Login

russian armor

Buildings: The unclaimed meta

30 Jan 2016, 06:36 AM
#21
avatar of Gbpirate
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1153 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2016, 06:31 AMpoop


pretty sure MG42, Vickers, Dshk? all out-range snipers while in buildings.

though it could be a bug, I'm seeing MGs fire well outside their "range cone" pretty often.


All UI displays of weapon/scatter ranges are inaccurate and only a rough estimate.

In buildings, the arc is measured from the center of the house, not the MG in whichever window it happens to be in. Therefore, it appears that the MG is firing outside its arc when in reality the arc is incorrect.
30 Jan 2016, 07:21 AM
#22
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2016, 06:31 AMpoop


pretty sure MG42, Vickers, Dshk? all out-range snipers while in buildings.

though it could be a bug, I'm seeing MGs fire well outside their "range cone" pretty often.


Depends on the height of the building I believe. Also Vickers has extra range in buildings than other mgs
30 Jan 2016, 08:03 AM
#23
avatar of MarkedRaptor

Posts: 320

I find that there's a huge problem with building hopping in general. Despite popular opinion, the only counter to building hopping is to have a flamethrower, every other "counter" doesn't work.

I'm not talking HMG's, I'm talking infantry. If you try to shoot a squad in a building for half an hour, he'll just get out and idle in back of it and wait for you to try to enter, then re enter the building. It's an annoying stall tactic that doesn't have much of a counter.

I do it, everyone does it, cuz its so efficient.
30 Jan 2016, 08:31 AM
#24
avatar of DAZ187

Posts: 466

i think the whole problem is the annoyance of buildings for

USF OKW And Brits

all pios should have flamers without docs
30 Jan 2016, 09:54 AM
#25
avatar of Spanky
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1820 | Subs: 2

Buildings give you a strategic approach and some maps rely on maps to make the game jump from one stage to another. I agree that it is annoying, but if you are having trouble vs some sort of a situation with a building, try flanking with grenades, flamers? .. just opinion.
30 Jan 2016, 11:14 AM
#26
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

Maybe Adding a little Set up/Exit timer (like a mg) for all squads in buildings. Just an idea
30 Jan 2016, 15:57 PM
#27
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2016, 09:54 AMSpanky
Buildings give you a strategic approach and some maps rely on maps to make the game jump from one stage to another. I agree that it is annoying, but if you are having trouble vs some sort of a situation with a building, try flanking with grenades, flamers? .. just opinion.


That is probably the best solution yes. I'm just annoyed by the maps that have a huge house at the cut off point or the fuel point. If the enemy gets to that building first, you are literally starving ressources until you can clear the building. This is in some cases the gg after 5 minutes when the British AEC arrives and you can't do ANYTHING against it because you have no fuel for T2.
30 Jan 2016, 16:25 PM
#28
avatar of zarok47

Posts: 587

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2016, 09:54 AMSpanky
Buildings give you a strategic approach and some maps rely on maps to make the game jump from one stage to another. I agree that it is annoying, but if you are having trouble vs some sort of a situation with a building, try flanking with grenades, flamers? .. just opinion.


This is all fine and dandy for ost and sov with their non-doc flamers, but the WFA and british factions?

For USF, you either force commander choice (armor or rifle) or make them tech nades early, severly hampering their early game flexibility.

For okw, its less severe, with their flamenades and sturmpio's, but on certain map (stone house infested arnhem or lierneux for example) this doesn't cut it.

As for brits, better hope you get that vickers in a nice building, else you're done for.

And don't get me started on how much it takes to destroy a freaking stone building (or the FHQ related cheese....)

So ye, i don't like this company of buildings.
30 Jan 2016, 17:49 PM
#29
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Grenades and flames make units in buildings sad.

Tossing grenades in the doorways is also good times for the particularly hoppy player.

And mortars are great at dealing damage to garrisoned squads and destroying buildings, but they tend to take a while. They're a good idea if you're one of the two factions with easy access to a mortar team.
30 Jan 2016, 18:14 PM
#30
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891



and 6 guys all at once warping from the entrance door to any window and back is realistic?


You can chalk it up to abstraction though, but a grenade blowing up a big stone building doesn't abstract anything. It's like if m-42 was given double range to make it relevant

flames could maybe burn buildings way longer to the point of burning down, or every faction could have an early option to take them down for muni.

30 Jan 2016, 18:28 PM
#31
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470


Mortor, Molotov?


neither of which are available at all stages of the game. OKW doesn't get the leig (which is inferior against buildings because of the projectile angle and possibly is still bugged) until t1 and their incendiary grenades are not available until they purchase the first tech. USF doesn't get anything until they tech as well. the brits mortar is stationary and their artillery is non-existent/shit.

then theirs the issue of flamers being really good against infantry, and heavy flamers also being good against the buildings, but not always being able to reach the building. 90% of the time an HMG in a building will counter a flamer and smoke is not available to all factions non-doctrinally or necessarily available when flamers are.
30 Jan 2016, 19:01 PM
#32
avatar of ferrozoica

Posts: 208

I've always thought there should be a few seconds delay after giving a squad the order to exit a building, similar to MG's. It would stop people just popping in and out to avoid grenades. Perhaps negate/lower the cover bonus for point blank too

Squads should also form an orderly queue when exiting instead of appearing with every squad member on one pixel at once, never liked that
30 Jan 2016, 19:06 PM
#33
avatar of Obersoldat

Posts: 393

Buildings arent really the problem, faction design of OKW/USF/Brits are since they have no efficient way of clearing buildings (mortar)
31 Jan 2016, 02:40 AM
#34
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

UKF vs garrisons is find because their cover bonuses are so tough and they have lots of good abilities and mortar pit.

