Login

russian armor

USF - A few more design errors

29 Jul 2015, 07:07 AM
#21
avatar of The Big Red 1

Posts: 758



The M26 really wasnt great at all. It suffered from mechanical failures, unsurprisingly - the bane of the panther. Its a miracle they didnt cancel the order to build them like many other tank designs.

very true but after all this is a game so we can slightly ignore some of the historical aspects here speaking of aspects the M26 was in CoH 1 and the US campaign which took place during 1944 and the M26 didn't appear on the ETO until late 1945 but i suppose with british coming into the fold USF do deserve to have a heavy tank of their own i mean the british have the churchill in their arsenal and that was classified as a heavy tank
29 Jul 2015, 07:11 AM
#22
avatar of Sesleri

Posts: 46

USF doesn't need a heavy tank. Factions can be different from each other.
29 Jul 2015, 07:24 AM
#23
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053


very true but after all this is a game so we can slightly ignore some of the historical aspects here speaking of aspects the M26 was in CoH 1 and the US campaign which took place during 1944 and the M26 didn't appear on the ETO until late 1945 but i suppose with british coming into the fold USF do deserve to have a heavy tank of their own i mean the british have the churchill in their arsenal and that was classified as a heavy tank


Heavy tanks arent healthy for the game. They havent been since their existence and still arent, though its been better with the callin limit.

USF vehicle crews can disembark, and abandoned tanks hold no ownership, so technically USF would be able to call in more Pershings.

USF vehicle crews also have crit repair AKA duct tape which is fine for normal USF tanks, but a tank with heavy armor and lots of health that deserves to die because it got close to a gren and got fausted or hit a mine that somehow is able to shake the crit off and roll away is pretty darn stupid.

USF has vehicle disembark and duct tape BECAUSE they have no heavy tank.

In this game, there are "heavy" tanks, and heavy tanks.

"Heavy" tanks are tanks like the KV-1, Churchill, and what i would want for a Sherman Jumbo. They have high armor, significantly higher health than medium tanks, but poor main weapons (as in, they cant just yolo into the enemy and take out a ton of crap. Churchill Crocodile is just better at roasting infantry and AVRE is a special tank like Sturmtiger).
The heavy tanks are the Tiger, IS-2, and King Tiger (potential destruction in that order). They have high armor, high health, and very good main weapons. They require the least skill of any tank to use and rely on the player to ignore building normal stuff and just buy one big tank. Nothing strategic or skillful about that. Anything by its lonesome they destroy, and they require a reasonable army to destroy, except obviously the player who built them still has the rest of their forces to fight with it. They are good all. 1v1's are very different, but the obvious cry for the Pershing comes from team games where USF needs more durable armor.

Giving USF a heavy tank is a lazy solution for a problem that can be solved in a way that improves the game.
29 Jul 2015, 07:34 AM
#24
avatar of The Big Red 1

Posts: 758



Heavy tanks arent healthy for the game. They havent been since their existence and still arent, though its been better with the callin limit.

USF vehicle crews can disembark, and abandoned tanks hold no ownership, so technically USF would be able to call in more Pershings.

USF vehicle crews also have crit repair AKA duct tape which is fine for normal USF tanks, but a tank with heavy armor and lots of health that deserves to die because it got close to a gren and got fausted or hit a mine that somehow is able to shake the crit off and roll away is pretty darn stupid.

USF has vehicle disembark and duct tape BECAUSE they have no heavy tank.

In this game, there are "heavy" tanks, and heavy tanks.

"Heavy" tanks are tanks like the KV-1, Churchill, and what i would want for a Sherman Jumbo. They have high armor, significantly higher health than medium tanks, but poor main weapons (as in, they cant just yolo into the enemy and take out a ton of crap. Churchill Crocodile is just better at roasting infantry and AVRE is a special tank like Sturmtiger).
The heavy tanks are the Tiger, IS-2, and King Tiger (potential destruction in that order). They have high armor, high health, and very good main weapons. They require the least skill of any tank to use and rely on the player to ignore building normal stuff and just buy one big tank. Nothing strategic or skillful about that. Anything by its lonesome they destroy, and they require a reasonable army to destroy, except obviously the player who built them still has the rest of their forces to fight with it. They are good all. 1v1's are very different, but the obvious cry for the Pershing comes from team games where USF needs more durable armor.

Giving USF a heavy tank is a lazy solution for a problem that can be solved in a way that improves the game.

but it was in the previous CoH game and if i recall you could only call in one Pershing at time relic somehow made it work without crippling the gameplay as you aforementioned so i see no harm in adding it if they are able do it right you may be entitled to your own opinion but i still strongly champion the idea of implementing the M26 Pershing in the USF arsenal because of the majority of players like myself are asking for it
29 Jul 2015, 08:06 AM
#25
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 1003

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jul 2015, 07:11 AMSesleri
USF doesn't need a heavy tank. Factions can be different from each other.


In this reason why OKW, dont have medium tanks. Ou :thumb:
29 Jul 2015, 11:02 AM
#26
avatar of sylvan1

Posts: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jul 2015, 01:59 AMSesleri
Less than 5 Pershings saw any use during WW2 and they weren't successful. We don't need this Korean War tank in every COH match.

Every faction doesn't need to be identical. It's ok that Americans lack heavy armor.




not true , please state the source of your information because id like to see where it says that.
29 Jul 2015, 12:16 PM
#27
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

Atleast the lieg doesn't work against OKW. You can place it within range of the base where it can get reinforced against counter-battery and protected by the flak truck. All while keeping up a nice consistant fire with it's long range autofire.

The Pack howitzer is a slow, inconsistent, defensive unit in a faction that's all about mobility and aggressiveness. It forces the USF player to fight in a style that it's not designed to. On top of that it comes in the tier with no suppression units to defend it. It's crummy range forces it to be close to the front line, yet it doesn't even have a gun shield like the leig to defend it and can't retreat if it gets in trouble. It's increased range with barrage might as well not even be there since it's accuracy past that point makes it impossible to even hit anything.

The pack really doesn't really belong in USF as it is right now.


The LeiG and long range don't belong together in the same sentence. You have to use it at close range and offensively because it can't hit anything with it's extremely small AoE if you use it at long range. I would almost always take a Pack Howitzer over a LeiG any day because the Pack Howitzer has a much better AoE and veterancy.
29 Jul 2015, 14:16 PM
#28
avatar of OrionHunter88

Posts: 141

HOLY CRAP THE IGNORANCE OF GERMAN FANBOIS


There were ONLY 44 OSTWINDS ever built.
ONLY 91 ELEPHANTs ever built
ONLY 88 JAGDTIGERs ever built.
ONLY 19 STURMTIGERs ever built.
STG44 infarred scopes were extremely rare.
ALL OF THESE AFVs/TECHNOLOGY mentioned had generally horrible service records. Elepehant and Jagd broke down all the time and were usually abandoned without ever even fighting. A handful of those TDs knocked out a few tanks and that was it.

German airpower on the western front was NON existant yet "Whermacht" has the most airpower in the game.

Sherman Jumbo saw QUITE BIT of service and had rather heavy armor capable of bouncing 75mm and even the occasional 88 (as reported).

IT DOES NOT MATTER. AT ALL. WHAT HAPPENED IN 1944-45. RELIC CHOSE TO DESIGN THIS GAME REGARDLESS OF THOSE UNIT PERFORMANCE/QUANTITY.

IF STURMTIGER/ELEPHANT/OSTWIND/JAGDTIGER CAN MAKE IT. SHERMAN JUMBO CAN DEFINATLEY MAKE IT and SO CAN PERSHING.
29 Jul 2015, 14:47 PM
#29
avatar of Blalord

Posts: 742 | Subs: 1

Yeah ! an other thread derailed in historical debate <444>3
29 Jul 2015, 15:20 PM
#30
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

Lmfao the rage on that guy. Calm down bro...
29 Jul 2015, 15:39 PM
#31
avatar of OrionHunter88

Posts: 141

Lmfao the rage on that guy. Calm down bro...


It's the same ole crap though. every time. Another debate about "sherman jumbo armor was "x" thickness and a long 75mm could penetrate it at "y" distance so it shouldn't even be in the game". Or "pershing barely saw any action in the war so it shouldn't be in the game". and so on. I get so sick of it, because any facts about all the ridiculous crap that relic put into German faction is just brushed aside. stop debating if the pershing made in difference in the war - the debate is why does germany have all this powerful content and USF does not.

Relic designed the game to make Germany exotic and Allies conventional. What ended up happeneing is the way they did it means Germany dominates the late game. People also say 4v4 balance will never exist - well ya sure while axis gets all the late game/team game designed commanders. USF just simply doesn't have the content to contend with Germany late game. It's not whether or not that content is balanced, it just isn't there.

29 Jul 2015, 16:53 PM
#32
avatar of SwonVIP
Donator 11

Posts: 640


USF Artillery Options.

USF desperately needs powerful artillery in the game. they are the ONLY faction that does not have stock long range artillery. I find this disturbing both for game balance and from historical perspective. USF had the best artillery in WW2 (Soviets may have massed the most in some battles) but USF artillery was the most modern in terms of ballistics calulators, communication, and motorization/mechanization. Relic FOOLISHLY choose to represent this power through redundant and often ineffective off map abilities. Where is buildable 105mm? Where is stock long range artillery? Calliope? ... so irritiating.


Priest? isnt that enough arti :luvDerp:
Cmon where is our Hummel then?

Some sort of an upgrade for the normal sherman would be a cool thing... like in vcoh
(Pay some fuel/ammo to get a better version of a sherman...)
29 Jul 2015, 18:59 PM
#33
avatar of OrionHunter88

Posts: 141

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jul 2015, 16:53 PMSwonVIP


Priest? isnt that enough arti :luvDerp:
Cmon where is our Hummel then?

Some sort of an upgrade for the normal sherman would be a cool thing... like in vcoh
(Pay some fuel/ammo to get a better version of a sherman...)


Priest is doctrinal.

OKW has Walking Stuka, Whermacht had Panzerwerfer and Soviet has Katyusha. Wher and Soviet also have buildable artillery pieces. OKW lacks doctrinal artillery and USF lacks non-doctrinal artillery...

USF needs non doctrinal artillery.
29 Jul 2015, 19:16 PM
#34
avatar of Abokasee

Posts: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jul 2015, 16:53 PMSwonVIP


Priest? isnt that enough arti :luvDerp:
Cmon where is our Hummel then?

Some sort of an upgrade for the normal sherman would be a cool thing... like in vcoh
(Pay some fuel/ammo to get a better version of a sherman...)


tbh rather see that then the Snooker-Que Walking stuka.

Annoyingly relic wanted to move away as far as possible from DoW1/CoH1 style upgrades like many SC/WC inspired RTS games, so we probably won't see that.



Priest is doctrinal.

OKW has Walking Stuka, Whermacht had Panzerwerfer and Soviet has Katyusha. Wher and Soviet also have buildable artillery pieces. OKW lacks doctrinal artillery and USF lacks non-doctrinal artillery...

USF needs non doctrinal artillery


Lacking doctrinal-arty is only really a drawback when you consider the rather niche-use of Arty as Heavy-AT (which seems to be one of the optimal ways of destroying Jadgtigers in 4v4)

EDIT:
Also admist this threads fecal-flinging competition of "Your tank was less produced than my tank." we have forgotten Relic literally added a Fictional "Stun" grenade. Yes this may be a reference to the Model 24 "concussion grenade" (#wikiwarrior) but that means its heavily dependent on HE, rather than Fragmentation; either one is going to murderating poor buggers with the effect of "ow I got knocked the freak out" being secondary.

In short: Relic is (slightly) more influenced by gameplay choices for the sake of interestingness (lets not touch on the topic of balance with some of these crazy things); the Ostwind is in because the Wirbelwind was in the last game (and not all that more common) and they were interested in having a vehicle that could bully around the light-armour vehicles. The choice was then between the Ostwind and the ugly as sin and obscure as heck Mobelwagen.

Sometimes this quest for quirks is bad; like cons being outstandingly crap late game at anything except engine botherers, or Fallschirmjager casually walking out of a building and murdering everything with FG42's like they just casually left $20 for Taxi-cab fare after banging some french-chick.
29 Jul 2015, 19:43 PM
#35
avatar of daspoulos

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Permanently Banned
Realistically speaking OKW is actually more historically accurate than it's ever been. Out of date PIV's upgunned and forced into battle fighting alongside JPIV's while being hopelessly outnumbered is pretty realistic.

I support USF getting the Pershing but is isn't going to be the magic bullet that fixes USF. It's just going to be Rifle Company 2.0.
Since we are devolving into historical debates, i'd like to clarify that more panthers were used than panzer4 ausf js in the ardennes offensive.
29 Jul 2015, 20:04 PM
#36
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

^^if OKW was real it would hoards of MP44 Volks, Stugs, and heavy tanks. Like a Panzer Elite on steroids.
29 Jul 2015, 23:54 PM
#37
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

Since we are devolving into historical debates, i'd like to clarify that more panthers were used than panzer4 ausf js in the ardennes offensive.


Certainly more PzIVs than Sturmtigers though. The change was definitely a step in the right direction on that front.

Pls add side armor in the next game relic.
30 Jul 2015, 00:19 AM
#38
avatar of The Big Red 1

Posts: 758



Certainly more PzIVs than Sturmtigers though. The change was definitely a step in the right direction on that front.

Pls add side armor in the next game relic.


not to mention a 76mm gun upgrade, sandbags and applique armor for the M4A3 sherman to increase combat effectiveness and survivability
30 Jul 2015, 00:30 AM
#39
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1



Heavy tanks arent healthy for the game. They havent been since their existence and still arent, though its been better with the callin limit.

USF vehicle crews can disembark, and abandoned tanks hold no ownership, so technically USF would be able to call in more Pershings.

USF vehicle crews also have crit repair AKA duct tape which is fine for normal USF tanks, but a tank with heavy armor and lots of health that deserves to die because it got close to a gren and got fausted or hit a mine that somehow is able to shake the crit off and roll away is pretty darn stupid.

USF has vehicle disembark and duct tape BECAUSE they have no heavy tank.

In this game, there are "heavy" tanks, and heavy tanks.

"Heavy" tanks are tanks like the KV-1, Churchill, and what i would want for a Sherman Jumbo. They have high armor, significantly higher health than medium tanks, but poor main weapons (as in, they cant just yolo into the enemy and take out a ton of crap. Churchill Crocodile is just better at roasting infantry and AVRE is a special tank like Sturmtiger).
The heavy tanks are the Tiger, IS-2, and King Tiger (potential destruction in that order). They have high armor, high health, and very good main weapons. They require the least skill of any tank to use and rely on the player to ignore building normal stuff and just buy one big tank. Nothing strategic or skillful about that. Anything by its lonesome they destroy, and they require a reasonable army to destroy, except obviously the player who built them still has the rest of their forces to fight with it. They are good all. 1v1's are very different, but the obvious cry for the Pershing comes from team games where USF needs more durable armor.

Giving USF a heavy tank is a lazy solution for a problem that can be solved in a way that improves the game.


I think a Sherman Jumbo call in would be nice, a nice solid beefy tank that can be used to soak damage while Jacksons/m10s hit armor in the back. The biggest issue with the USF is that they developed the Tank Destroyers to be hiding behind something to soak damage and the regular Sherman cant do that effectively. Leading to the USF player having to ultra micro his jacksons or use his REs and Rifles as cannon fodder to prevent them from being useless.
30 Jul 2015, 00:47 AM
#40
avatar of EatMyFrag

Posts: 16

I completely agree that the USF should be the faction with a commander called "Close Air Support". They had way more support late war than the Germans for sure. I also agree that the USF should have better indirect fire options. I would be happy with just a mortar team to dislodge MG spam in buildings and bunker spam.

STOP WITH THE PERSHING. Give us Sherman Jumbo's which were used much more than the Pershing and would fit into the Faction much more seamlessly. Sherman Jumbo would be able to absorb damage and deal it almost as effectively as a heavy tank.
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

592 users are online: 592 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM