OKW manpower penalty?
Posts: 521
Posts: 951
I think you're losing too many units in your 4v4 Axis spam games to one of the few things that actually work and that you're just venting here.
I'm hardly venting and my example was 2 v 2. RTFP
Thanks for the snotty dig at team games though, another example of why this community is fucked.
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Alexzandvar if you can't see that shrekblobs with obers is the problem, and that you can't crush the obers because of homing shreks then I can't really help you.
It is a problem, one that occurs because you have nothing to spend MP on other than more infantry as OKW. So why should OKW be handicapped to were they can't get armor nor get infantry to deal with enemy units?
Yeah It's stupid, but as long as OKW armor is gated behind high cost and a fuel penalty OKW needs ~something~ to stay effective on the field.
And yeah If I can't crush I just set a demo charge off and make his army disappear, or call in some 120's on him. Or vaporize him with a 203mm shell, or snipe his Obers with a scott, or suppress them with overlapping maxims, or just rush him with more than 1 tank supported by infantry.
Posts: 521
I'm hardly venting and my example was 2 v 2. RTFP
Thanks for the snotty dig at team games though, another example of why this community is fucked.
Uhh, I should have quoted, but I meant Alexzandvar. Why would I even say such a thing to you? You speak common sense man. Keep up, I don't want to be the one to discourage you.
The guy literally called indirect fire and vehicle crushes the biggest source of dead infantry. Ironically that is only true for Allies that lose a lot to the Stuka.
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Uhh, I should have quoted, but I meant Alexzandvar. Why would I even say such a thing to you? You speak common sense man. Keep up, I don't want to be the one to discourage you.
The guy literally called indirect fire and vehicle crushes the biggest source of dead infantry. Ironically that is only true for Allies that lose a lot to the Stuka.
A single con squad can only kill a few models before being wiped out, a 120 mortar shell can 1 shot an entire squad. A demo charge can kill a entire army, a Scott can 1 shot a squad, Iv gotten B4's with 120+ kills before.
And this incessant bitching about the Stuka is adorable, there couldn't be a more obvious indication of an incoming Stuka barrage unless literal giant flashing letters appeared on your screening saying "INCOMING STUKA BARRAGE MOVE YOUR SHIT YO"
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1439
I'd really appreciate 3v3 players referred from spaming here as their opinions are irrelevant in 1v1.
Thank you.
Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2
Permanently Banned+100
Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Sorry I forgot to mention this topic is with 1v1 in mind as this is the mode Relic is focusing its balance effort.
I'd really appreciate 3v3 players referred from spaming here as their opinions are irrelevant in 1v1.
Thank you.
Every single game mode has the same balance issues, except they escalate in significance as the game mode goes higher.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Every single game mode has the same balance issues, except they escalate in significance as the game mode goes higher.
I'll disagree. Theres a huge difference between 1v1 and the rest.
Theres a huge difference between 2v2 and 3v3+
On 1v1, you can't rely on anyone to get AT, mines or have a commander which can cover the weakness of the one you've chosen.
You can't have M3 + double snipers + At guns + Maxims + mortar into T34 and katyushkas... Everysingle unit counts, wipes are harsh, forcing a huge retreat means losing the map control, etc. You spread your army and cap or you concentrate and engage with a higher popcap?
2v2 has some things of 1v1 while letting you field a wider variety of units and combinations.
USF: doesn't have as much problems on 1v1-2v2 in comparison to 3v3-4v4.
OKW: isn't as easy on 1v1 than 2v2 >>>>>>>> 3v3+
OH: is pretty harsh on 1v1, not on 2v2 >> 3v3+
SU: trololol...
Posts: 2070
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
I'll disagree. Theres a huge difference between 1v1 and the rest.
Theres a huge difference between 2v2 and 3v3+
On 1v1, you can't rely on anyone to get AT, mines or have a commander which can cover the weakness of the one you've chosen.
You can't have M3 + double snipers + At guns + Maxims + mortar into T34 and katyushkas... Everysingle unit counts, wipes are harsh, forcing a huge retreat means losing the map control, etc. You spread your army and cap or you concentrate and engage with a higher popcap?
2v2 has some things of 1v1 while letting you field a wider variety of units and combinations.
USF: doesn't have as much problems on 1v1-2v2 in comparison to 3v3-4v4.
OKW: isn't as easy on 1v1 than 2v2 >>>>>>>> 3v3+
OH: is pretty harsh on 1v1, not on 2v2 >> 3v3+
SU: trololol...
But units don't change, Rifles don't magically become shit or magically get better depending on the game mode. Volks are weak to allied starting infantry no matter what game mode you are in.
Yeah you have to be a lot more formulaic in 1's, but it's not like 2's or 3's are much better. The amount of good units in the game doesn't increase, it's just that your more limited in 1's because of not having a team mate to support you.