I think WFA design is poor because they rely on support guns and grenades for anti garrison when support guns are pricy and more direct fire units

If USF got a light mortar and okw got a heavy 120mm mortar everyone would've been happy long long ago
31 Jan 2016, 21:28 PM
#35
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

It's worse for some factions. As Soviets the issue is almost non-existant, with Molotovs alone easily denying buildings. As US your infantry does so much damage at short range that buildings are less of a problem, moreso with grenades unlocked but you barely even need them.

As Ostheer, however, before T1 is unlocked buildings are a pain in the butt, and even after you have so much competition for your ammo (medic bunker, LMG, flamer, shrecks) that launching 2 riflenades is not cost-effective, and might just not work anyway vs good players. As OKW you pretty much are impotent against buildings until you tech, unless you go double Sturms which hamstrings your mid and lategame. As Brits, well, unless you really like the Wasp, you make do with the Vickers until the AEC comes out.

A Brit player that has taken control of a few buildings, however, can be hell for Axis to dislodge, thanks to IS gaining their bonus and Vickers being insane inside structures as well.

It's much less of a problem in the lategame, since by that time even generalist tanks can clear a building easily. But I increasingly find that the early game is decided by who can get their starter unit and then an MG in X strategic building, which is very hard to subsequently dislodge if properly supported. Semoysky is particularily bad for this, to say nothing of maps I untick like Ettelbruck.

I'd just make small arms more effective against structures at close range. Surrounding a building with 3 Volks squad and having the Maxim/Vickers still not die after more than a minute of sustained fire is just stupid.
18 Feb 2016, 11:05 AM
#36
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

Ok I'm gonna dig out my own thread again for some tips I found out.

Yesterday I lost about 6 games in a row and that dropped me from my usual ingame rank which is about 10-12 to level 7. So I thought that it can't get worse and I started to try some new tactics.

I want to explain how I managed to win 8 games in a row right now against players that still were on a much higher ranking than I am.

My Ostheer buildorder:

As soon as the game starts, I build an MG42 and move my pioneer to the 'cutoff' building or if there is none, to another important building on the map. I do not cap anything on the way. When the first MG has arrived I place it inside the building and use my pio to cap stuff. Meanwhile the second MG is done and this one also takes place inside a house or behind a green cover point with good view. I then build another pio for capping purposes and after that I build another MG42.

If the enemy also gets inside a building, I use my first and third MG42 to get him out. I haven't noticed that before but two MG42 deal a huge amout of damage even to units inside buildings. The enemy usually has to leave or dies after about 10 bursts. The second MG42 protects the flanks. Meanwhile the pios have capped about half of the map and I tech to T2.

Depending on the enemy I build either a Halftrack (against USF and Sov) or 2 222s (against Brits to counter an early AEC) followed by a Halftrack. Keep in mind to let your 222s target vehicles only until the AEC is destroyed. Even if you lose 1 or both it doesn't matter as long as the AEC is dead. The key tactic behind everything is the halftrack, because a Flame SdKfz deals ridiculous amounts of damage against buildings. 80% of the time the enemy can't even react before his troop is wiped. Sometimes this happens at the first burst. I follow then with a PaK or Shreck Panzergrens (if there is enough ammunition).

In addition I get a mortar HT and place Tellermines like Crazy. Most of the time I control the whole map around 5-6 Command Points. When two MGs cover up the main buildings, the third one can A-move together with the Flame HT and/or The Shreck Pzgrens to keep enemies from capping. If everything works, you get huge ammounts of ressources and you can spam bunkers everywhere because they cost no pop cap.


I know I am anything but a pro, but "casual" players that suffer against Allies that camp in buildings should give this strat a try. And currently the whole game revolves around buildings.
18 Feb 2016, 11:11 AM
#37
avatar of PencilBatRation

Posts: 794

Company Of Clingy Building Hoppers


You are not alone man. That is one of the most boring aspects of coh2.
18 Feb 2016, 11:22 AM
#38
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

Volks Inc nade makes the building meta a bit unfair tbh. You cant garrison buildings against them but they can use them pretty effectly. Makes maps as semosusky Unfun to play (like they were fun to play at any moment lol). But I dislike the amount of flame weaponary anyway, kills the immersion to see so many flame weapons on the battlefield

No balance rant, more like gameplay rant.
18 Feb 2016, 11:30 AM
#39
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

Makes maps as semosusky Unfun to play (like they were fun to play at any moment lol). But I dislike the amount of flame weaponary anyway, kills


TBH semoisky summer was my favourite map back then when the fuel point was beneath the base sector :snfPeter:
18 Feb 2016, 11:33 AM
#40
avatar of General Tao

Posts: 48

This isn't gonna be a popular opinion but...

I wish buildings could be repairable. In later game when medium/heavy tanks come in, buildings are hands down the best way for AT infantry to get the drop on tanks. The lack of buildings and the ability to use TrueSight to surprise tanks in late game is one of the reasons why AT infantry suffer atrocious casualties.
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

977 users are online: 977 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49081
Welcome our newest member, kavyashide
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM