Login

russian armor

Blobbing is back

18 Sep 2015, 05:07 AM
#21
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Riflemen, LMG or Assault rifles, it performs as both. LMG due to range, but assault rifle due to move while firing.


Not true though. The BAR has a damage curve like the FG 42. LMG's have a very different damage curve.
18 Sep 2015, 05:13 AM
#22
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



Not true though. The BAR has a damage curve like the FG 42. LMG's have a very different damage curve.


Pmuch, BAR's are FG42's with 1 more DPS at close and 1 less DPS at far.

EDIT: This makes the match up between Fallsch and Rifles funny, in and that Fallsch cost 160 more MP and at vet 3 only have .01 better received accuracy :foreveralone:
18 Sep 2015, 05:14 AM
#23
avatar of Fuzz
Donator 11

Posts: 98

Relic ninja-buffed fanboy bias
18 Sep 2015, 05:15 AM
#24
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Sep 2015, 04:59 AMGrumpy


Is that the ISU152 that almost was a counter to the Elefant and JT, but was overnerfed to where it isn't built much anymore? Do you want riflemen to join the ranks of the B4, ML-20, M8 greyhound, etc, etc?


Lol, before we get too off topic but yes I'm talking about the isu152 the auto win. The one shot one squad killed. With the 100 range. It out performed the elephant due to cons and engis being able to repair while ib combat at a safe distance. And when hit they wouldn't die. But when repairing the elephant, and hit, almost all rep crews died. Might have been before WFA came out. And no I don't want riflemen to join those ranks I never said that. Jesus what's wrong with people on these forms. I'm simply saying that the changes have encouraged blobbing.
18 Sep 2015, 05:17 AM
#25
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124



Not true though. The BAR has a damage curve like the FG 42. LMG's have a very different damage curve.


Really. Like does it look like I'm trying to do actual stats and statistics? I'm simply saying the changes are encouraging blobbing and support blobbing. The BAR is able to move and shoot and have range to it. Simple
18 Sep 2015, 05:19 AM
#26
avatar of pugzii

Posts: 513



Really. Like does it look like I'm trying to do actual stats and statistics? I'm simply saying the changes are encouraging blobbing and support blobbing. The BAR is able to move and have range to it. Simple


Nice Axis playercard
18 Sep 2015, 05:21 AM
#27
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Sep 2015, 05:19 AMpugzii


Nice Axis playercard


Thanks bro, what's next? I'm a fanboy. Haha ok. Typical coh2 fourm guy here.
18 Sep 2015, 05:22 AM
#28
avatar of KurtWilde
Donator 11

Posts: 440

Whoever though giving basic 5 and 6 man infantry absurd levels Rec Acc should be put in a home. Every game now is literally nothing but "Wait until critical mass of Cons and Rifles is Achieved then sweep the map".

It's like the old days of Vet 5 Volks.


yeah man, i had them vet 3 rifles with bars rip my tiger, just yesterday. so OP
18 Sep 2015, 05:25 AM
#29
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1

Here's a replay to satisfy you hunger: http://www.coh2.org/replay/40602/2v2-with-rollo-versus-cancer



I just watched that game. Didn't change my mind in the slightest. Here is why:

1) Trois Ponts. Seriously, what did you expect? This game has plenty of hilariously badly designed maps, and this is a perfect example.

2) Unsupported team weapons. You iterally left 1 MG42 and 1 PAK gun and expected them to hold back the enemy. He dropped Sherman smoke on you, then WP arty, and you lost your defensive line. What you need to do is have at least 2 MG teams, so they can cover each other. You also need infantry in front of your teams to spot enemies. Not playing on cancer lane maps like Trois Ponts helps.

3) Blobbing. You didn't blob much, but your ally several time in the game just right clicked all their units towards the middle of the enemy blob and expected results. The 2 vet3 Flamer rifles and 4x vet3 no weapon REs complied and wrecked them, since close is the ONLY range they would have won that engagement.

There were many issues that game, but even non-buffed vet 3 rifles would have done well that game. They were blobbing even at vet 2, and were still wrecking face.
18 Sep 2015, 05:25 AM
#30
avatar of KurtWilde
Donator 11

Posts: 440

you guys make Dota 2 players seem so sensible.
18 Sep 2015, 05:38 AM
#31
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



I just watched that game. Didn't change my mind in the slightest. Here is why:

1) Trois Ponts. Seriously, what did you expect? This game has plenty of hilariously badly designed maps, and this is a perfect example.

2) Unsupported team weapons. You iterally left 1 MG42 and 1 PAK gun and expected them to hold back the enemy. He dropped Sherman smoke on you, then WP arty, and you lost your defensive line. What you need to do is have at least 2 MG teams, so they can cover each other. You also need infantry in front of your teams to spot enemies. Not playing on cancer lane maps like Trois Ponts helps.

3) Blobbing. You didn't blob much, but your ally several time in the game just right clicked all their units towards the middle of the enemy blob and expected results. The 2 vet3 Flamer rifles and 4x vet3 no weapon REs complied and wrecked them, since close is the ONLY range they would have won that engagement.

There were many issues that game, but even non-buffed vet 3 rifles would have done well that game. They were blobbing even at vet 2, and were still wrecking face.


Yeah exactly, the Vet 3 Rifles and Vet 3 Cons were punching way above their cost. Yes our opponents were being kinda dumb on occasion (like the whole leaving thing) but I don't really understand why I need to recreate a perfect replay for you that tests all the changes in vacuums to show you that .56 Rec Acc on a 280 MP Squad that has 5 men is not okay.

If you want USF to play better and not like some gimmick faction for a-movers then consider more skill based options like adding elite infantry, reducing reinforce cost at vet 3, and or adjusting RE's. Because sledgehammer changes like this suck.

Insanely durable Vet 5 Volks were unbalanced, Insanely durable Vet 3 Rifles are unbalanced, Insanely durable Vet 3 cons are somewhat unbalanced but well at least they don't have freaking weapon pick ups.

EDIT: I'm really going to have to actually make that table for how much high recieved acc impacts Kar98k using unit's aren't I? Because it's a problem.
18 Sep 2015, 05:54 AM
#32
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1



Yeah exactly, the Vet 3 Rifles and Vet 3 Cons were punching way above their cost. Yes our opponents were being kinda dumb on occasion (like the whole leaving thing) but I don't really understand why I need to recreate a perfect replay for you that tests all the changes in vacuums to show you that .56 Rec Acc on a 280 MP Squad that has 5 men is not okay.

If you want USF to play better and not like some gimmick faction for a-movers then consider more skill based options like adding elite infantry, reducing reinforce cost at vet 3, and or adjusting RE's. Because sledgehammer changes like this suck.

Insanely durable Vet 5 Volks were unbalanced, Insanely durable Vet 3 Rifles are unbalanced, Insanely durable Vet 3 cons are somewhat unbalanced but well at least they don't have freaking weapon pick ups.

EDIT: I'm really going to have to actually make that table for how much high recieved acc impacts Kar98k using unit's aren't I? Because it's a problem.


How were they punching above their weight? He used a smoke barrage, then walked forwards. You had nothing but 1 MG42 and a PAK. You lost. You guys lost that game from a combination of poor positioning, poor map, and poor decisions. Like seriously, you can't show me that game and use it as proof that the rifles were being OP.
18 Sep 2015, 06:09 AM
#33
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



How were they punching above their weight? He used a smoke barrage, then walked forwards. You had nothing but 1 MG42 and a PAK. You lost. You guys lost that game from a combination of poor positioning, poor map, and poor decisions. Like seriously, you can't show me that game and use it as proof that the rifles were being OP.


Dude we didn't lose the game, did you even watch the replay :foreveralone:

This also doesn't address any of my other points about Riflemen having vet that's more powerful than units with smaller model counts that cost much more per individual model. You said in another thread IS pay for their good vet in cost, but here you seem to be saying the opposite?

No 5 man squad that costs less per model than many 4 man squads should not have superior received accuracy to those 4 man squads

Like, this has nothing to do with "I played a game, I lost tearstearstears", this is a legitimate problem you are dismissing out of hand for unknown reasons. Do you have some sort of argument for why Rifles should cost 280 MP and have superior scaling to more expensive units as well as retaining excellent versatility?

Effective Health Against Small Arms = Cumulative Health of Unit/Received Accuracy Unit or Chance to Bounce Shots with Armor

Vet 3 Grens have 457 effective health (4*80)/.7007

Vet 3 Rifles have 714 effective health (5*80)/.56

Vet 3 Fallsch have 581 effective health (4*80)/.55

Vet 5 Sturms have 627 effective health (4*80)/.51

and so on and so forth, can you see what the issue is here or do I need to make it even more explicit for you?
18 Sep 2015, 06:24 AM
#34
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7

please keep in mind that using small arms is the LEAST effective way to deal with late game infantry. mortars, tanks, and other explosives should be the primary method of killing them. also riflemen are still infantry, which means theyll get fucked up by machine guns that are staggered.

even if riflemen are the beefiest mainline infantry (which im totally ok with), you still need to invest a good deal amount of munitions for them to have good late game offensive capabilities. other wise you have a tanky squad that doesnt have the dps to match up against grens or obers late game.
18 Sep 2015, 06:27 AM
#35
avatar of Carlos Danger

Posts: 362

I'm so tired of "it costs more and therefore should be better" arguments. If that were true, Shock Troopers should always beat Panzerfusiliers and Assault Grenadiers should always beat Conscripts. Obviously those are special cases, but I want to point out that that logic alone cannot be used to justify balance changes.

The US late-game deficiencies have more to with a lack of decent late-game tanks and AT options rather than with Riflemen underperforming anyways. Not saying that Riflemen aren't a problem, but they aren't the biggest issue.

please keep in mind that using small arms is the LEAST effective way to deal with late game infantry. mortars, tanks, and other explosives should be the primary method of killing them.
This is true, although I'm not sure that it should be. I feel that small arms should be as effective as any other weapon.
18 Sep 2015, 06:38 AM
#36
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

The problem with rifleman previously was their overpriced bar. Their veterancy was decent previously and didn't need the buff.

conscript is another matter since they lack upgrade. PPsh and PTRS don't count.
18 Sep 2015, 06:49 AM
#37
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7

I'm so tired of "it costs more and therefore should be better" arguments. If that were true, Shock Troopers should always beat Panzerfusiliers and Assault Grenadiers should always beat Conscripts. Obviously those are special cases, but I want to point out that that logic alone cannot be used to justify balance changes.

The US late-game deficiencies have more to with a lack of decent late-game tanks and AT options rather than with Riflemen underperforming anyways. Not saying that Riflemen aren't a problem, but they aren't the biggest issue.

This is true, although I'm not sure that it should be. I feel that small arms should be as effective as any other weapon.


as long as all units have high recieved accuracy bonuses, small arms will never be the most efficient way to kill units unless you have units that have insnaely high dps such as vet 2 obers or shocks/commandos at close range.
18 Sep 2015, 06:53 AM
#38
avatar of Nabarxos

Posts: 392

you are telling me that he managed to get a blob of vet 3 riflemen????

and you also expect a single MG-42 to counter it

HA HA HA

nice joke
18 Sep 2015, 06:58 AM
#39
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



as long as all units have high recieved accuracy bonuses, small arms will never be the most efficient way to kill units unless you have units that have insnaely high dps such as vet 2 obers or shocks/commandos at close range.


Well the new spacing changes make them more efficient when working outside of tight spaces. Lot harder to bring the pain with AoE now that squads can spread themselves our so much more. Recieved Accuracy also affects bolt action rifle units (Mosins and Kar98k's) much much more than high ROF weapons such as Shocks, Commandos, and LMG's.

To elaborate on the bolt action rifle thing; in CoH2 Bolt Action rifles have high damage but a low ROF and long reload meaning they depend very much on hitting their targets consistently to do DPS. But of course than means RNG plays heavily were you can get unlucky and have all your shots miss, giving the enemy unit a very large advantage.

This is a BIG reason why Cons can't seem to kill things later in the game, they have slow firing rifles and poor accuracy facing off against high rec acc units. The reason why this Rifle change has a huge impact is because the vast majority of OKW and Ost units use Kar98k's.
18 Sep 2015, 07:00 AM
#40
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

MG42 doesn't pin the whole blob?
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

384 users are online: 384 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