Good idea. Considering that current OKW troops are very strong with vet. THis could be a good idea
This wouldn't change them being good with vet, this would only make OKW garbage early game. Why should a units vet bonus's factor in to your income/cost at the very start of the game when nobody has vet?
Posts: 2885
This wouldn't change them being good with vet, this would only make OKW garbage early game. Why should a units vet bonus's factor in to your income/cost at the very start of the game when nobody has vet?
And now you got the whole point! Okw should be very weak early game. It was designed that way. That's the only reason the faction got nondoctrinal heavy tank and 5 levels of vet! And even not just regular vet but bonuses that multiple the worth of squad. Balancewise there is no real need for a faction that is best in every stage of the game to exist at all.
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
And now you got the whole point! Okw should be very weak early game. It was designed that way. That's the only reason the faction got nondoctrinal heavy tank and 5 levels of vet! And even not just regular vet but bonuses that multiple the worth of squad. Balancewise there is no real need for a faction that is best in every stage of the game to exist at all.
So what's the point of it being a faction if it's retardedly easy to lose in the first 9 minutes of the game? Allies are already on top early game, a MP income reduction would make it so all USF or Soviets would need to do is spam cons/rifles early game for a easy win.
No faction should be based around being only good at a certain part of the game, every faction should be equal no matter what the game clock is. OKW and Ostheer early game shouldn't be shit because they have good late game, Allies early game shouldn't be good just because they have shit late game.
Posts: 2885
So what's the point of it being a faction if it's retardedly easy to lose in the first 9 minutes of the game? Allies are already on top early game, a MP income reduction would make it so all USF or Soviets would need to do is spam cons/rifles early game for a easy win.
No faction should be based around being only good at a certain part of the game, every faction should be equal no matter what the game clock is. OKW and Ostheer early game shouldn't be shit because they have good late game, Allies early game shouldn't be good just because they have shit late game.
Maybe it shouldn't but that is Relics attitude from very beginning in both coh2 and 1. It's a part of franchise in quite similar way to cover or reinforce. But if you want axis to have early game faction, and you want okw to be that faction you need to take all, and I mean all it gets for the late game. Early game faction is not the faction that stalls to get easy win in super late game but the faction that has to win greatly in early game and then tries to seal the deal during med game. Right now okw is definitely not that kind of faction. Usf was designed that way and it works pretty well.
Posts: 432
Pretty much this is the problem. How is the '44-'45 model of the German army one where the 14 and 50 year old members of the Volksturm becoming better soldiers than veteran Soviet and American 20-25 year olds? How are the grizzled veterans of the Eastern Front now able to achieve even higher levels of vet to demigod like combat abilities?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgrenadier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkssturm
LEARN TO FRAGGING READ PEOPLE! THERE IS A GODDAMN DIFFERENCE! "VOLKSGRENADIER" WAS JUST A RELABELING AND CONSOLIDATION OF EXISTING GRENADIER DIVISIONS!
The name "Volksgrenadier" was thought up to appeal to nationalism (Volks = Peoples) and Germany's older military traditions (Grenadiers)!
DO NOT CONFUSE THE TWO!
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Maybe it shouldn't but that is Relics attitude from very beginning in both coh2 and 1. It's a part of franchise in quite similar way to cover or reinforce. But if you want axis to have early game faction, and you want okw to be that faction you need to take all, and I mean all it gets for the late game. Early game faction is not the faction that stalls to get easy win in super late game but the faction that has to win greatly in early game and then tries to seal the deal during med game. Right now okw is definitely not that kind of faction. Usf was designed that way and it works pretty well.
I'm sorry dude but I can't even tell what your trying to say. But the be all and end all of it is that OKW early game is already pretty anemic and we don't need a stupid MP penalty on top of that making it even worse.
Posts: 2885
I'm sorry dude but I can't even tell what your trying to say. But the be all and end all of it is that OKW early game is already pretty anemic and we don't need a stupid MP penalty on top of that making it even worse.
What I wanted to say is that there are three ways of ballancing okw. First is to weaken it's early game and make it worked as planned by designers. The others are to make a huge overhaul of all factions (as you suggest) or change almost everything in that faction (like I said in last post).
So I guess I'm not misteaken to say that the first one is the easiest to do and the most probable to happen even if it makes axis faction strong in late game and allied factions strong in early game.
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
What I wanted to say is that there are three ways of ballancing okw. First is to weaken it's early game and make it worked as planned by designers. The others are to make a huge overhaul of all factions (as you suggest) or change almost everything in that faction (like I said in last post).
So I guess I'm not misteaken to say that the first one is the easiest to do and the most probable to happen even if it makes axis faction strong in late game and allied factions strong in early game.
It is working as planned, the early game doesn't need to be weaker. I fail to see how making OKW impossible to play fixes any issues.
Livestreams
10 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, vanyaclinic02
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM