LMG34 they would be worse than Para's in every way despite costing more.


ober have passive 30% rec acc bouns but para's not have it and m1 carbine very low dps on long range
4 Mar 2015, 17:08 PM
#158
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



ober have passive 30% rec acc bouns but para's not have it and m1 carbine very low dps on long range


Because they are a 4 man squad. And Para's do about the same DPS at medium range while having 6 squad members.

Long range DPS means diddly, it's one of the reasons Gren's are in such a bad spot right now.
4 Mar 2015, 17:45 PM
#159
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



Then the other player must be broken in the head because 3 Schwers is over 300 fuel and a single Panther on top of that is 227.5! Did this game like over an hour?

And yes you need to take a commander to beat a unit. Either quit bitching about it or stop playing the game because commanders exist for a reason. Soviets are entirely designed around them, and USF commanders are mostly shit, but some are very good (Aiborne/Recon/Infantry).


Not building. Its ok to unit doctrine to counter doctrine but doctrine vs stock, not to mention buidling is broken.




other lmg dp-28 and mg42 0.75 dps on move too


I belive Guards and Grens can't use LMGs while moving.
4 Mar 2015, 18:15 PM
#160
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
Its nealry game ending as USF in 1v1's.

It can be destroyed in higher game modes. But it will require everything.

But in 1v1's its equivalent to the tiger ACE IMO
PAGES (11)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

901 users are online: 901 guests
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50004
Welcome our newest member, Abtik Services
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM