Schwerer so broken, will it be fixed in the upcoming patch?

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 02:01 AMdrChengele

Precisely. This "Indirect fire" thing is being parroted around by the standing members of the Axis Anti Nerf Committee, when they really mean to say is howitzers. The 120mm mortar also does wonders.
But this only applies to Soviets and 1/6th of US commanders. By the time I have significant indirect fire (howitzers or powerful offmaps), I will also have tanks, call-ins, AT guns. I don't need help at this phase. I want to know what to do about the Schwerer in minute 8 of the game.

And even so, let's say people use howitzers, AT guns, offmaps etc - so now we have used ammo, manpower, teching, fuel, all to remove a structure from the battlefield. What about opportunity costs? While you are investing resources and time, I assume the OKW enemy is kind enough to have units of comparable manpower cost simply idle around and do nothing? When I build a T4 as Soviet, it does not present an inconvenience on the map and OKW doesn't have to allocate resources just to remove it or lose access to a portion of the map.

I will remind you that Sov tier buildings are more expensive, offer about the same in terms of unlocked units, but none of the advantages. Trying to pass a forward HQ, a fortification and a repair center as a weakness instead of an immense strength of the faction is asinine. Nothing prevents you from putting all your buildings at the base just as every other faction has to, and still have a more useful, cheaper base, with inbuilt repair and medic functions. Literally anything you do beyond that is a bonus, an OPTION, a glorious possibility that you have that no other faction has. If you choose to use this option, you enter the realm of risk/reward mechanic. Except the risk is relatively small, and the rewards immense. Worst case scenario - the building goes down. So? you lost roughly a Puma's worth of resources to occupy a significant portion of opponent's firepower for a prolonged period of time.

Now, I personally like the different flavours of each faction, and it's nice to have OKW differ in this aspect. But you can't really complain about forward positions being exposed to artillery. Yes, we know they are. It's because you choose to put them there even though you could have put them in the base and still be no worse than all other factions.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 03:26 AMAlexzandvar

I guess we should just remove soviets from the game because they are entirely designed around using doctrinal units.

Oh wait that's exactly the reason Soviets preform so well.

Everything about the Schwer has already been said, it shouldn't pen medium tanks but otherwise it's fine. If you can't kill it that's on you.

Use 2 pathfinder artillery call in's an it's instantly dead and he can't do anything about it, or use time on target, or hit it with an AT gun, ect.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 03:40 AMAssaultPlazma

Still waiting on you to provide a link to the relic developer who stated soviets were deisgned with being call in dependent in mind; If removing from the game then rebuilding is what it takes than sure....

Oh and curious what does the soviet call in meta have to do with USF call in usage?

No one is arguing that it cant be killed, everyones wondering why it exist in the first place. That being omni-directional AI and AT massed area denial that simply comes from teching and takes absurd amount of effort to destroy?

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 02:01 AMdrChengele

If you choose to use this option, you enter the realm of risk/reward mechanic. Except the risk is relatively small, and the rewards immense.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 03:58 AMAlexzandvar

It's exists because Relic wanted to exist because OKW is a faction that is different from the other factions because it would be a tad boring for every faction to be the same. OKW focus's on truck based teching ----> all WFA techs give a bonus ----> OKW truck teching gives you a bonus in the form of forward retreat point/area denial/repairs and conversion.

And if you don't believe Relic sad it, then just look at all the call ins soviet commanders give. There is over twice the amount of call in unis for Soviets than any other faction.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 05:23 AMOmega_Warrior

This argument is stupid when you realize peter said they were changing the soviets so they weren't dependent on call-ins. Just because that's the way it is currently, doesn't mean that they believe that's the way it should be. Especially when they specifically say it isn't.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 05:23 AMOmega_Warrior

This argument is stupid when you realize peter said they were changing the soviets so they weren't dependent on call-ins. Just because that's the way it is currently, doesn't mean that they believe that's the way it should be. Especially when they specifically say it isn't.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 02:01 AMdrChengele

Now, I personally like the different flavours of each faction, and it's nice to have OKW differ in this aspect. But you can't really complain about forward positions being exposed to artillery. Yes, we know they are. It's because you choose to put them there even though you could have put them in the base and still be no worse than all other factions.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 07:03 AMAlexzandvar

To bad Peter doesn't work at Relic anymore.

The chance of Soviets receiving a radical redesign is exactly zero, they would buff the stock units but that's about it.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 07:27 AMJohnnyB

Umm... pardon me, but I fail to understand why the hell people are so displeased with soviet build. So they are call-in dependant. So what? They are the best army in COH2 right now, have all the options you can think of and counters for everything. Ostheer would pay gold to have such power.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 06:51 AMQueenRatchet123

Source?

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 07:22 AMAlexzandvar

I'm still blown away people think a radical redesign is going to happen because Relic has never in their history done so.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 08:21 AMKatitof

So that it means 80% of doctrines are screaming "I'm going to loose" or "you are so bad at this game that I can beat you with partisans/tank hunters/NKVD/con support/whatever".

And soviets stand up in current meta almost exclusively because of armor and infantry call-ins.

Soviets are meant to SUPPLEMENT TIERING CHOICES WITH DOCTRINES(I went T1? I suppose I need guards/M-42/120mm to fill the gap, I went T3? I'll probably need heavy armor to hold off or break through).
Not to REPLACE STOCK UNITS WITH DOCTRINAL ONES BECAUSE FIRST ONES SUCK DONKEY BALLS(tiering? Why? There is nothing there that would justify spending even 10 fuel for that, doctrines provide all what tiering does, but better and more cost effective, snipers and AT guns being often mandatory exceptions).

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 09:10 AMJohnnyB

So basically you rant because of soviet faction build. Waaa... I don't like it. So what? That doesn't mean soviet faction is not powerful. It doesn't mean that they cannot crush any Axis army/combo. They have answers to everything, they just need to pick the right doctrine when the time comes. So the simple argument - I don't like this because... I don't like it - it's not going to work. Try some Ostheer games and see what the other way means and see if you "like it". Oh shore, you have options, you can make beautifull combos, hundreds of tactics and in the end.... you lose. Just lol.

Jump back to quoted post19 Mar 2015, 02:43 AMAlexzandvar

Christ on a cracker there is no "Anti nerf" committee, there is no axis conspiracy, there are counters in the game for OKW and the fact you don't use them is on you, not us.