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

All faction should have forward retreat point or none of the factions, that's quite simple.

Why? Where is it written that the factions should mirror each other? Where does this stop? Should an MG42 have a crew of 6? IMHO diversity in the faction design is a good thing.

Why shouldn't the OKW have a forward deploy-able building with a flak? (I'm not saying as is, but conceptually).


@ the OP: Is the Schwerer broken - no. Over performing - slightly.

Why shouldn't the OKW have a forward deploy-able building with a flak? (I'm not saying as is, but conceptually).

You ask why? Becuase it fixes the game for OKW it literally fights alone so Okw can blob with everything else on the opposite site.

Here you have all the advantages of every faction:

Show Spoiler

That Soviets durability
I can't figure out what that durability means, dying cons or vanishing 6man-crew thanks to rifle nade?

Why? Where is it written that the factions should mirror each other? Where does this stop? Should an MG42 have a crew of 6? IMHO diversity in the faction design is a good thing.

Why shouldn't the OKW have a forward deploy-able building with a flak? (I'm not saying as is, but conceptually).


@ the OP: Is the Schwerer broken - no. Over performing - slightly.

Is this question real?

Vielsam.
Your have to reatreat your troops from side to the base - very very looong road.
OKW or USF can laught at SU and OST since they can retreat to forward base and go back in 20sec while for OST or it's over 1 minute.

You can blob straight into HMG, retreat to forward point and 20sec later push again but from different side.

OST blob faces HMG, retreat, and it takes over 1 minute to go back.

It's damn obvious disadvanatge.
And it's bigger with every game mode.

Is this question real?

Vielsam.
Your have to reatreat your troops from side to the base - very very looong road.
OKW or USF can laught at SU and OST since they can retreat to forward base and go back in 20sec while for OST or it's over 1 minute.

You can blob straight into HMG, retreat to forward point and 20sec later push again but from different side.

OST blob faces HMG, retreat, and it takes over 1 minute to go back.

It's damn obvious disadvanatge.
And it's bigger with every game mode.

You've missed my point. There is no reason why the faction can't have different features and play styles. They don't need to mirror each other. So what if the USF have an advantage in that way? I'm not saying that its all balanced, but there is nothing at a conceptual level that's egregiously wrong.

The same thing can be said for the Schwerer.

You've missed my point. There is no reason why the faction can't have different features and play styles. They don't need to mirror each other. So what if the USF have an advantage in that way? I'm not saying that its all balanced, but there is nothing at a conceptual level that's egregiously wrong.

The same thing can be said for the Schwerer.

Because diffrence for the sake of just being different withtout any thought is stupid.

Because diffrence for the sake of just being different withtout any thought is stupid.

I'm not sure where to go with your statement. Are you saying that my different opinion is stupid and that I didn't put much thought into it?

Or

Are you saying that Relic didn't put much thought into the design of the WFA's?

I'm not touching the first, but with regards to the second; I'd say that there was lots of thought put into structuring the different factions. Unfortunately there are still some issues with the balance execution.

about okw and usf forward retreat point

well, in some maps, the impact is ok. in other maps, forward retreat points give exponential advantages, allowing one side to come back to the field in 30 seconds while another would take 3 minute.

to completely balance the forward retreat point, the entire automatch map pool has to take that into account. not to mention some maps have this perfect spot for forward retreat points that only mortars can reach.

the whole thing takes away many interesting things from the game imo. wouldnt mind them being removed completely.

well, in some maps, the impact is ok. in other maps, forward retreat points give exponential advantages, allowing one side to come back to the field in 30 seconds while another would take 3 minute.

to completely balance the forward retreat point, the entire automatch map pool has to take that into account. not to mention some maps have this perfect spot for forward retreat points that only mortars can reach.

the whole thing takes away many interesting things from the game imo. wouldnt mind them being removed completely.

Yep, forward retreat points and the Schwerer HQ are alright in theory, but make balance next to impossible because map design is now playing such a huge factor. When Brits came in to CoH1 it messed up the balance because you now had a faction which operates totally differently in terms of map control and usage. Why Relic would then go ahead and do the same thing and create the same unresolvable issues in CoH2 is beyond me.

I'm not sure where to go with your statement. Are you saying that my different opinion is stupid and that I didn't put much thought into it?

Or

Are you saying that Relic didn't put much thought into the design of the WFA's?

I'm not touching the first, but with regards to the second; I'd say that there was lots of thought put into structuring the different factions. Unfortunately there are still some issues with the balance execution.

Second. From what I heard the Alpha OKW was better on paper than this, part-time Faction we got now.

well, in some maps, the impact is ok. in other maps, forward retreat points give exponential advantages, allowing one side to come back to the field in 30 seconds while another would take 3 minute.

to completely balance the forward retreat point, the entire automatch map pool has to take that into account. not to mention some maps have this perfect spot for forward retreat points that only mortars can reach.

the whole thing takes away many interesting things from the game imo. wouldnt mind them being removed completely.

There is nothing wrong with forward retreat points, no matter what map you are playing. It involves strategic decisions and come also with disadvantages. This game isn't and should not be all about micro. It should involve brains also. If a player succeed to beat the other just because he made better decisions despite his inferior micro, we should value that.
Such are all the complaints related to different "exploits" like blobbing or placing the OKW T4 or whatever. If your opponent blobbed the shit out of you and you had enough amo to place let's say, several demo charges on his path but you didn't, you have no right to complain that he is a noob and beated you because he is a gardening spammer. If you are complaining that your opponent built shermans to fast and killed your volks blobs that could not handle them with their schrecks, but you didn't chose the fortifications doctrine (PAK 43) though you had it in your loadout, you have no right to complain that you didn't have fuel to build enough vehicles to counter your opponent. And the list can continue. Sometimes good decisions are more valuable than micro. And a well placed retreat point is a good decision, though risky. Because forward retreat points can be shelled like hell with ballistics that will do alot of damage. You knew that, I suppose.

