Login

russian armor

USF mortar and OKW mg

30 Jul 2016, 12:26 PM
#21
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 01:11 AMCyanara
For reasons mentioned above, it feels more like the USF mortar needs to be a lighter version of the weapon and remain at T0.


I agree, the usf mortar should be the 60mm version with high RoF but lower AoE and range. That would mean we get new interesting unit in mortar world instead of copy paste, and we don't hand out sthrenghts of one faction (wehr turbo mortar) to other factions cousing further power creep.
30 Jul 2016, 13:07 PM
#22
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Exactly what buffs are you talking about. Flamers are already in the game, jeeps are already in the game. The one and only thing that could be considered a buff would be if a flamer was put in a jeep. Usf would gain an end game buff by not needing to choose a flamer doctrine.

I proposed moving morter to t1, how is that a buff. I propose delaying stuart, how is that an empty gesture. Both these suggestions give axis more time to stabilise and establish counters.

Everyone acknowledges that ostheer is struggling and that the usf morter is still a tad op however the fact remains that usf has very limited counters( flamer doc and nade tech ) to mg spam.
they litteraly need a mortar with awesome barrage but shitty AA they got that inverted and so is op
Something like 10 sec barrage that saturate the area for 99% kill everyone inside but AA worse than Soviet 82 mortar

30 Jul 2016, 13:55 PM
#23
avatar of The amazing Chandler

Posts: 1355

Remove mortar(USF didn't need it) or put it in T1 or T2 and put 50 cal in T0.
Problem solved.
30 Jul 2016, 14:34 PM
#24
avatar of Kpen97

Posts: 375

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 01:56 AMaaa
okw has smth like 5 units that not require teching at all.


your playercard on your signature for coh2.org says rank 90+ but i vs you just before noob LOL.
30 Jul 2016, 14:50 PM
#25
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

It is almost as if having one less tier has made unit pacing problematic for WFA.
30 Jul 2016, 22:50 PM
#26
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



Exactly what buffs are you talking about. Flamers are already in the game, jeeps are already in the game. The one and only thing that could be considered a buff would be if a flamer was put in a jeep. Usf would gain an end game buff by not needing to choose a flamer doctrine.

I proposed moving morter to t1, how is that a buff. I propose delaying stuart, how is that an empty gesture. Both these suggestions give axis more time to stabilise and establish counters.

Everyone acknowledges that ostheer is struggling and that the usf morter is still a tad op however the fact remains that usf has very limited counters( flamer doc and nade tech ) to mg spam.

giving them something that otherwise require doctrine is a buff, especially if they suddenly get the both of them together.

and rifleman is strong enough to carry the USF early game by themselves. Any extra tool is only going to make the usf more effectives. the only nerf that would matter at this point is nerfing the rifleman.

and mg spam is not even a balance problem. the wehr is only going to be able to lock down a small section of the map with only mg.
30 Jul 2016, 23:41 PM
#27
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611


giving them something that otherwise require doctrine is a buff, especially if they suddenly get the both of them together.

I already acknowledge this fact in my previous post. It would be no different to sov clown car and would delay usf light vehicles.


and rifleman is strong enough to carry the USF early game by themselves. Any extra tool is only going to make the usf more effectives. the only nerf that would matter at this point is nerfing the rifleman.

Wrong. Rifle men are basically the same as they have always been, with the exception being the change to vet3. If they were fine early game before morter, how are they now OP.:loco:
Also saying rifle men are enough to carry usf early game is short sighted and situational. Usf (like all factions ) cannot get opponent out of a building unless they out number opponent. They certainly cannot get supported mgs out of buildings.


and mg spam is not even a balance problem. the wehr is only going to be able to lock down a small section of the map with only mg.


Wrong, 2 mgs will easily give you your cutoff and your fuel. 3 or 4 mgs will give you half the map untill vehicles arrive.

Seems to me you are clearly an mg spammer for ost and soviet. No wonder so many tears.


Mg spam meta for these factions is widely considered cancer, although stronger on soviet.

Let me state quite clearly, since you are ignorant and completely biased in your views and refuse to add anything to the conversation other than nerf rifles, nerf morter, nerf stuart, blah blah blah. I fully support a nerf to the morter in exchange for more options early game. I also support mild buffs to ostheer early game to make the faction a little more user friendly.

I DO NOT support mgs spamming fucktards that want to compain that their mgs are no longer set and forget.
31 Jul 2016, 02:02 AM
#28
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930


I already acknowledge this fact in my previous post. It would be no different to sov clown car and would delay usf light vehicles.


Wrong. Rifle men are basically the same as they have always been, with the exception being the change to vet3. If they were fine early game before morter, how are they now OP.:loco:
Also saying rifle men are enough to carry usf early game is short sighted and situational. Usf (like all factions ) cannot get opponent out of a building unless they out number opponent. They certainly cannot get supported mgs out of buildings.



Wrong, 2 mgs will easily give you your cutoff and your fuel. 3 or 4 mgs will give you half the map untill vehicles arrive.

Seems to me you are clearly an mg spammer for ost and soviet. No wonder so many tears.


Mg spam meta for these factions is widely considered cancer, although stronger on soviet.

Let me state quite clearly, since you are ignorant and completely biased in your views and refuse to add anything to the conversation other than nerf rifles, nerf morter, nerf stuart, blah blah blah. I fully support a nerf to the morter in exchange for more options early game. I also support mild buffs to ostheer early game to make the faction a little more user friendly.

I DO NOT support mgs spamming fucktards that want to compain that their mgs are no longer set and forget.


now you're just turning USF into Sov special rifle. The soviet also have to pay 160 mp at the beginning to access their penals and clown car, and even then the soviet still have a solid starting game.

The usf doesn't need to pay any starting tech like the wehr.

Soviet mg spam is a problem because it was overpowered. They were kind of cheap and their number nullify their smaller arc. Relic already nerf mg spam by making them more expensive. Using 2 mg is hardly "spam".

and who build four mg as wehr? 4 maxim was the norm with soviet, but 4 mg42?
31 Jul 2016, 02:33 AM
#29
avatar of Rappy

Posts: 526

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jul 2016, 01:05 AMGrumpy


So you want to remove the only way that USF has of dealing with garrisoned MG's in the early game (without critically delaying tech), and turn around and give the other axis faction a MG so they can garrison also....

Is this a joke? Smoke loses the game because it delays tech a tiny bit? Please tell me all the other faction t0 garrison solutions?
31 Jul 2016, 04:54 AM
#30
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611


now you're just turning USF into Sov special rifle.

So what. Clown car meta is dead and is unlikely to be revived in any significant manner by usf. Wc51 would be primarily used to counter kubels and snipers. Hardly Op as its only real strength is harassing and chasing lone squads. Wc51 would be hugely risky investment since 20fuel would delay ambulance, t1 or t2 or any other light vehicle. Any competent axis player will fast tech a vehicle of their own.

The soviet also have to pay 160 mp at the beginning to access their penals and clown car, and even then the soviet still have a solid starting game.

What does this mean and how is it relevant.

The usf doesn't need to pay any starting tech like the wehr.

Ost t1 is 80mp and 10 fuel, hardly a significant number. Axis t0 and t1 units (ex sniper ) are cheaper than rifles. The mp difference equalises after a couple of units are produced.

Soviet mg spam is a problem because it was overpowered.

Op units usually are a problem.:lolol:

They were kind of cheap and their number nullify their smaller arc.

wtf are you talking about. The problem was sov could a-move maxims because of quick set up and almost instant pin.

Relic already nerf mg spam by making them more expensive. Using 2 mg is hardly "spam".

Yes they were nerfed but not nearly hard enough, any tournament will feature heavy maxim play. Not only is it still op but it is utterly broken because of the cheese factor.

and who build four mg as wehr? 4 maxim was the norm with soviet, but 4 mg42?

