Login

russian armor

Conscript scaling

17 Mar 2016, 21:07 PM
#41
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1



Emote, i/ or twitch chat slang helps :P There's no such thing as "normal" sarcasm on this forums.

I do sometimes :guyokay:
17 Mar 2016, 23:13 PM
#42
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279




wat

That was a mess wasnt it... Sorry.
Basicly relics idea of how the soviet are to function is out dated, Tue idea of having a weak core army and needing to use doctrines to fill holes is stupid and limiting.

If the core armies are strong enough to face what ever the enemy can throw at you with their core army only then the factions are balanced
.

The only other faction that needs a doctrine to counter core units of another faction is the Wehr and the mortar halftrack as 2/3 Brit emplacements can directly counter a Wehr mortar and pak

If the soviet had a core army that could fight there would be much more diversity
-Having a medium tank that can pen targets heavier than a puma would mean the doctrines without armour would be more viable (NKVD)
-Having cons that at the very least get a gun without picking a doctrine means less maxim spam
-If penals were better there would be less maxim spam
-Having a t4 worthy of other t4s would mean less sticking it out in t3 and spamming su76

if the soviet core was stronger they could nerf the cheese that people hate playing/and playing against

Wouldn't you like to play/ play against more than 5 soviet commanders?
Theres an armful but only a few see action because they are NEEDED to plug holes and thats something no other faction needs to worry about...

They arnt in the worst spot imaginable but they definitely need to be updated to fit into the new way of working (kinda like the real USSR lol)
18 Mar 2016, 03:15 AM
#43
avatar of Retief

Posts: 28

Yeah, it would be really terrible if factions were missing core abilities like mines, flamers, rocket artillery, at snares, or hmgs. Oh wait ...

Every faction has holes in its lineup. That's how the game is designed.
18 Mar 2016, 03:33 AM
#44
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2016, 03:15 AMRetief
Yeah, it would be really terrible if factions were missing core abilities like mines, flamers, rocket artillery, at snares, or hmgs. Oh wait ...

Every faction has holes in its lineup. That's how the game is designed.


they aren't as gaping as useful infantry or medium armour though... and the other factions have something to compensate for their holes
lack of flamers- usf have smoke on core infantry making them the best at smoking
-okw have napalm nade.. all the benefits of the molotov without the pesky side grade, range or slow ass animation drawbacks

rocket arty- usf have AI out the ass and things like sherman HE more than make up for the lack of rockets
- ukf wouldn't need it if base howis didnt suck donkey balls

AT snare - okw instead have spammable hard AT.. no need to slow down the prey if you can put it off the field permanently! (also they have AT options to rival usf AI in quantity and quality)

HMG you certainly have me there, the flak trak is far too squishy for when it comes out to provide reliable blob control (maybe it should be able to hull down as an ability?)

(who doesn't have mines? iirc sappers can lay mines for the ukf, soviet and okw have the same anti all mine, wher has specialised mines and usf have the M20 mine)
18 Mar 2016, 05:46 AM
#45
avatar of Retief

Posts: 28

Fair point on the mines, though I'd argue that av-only mines on a light vehicle isn't on par with the other mine options. Also, brits lack both at snares and flamers (unless you really want to count a 120 munition upgrade on one of the squishiest vehicles in the game), and they don't have nearly as much compensation as usf/okw.
18 Mar 2016, 15:37 PM
#46
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

non-doc DP28 upgrade after reach Tier3 I suppose
18 Mar 2016, 15:47 PM
#47
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2016, 05:46 AMRetief
Fair point on the mines, though I'd argue that av-only mines on a light vehicle isn't on par with the other mine options. Also, brits lack both at snares and flamers (unless you really want to count a 120 munition upgrade on one of the squishiest vehicles in the game), and they don't have nearly as much compensation as usf/okw.

Yeah and guess what Brit is the second worst designed faction after SU, relying on emplacements and lack of reliable snare has been a problem for Brit since COH1 and now we need commander to fill that gap and curiously all the needed commanders aren't stock commander.
18 Mar 2016, 16:05 PM
#48
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


Yeah and guess what Brit is the second worst designed faction after SU, relying on emplacements and lack of reliable snare has been a problem for Brit since COH1 and now we need commander to fill that gap and curiously all the needed commanders aren't stock commander.

Actually, thats utter bullshit, because brits do not rely on emplacements.
Bofors vs AEC is question of defense and offense, 17 pounder, I doubt anyone remembers how it looks like and mortar pit is the only factions indirect fire.

They need one for indirect fire or they are forced into 2 doctrines for it, one of them being extremely underpowered.

But they are not reliant on emplacements at all compared to coh1 brits.

If arty regiment was actually working and providing indirect fire instead of big firecrackers, pits would be much less common.
18 Mar 2016, 16:11 PM
#49
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954


Yeah and guess what Brit is the second worst designed faction after SU, relying on emplacements and lack of reliable snare has been a problem for Brit since COH1 and now we need commander to fill that gap and curiously all the needed commanders aren't stock commander.


Brits got lot's of non-doctrinal options(AT/AI), and specificly designed veterancy, and a lot of late-game toys, it's the most versatile allied faction.

Soviet rely on cheese unit and (few)commanders, it's pretty boring. And no late game capable vehicle without a doctrine, and shitty veterancy design
18 Mar 2016, 16:22 PM
#50
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2016, 05:46 AMRetief
Fair point on the mines, though I'd argue that av-only mines on a light vehicle isn't on par with the other mine options. Also, brits lack both at snares and flamers (unless you really want to count a 120 munition upgrade on one of the squishiest vehicles in the game), and they don't have nearly as much compensation as usf/okw.

I agree that the m20 only mines are a pin but they do have the advantage of guaranteed immobility iirc (or is it heavy engine damage...idr) giving RET those meh mines that were doctrinal would be a nice move I think.

And yea the Brits needing the wasp is a bit annoying, tho it does have long range (unless that was nerfed) and a really neat animation when it dies XD.
19 Mar 2016, 05:32 AM
#51
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2016, 16:11 PMUGBEAR


Brits got lot's of non-doctrinal options(AT/AI), and specificly designed veterancy, and a lot of late-game toys, it's the most versatile allied faction.

Soviet rely on cheese unit and (few)commanders, it's pretty boring. And no late game capable vehicle without a doctrine, and shitty veterancy design

But the problem is without emplacements, Brit play nearly the same as OH with better DPS, more blobbing potential with less utility for each units. Looking at UKF vs OH match, Brit can either go AEC cheese (less so now), Sim city or sniper wars and pray that OH does not go prostruppen + sniper. And I haven't seen many Brit player dare not vetoing Semoisky Summer.
19 Mar 2016, 07:26 AM
#52
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

how is ostruppen scaling compared to conscript scaling? aside from the cover bonus, the two units are pretty similar.
19 Mar 2016, 08:34 AM
#53
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1

how is ostruppen scaling compared to conscript scaling? aside from the cover bonus, the two units are pretty similar.

But Osttruppen do a good bit more damage at max-range with the cover bonus. Definitely worth the 18% higher RA, while also being cheaper. If it wasn't for the current -40% RA at vet 3, Scripts would just be "Well, they have Molotovs?" by comparison. Also, 6 Panzerfausts definitely beats 5 RPG-43s.
19 Mar 2016, 12:44 PM
#54
avatar of isoul

Posts: 48

From one point on, at mid-game, it feels like Cons are more of a liability than an asset (unless you keep them for merge, stealing abandoned weapons and vehicle snare).

By late game they deal not enough damage, models die too easily (bleeding you MP) and they feed my opponent squads XP to vet faster!

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

578 users are online: 578 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM