Login

russian armor

Should OKW get a heavy artillery piece?

PAGES (7)down
31 May 2015, 21:47 PM
#101
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2015, 19:17 PMCieZ


The only time OKW underwent an actual faction overhaul was during the WFA Alpha, after months of the community begging for it (rightly so) because their initial design was flat out stupid.

Everything you've mentioned and tried to claim as a "drastic faction change" or whatever your exact words have been simple balance adjustments and haven't even come close to changing the core design behind the faction.

Their tech tree is literally exactly the same as it was on release. Volks have schrecks, Kubel still suppresses, KT is still the strongest individual tank in the game. Obers are still the strongest individual infantry in the game. Pretty much all of their units still serve the exact same purpose as they always have. JLI are probably the most changed unit OKW has, but even then they serve the same role that they always did.

Not every faction needs access to everything, and not every faction needs to be strong at everything - if we want that, just design one perfect faction and play mirror matches all day everyday.

As much as I'm hesitant to agree with Katitof (because all you forum warriors are silly to me) he's definitely right in this case. You don't really have a leg to stand on aside from being stubborn and unwilling to admit that you're wrong.


Wanting factions to have inherent weakness's that you can't counter at all is one of the dumbest things you could ever want because it creates "Rock, Paper, Scissor" game play. Yes certain factions should have a more carved out roll that they are better at but a faction having a weakness you can do almost nothing about just makes thing aggravating.

I guess I should have used better phrasing; OKW meta has shifted a lot since their release due to units getting major changes. Imagine if Shocks got their PPsH gated behind an upgrade, I don't think anyone would disagree that would cause a meta shift.

or spending so much time on forums as opposed to playing the game. It's just my opinion though. If you guys have as much fun constantly posting stuff on the forums as I have playing the game - who am I to judge?


I don't only play one faction, but yes it's quite obvious that me and Katitof enjoy arguing.

I guess the reason I'm being so stubborn in this case is well; I guess I can't even talk about it! :D

Alex trying to one up Ciez made my day, with zero evidence or grounds to attempt to do so.


Man you guys really are fucking obsessed with me lol
31 May 2015, 22:05 PM
#102
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Well, in my job I have a lot of spare time so I can in theory sit for 8 hours a day on forums(with breaks for work obviously) in less intense days.

PC at work is not good enough to play modern games, so I discuss them and watch streams instead. Play time at home is about 4 hours a day on average.

So there you have it why I post more then play.
31 May 2015, 22:08 PM
#103
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2015, 22:05 PMKatitof
Well, in my job I have a lot of spare time so I can in theory sit for 8 hours a day on forums(with breaks for work obviously) in less intense days.

PC at work is not good enough to play modern games, so I discuss them and watch streams instead. Play time at home is about 4 hours a day on average.

So there you have it why I post more then play.


I'm just a college student who enjoys arguing with strangers on the internet
31 May 2015, 22:32 PM
#104
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4



Wanting factions to have inherent weakness's that you can't counter at all is one of the dumbest things you could ever want because it creates "Rock, Paper, Scissor" game play. Yes certain factions should have a more carved out roll that they are better at but a faction having a weakness you can do almost nothing about just makes thing aggravating.



You're reading more into what I'm saying than you should. I've never said factions should have inherent weaknesses that they cannot counter.

I did say that each faction should have a weakness. This comes with the turf of every faction having their own flavor and play style. In my opinion it would be boring if we had four extremely vanilla/well-rounded/similar factions. As much as I enjoyed AoE 2, I loved AoE 3 more because of how unique each nation ended up being in AoE 3. Same with WC 3 and SC 2 - each race is unique/distinct.

Not every faction needs a heavy artillery piece, OKW most certainly does not. It doesn't suit their flavor, it doesn't sit well with their design and it would be an absolute nightmare to deal with. Even the OKW PaK 43 + Med Truck + Flak HQ is borderline OP on a few maps, and the PaK 43 has significantly less range than howitzers in this game.
31 May 2015, 22:43 PM
#105
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2015, 22:32 PMCieZ




Which is why some people have suggested giving OKW a Self Propelled Artillery piece that costs fuel similar to a Priest (Hummel or Wespe comes to mind!) so you couldn't camp with it and it would cost fuel so you couldn't spam it.

Something has got to go in the new OKW commanders :(
31 May 2015, 22:47 PM
#106
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Which is why some people have suggested giving OKW a Self Propelled Artillery piece that costs fuel similar to a Priest (Hummel or Wespe comes to mind!) so you couldn't camp with it and it would cost fuel so you couldn't spam it.

Something has got to go in the new OKW commanders :(



^You and CieZ argument.
31 May 2015, 23:05 PM
#107
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2015, 22:47 PMKatitof



^You and CieZ argument.


I'm not arguing with him anymore really, but the Wespe and Hummel would be a very different story to OKW getting a LefH or something similar since you couldn't camp and just endlessly reinforce the Howitzer by putting a medi-truck next to it like you can with a Pak43.

It would also be limited by fuel, and being doctrinal.
1 Jun 2015, 01:19 AM
#108
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4



Which is why some people have suggested giving OKW a Self Propelled Artillery piece that costs fuel similar to a Priest (Hummel or Wespe comes to mind!) so you couldn't camp with it and it would cost fuel so you couldn't spam it.

Something has got to go in the new OKW commanders :(


How does this have anything to do with my statement: "You're reading more into what I'm saying than you should. I've never said factions should have inherent weaknesses that they cannot counter."

Which stems from you having said:

"Wanting factions to have inherent weakness's that you can't counter at all is one of the dumbest things you could ever want because it creates "Rock, Paper, Scissor" game play. Yes certain factions should have a more carved out roll that they are better at but a faction having a weakness you can do almost nothing about just makes thing aggravating."

Should I break it down for you further? I feel like your latest post is completely irrelevant to the discussion we were having, and you're the only person I've ever seen asking for OKW to have a self propelled artillery unit, which I might add, they don't need at all.

I said good day sir.
1 Jun 2015, 01:29 AM
#109
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jun 2015, 01:19 AMCieZ

Should I break it down for you further? I feel like your latest post is completely irrelevant to the discussion we were having, and you're the only person I've ever seen asking for OKW to have a self propelled artillery unit, which I might add, they don't need at all.



Why do you think OKW shouldn't get one? Units are not based on need, they are based on giving more options. Technically every faction could have very few units through the justification they don't need anymore.

A self propelled howitzer would fit your more mechanized view of OKW?

EDIT: I think we are going in circles because I think your assuming I think Allies shouldn't get any help either, both USF have new commanders coming and something needs to go in them.
1 Jun 2015, 02:16 AM
#110
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4



Why do you think OKW shouldn't get one? Units are not based on need, they are based on giving more options. Technically every faction could have very few units through the justification they don't need anymore.

A self propelled howitzer would fit your more mechanized view of OKW?

EDIT: I think we are going in circles because I think your assuming I think Allies shouldn't get any help either, both USF have new commanders coming and something needs to go in them.


I've stated numerous times why I don't think they should have one, but I'll make a list. Maybe that'll be easier for you to read.

1 - It does not fit with the design of the faction. OKW is supposed to be able to take, but have a harder time than Ostheer holding territory offensively. (No MG42, no mobile HT, lack of stopping power provided by LMG42s, medium tanks, bunkers, s-mines, etc)

2 - They already have a mobile indirect fire option in the form of the Stuka. Sure it isn't an area denial tool, but current howitzers are hardly good at denying area.

3 - OKW needs to lack something. Right now they lack a howitzer type unit, this seems fair to me. (I'll remind you that they have the best AT in the game and access to the most powerful infantry as well as being the only faction with a non-doctrinal heavy tank).

1 Jun 2015, 02:30 AM
#111
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

EDIT: I don't think we really disagree that much, and I apologize for arguing so much (I can be stubborn). But I'm just confused about what OKW could get next other than some sort of Artillery.

They have so much infantry already, and they aren't exactly lacking for AT like you point out. So what is there left?
1 Jun 2015, 03:40 AM
#112
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

EDIT: I don't think we really disagree that much, and I apologize for arguing so much (I can be stubborn). But I'm just confused about what OKW could get next other than some sort of Artillery.

They have so much infantry already, and they aren't exactly lacking for AT like you point out. So what is there left?


They could use a more reliable off-map to kill howitzers.

Perhaps a doctrinal light vehicle or tank.

Doctrinal sniper might be interesting. Some sort of Riegal type mine perhaps. Might be too strong on OKW though. An LMG or MP40/MP44 upgrade for Volks could be fun.

v2 rocket offmap might be badass? I dunno, I mean I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of OKW having a howitzer, I just don't think it's necessary. And I'd rather them rework the commander system anyways.
1 Jun 2015, 03:48 AM
#113
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jun 2015, 03:40 AMCieZ


They could use a more reliable off-map to kill howitzers.

Perhaps a doctrinal light vehicle or tank.

Doctrinal sniper might be interesting. Some sort of Riegal type mine perhaps. Might be too strong on OKW though. An LMG or MP40/MP44 upgrade for Volks could be fun.

v2 rocket offmap might be badass? I dunno, I mean I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of OKW having a howitzer, I just don't think it's necessary. And I'd rather them rework the commander system anyways.


Yeah I think we pretty much agree.
1 Jun 2015, 06:53 AM
#114
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jun 2015, 03:40 AMCieZ


Perhaps a doctrinal light vehicle or tank.


antenna 221!
1 Jun 2015, 07:48 AM
#115
avatar of Squeaky Door 96

Posts: 192

Permanently Banned


Here's a few:

1. New OKW commanders would need something

2. Would allow OKW to counter enemy artillery, which they are really weak to

3. Enable OKW to deny territory

4. Help get rid of OKW MP float

5. Encourage more combined arms

OKW is good at countering blobs since the go to counter to blobbing is just blobbing harder, which OKW is really good at.


Enable OKW to deny teritory? What are you doing with your Flack HQ? That thing denies teritory to every infantry unit in the game that faces it, it can 1v1 a t34-76, t34-85, sherman, jakson and win.

3 Jun 2015, 03:51 AM
#116
avatar of Jackiebrown

Posts: 657



Why do you think OKW shouldn't get one? Units are not based on need, they are based on giving more options. Technically every faction could have very few units through the justification they don't need anymore.

A self propelled howitzer would fit your more mechanized view of OKW?

EDIT: I think we are going in circles because I think your assuming I think Allies shouldn't get any help either, both USF have new commanders coming and something needs to go in them.


Well that is the entire reason for commanders, giving you options that otherwise you would not have unless you go for "that" certain doctrine. If I want artillery I go for the doctrine with the Hummel/Wespe, if I am feeling defensive I go Fortifications. New commanders to try out for US and OKW would give the game more flavor.
3 Jun 2015, 05:57 AM
#117
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063

Just give me Nebel werfer call-in (or give us the ability to choose alternate units like TOV, nebel replace ISG) and OKW can finally have something to combat 120mm.
3 Jun 2015, 06:10 AM
#118
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



Enable OKW to deny teritory? What are you doing with your Flack HQ? That thing denies teritory to every infantry unit in the game that faces it, it can 1v1 a t34-76, t34-85, sherman, jakson and win.



Except, that's your only thing that you can use to deploy to deny territory. And it doesn't do it in the same way an artillery piece does.

Outside of the Schwer OKW's defensive options are kinda limited due to the Flak Emplacement being utter trash (and expensive for what it does), and sandbags dying to easy. It's always more rewarding for OKW players to play very aggressive.

3 Jun 2015, 06:27 AM
#119
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Except, that's your only thing that you can use to deploy to deny territory. And it doesn't do it in the same way an artillery piece does.

Outside of the Schwer OKW's defensive options are kinda limited due to the Flak Emplacement being utter trash (and expensive for what it does), and sandbags dying to easy. It's always more rewarding for OKW players to play very aggressive.


Its almost like potent, offensive arty offmaps, lack of defensive tools, lack of campy on map arty seems to be creating one coherent army.

Its almost like OKW is designed not to defend and hold territories, but like an army that is suppose to press and push against them.

If I wouldn't know better, I would say OKW army is made the way to make it offensive army with slow start and strong snowball effect, like its themed after certain war period, maybe even certain campaign/battle.

If I was to guess, I would say they might have been made and themed in such way that they would remind of ardenes assault where germans were using intense arty barrages(off maps, specifically pfusilier doc one) right before the attack and where germans were offensive, not defensive.
3 Jun 2015, 06:39 AM
#120
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1




This is a really funny post considering Fortifications is one of the most powerful OKW doctrines.
PAGES (7)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

United States 206
United States 20
unknown 6

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

876 users are online: 876 guests
0 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49125
Welcome our newest member, Xclusive
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM