Ostheer HMG too strong now
29 Jun 2015, 17:37 PM
#341
Posts: 1225
I think some of the cover isnt properly modeled Gabba, thats why in practical terms it sometimes does happen.
29 Jun 2015, 17:47 PM
#342
Posts: 225 | Subs: 1
Dunno,useless ?It took a bit longer yes but not useless,unless you were incapable to position it well.It was a cost effective area denial and anti blob weapon,when vet 3.
Frankly speaking,havent played 1vs1 for some time(sick of waiting 10 mins and then roflstomping someone).But my recent 2vs2 games tell me that it is pretty hard for usf in other game modes than 1vs1 to compete with ostheer.
USF struggels the most,because 1) mg too effecitve 2) too cheap
That doesnt mean they suck at it ,have hardly played coh1 and would still assume i am good at flanking,no prejudices pls.
Frankly speaking,havent played 1vs1 for some time(sick of waiting 10 mins and then roflstomping someone).But my recent 2vs2 games tell me that it is pretty hard for usf in other game modes than 1vs1 to compete with ostheer.
USF struggels the most,because 1) mg too effecitve 2) too cheap
That doesnt mean they suck at it ,have hardly played coh1 and would still assume i am good at flanking,no prejudices pls.
29 Jun 2015, 17:56 PM
#343
Posts: 1225
Pretty useless and too RNG dependant. At medium range, even in a 1v1 situation (meaning MG vs ie. Riflemen squad) you could easily lose the gunner to the first rifle/conscript volley before he even got a shot off, losing you the engagement and possibly the gun. One hostile model running over yellow cover often meant you'd need an additional burst to suppress, losing you the engagement, etc. It was simply not a reliable tool.
Not saying you (or anybody) suck at flanking or anyhting, but people adapt to necessities and their skillsets emerge accordingly. The vcoh 1v1 matchup was all about setting up, timing, and defending against flanks, and high tier players were ridiculously good at it. In Coh2 this is noticeably absent. Its not because the standard of play has necessarily deteriorated, its because the game mechanics/faction dynamics/maps make it far less important.
Not saying you (or anybody) suck at flanking or anyhting, but people adapt to necessities and their skillsets emerge accordingly. The vcoh 1v1 matchup was all about setting up, timing, and defending against flanks, and high tier players were ridiculously good at it. In Coh2 this is noticeably absent. Its not because the standard of play has necessarily deteriorated, its because the game mechanics/faction dynamics/maps make it far less important.
29 Jun 2015, 18:04 PM
#344
Posts: 211
Seriously though, wasn't the arc of fire smaller in vCoH? And didn't MG play feel kinda right there? I am by no means an expert, but I think this would be preferable gamedesign ( a slightly smaller arc, that is). I don't want it to be ridiculously narrow as the allied HMGs have it, rather like in CoH 1.
Like, it should have punch, but the whole flanking mechanic and arc of fire thing, which is so unique to CoH, is way too interesting to give it an arc of almost 180°.
Like, it should have punch, but the whole flanking mechanic and arc of fire thing, which is so unique to CoH, is way too interesting to give it an arc of almost 180°.
29 Jun 2015, 18:05 PM
#345
Posts: 225 | Subs: 1
That sums it up quite well altough i agree with most of your points that doesnt mean the mg 42 isnt a bit op now.
As i said the problem is based on the lack of options for usf.I just want the mg42 to be slightly more pricey ,lets say around 260-270,to be on par with other mgs and of course to not over perform ,which it currently does.
As i said the problem is based on the lack of options for usf.I just want the mg42 to be slightly more pricey ,lets say around 260-270,to be on par with other mgs and of course to not over perform ,which it currently does.
29 Jun 2015, 19:02 PM
#346
8 
Posts: 146
I like that the mgs actually suppress now, but I don't like that they can suppress units outside the arc of fire. So you flank with one squad but get too close to a unit in the arc of fire and they get suppressed too.
29 Jun 2015, 19:09 PM
#347
Posts: 1705
Its overperforming for the cost and its not dependent on availability of counters, it needs cost increase, because its imbalanced anyway, we can also nerf the stats and keep the cost if you like that more.
Elephant always existed and ISU still got nerfs. See?
First add mortar and see how much the dynamic is changed,then cost increase if needed.Becuase ost was largely helpless against usf earlygame before mg42 buff.Go on deny that.
And don't compare isu with elephant,lol.We all know what an abomination chain squadwiper isu was.The only thing comparable to isu abuse was original tiger ace.
29 Jun 2015, 19:17 PM
#348
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Concept of cost effectiveness is completely foreign to you aust, right?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
29 Jun 2015, 19:18 PM
#349
Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2
Permanently BannedI like that the mgs actually suppress now, but I don't like that they can suppress units outside the arc of fire. So you flank with one squad but get too close to a unit in the arc of fire and they get suppressed too.
That's intended, its AOE suppression, you need to keep distance between squads.
There is no recording in all WW2 history of a piat actually knocking off a vehicle. Yes, it was THAT bad.
29 Jun 2015, 19:20 PM
#350
Posts: 1705
Concept of cost effectiveness is completely foreign to you aust, right?
Compare the katyusha to the panzerwerfer and ask me again kati.Compare us teching with ost teching as well if u feel upto it.
Isn't assymetric balance one of your favourite lines?
29 Jun 2015, 19:24 PM
#351
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Concept of cost effectiveness is completely foreign to you aust, right?
Giving USF more counters and increasing the cost are not mutually exclusive things. He said he thought it should cost more so what exactly is your grief here?
It should just be 280 like the .50 cal.
29 Jun 2015, 19:26 PM
#352
8 Posts: 146
That's intended, its AOE suppression, you need to keep distance between squads.
I know, it's cool that its AOE, but it would be nice if the AOE would only work inside the arc of fire of the mg, its kinda silly to get suppressed if you cant even get hit by it.
29 Jun 2015, 19:29 PM
#353
Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2
Permanently Banned
I know, it's cool that its AOE, but it would be nice if the AOE would only work inside the arc of fire of the mg, its kinda silly to get suppressed if you cant even get hit by it.
I don't think that is possible within the game engine. Don't quote me on that though.
But I don't agree, you just have to work with it and think about your squad positioning
There is no recording in all WW2 history of a piat actually knocking off a vehicle. Yes, it was THAT bad.
29 Jun 2015, 19:31 PM
#354
Posts: 1705
Giving USF more counters and increasing the cost are not mutually exclusive things. He said he thought it should cost more so what exactly is your grief here?
It should just be 280 like the .50 cal.
I said it should be done in phases.First mortar,then cost increase if still needed.Because ost teching is still shit and MP starved...behind the hysteria .One mg performance spike hasn't made me forget months of effortless humiliation for wehrmacht earlygame against rifle hordes.
If one asked me in a vaccuum i would say it should cost more than 240 mp.At least 260 mp.
But when i take into account ost teching MP i backtrack.
Fix ost teching cost and hike its MP cost-no problems for me.I'm just glad frontal charges on useless mgs are over..i'm willing to pay a bit more if necessary for that.And its not just mg42,the .50 cal is extremely deadly as well...its just that riflemen spammers are not used to employing it.USF needs a bit more diversity with mortar and ost needs tech costs so t4 is actually useable in low game modes.
29 Jun 2015, 21:16 PM
#355
Posts: 1484
The arc should be a little narrow, other than that, I love the new MG!
 | Playercard of WingZero | |||||||||||||||
|
29 Jun 2015, 22:54 PM
#356
Posts: 55
A major problem with the unit now is the speed it can pick up and reposition itself. In combination with the fast suppression it makes flanking practically impossible in a lot of map positions and also makes abilities like the molotov completely useless. If the unit is going to be so effective it should go back to having a longer setup and reposition time.
30 Jun 2015, 00:01 AM
#357
Posts: 432
A major problem with the unit now is the speed it can pick up and reposition itself. In combination with the fast suppression it makes flanking practically impossible in a lot of map positions and also makes abilities like the molotov completely useless. If the unit is going to be so effective it should go back to having a longer setup and reposition time.
It's already got the longest deploy and redeploy timers in the game for an MG. It's been unchanged forever. Speed is no different than it ever really was.
30 Jun 2015, 00:20 AM
#358
Posts: 515
Just played a 1v1 as USF. Guy had MG in church on Semois. I flanked it with 4 riflemen and killed it with nades, then stole it. If that MG was any more broken though I probably would have lost the game right there.
30 Jun 2015, 00:33 AM
#359
Posts: 611
Just played a 1v1 as USF. Guy had MG in church on Semois. I flanked it with 4 riflemen and killed it with nades, then stole it. If that MG was any more broken though I probably would have lost the game right there.
How did you achieve such a miraculous feat. You must have the micro skills of a south Korean gaming god.
30 Jun 2015, 00:36 AM
#360
Posts: 55
It's already got the longest deploy and redeploy timers in the game for an MG. It's been unchanged forever. Speed is no different than it ever really was.
"Speed is no different then it ever really was" is exactly my point - there has to be some balance to the unit. If you are going to make it significantly better at suppressing infantry and also deal more damage and at greater distances, then increase the deploy/redeploy timers so that getting flanked actually has real consequences and you actually do have to worry about a molotov instead of just picking up and moving faster then a molotov can even break and cause damage to the unit.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
29 | ||
|
|
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.939410.696+5
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265
Board Info
933 users are online:
933 guests
1 post in the last 24h
11 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
11 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50002
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM