Should Artillery be limited, and if so, to how much?
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
So, I decided to make this poll to see how much people would like to see the old limit of CoH on artillery come back, since in the old game, with the arrival of the Panzer Elite and British came along Self-Propelled Artillery in the form of the M7 Priest and Hummel, which were later limited to 3 each to combat spam, perhaps this is also needed in CoH 2 for the same reasons but instead of just limiting call-in artillery I propose we also limited non-doctrinal one, for example you can't get more than 3 Panzerwerfers and 3 Katyushas, the support guns of the Western Front Armies are up for debate as well as the British mortars, and I don't think the Eastern Front mortars should also have the limit as they're not as effective or spammed as much, or at least that's what I've noticed. So yeah, this is generally it, cheers.
Posts: 232
Instead the game is balanced around the notion that you can build whatever you like, but it will have weaknesses. Sure you can spam 4 or 5 arty units, just don't expect it to stop a tank rush.
Posts: 1124
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
Posts: 160
we have seen in the esl cups how often it happens, that someone spammed the calliope.
Even the heavy tank limit to 1 was a great idea, because it forces u to use combined arms.
This game should be about combined arms flanks etc. and not only spam 1 unit and win...
and ppl who only play 1's know that more than one katyusha could be your death.
Posts: 673
You always need no more than 2 howitzers/rocket platforms. Getting 1 or 2 more will not add too much firepower to your artillery group, but will steal from you valuable MP income and eat your popcap. So, all reasonable players always making no more than 2 artilleries per player even without limits.
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
Limits are generally a bad way to design and balance the game. It restricts what options you have and if carried far enough would railroad everyone into the same builds.
Instead the game is balanced around the notion that you can build whatever you like, but it will have weaknesses. Sure you can spam 4 or 5 arty units, just don't expect it to stop a tank rush.
Why the limit on Heavy Tanks then? I mean, if what you say is true, I don't see a point in the heavy tank limit being 1. Yeah sure it's not the same type of unit but still, it's a limit, something which you're opposed to.
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Though I'll admit, even that limitation could be hard to balance around. We certainly don't want arty to be reliably one-shotting infantry squads or shooting every 20 seconds to balance themselves, suppression on all of them would probably have to happen.
Posts: 232
Why the limit on Heavy Tanks then? I mean, if what you say is true, I don't see a point in the heavy tank limit being 1. Yeah sure it's not the same type of unit but still, it's a limit, something which you're opposed to.
The heavy tank limit has two reasons.
First was that most of the heavies are tech free call ins. There was a period where avoiding tech costs and simply spamming late game heavies was the dominant strategy.
The second is that the heavies are (mostly) powerful generalist units. With a Tiger or King Tiger you can be reasonably confident in most fights. This is also why the Churchill is labelled a heavy tank but not limited - it simply doesn't have the offensive power that limited heavies like the IS-2 have. Following on from the first point, end game fights also turned into heavies vs heavies all the time. It wasn't interesting or particularly fun.
It wasn't an ideal way to deal with it, but it's what we got. Arguably there were also a few units caught up in it that had a "natural" limit anyway - few people every bothered with more than one Elephant or Jagdtiger anyway.
Posts: 680
Posts: 656
Why the limit on Heavy Tanks then? I mean, if what you say is true, I don't see a point in the heavy tank limit being 1. Yeah sure it's not the same type of unit but still, it's a limit, something which you're opposed to.
Heavy tanks are generalist units with no major weaknesses that are capable of combating everything on the field hence why the tanks are limited to 1. Even a long range tank destroyer will struggle to deal with a heavy alone. Before the limit was imposed the safest strategy was often to just try to produce more heavies than your opponent. This is not the case for arty which has a very clear weaknesses to offmap strikes (for static arty at least) and zero field presence. Producing too much arty will leave your army at a very significant MP or fuel disadvantage that a competent opponent can exploit to destroy said arty.
Posts: 275 | Subs: 1
If someone spams artillery - he is already lost that game. That's how it usually works.
+1
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Heavy tanks are generalist units with no major weaknesses that are capable of combating everything on the field hence why the tanks are limited to 1. Even a long range tank destroyer will struggle to deal with a heavy alone. Before the limit was imposed the safest strategy was often to just try to produce more heavies than your opponent. This is not the case for arty which has a very clear weaknesses to offmap strikes (for static arty at least) and zero field presence.
Speaking of which, that's something I'd gladly have changed at the cost of being limited to one of them.
Stuka Dive Bombs and other like ensuring any static howitzer is a waste of time and MP just ain't right.
Posts: 21
Posts: 199
If someone is really dug in then you can still make the choice but it comes at a cost.
Livestreams
19 | |||||
13 | |||||
2 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.271108.715+22
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Durddcdy23
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM