SEPTEMBER 17TH PATCH NOTES
Posts: 100
Posts: 1217
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ODcC5z6Ca0
Posts: 403
Why does "Cooldown unified from 3.2/1.7 to 3/3" have two different values?
max/min
Posts: 218
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
It's gonna be Rifle Company of Heroes 2. But overall it looks good. Looking forward to the new maps.
My words luvntes my words.
Elite riflemen mean 1 star closer to 3 vet OP bonus ,
Easy eight nicely buffed
Flares are great katitof can write an essay about em
Flametrower and bar ? Yes please !
And incendiary barrage with different animation . Never bad ability
Posts: 117
Posts: 1664
Am I seriously the only one who LIKED Cold Tech and Blizzards? I think they added great immersion to the game, and added something that differentiated winter maps from summer maps beyond just vehicle camo. The respite that Blizzards would provide from combat was also very nice in many circumstances.
They severely hampered performance in this already horrifically optimized game so they HAD to go.
Posts: 218
Explosions and tracer fire hamper performance in large quantities, they have to go!
They severely hampered performance in this already horrifically optimized game so they HAD to go.
If a player builds enough demo charges and sets them off at once it will CRASH the game! Remove demo charges!
Posts: 135
Viable (hopefully not op) flame rifles, viable infantry company with the buffs/fixes, and viable armor company in OFC would make me a happy camper. The current flame rifle spam meta is so repetitive :/.
Posts: 503
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
think a minute about finnal of OCF, Whithc factions will be played ?
British of course not becuase ostheer can just lolrush them with 222 sniper , mg , grens and halftruck without counter + still brits bleed like pigs
Yes their late game is potent but you need to survive it to that point . Good early game in oswind often means gg because brits dont get at nades
Will it be okw ?
Of course not
Big buffs to USA make okw weak agains them early game and even mid late game becuase they cant fight m10 spam or easy 8 spam effectively
Or do okw want to play agains new russians ?
No it dont want to play agains them
Sniper + flame car + 2 cons + maxim + at gun/maxim (if he is so brave and flacktrack) folloved by t70 is really potent.
And by that time okw will have nothing to counter them.
Add there something like guards + t 85 or shocks + kv 8 + incendiary barrage + is2 .
GG OKW GG
Now i think it will be russians versus Ostheer and sometimes USA (good buffs , now even lihtenaunt is good if he is folloved by paras thompsons or buffed double bar patfinders + at gun , if enemy want to go sniper , otherwise going captain and them easy 8 or m10 spam lways worked) again otheer depending on players preference
Want somebody to disagree ?
Posts: 254
The manpower bleed wasnt adressed =(
If you mean the one for backbone infantry, yes it has been addressed. The bleed has been transferred from USF to OST since Rifles will be much stronger against Grens now.
Nice patch. Funny tho how Brits received nerfs and buffs but their early game was untouched. IS vulnerable against any vehicle without any useful Vet 1 ability an no AT and therefore overprized like the Vickers. No change to SelfRep for UC. Still no mid game AI vehicle aside from UC. Oh well. At least anti-sniper measures are not reduced to something like a Kubel (lel Relic).
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
Am I seriously the only one who LIKED Cold Tech and Blizzards? I think they added great immersion to the game, and added something that differentiated winter maps from summer maps beyond just vehicle camo. The respite that Blizzards would provide from combat was also very nice in many circumstances.
i liked them too sad theyre gone
Posts: 117
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Couple of things here. IS-2 shoots at higher armored targets, so its higher penetration values only allow it to get a chance to penetrate the harder target. They are also shooting at tanks with high speed frequently (blitz), and often tanks that have excellent cover in the form of smoke. All these things make the time required for an average kill go up.
If you think the IS2 with its slower reload and less accuracy is better at gibbing inf, then you don't play enough. IS2 can only hit infantry if they stand near cover and the IS2 gets lucky. Infantry always provide a reliable threat to IS2 since it is unlikely to wipe in one shot even when it does hit, and the long reload basically guarantees the squad can retreat to safety. The Tiger is far more lethal to inf, especially our new smaller Allied squad sizes. For instance, use attack ground with a tiger to always get the shell to land in the middle of a squad to ensure maximum damage.
Course they will both have the same range at vet 2, but you did not notice I said that in my comment. Only they Tiger will have 5 more range until vet 2. Which is kind of a big deal since that means it will always get the first shot.
The Tiger II is a fortress around which your attack hinges. It is the most skilless version of a tank in the game, and this only stresses that point. Since it cannot chase and it has insanely high damage it just sits still and destroys all within its range. When it takes damage it falls back gets repaired and moves back to the line. Its blitz is too slow to help it chase down tanks so it just uses it to try to escape. Nothing redeeming in this tank, and now it will always get the first shot on attacking tanks. Upping the micro requirement for allied players and lowering it for the German player. It should have been made cheaper and faster.
Indeed the Zis has good penetration which is compensated for by its terrible, absolutely basement, fire rate. So your basic argument is that if the 6-pounder can reliably penetrate Tiger from the front the tank deserves a buff? I assume all Allied tanks are well overdue for a buff then since the pak is like a knife through butter and almost all Axis AT always penetrates Allied tanks, besides Axis having the best snares, the best vet levels, the best abilities for AT, the most AT, and the best command structure allowing them to access it whenever they need.
If the plan is to buff the Tiger, what is the purpose of that? Is it to encourage Axis tanks to be more suitable to engage on their own? Is it to make the Axis more flexible? I don't want to see more Tigers and Tiger II's. I want to see more players digging into their tier structure and picking the right tool for the job.
This kinda falls apart when A. If you have a Tiger II you will mostly likely have no other vehicles or maybe 1 other to support it and B. The Tiger II's vet doesn't increase the range on it (well in general the Tiger II's vet is a dumb but w/e).
On the subject of AT, Soviets and Brits have no lacking in AT that can pen Axis tanks, and visa versa. The "myth" of superior armor on the Axis side is just that, a myth. Axis tanks preform for how the cost, if you are upset that lower cost tanks have lower stats well then I don't think you understand how cost performance ratio works.
The reason for the Tiger I buffs was that the IS2 completely clowned it out, and the scatter on the AoE on the IS2 really shouldn't be overlooked since it's devastating to units in cover and helps against more spread out units (lower AoE of course being worse against less clumped units) which is now how most infantry operate out of cover.
Really the Tiger I and IS2 being equals is fine, the other way of fixing it would have been to reduce the Tiger I's cost but that would have made it to good versus USF (although almost all of USF problems are being fixed).
Personally I like that Heavy tanks will now be viable, and mediums will ALSO be viable.
Posts: 20
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Am I seriously the only one who LIKED Cold Tech and Blizzards? I think they added great immersion to the game, and added something that differentiated winter maps from summer maps beyond just vehicle camo. The respite that Blizzards would provide from combat was also very nice in many circumstances.
You are probably the minority. Cold tech needed a rework since day1, having less drastic effects. I'll like to have it back once rebalanced, but i'll prefer it removed on it's actual state.
Posts: 218
A raging blizzard SHOULD have drastic effects.
You are probably the minority. Cold tech needed a rework since day1, having less drastic effects. I'll like to have it back once rebalanced, but i'll prefer it removed on it's actual state.
And it's never getting put back in. The playerbase is vocal enough against it that cold tech is gone for good now.
Seriously people, why not just delete all winter maps? There's nothing making them different now.
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
I don't understand all of the Flame weapons adjustments. I was hoping somebody could explain them a bit better to me. I just can't quite wrap my head around all the numbers and variables in the patch notes.
Handheld flamers do worse vs units not in cover, and they do better vs units in yellow, and significantly better vs units in green. Also they don't leave behind a dot anymore.
Posts: 254
Handheld flamers do worse vs units not in cover, and they do better vs units in yellow, and significantly better vs units in green. Also they don't leave behind a dot anymore.
Finally like vCoH.
Livestreams
1887 | |||||
10 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.830222.789+36
- 2.561204.733+3
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.916404.694-1
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.305114.728+1
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.14758.717+1
- 10.17046.787-1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
16 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Qplcdidds04
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM