There is something should be done about rocket artillery.

Calliope is completely overpowered (the doc it's in is far too good too). Panzerwerfer is really strong but teching to T4 costs quite a bit so I guess it's fine.

Rocket arty should be like the katyusha: situational.

The bolded part is their job.
If they didn't, camping with atg's would become the meta.

+1

How about removing ALL squad wipes from the game and introduce the "Tie"

Unacceptable, unless both sides will see this as their post game screen, nothing less will be accepted.

Show Spoiler

We can't allow scrubs to feel bad or they might actually quit.

Stuka isn't fine coz it is guaranteed wipe of team weapons.

Should be added some RNG to its barrage pattern.

Stuka zu fuss is fine.

Calliope and PzWefer need to be nerfed fixed to Katy's level.

Working as intended. Many bad players use triple Pak/Zis/6P/R43 to support their heavies.


Such players get punished by the Calliopium/PW. Late game you should have your own vehicles instead of solely relying on your support teams.


In other words, L2P. It's not going to change.

Lelics asses laughs at that. They already made okw tech tree cost x2 less than sov one without any explanation.
Just dont play a game that doesnt worth your time.

I am confused by this thread. Is it that rocket artillery is particularly potent, or is it that static artillery is so underwhelming that by contrast it appears too good?

In any case, I dislike the wipe potential inherent in the Stuka's drop pattern, and the Calliope is too powerful as well as the werfer.

Possibly change the Stuka to drop two creeping lines (3 rockets in each line) in parallel, and reduce the total area so that Brit emplacements can be hit harder, but weapon teams can escape for easily. Or institute a random spread pattern encourage OKW players to bring the Stuka in close to fire, as it is the most survivable rocket arty after the Calliope.

Katyusha firing a bit faster (I mean thats what it's shtick was IRL) and Callopie not being a literal tank durability wise would be nice. Especially since going deep with a light vehicle is effective against every rocket artillery piece except the Callopie which is silly.

Stuka is still broken, in a recent game i've seen it oneshot an ML20 twice in a row (not decrewed but totally destroyed in one shot) 1200mp down the drain. What the actual fuck?

Artillery options in general are a bit of a mess. For example, both axis factions get a stock heavy indirect fire unit whereas only the soviets get a stock option on the allied side.

Katyusha firing a bit faster (I mean thats what it's shtick was IRL) and Callopie not being a literal tank durability wise would be nice. Especially since going deep with a light vehicle is effective against every rocket artillery piece except the Callopie which is silly.

I'd go the other way with the calliope. Leave it durable but increase scatter so that it has got to expose itself to be effective. It keeps visual consistency and preserves faction differentiation, while reducing the unfairness of getting bombed by an unassailable monster from afar.

Stuka isn't fine coz it is guaranteed wipe of team weapons.

Should be added some RNG to its barrage pattern.

nah its not a guaranteed wiping. sometimes yes but definetly not every time. Furthermore the Stuka zu Fuß on a howitzer is also RNG. Sometimes its only decrewed, sometimes its destroyed
Anyway pwerfer and calliope needs to be addressed for the next patch

The bolded part is their job.
If they didn't, camping with atg's would become the meta.

There is difference between doing what they supposed to do and being overpowered wipe machine.

+1


Unacceptable, unless both sides will see this as their post game screen, nothing less will be accepted.

Show Spoiler

We can't allow scrubs to feel bad or they might actually quit.

I was trying to be ironic.
Btw, which emote stands for ironic?

I was trying to be ironic.
Btw, which emote stands for ironic?

I use one of these

And so was mine I was hinting at this thread.

1: The problem with Pzwerfer, Calliope and (to lesser extent) stuka is they deliver massive burst damage with great precision, with minimal risk or munitions cost. In a game about unit preservation, being able to delete team weapons and garrison units before they can react is bad design.

2: MGs are not effective at blob-countering past the early game, and conventional artillery is not effective at doing much of anything. Thus the heavy lifting of blob-countering, building attack, and bombarding enemy positions prior to attack all falls down to the rocket artillery units. In order to be able to do this the units have to be super strong.

3: The three offending parties need to have their ability to quickly wipe units decreased, and changes made so they aren't trying to fill the gaps that lackluster MGs and conventional artillery are creating. Certain changes could be made in the area of reduced precision, longer firing time, reduced damage (but suppression added).

4:Likewise the off maps that render fixed artillery useless, and the general shittiness of mobile tube arty should be looked at. The fact that basic infantry have the ability to beat MGs in frontal assaults is also bad design and should be addressed.

Walking stuka, panzerwerfer and calliope shouldn't wipe squads that easy, just in last game i got more than half of my army wiped by single walking stuka barrage, so much fu**ing balance (i wasn't blobbing),

1. dont blob
2. playercard plz

3. if you disagree with 1., post replay plz

I wasn't blobbing at all. You can check my name in replay noob.

You asking for my playercard but it's already here.

Where is your playercard? It isn't anywhere that I can see.


I somewhat agree about rocket artillery. They should all be the same range as the werfer imho and some of them should have the damage on their rockets reduced.

Where is your playercard? It isn't anywhere that I can see.

.

Click my name in replay.

Click my name in replay.

Thanks for that. I think what everyone means though is to put your playercard link here on coh2.org. So it's easy for people to check how much a player plays each faction and assess potential bias.

Mine, for example, shows a clear preference for OKW and that makes me somewhat blind to the weaknesses of the allies. So when someone is reading one of my posts, they can take into account that I do not have the full picture.

Anyway, up to you.