Login

russian armor

Demos for axis

24 Apr 2015, 07:17 AM
#61
avatar of AssaultPlazma

Posts: 300

Maybe I'm just being pessimistic, I mean it could work, its just I wouldnt know how to find the sweet spot of performance, cost, and historical authenticity for it to be balanced. Because lets be honest It would need to perform well at almost all roles. Only downsides being perhaps cost, can't shoot through walls, its an emplacement.



Nah im with you 100% on that one. I guess if they put it in the defensive commander it wouldnt be bad since it has nothing else going for it. But man they would really need to test it before hand.
24 Apr 2015, 08:29 AM
#62
avatar of Overkillius

Posts: 30

If nothing else I'd like to see either engis with sweepers not suiciding into detected demos, or have the charge temporarily disable when engis approach it with sweepers. That just seems reasonable.
24 Apr 2015, 08:36 AM
#63
avatar of Ful4n0

Posts: 345



lol, guess we shouldn't nerf or change anything ever because #Adapt.

Oh wait that's insane, demo's should be given to every faction because more blob counters are good. Or do you think Allies can't blob?



Oh wait that's insane, mortars should be given to every faction because more blob counters are good. Or do you think Axis can't blob?

Oh wait that's insane, HEAVIES should be given to every faction because more blob counters are good. Or do you think Axis can't blob?

Oh wait that's insane, NON-DOC Mines should be given to every faction .....


24 Apr 2015, 08:42 AM
#64
avatar of samich

Posts: 205




your original post said exist which implied the US was in some inept and couldnt make any. US had the designed and they all completed trials and were ready for production said production never happened, but I guess its just all semantics.

Pershing was a Heavy Tank during WWII and reclassified after WWII because the bar for armor and firepower for tanks had gone up. Saying the Pershing was a medium tanks means both the IS-1 and Tiger I were also mediums as all had comparable firepower armor and roles.


Pershing was actually designed as a medium tank, it was reclassified as a heavy during the war as a propaganda tool.
24 Apr 2015, 09:02 AM
#65
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

If nothing else I'd like to see either engis with sweepers not suiciding into detected demos, or have the charge temporarily disable when engis approach it with sweepers. That just seems reasonable.


This is correct.
Before it was even worse and that was ridiculous. A sweeper could detect the demo but you were not able to attack it directly. You had to attack ground with tanks or barrage with mortars. At least inf can direct fire now but that's also no good solution.

Demos should not detonate when a sweeper is close to it.
24 Apr 2015, 09:09 AM
#66
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

My suggestion is make demos explodable only when you have a combat engineers squad in range
24 Apr 2015, 09:16 AM
#67
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 09:09 AMtuvok
My suggestion is make demos explodable only when you have a combat engineers squad in range


This is also a very interesting idea in my opinion.
24 Apr 2015, 09:31 AM
#68
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

If nothing else I'd like to see either engis with sweepers not suiciding into detected demos, or have the charge temporarily disable when engis approach it with sweepers. That just seems reasonable.




This is correct.
Before it was even worse and that was ridiculous. A sweeper could detect the demo but you were not able to attack it directly. You had to attack ground with tanks or barrage with mortars. At least inf can direct fire now but that's also no good solution.

Demos should not detonate when a sweeper is close to it.


I fing it as a micro - good micro feature. Sending Sweepers into FoW and giving garden about them is not good solution.

It's same for regular mines. Most of the time you must order to disarm mines. If you won't, sweepers will just stand still next to it. Of course they won't blow up but like I said, it's micro issue. If you detected demo and did not target it, you can't blame the game.

There are also other ways to make demos less effective. If you see fences like the ones on Faymonville (south fuel) it's obvious that demo maybe be planted between fences. All you need to do is to jump over fences to dodge demo.

People usually send squad to cap point and forgot about it. Demos are usually planted in the middle of the point and squad capping point without micro is capping.... in the middle. So in fact demos are no so devastating. You just need to cap at the edge of the circle.

Point is, you can make demos useless with micro most of the time.
24 Apr 2015, 09:49 AM
#69
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2015, 22:25 PMKatitof
Together with non doc weapon upgrades for soviets and heavy tanks for USF?

Every army lacks something.
If you believe one aspect to be unfair because X army doesn't have it, then no reason exists why other armies can't have what X army have and they don't.


I agree with you here. Assymetry isn't all bad.


Still let's look at OPs main point, that Demos are no fun due to their one-shot wipe factor. Does any army need that? I don't think they do. There are many other options that could be put in the gam to stop blobs, this one is the most damaging to the game's enjoyability.

I think all demo should be on a charger, I see no reason why any army should have the ability to delete squads with such a simple item. It's also a great cover-denier and territory-denier as you can't use any building without fear of losing a squad and you have to wait for your sweepers to arrive before you can harass.
Neo
24 Apr 2015, 12:10 PM
#70
avatar of Neo

Posts: 471

I agree. You shouldn't be able to fire off a demo if there's a minesweeper squad on top of it.
24 Apr 2015, 12:56 PM
#71
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

How about a new proposition?

Get rid of the demos and give all allied factions access to s-mine fields instead. I find s-mine fields better in many regards:

-no sight required
-high lethality
-fast to set up
-comparatively long sweeping time
-comparatively low cost
24 Apr 2015, 13:28 PM
#72
avatar of NigelBallsworth

Posts: 269

Demos are fine the way they are. 90 muni isn't cheap,even less so if you wanna pull the ol' demo/mine combo, and Axis don't need anything else to stack the deck in their favor. As someone has already said, sorry if your shrek/ LMG blobs are getting destroyed by demos; maybe learn a more balanced approach to combat, instead of attack moving your blob ?
24 Apr 2015, 13:33 PM
#73
avatar of AssaultPlazma

Posts: 300

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 08:42 AMsamich


Pershing was actually designed as a medium tank, it was reclassified as a heavy during the war as a propaganda tool.

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/18/m26-pershing-medium-or-heavy-plus-other-stuff/


Tank classification is not standard across nations. Within the context of WW II m26 Pershing was a heavy tank by all acounts. By the time they made it to the front there really werent any Heavy Tank things to do anymore.


Pershing is a straight equal to the IS-1/Tiger I during WW2, but then competes with
Centurion/T44/T-54 post war. Had the T-44 and centurion seen action(T-44 saw barely any) the same argument would be used against them.
24 Apr 2015, 13:48 PM
#74
avatar of Switzerland
Donator 33

Posts: 545

I find it entertaining that Alex did indeed find an "argument" to give axis demos and not give allies anything in return. Also the statement that OKW has no artillery was a rich one. Stuka, LEIG gun now with suppression, and strum to force retreats or fire over hedges. A lot of give to one and nothing for the other, cute.
24 Apr 2015, 13:53 PM
#75
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I find it entertaining that Alex did indeed find an "argument" to give axis demos and not give allies anything in return. Also the statement that OKW has no artillery was a rich one. Stuka, LEIG gun now with suppression, and strum to force retreats or fire over hedges. A lot of give to one and nothing for the other, cute.

Are you even surprised?
His fanboyism surpassed all the common sense and logic combined long time ago already.
He always wants to have the cake, eat the cake and not share it with anyone even though he is on a group party.
24 Apr 2015, 13:54 PM
#76
avatar of samich

Posts: 205


http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/08/18/m26-pershing-medium-or-heavy-plus-other-stuff/


Tank classification is not standard across nations. Within the context of WW II m26 Pershing was a heavy tank by all acounts. By the time they made it to the front there really werent any Heavy Tank things to do anymore.


Pershing is a straight equal to the IS-1/Tiger I during WW2, but then competes with
Centurion/T44/T-54 post war. Had the T-44 and centurion seen action(T-44 saw barely any) the same argument would be used against them.


Interesting read but it does seem to speak to my point.
The M26 was designed as a medium tank (american classification) and then redesignated as a heavy in order to boost morale. Then it was returned as a medium post war.

To quote your article "the M26 was built as a medium tank(that could still do heavy tank things), was used as a medium tank, and was called a medium tank before and after its stint as a heavy."

I would argue that the classification of a tank should come from the nation that produced it, within reason. Someone mentioned that the panther was classified as a heavy by the US (I have no idea if that is true or not) but it is now known to be a medium tank as it was designated by the germans.
24 Apr 2015, 14:12 PM
#77
avatar of AssaultPlazma

Posts: 300

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 13:54 PMsamich


Interesting read but it does seem to speak to my point.
The M26 was designed as a medium tank (american classification) and then redesignated as a heavy in order to boost morale. Then it was returned as a medium post war.

To quote your article "the M26 was built as a medium tank(that could still do heavy tank things), was used as a medium tank, and was called a medium tank before and after its stint as a heavy."

I would argue that the classification of a tank should come from the nation that produced it, within reason. Someone mentioned that the panther was classified as a heavy by the US (I have no idea if that is true or not) but it is now known to be a medium tank as it was designated by the germans.


Why I posted it. Although im pretty at least a portion of the pershing development is around the m6 heavy tank but I need more info. Sure it more or less ended up as a medium tank however in regards to coh 2 and WWII as a whole it was basically a heavy tank and shouldnt be treated as anything less than a Tiger I.
24 Apr 2015, 14:19 PM
#78
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 08:36 AMFul4n0



Oh wait that's insane, mortars should be given to every faction because more blob counters are good. Or do you think Axis can't blob?

Oh wait that's insane, HEAVIES should be given to every faction because more blob counters are good. Or do you think Axis can't blob?

Oh wait that's insane, NON-DOC Mines should be given to every faction .....




Funny thing is I agree with everything in this post. I think the limits on what units each faction can get is retarded.

I find it entertaining that Alex did indeed find an "argument" to give axis demos and not give allies anything in return. Also the statement that OKW has no artillery was a rich one. Stuka, LEIG gun now with suppression, and strum to force retreats or fire over hedges. A lot of give to one and nothing for the other, cute.


You do understand what unit gaps are right? I am more than in favor of all the armies getting more units to fill their gaps if you read any of my posts ITT. I think USF should have my artillery, I think Soviets need better stock units.

But OKW has 1 rocket artillery piece that costs 151 fuel which isn't exactly something OKW can just pull out of it's ass. A MP based artillery unit in a doctrine would be fine.

And your seriously suggestion the Sturmtiger is artillery? lol, simply ebin.
24 Apr 2015, 14:41 PM
#79
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987

Demos are fine the way they are. 90 muni isn't cheap,even less so if you wanna pull the ol' demo/mine combo, and Axis don't need anything else to stack the deck in their favor. As someone has already said, sorry if your shrek/ LMG blobs are getting destroyed by demos; maybe learn a more balanced approach to combat, instead of attack moving your blob ?


I hate blobs too. People aren't complaining that it destroys blobs. It's that it can auto-delete single units too and with great ease. Two clicks.

90 muni is quite expensive but it's a cheap exchange for 250-400 manpower + upgrade (shrek/lmg).

If it was only destroying blobs, I wouldn't mind it so much. But it removes units one by one all through the game. The only way to avoid it is to lead every attack with a minesweeper, to harass every point with a minesweeper. To do that you have to wait for them to get to the field. So you lose territory which means more munis for more demos.

If both sides had demo, the game would become less dynamic with people waiting for sweepers so they can make attacks. If neither side had them the game would be much better.

There are several threads on this with some very high level players calling for its removal and no high level players saying "it's fine". I just wish the less experienced players with a lower understanding of CoH2 and RTS would look to what the top players are saying instead of defending it on the basis of "it makes me feel good when I blow up squads with demo, therefore it's good". or "Axis has OP-Soldaten so we need demos"
24 Apr 2015, 14:41 PM
#80
avatar of Switzerland
Donator 33

Posts: 545

Your posts don't ussually reflect these gaps, case and point you opinion on caches and opens for the super float OKW would solve the float problem, at no penalty to them. And strum can fire from cover and is a rocket artillery launcher, however short ranged it may be. Maybe you can state then what you see as a fair trade for the demo for axis and what the Soviets and USF would get?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

1010 users are online: 1 member and 1009 guests
M3g4s34n
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