There is nothing wrong with forward retreat points, no matter what map you are playing. It involves strategic decisions and come also with disadvantages. This game isn't and should not be all about micro. It should involve brains also. If a player succeed to beat the other just because he made better decisions despite his inferior micro, we should value that.
Such are all the complaints related to different "exploits" like blobbing or placing the OKW T4 or whatever. If your opponent blobbed the shit out of you and you had enough amo to place let's say, several demo charges on his path but you didn't, you have no right to complain that he is a noob and beated you because he is a gardening spammer. If you are complaining that your opponent built shermans to fast and killed your volks blobs that could not handle them with their schrecks, but you didn't chose the fortifications doctrine (PAK 43) though you had it in your loadout, you have no right to complain that you didn't have fuel to build enough vehicles to counter your opponent. And the list can continue. Sometimes good decisions are more valuable than micro. And a well placed retreat point is a good decision, though risky. Because forward retreat points can be
shelled like hell with ballistics that will do alot of damage. You knew that, I suppose.

Im sorry, but what disadvantages Mjr&Med truck have?

Im sorry, but what disadvantages Mjr&Med truck have?

Read all my post kappa.

Read all my post kappa.

I did and I still dont know why you think forward retreat point is OK, and what strategic decisions and disadvantages come with Med truck and Mjr.

I did and I still dont know why you think forward retreat point is OK, and what strategic decisions and disadvantages come with Med truck and Mjr.

Strategic decisions: WHERE should I place my retreat point on map? Closer to my base?Closer to his? Closer to a cutoff? Closer to a resources/victory point , etc. Should I shield it with a house or with some trees? How to place it in order for retreating units to easily access it?

Disadvantages: An advanced retreat point can be shelled with balistic weapons that can be placed verry safe (NEAR or even IN your opponent base). An advanced retreat point can be shelled with off maps and can be easilly spoted in order to. Finally, an advanced retreat point can be stormed in team games by 2-3 armies in the same time, and be made one with the ground with all retreated units.

Is it more clear now?

Strategic decisions: WHERE should I place my retreat point on map? Closer to my base?Closer to his? Closer to a cutoff? Closer to a resources/victory point , etc. Should I shield it with a house or with some trees? How to place it in order for retreating units to easily access it?

Disadvantages: An advanced retreat point can be shelled with balistic weapons that can be placed verry safe (NEAR or even IN your opponent base). An advanced retreat point can be shelled with off maps and can be easilly spoted in order to. Finally, an advanced retreat point can be stormed in team games by 2-3 armies in the same time, and be made one with the ground with all retreated units.

Is it more clear now?

To me it sounds like either you get only advantages or you're just an inexperienced player.

Strategic decisions: WHERE should I place my retreat point on map? Closer to my base?Closer to his? Closer to a cutoff? Closer to a resources/victory point , etc. Should I shield it with a house or with some trees? How to place it in order for retreating units to easily access it?

Disadvantages: An advanced retreat point can be shelled with balistic weapons that can be placed verry safe (NEAR or even IN your opponent base). An advanced retreat point can be shelled with off maps and can be easilly spoted in order to. Finally, an advanced retreat point can be stormed in team games by 2-3 armies in the same time, and be made one with the ground with all retreated units.

Is it more clear now?

After few games and replays you know exactly where to put forward retreat on each map.

Off maps or arty will do nothing to retreating units cause during retreat when You expect strike you can cancel it so units will retreat to base.

Major can switch point all the time.

Its pure unfair advantage. No need to say more

To me it sounds like either you get only advantages or you're just an inexperienced player.

I don't know, you seem an inexperienced player to me, if you can't see the disadvantages.

After few games and replays you know exactly where to put forward retreat on each map.

Not quite. I bet your actual positioning can be improved, for instance.

Off maps or arty will do nothing to retreating units cause during retreat when You expect strike you can cancel it so units will retreat to base.

Aham. After balistic bombardement whiped your almost entire retreated blob, you can cancel it, no doubt about it
But it's clear for me I can't add anything to make you admit this so I'm quiting this pointless debate.

Not quite. I bet your actual positioning can be improved, for instance.



Aham. After balistic bombardement whiped your almost entire retreated blob, you can cancel it, no doubt about it
But it's clear for me I can't add anything to make you admit this so I'm quiting this pointless debate.

You dont understand me.
You retreat blob to med truck, enemy is using arty on this med truck so it will hit in same moment when blob come back to truck.
If you expect this you can cancel retreat point (during retreat) so units will go back to base so arty will hit only a truck.

To me it sounds like either you get only advantages or you're just an inexperienced player.

Uhm no. If you place a med truck you better believe that i take into consideration if the allies have access to 120 mm or even worse b4's. and i have seen some okw players losing several k's worth in mp because of squad wipes at their medtruck.

@Australian magic

Yeah that not going to work. you need to know if he fires your arty on your med truck. and you simply cannot know that. even if you retreat back to base you just left a very vulnerable med truck on the middle of the map.