4 mgs is uncommon, probably less than 10% but 2 is almost standard. No normal intelligent person will deny that there is a problem relating to the design of usf and their reliance on doctrines with flames or indirect fire to deal with multiple mgs.

Yes, i know nades also counter mgs, but this can be a waste of muni, often resulting in no tangible gain vs a competent player and the 25 fuel delays tech and light vehicles.

The solution is fix usf needing a doctrinal flamer, move the morter to t1, fix axis AC bug and make it more AI, then move on to p4 etc etc. The problem is everything feels a bit like a square peg in a round hole atm because the early game mechanics are just off tilt.
31 Jul 2016, 07:37 AM
#31
avatar of Gbpirate
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1153 | Subs: 1

Not reading all of the posts here, and none in detail on the second page, but I can say to OP that I played a game as USF on Road to Kharkov against an OKW guy ranked 514 and he blobbed to my cutoff the first 3-5 minutes.

Had to get LT for an MG/suppression and, luckily, he was stupid coordinating his Luchs/infantry and i killed it with an AT gun/capt/rifle AT nades.

That being said, it would be great if everyone had an MG in T0 but then that would be boring af and not help w/ asymmetry.

I'm a firm believer that the faction design for OKW/USF is bad. It would be 10x easier for balance if all tech was linear (like Ostheer...hey, hey, hey!) with side-tech options like Panzer Elite/UKF in coh2.

I agree with whoever said the USF mortar should be a lighter version of itself (I believe that, at some point in an alpha, the US had a light 60mm mortar - that would be nice). Mortars hard counter MGs and USF nades are expensive fuel wise. I would like to see riflemen smoke @ 20 muni instead of 15 and a 60mm USF mortar w/ lower damage and AoE.

As Skemshead said above, USF (and all factions) should get non-doctrinal access to flamethrowers.

Man, I could go on and on about what each faction needs and what Relic should've done/should fix. The newer the faction the better the stuff (no white phosphorus for ost/sov; volks get an upgrade that prevents them from freezing to death, previously an important yet annoying aspect that required micro and attention; no AT in USF Lt. tier; no Wehrmacht light tank; crazy OP Brit off-map abilities...though they have been nerfed).
31 Jul 2016, 10:57 AM
#32
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930


So what. Clown car meta is dead and is unlikely to be revived in any significant manner by usf. Wc51 would be primarily used to counter kubels and snipers. Hardly Op as its only real strength is harassing and chasing lone squads. Wc51 would be hugely risky investment since 20fuel would delay ambulance, t1 or t2 or any other light vehicle. Any competent axis player will fast tech a vehicle of their own.


What does this mean and how is it relevant.


Ost t1 is 80mp and 10 fuel, hardly a significant number. Axis t0 and t1 units (ex sniper ) are cheaper than rifles. The mp difference equalises after a couple of units are produced.


Op units usually are a problem.:lolol:


wtf are you talking about. The problem was sov could a-move maxims because of quick set up and almost instant pin.


Yes they were nerfed but not nearly hard enough, any tournament will feature heavy maxim play. Not only is it still op but it is utterly broken because of the cheese factor.


4 mgs is uncommon, probably less than 10% but 2 is almost standard. No normal intelligent person will deny that there is a problem relating to the design of usf and their reliance on doctrines with flames or indirect fire to deal with multiple mgs.

Yes, i know nades also counter mgs, but this can be a waste of muni, often resulting in no tangible gain vs a competent player and the 25 fuel delays tech and light vehicles.

The solution is fix usf needing a doctrinal flamer, move the morter to t1, fix axis AC bug and make it more AI, then move on to p4 etc etc. The problem is everything feels a bit like a square peg in a round hole atm because the early game mechanics are just off tilt.



the soviet start with 390 mp, of which 160 are usually spent building either the support weapon or special rifle. They barely have enough mp for a conscript and one building, but the strength of the unit makes up for it.

the USF get rifleman and mortar right off the start and 400 mp to play. That's a significant advantage because the USF doesn't have to waste the first minute building whatever or spending the resource to get decent starting units. Even replacing the mortar with jeeps and flamer is still a significant boost compared with one patch ago.

