Login

russian armor

Bofors

PAGES (14)down
2 May 2016, 22:23 PM
#21
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

jump backJump back to quoted post2 May 2016, 22:09 PMsinthe
I wouldn't say remove them completely. But the efficiency of the Axis emplacements should at least mirror that of the british. The Flak emplacment comes to mind or better yet let them be unmanned to allow a level of risk for the british player.


This would be an interesting test. Take the Ost Pak43 and OKW Flak and mirror their stats (and cost) to that of the brits (17lb and Bofors), and see what happens. That means give them brace and make them impossible to decrew.

Could be fun or it could be horrible. Not really sure.


Even so, barrage still needs to go.
2 May 2016, 22:41 PM
#22
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

The only counter is when relic gets their quota and nerfs it. Go ahead, keep letting the cancer spread..

Fact of the matter is. It's push button for one player. Extream micro for another.

Forces OH commander choice
Forces OKW to Yolo blobb and hope it's not supported by an ally, or Mgs and such

JUST ANOTHER ELIMENT IN THE GAME WHERE AXIS ARE RESPONDING TO ALLIED GAME PLAY
-somethING that has been a problem since the release of the game

There are 3 people who are on these fourms constantly watching for threads like this, and to defend emplacements to death.

Remove emplacements period


To point this out: This is not to defend emplacements; I would be rather happy having a mobile mortar than a static one when playing brits and I never even once played this bs new counter-battery commander (even not on free trial weekend).

But:

Your post is so heavily biased that I can't take it for serious and it does not contributes to this discussion. There are enough examples where allied forces have to show up with more micro. Simply every time when you have to flank a single big tank with multiple smaller ones and avoid getting your smaller tanks in the way of each other or into the angle of defending AT-weaponary/snares. It is not the problem here that one player needs more micro than the other, you'll find that in different spots in this game and man why shouldn't allied have something that helps noobs to get along? The problem is that the combination of bofors and mortar pit performs very strong if not op versus Ostheer while it sucks versus OKW when you are a halfway decent OKW player. This means countering british emplacements with LeiGs isn't that extrem micro intensive. As I said it is a problem for Ostheer.

2 May 2016, 22:59 PM
#23
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414



To point this out: This is not to defend emplacements; I would be rather happy having a mobile mortar than a static one when playing brits and I never even once played this bs new counter-battery commander (even not on free trial weekend).

But:

Your post is so heavily biased that I can't take it for serious and it does not contributes to this discussion. There are enough examples where allied forces have to show up with more micro. Simply every time when you have to flank a single big tank with multiple smaller ones and avoid getting your smaller tanks in the way of each other or into the angle of defending AT-weaponary/snares.


I'm trying to be objective. I bought the british today and started playing with them with either the land mattress and the buff emplacements commander. I did notice that everytime I played against OH, they were using MHT with relative success. But I'm still super noob with british but I still see a great deal of difficulty in people dealling with my bofors.

Again axis doesn't have anything that is this effective or noob friendly. And for the most part it seems that british armour is better than the axis equvilents.

While playing Axis I lose my tanks to AT blob infantry more often than not.
3 May 2016, 00:08 AM
#24
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

Is the mortar HT useless against emplacements these days? I remember when they would burn them down in one incend barrage lol. I know they nerfed damage but in principle that would be a good ost counter.
3 May 2016, 00:53 AM
#25
avatar of Waffaru

Posts: 56

The only counter is when relic gets their quota and nerfs it. Go ahead, keep letting the cancer spread..

Fact of the matter is. It's push button for one player. Extream micro for another.

Forces OH commander choice
Forces OKW to Yolo blobb and hope it's not supported by an ally, or Mgs and such

JUST ANOTHER ELIMENT IN THE GAME WHERE AXIS ARE RESPONDING TO ALLIED GAME PLAY
-somethING that has been a problem since the release of the game

There are 3 people who are on these fourms constantly watching for threads like this, and to defend emplacements to death.

Remove emplacements period


Wow, your posts sure don't live up to your name.
3 May 2016, 02:51 AM
#26
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

It never really does
3 May 2016, 03:38 AM
#27
avatar of Rappy

Posts: 526

I don't find the mortar half track that effective. It doesn't kill the pit or bofors in one incendiary grenade. So then there is the cool down, or the backlash where they come at it with everything. In the meantime the emplacement is usually repaired back to full health. I wouldn't call that a hard counter.

The most effective counter I know of is AT guns just out of range or arty after brace. Problem is with the cancer commander, people don't tend to brace as often anymore unless they see arty flares. You don't want to spend 150 munitions on artillery and then see brace go on. An upgraded Bofors from cancer commander takes literally zero damage from 105m howitzer if braced.

Aerohank. I honestly think 8 out of 10 team games at the moment have emplacement play. I was amazed that you hadn't faced them in a while, but then I noticed you don't really play team games. I agree, in 1v1 you might see a mortar pit, but not often bofors and it's fairly easy to deal with them because they surrender some capping etc. But in team games they are just everywhere at the moment. Facing double brit emplacement spam on a place like minsk pocket is wonderfully miserable. You can be utterly thrashing the opponent the entire game and then as soon as the emplacements go up, its game over. A good Brit player always has their mortar pit covering their bofors which counters most emplacement counters. By the time you have medium tanks, they have a wall of AT.
3 May 2016, 04:05 AM
#28
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

3 May 2016, 05:09 AM
#29
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561

if anything it should at least have a price increase? i think it currently costs 280 MP/30 fuel? (correct me if im wrong) and is way to cost efficient for what it does. By the time you waste so much manpower, munitions and fuel to take it out another one comes up instantly too lol
This is about the only post on this thread worth anything. A manpower increase might be good and prevent spamming multiple bofors and making bofor/pit combos a bit harder.

Almost every other post involves nerfing it into near uselessness.
3 May 2016, 05:34 AM
#30
avatar of DjDrowsyBear

Posts: 41

This is about the only post on this thread worth anything. A manpower increase might be good and prevent spamming multiple bofors and making bofor/pit combos a bit harder.

Almost every other post involves nerfing it into near uselessness.


I can expand on that idea as well.

Increase the cost of the Bofors from 280-mp/30-fuel/10-pop to 320/60/12 and decrease the range of its suppressive barrage ability from 60 to 50. The Bofors will still be extremely strong at locking down a point against infantry and vehicles but the cost increase will force the UKF player to seriously consider what route he wants to go. If he buys the Bofors then he will seriously slow down his Cromwell. If this is seen as too drastic of a nerf (which I don't believe it is) then a potential alternative is to up the cost of the initial side tech and lower the cost increase of the Bofors. The change in its suppressive barrage range is just to prevent it from countering indirect fire (something it wasn't meant to do).

In addition to that change:

Increase the population cost of the mortar pit from 8 to 12.

Decrease the population cost of the 17-pounder from 20 to 14.

The result of all of that together would still allow for sim cities to be a completely viable strategy (considering how powerful all of those emplacements are) but not nearly as cheap and easy to pull off. If the UKF player decides to go with the sim city route then it will heavily punish his mid-game (slower Cromwells) and even his extreme late game to an extent (due to population increases). In total, I think it would allow for a much less frustrating experience for Axis players and a greater strategic diversity from UKF players.
Phy
3 May 2016, 06:49 AM
#31
avatar of Phy

Posts: 509 | Subs: 1

I haven't faced emplacement play anymore since the last balance patch so I don't have any replays at the moment. I'll save the replay next time I face them.


Lucky you.

Bofors needs a price increase. It takes a lot of resources and microing to kill for its price.
3 May 2016, 06:50 AM
#32
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

After Relic changed the way lasting fire works ingame, there is no hard counter against it. OKW could effectively use combined attack with incendiary grenade. Also the firesturm doctrine was pretty good against it. Wehrmacht had an even more interesting tool, called mortar HT which now does something close to nothing to these emplacements.

Brits can still be beaten even with these tools, I don't know if they need nerfing or such. But related to hard counters, this is my answer, there is none.
3 May 2016, 06:54 AM
#33
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 May 2016, 03:38 AMRappy
I don't find the mortar half track that effective. It doesn't kill the pit or bofors in one incendiary grenade. So then there is the cool down, or the backlash where they come at it with everything. In the meantime the emplacement is usually repaired back to full health. I wouldn't call that a hard counter.



Because a unit doesn't oneshot another one doesn't mean it isn't effective.

You're sharing strange reasoning here with some of your fellows. everything should be one shot or instantly countered by another unit once built.

Ostheer T3 counter Bofors, I have no doubt in that. Pumas as well.

Ah, also, vs the fortification commander, use your brain, don't focus 1st the mortar pit or Bofors but the forwarded assembly, you'll see it does miracles.
3 May 2016, 07:40 AM
#34
avatar of Rappy

Posts: 526

jump backJump back to quoted post3 May 2016, 06:54 AMEsxile


Because a unit doesn't oneshot another one doesn't mean it isn't effective.

You're sharing strange reasoning here with some of your fellows. everything should be one shot or instantly countered by another unit once built.

Ostheer T3 counter Bofors, I have no doubt in that. Pumas as well.

Ah, also, vs the fortification commander, use your brain, don't focus 1st the mortar pit or Bofors but the forwarded assembly, you'll see it does miracles.

You are missing the point of why I find it ineffective (the mortar incendiary rounds). The cooldown is long enough that the emplacement is fully repaired in that time. So no I'm not insisting on one-shot counters, obviously. Also there is the problem that the halftrack itself has to close in pretty close to fire. After it has done this once, it doesn't then return to that boundary again without being met with a lot of resistance. And seeing as its made of paper it swiftly explodes.
3 May 2016, 08:04 AM
#35
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 May 2016, 07:40 AMRappy

You are missing the point of why I find it ineffective (the mortar incendiary rounds). The cooldown is long enough that the emplacement is fully repaired in that time. So no I'm not insisting on one-shot counters, obviously. Also there is the problem that the halftrack itself has to close in pretty close to fire. After it has done this once, it doesn't then return to that boundary again without being met with a lot of resistance. And seeing as its made of paper it swiftly explodes.


LoL, exactly what I'm saying. - I build one unit and I'm lost because it doesn't 1 or 2 shots my target.
3 May 2016, 08:15 AM
#36
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Ostheer has amazing doctrine agasint empacement in teamgames.

The one with MHT, LeFH and Sector Arty.
It punishes emplacement play really hard.

Just use it instead of whining all the time.
No one is saying you should be able to kill bofors in 2 barrages, in few seconds.
3 May 2016, 08:39 AM
#37
avatar of Neon67

Posts: 16



I can expand on that idea as well.

Increase the cost of the Bofors from 280-mp/30-fuel/10-pop to 320/60/12 and decrease the range of its suppressive barrage ability from 60 to 50. The Bofors will still be extremely strong at locking down a point against infantry and vehicles but the cost increase will force the UKF player to seriously consider what route he wants to go. If he buys the Bofors then he will seriously slow down his Cromwell. If this is seen as too drastic of a nerf (which I don't believe it is) then a potential alternative is to up the cost of the initial side tech and lower the cost increase of the Bofors. The change in its suppressive barrage range is just to prevent it from countering indirect fire (something it wasn't meant to do).

In addition to that change:

Increase the population cost of the mortar pit from 8 to 12.

Decrease the population cost of the 17-pounder from 20 to 14.

The result of all of that together would still allow for sim cities to be a completely viable strategy (considering how powerful all of those emplacements are) but not nearly as cheap and easy to pull off. If the UKF player decides to go with the sim city route then it will heavily punish his mid-game (slower Cromwells) and even his extreme late game to an extent (due to population increases). In total, I think it would allow for a much less frustrating experience for Axis players and a greater strategic diversity from UKF players.


320/60/12 is still pretty low compared to a double ost mortar or tanks. It should be more increased to at least 420/40/12. Why? Because it can kill medium tanks, insta kill infantry, big range and ultra resistant. It requires a lot of micro to kill it. Because lets face it, if you start tickling it, you will see mortars or blobs incoming 5 secs later. Emplacements are rarely left undefended..., add to that their mortar range and in 2v2 you lock the 2/3rd of the map, and send your troops attack the last third.

I don't have such an issue about the actual power of bofor, more their resistance.
When braced, which is free, they take almost no damage from everything. Even a tank is not that hard to kill. This is particularly annoying when using sector artillery or when you have spared enough ressource for one rocketenwerfer. You will use your resources for nothing if he braces it at the right time. Then wait 90sec to reload and do it again

Emplacements should either cost way more or and be more vulnerable. Brace should reduce the damage to only 50%.


MHT might be a good counter, but should I choose my commander because of only one or two units he has on the field ?

Yet, don't forget the counter barrage ability, able to destroy any indirect fire unit on the field on small maps, meaning 1v1 2v2. This makes your mortar free target practice for the brit.
3 May 2016, 09:15 AM
#38
avatar of mortiferum

Posts: 571

I am interested in how to counter a team play where one is terminal cancer and the other has land mattress which only does counter battery.
3 May 2016, 10:12 AM
#39
avatar of Cobiee

Posts: 14

Feusturm doctrine...Kappa
3 May 2016, 10:24 AM
#40
avatar of TickTack

Posts: 578

jump backJump back to quoted post2 May 2016, 18:55 PMsinthe
What is the hard counter for this?

Pak or Raketen using attack-ground from beyond visual range.
PAGES (14)down
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

521 users are online: 521 guests
1 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48939
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM