American Base howitzer

Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2015, 22:17 PMAlexzandvar

Not really, just pointing our the fact USF actually does have some options for indirect fire they don't need to pay 151 fuel for.

Both WFA factions are skimpy on indirect fire tbh.

Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2015, 22:48 PMOmega_Warrior

Not all indirect options provide the same role.

There are attrition based indirect like mortars who's role is to bleed players as they attempt to attack or provide light anti support weapon support for your attacks.

Then there are barrage type weapons who's roles to break up larger defensive formations and punish blobs.

Okw has both types in their no doctrinal lineup. i would like to see them get more through commanders but it is by no means necessary as both will fulfill their roles without need of a doctrine.

Unlike USF who has two attrition types and MUST choose a doctrine if they want a real barrage type indirect weapon.

Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2015, 23:58 PMAlexzandvar

The support guns both need to be fired directly into enemy lines like a ZiS gun to be useful, they really aren't able to be classified as a indirect fire unit leaving OKW with only 1 option, the stuka.

The thing is nobody on these forums seems to pay any attention to the fuel disability which makes the Stuka absurdly expensive and basically the largest non-direct fire unit investment in the game.

Your right USF needs to take a doctrine, but Infantry is by far not a bad one. And with OKW to get the LeiG and Stuka you need to get t1 and t2 while the mortar HT and priest are both call in's and can be pop-cap abused.

Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2015, 23:58 PMAlexzandvar

The support guns both need to be fired directly into enemy lines like a ZiS gun to be useful, they really aren't able to be classified as a indirect fire unit leaving OKW with only 1 option, the stuka.

The thing is nobody on these forums seems to pay any attention to the fuel disability which makes the Stuka absurdly expensive and basically the largest non-direct fire unit investment in the game.

Your right USF needs to take a doctrine, but Infantry is by far not a bad one. And with OKW to get the LeiG and Stuka you need to get t1 and t2 while the mortar HT and priest are both call in's and can be pop-cap abused.

Jump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 13:17 PMKatitof

I don't really see any valid reason to give USF stuka dive target practice.
However its pretty hilarious to see a faction known for the artillery barrages before engaging anything have THE worst indirect fire options in game.

Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2015, 22:05 PMAlexzandvar

Okay, can OKW have a howitzer to because currently it has 1 indirect fire unit. Versus the Mortar HT and Priest.

The infantry support howitzers/field guns are made to be used like the ZiS barrage, fired directly into enemy armies, not used for indirect fire support like mortars.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 08:44 AMAustralian Magic

leig - pack
priest (doc) - stuka (non doc).
MHT? Really? It's like calling Irregulars elite-inf cause they are doc.


And last time I checked, none unit costs 151 fuel ("adjusting" fuel is just shitty argument).

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 08:51 AMAlexzandvar

The fuel adjustment thing is central to OKW's entire design, for every 1 fuel every single other player gets okw gets .66 fuel.
.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 08:59 AMAustralian Magic

I just wonder if you think about teching costs, and some upgrades (LMG) or nades (10!!!!) costs when you say anything about adjusting fuel.

Point is, some units/features are already adjusted to lower income.

Oh, and I saw many times Stuka with 80-150 kills yet Ive never seen Priest with more than 50.

And let's not forget about scavenging and conversion.

Im cool with 100% income for OKW, but no more vet 5, LMG for 120ammo, nades for 40, T4 for 120fuel etc etc.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:09 AMdaspoulos

Ok lol is this 4v4 or comp stomp. 40-50 kills I can believe vs soviet t2 and mortar spam but 80-150 kills? Gtfo here with this over exaggeration.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:10 AMAustralian Magic

80-150 kills in 4v4 is something regular from good player (once I was albe to ger 124 kills with single PzIV so...)

You can get 40 kills with single infantry squad so why are you surprised that Stuka can get a way more?

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 08:59 AMAustralian Magic

I just wonder if you think about teching costs, and some upgrades (LMG) or nades (10!!!!) costs when you say anything about adjusting fuel.

Point is, some units/features are already adjusted to lower income.

Oh, and I saw many times Stuka with 80-150 kills yet Ive never seen Priest with more than 50.

And let's not forget about scavenging and conversion.

Im cool with 100% income for OKW, but no more vet 5, LMG for 120ammo, nades for 40, T4 for 120fuel etc etc.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:15 AMdaspoulos

Because 4v4 holds no ground in an actual balance discussion. Besides I literally have 0 problems as allies when playing 4v4 with my friends, we win 90% of our games not because allies OP. But because we don't suck.
Okw may get cache advanatage. But in 4v4 soviet call in meta gets amplified by like x2. 2-3 people just spamming is2s facerolls everything. Or going fhq on some maps, or 120 spam, ptrs spam. Jackson blob + lmg rifle blob. 4v4 is all about cheesing your opponent because its a for casuals only gamemode thats just for fun.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:17 AMAlexzandvar

The Stuka comes in sooner and is shooting at larger squads. No shit it will have more model kills than a Priest will. But the fuel penalty is central to OKW's design because things that look cheap are actually pretty much just on par or more expensive than what other factions get.

OKW has .80 munitions, so the nade is already almost 40 (37.5) and the LMG is 75 while the Shrek is 112.5.

Scavenging really isn't a crutch you can rely on when it demands your enemy sucking ass anyway to make up the difference.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:25 AMAustralian Magic

Allies AT team is very poweful in 4v4, it's obvious, but AT vs AT in late-game is not that easy, especially, when IS2 spam is facing Tigers with Jadgtigers and Elephnats behind.



You know OKW has nades for 10ammo?
With good scaveng you can get "free" Luchs.

And like I said, 100% income with 120ammo LMG, 80/120Fuel for T3/T4 and other stuff would make more whine threads so don't say anything about adjusting fuel cause it's already adjusted for OKW most of the time (yet it should not be).

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:32 AMAlexzandvar

You have no idea what your talking about. Infiltration nades come on the longest cool down of any ability in the game, they are by no means easy to spam and are very RNG dependent since you can't decide were the grenades land.

And AGAIN; OKW's pricing is the same as every others faction's pricing in most areas. But with the fuel penalty they are paying more to justify having better stock units in some area's.

If you adjust the cost of a unit for the fuel income disability it makes a lot more sense:

T1 and T2 are 60 fuel. T3 is 120 fuel like every other factions.

So teching for OKW is almost exactly the same as it is for other factions, barring USF who doesn't get free tech 1.

The sticking part is the units, the Panther costs 265 fuel, the KT costs almost 400, the CPIV costs over 200, ect.

And a "free" luchs would require you to salvage 10 wrecks/support weapons. If you enemy is losing that many tanks and weapons they have already lost the game.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 08:43 AMStormless

Can I just point out to everyone, that the USF has some of the strongest pin point accuracy artillery in the game. Even with no commander, a vetted major can provide artillery and recon. Recon support pathfinder and mechanized artillery is just insane quick and acts just like the British liutenant from CoH1. It's also cheap as anything considering it's focused firepower.