Note that the sov and Wehr get access to the mortar only if their starting unit spent the first 30 second constructing the production building. Their opponent is all but guarantee to have garrisoned that all important building first. Getting access to the mortar means you're more likely to need it.

the wehr get access to the mortar and flamer because they are slow and will arrive at the fuel later than USF.

and 80 mp 10 fuel does make a difference. The wehr get 420 start mp but they have to spend 80 of it on the barrack. The USF get 400 mp and they don't need to pay building cost. 340 vs 400 mp is a big difference.

and the rifleman get Smoke in addition to nade. Even the smoke is a huge factor because the US rifleman easily beat the wehr in close quarter. Even just getting in close is a huge victory for the usf.

and I don't see the wehr ever getting map dominance with mg spam. Most USF defeats are usually because they let the game run too long. It feels like adding the mortar to the USF is just reinforcing the notion that the USF is suppose to defeat the axis early.

and the USF already have access to the major artillery(which is now decent for 60 mp) , m8a1, and the pack howitzer mid-late game. If the Wehr is dugging in, the USF can use any of those option to remove troublesome mg. The USF does have access to artillery, just not zero second artillery.
1 Aug 2016, 06:54 AM
#33
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611




the soviet start with 390 mp, of which 160 are usually spent building either the support weapon or special rifle. They barely have enough mp for a conscript and one building, but the strength of the unit makes up for it.

the USF get rifleman and mortar right off the start and 400 mp to play. That's a significant advantage because the USF doesn't have to waste the first minute building whatever or spending the resource to get decent starting units. Even replacing the mortar with jeeps and flamer is still a significant boost compared with one patch ago.

Note that the sov and Wehr get access to the mortar only if their starting unit spent the first 30 second constructing the production building. Their opponent is all but guarantee to have garrisoned that all important building first. Getting access to the mortar means you're more likely to need it.

the wehr get access to the mortar and flamer because they are slow and will arrive at the fuel later than USF.

and 80 mp 10 fuel does make a difference. The wehr get 420 start mp but they have to spend 80 of it on the barrack. The USF get 400 mp and they don't need to pay building cost. 340 vs 400 mp is a big difference.

and the rifleman get Smoke in addition to nade. Even the smoke is a huge factor because the US rifleman easily beat the wehr in close quarter. Even just getting in close is a huge victory for the usf.

and I don't see the wehr ever getting map dominance with mg spam. Most USF defeats are usually because they let the game run too long. It feels like adding the mortar to the USF is just reinforcing the notion that the USF is suppose to defeat the axis early.

and the USF already have access to the major artillery(which is now decent for 60 mp) , m8a1, and the pack howitzer mid-late game. If the Wehr is dugging in, the USF can use any of those option to remove troublesome mg. The USF does have access to artillery, just not zero second artillery.


Dude, you should get a job as a politician. Politicians have a knack of completely ignoring the subject or question and instead twist the conversation so they can focus on pushing their own message or agenda.

Everyone acknowledges the t0 morter is a problem for OST, you on the other hand seem to think that usf's limited or restrictive counters to mgs in buildings are fine. You utterly refuse to concede any ground to try and improve the gameplay. Most people are in favour of tweaking both the usf and ost to find a better balance, yet you just go on and on about nerfing usf.

Stop comparing to soviets, the tech cost are vastly different.

Stop saying a difference of 60manpower at start of game is huge when rifles cost 20mp more than mg42 and 40mp more than grens.

Stop complaining about the huge build time of ost t1, its 15 seconds. Not 30 seconds and not a minute like you claimed in your post.
Stop saying ost cannot get to fuel before usf when there are two fuels on most maps (1v1).

Stop saying jeeps and flamers are a significant boost while quietly refusing to acknowledge that flames are already present in doctrine and a 20 fuel jeep will delay usf light vehicle and tech.

Stop trying to sell grenades as the solution. They are a significant teching choice that is no guarantee against quality opposition. Yes I know grenades have smoke but smoke will not necessarily get an mg out of a house (unless you have flames as well). Remember if he cannot see you, you also cannot see him. In the open is different but the issue is houses.

If i haven't said enough times already, move the morter out of usf t0 so ost has time to get established.


1 Aug 2016, 07:10 AM
#34
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

1 Aug 2016, 11:26 AM
#35
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



Dude, you should get a job as a politician. Politicians have a knack of completely ignoring the subject or question and instead twist the conversation so they can focus on pushing their own message or agenda.

Everyone acknowledges the t0 morter is a problem for OST, you on the other hand seem to think that usf's limited or restrictive counters to mgs in buildings are fine. You utterly refuse to concede any ground to try and improve the gameplay. Most people are in favour of tweaking both the usf and ost to find a better balance, yet you just go on and on about nerfing usf.

Stop comparing to soviets, the tech cost are vastly different.

Stop saying a difference of 60manpower at start of game is huge when rifles cost 20mp more than mg42 and 40mp more than grens.

Stop complaining about the huge build time of ost t1, its 15 seconds. Not 30 seconds and not a minute like you claimed in your post.
Stop saying ost cannot get to fuel before usf when there are two fuels on most maps (1v1).

Stop saying jeeps and flamers are a significant boost while quietly refusing to acknowledge that flames are already present in doctrine and a 20 fuel jeep will delay usf light vehicle and tech.

Stop trying to sell grenades as the solution. They are a significant teching choice that is no guarantee against quality opposition. Yes I know grenades have smoke but smoke will not necessarily get an mg out of a house (unless you have flames as well). Remember if he cannot see you, you also cannot see him. In the open is different but the issue is houses.

If i haven't said enough times already, move the morter out of usf t0 so ost has time to get established.



the wehr early game have been playing perpetual catch up to the USF early ever since release.

go to http://coh2chart.com/ , and take a look at the 1v1 win ratio for USF and Ostheer as far back as it will take you. It's clear that the USF consistently hold an advantage over the ostheer.

the ostheer's static gameplay is frankly an necessity against the USF. All this fuss about giving USF an early counter against mg, but yet ignoring how screwed the wehr grenadier are against the rifleman.

A "bad" game for USF is one where they don't dominating the wehr early game before the usf's weak late game show up. There's a reason why the calliope and pershing were the most popular USF commanders during ESL. They both significantly improve the USF's late game.

Giving the USF an early direct counter to the wehr's mg42 is ignoring the shaky ground the wehr stand on in the beginning.

the rifleman cost more than the grenadier and the mg42 because the rifleman is better. The rifleman is the best starting infantry unit in the game. Don't complain about paying more for better units.
1 Aug 2016, 12:17 PM
#36
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Indirect fire pretty much nullifies static gameplay. When ostheer is pretty much pigeonholed into static gameplay this becomes problematic. We saw this long ago with the 120mm before WFA and the British faction just had a field day with this issue. Now USF has a t0 mortar. Ostheer already had its mg42 put in t0 because they struggled against USF. Throwing USF the direct and obvious counter to that pretty much undid the whole flippin point of the t0 mg42.

WFA suffers so hard from having so few tier buildings.

**edited terrible cellphone typing
1 Aug 2016, 18:39 PM
#37
avatar of Glendizzle

Posts: 149

t0 pgrens.

booyah
1 Aug 2016, 21:59 PM
#38
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611


Stop saying a difference of 60manpower at start of game is huge when rifles cost 20mp more than mg42 and 40mp more than grens.



the rifleman cost more than the grenadier and the mg42 because the rifleman is better. The rifleman is the best starting infantry unit in the game. Don't complain about paying more for better units.


Please indicate where I complain about the cost of usf units.
1 Aug 2016, 22:15 PM
#39
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930





Please indicate where I complain about the cost of usf units.




Stop saying a difference of 60manpower at start of game is huge when rifles cost 20mp more than mg42 and 40mp more than grens.

1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

United States 151
United States 16
unknown 7

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

858 users are online: 858 guests
0 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49125
Welcome our newest member, Xclusive
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM