USF - A few more design errors

In this reason why OKW, dont have medium tanks. Ou

This is the reason why USF only starting option is spamming riflemen and lack a mortar....

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.

I'd honestly think adding side armor the way everyone thinks it should be added is actually a bad idea. It would be unfair to add side armor if historic tank ranges and armor angling weren't added as well. Being realistic I can understand how those 2 wouldn't make much sense either. So even though I realize the front half and back half system is also bad my suggestion would be to make the tank armor hybrids of both ideas.



Reasoning for this is so tanks shooting at the front corner of a tank don't penetrate when hitting the side of the tank at such an extreme angle from the front that it would be silly for them to pen. Also considering how much simpler it is to close the distance to tanks in this game and the fact that front armor can still be penetrated by any gun. Even in situations that they shouldn't. (Ex. T34/76 shooting at King tiger frontal armor).

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.

you do understand that the sherman was classified as a medium tank and not a heavy tank it may have more armor but unfortunately at the end of the day its still a medium tank. but it would be nice welcome addition to the USF alongside the M26 Pershing

I'd honestly think adding side armor the way everyone thinks it should be added is actually a bad idea. It would be unfair to add side armor if historic tank ranges and armor angling weren't added as well. Being realistic I can understand how those 2 wouldn't make much sense either. So even though I realize the front half and back half system is also bad my suggestion would be to make the tank armor hybrids of both ideas.



Reasoning for this is so tanks shooting at the front corner of a tank don't penetrate when hitting the side of the tank at such an extreme angle from the front that it would be silly for them to pen. Also considering how much simpler it is to close the distance to tanks in this game and the fact that front armor can still be penetrated by any gun. Even in situations that they shouldn't. (Ex. T34/76 shooting at King tiger frontal armor).

There is a mod I've seen on here that is working armor angling into the game, which is a cool hack considering its a mod and the base game doesn't seem to support the stuff by default. IMO the game is small enough in scale for armor angling and side armor to be factors in penetration. Particularly for the smaller scale game. I think that this might be a good testbed for whether or not it works in a coh type scenario although obviously it will depend on the quality of their balancing too.

In a CoH3 scenario I would be in favour of increasing tank ranges, but not dramatically. Like 60 range default, 80 for TDs and AT guns or something like that. Mainly because the distances are SO short that they are often irrelevant in practical scenarios. My main bugbear is infantry AT, which is only somewhat shorter range than the tanks they're fighting. In real life a Sherman could easily engage targets at 600-800 meters, while a Pscreck has an effective range of well under 200m. And some fausts only working effectively to 60 meters or less. This would all feel a bit less weird if you had slightly more room to differentiate these ranges with. But not so many that infnatry are totally worthless. It's a balancing act obviously but I definitely want to see slightly longer ranges. Acutally inf rifles and such could use a small range boost too for similar reasons!

Fortress Europe Mod, which includes a much more sophisticated system of armor than what we have now.

Theres a thread here as well as a video sampling armor on tanks.

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.

CAPSLOCK isn't your friend. Any message you had just gets lost in the rage.

There is a weird dynamic here with Axis fanboys and Relic. Historical arguments are only applied against Soviets or USF. When anyone brings up historical arguments against Axis, the reply will always be that the intention of the game is to be competitive, not be a simulation.

IMO, adding a Pershing wouldn't really fix any problems. The problem primarily is in the strange design of OKW with the fuel and muni penalty, five levels of vet, and units that are buffed to compensate for the penalty.

Lastly, the JT, KT, Elefant, and SturmTiger are the units that cause problems in larger team games. I'd much prefer that the popcap on those be increased to around 40 so that they don't dominate games and players have to make some trade-offs to get those units.

Adding some more modularity to the USF might make it alot more fun to play...unfortunately it might also make things more complicated. However this faction is micro intensive anyways so it does not really matter.

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.

Seriously?

+1. Also LeiG needs the same help.

I have the feeling (have not checked the stats) that Leig is performing better than pack howie when I use it, maybe RNG.

I have the feeling (have not checked the stats) that Leig is performing better than pack howie when I use it, maybe RNG.

The Pack has higher scatter so if you use it at long range (like your not supposed to) it won't hit shit, if you used at closer ranges (like your supposed to use both) it outperforms the LeiG. But both are honestly nothing compared to an actual real mortar.

AoE in the Pack is higher so when you do hit you fuck shit up.

I think anyone considering historical arguments should consider that CoH1 was created on the back of the success of Saving Private Ryan. It's inspired by MOVIES, not history, and that goes a long way to explaining some of the unit choices. If you watch the old 60's WW2 movies, many of the inspirations seem clear - such as the prominence of the Greyhound, which appeared in The Bridge At Remagen, or the British commandos from A Bridge Too Far, so on and so forth.

If I'm not mistaken, even some of the unit responses were lifted directly from movies, specifically the "Pour it on 'em!" that the jeeps used to say when given an attack order.

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.

2,212 M26 Pershing tanks were built in 1944 and 1945. By the end of the European War, 310 M26 Pershing tanks operated in Europe. Pershing please.

HOLY CRAP THE IGNORANCE OF GERMAN FANBOIS

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

Which version of the Jumbo are you referring to? The short barreled 75mm version or the longer barreled 76mm version? If they would introduce the longer barreled 76 mm version, it would be totally fine by me, finally something usefull for the USF to actually attack German armor, instead of hiding behind units and hoping not to get hit three times and die

2,212 M26 Pershing tanks were built in 1944 and 1945. By the end of the European War, 310 M26 Pershing tanks operated in Europe. Pershing please.

'operated'. Only 20 took part in any combat in ww2. Rather have the Sherman Jumbo with the longer 76 mm barrel. Would work like the t34-85 now works with a doctrine.

'operated'. Only 20 took part in any combat in ww2. Rather have the Sherman Jumbo with the longer 76 mm barrel. Would work like the t34-85 now works with a doctrine.

Not sure whey it has to be an either/or type situation. Both tanks should be in the game.

Not sure whey it has to be an either/or type situation. Both tanks should be in the game.

Giving the USF every option of heavier armor in the book won't do the game any good. How do you wish to see both implemented? Pershing as a call in heavy and Jumbo as a heavier sherman non doctrinal unit?

I don't think the Pershing is the solution to the current problem, since it was a slow ass machine with horrible power to weight ratio (why they created the t32), I rather have a Sherman Jumbo that has manoeuvrability, can actually flank efficiently and take hits without having it die when you blink your eyes. The longer 76 mm barreled gun can have better ammo values then the e8 sherman, to give it that extra more punch.