[2vs2] RIP Axis

hp is not all if so Churchill should be capped to 1 count the gun too

So how do you define heavy tank in CoH2?

IMO hp pool and slugish movement is everthing to define heavy tank in CoH2 but try prove me I'm wrong.

KV1 is the only exception for slugish movements but it's problably the worst design tank in game with it's veterancy and has no defined role on battlefield.

The reason i was reffering to the allies as better here is because of

A) - US Vehicle crews with crit repair
B) - Self repair on some light vehicles, (T70 and Bren carrier)
C) - Lots of doctrinal auto repairs on the sov and Brit factions. (especially the brits with the smoke shield)
D) - The allies have combat repair options, the axis you have to run the tank back to base or risk your pio's being 1 shot by some artillery or attacking tank, where as the allies can in most cases stay near the front and not surrender ground, so while the hps of the repairs may not be as good as sturms, tactically and strategically, they are better.

Most things here are not quite right.
A) Crit repair does not repair a tank and is thereby not part of the discussion surrounding repair options/speed. It is however an entirely different problem which should have been addressed a long time ago either by removal or a price increase. The only thing that can be considered correct here is that USF might actually repair a medium tank faster since they do have the vehicle crew to do so and do not rely on a builder unit.
B) The point was regarding repair options for tanks. While again the t70 is problematic in its own right, it is not part of the argument. The bren carrier can as well not be used to enforce your point as it crutches on that ability since there is no repair available until the faction techs up.
C) There is one such option for each of those factions. For the brits it is part of 3 out of 8 commanders. For Soviets it is part of 3 out of 21 commanders. Both abilities render the tank combat ineffective and immobile which is why repair at the front is sorely ill-advised. Even more so with the Soviet ability since it does not conceal the tank as well.
D) Brist and Sovs have the same stock ability to repair in combat as Ostheer does and the same risks associated with it. The only differences are the ones covered in C) which are doctrinal. To take these into account has again got nothing to do with your inital point as it is akin claiming that Ostheer would have better ways to save their tanks with panzer technician.
The two exceptions are OKW (truck repair and increased repair speed with sweeper upgrade and better builders) and USF (vehicle crews).

u face in 2v2 only alli blobbs. no skill if u take rifles.

wtf relic? and the possiblity as okw is low to conter blobbs.. u need much skill, the right commander and a dump enemy how cant hear a stuka, artilierie or sturmtiger....

maybe than u can win....but if the alli blobbs...no sense to play

u face in 2v2 only alli blobbs. no skill if u take rifles.

wtf relic? and the possiblity as okw is low to conter blobbs.. u need much skill, the right commander and a dump enemy how cant hear a stuka, artilierie or sturmtiger....

maybe than u can win....but if the alli blobbs...no sense to play

If you have so big problems maybe you should post a replay of a game which caused you so much problems so people here can work on it and show you some misteakes?

Instead of constant whines..

yeah..i have so much replays...unbelievable which noobs can win this game only with 2 units

yeah..i have so much replays...unbelievable which noobs can win this game only with 2 units

I went through your posts and since the first one you constatly whine how axis are up and how allies are OP.

So I ask, why don't you play a game post a replay? Then we will see where the problem lies.

In other words, stop trolling and start to be reliable.

yeah..i have so much replays...unbelievable which noobs can win this game only with 2 units

Glad to hear you're having finally some success in the game. Keep it up!

I went through your posts and since the first one you constatly whine how axis are up and how allies are OP.

So I ask, why don't you play a game post a replay? Then we will see where the problem lies.

In other words, stop trolling and start to be reliable.

i load up some game...look to the blobbers game. All games are random teams (maybe the enemy play as team in teamspeak)

In my opinion..they get all the nice stuff from every faction....only a better version from the copy units.

the get strong tanks, strong infantery, fast repair, strong emplacement, strong mines, strong uniqe units, strong grenades, strong air force, strong artilleriy, can build caches, sniper, strong viewrange /scouts, flamers, mörsers, best cost / power effective units (example bofors)

And this is after almost everything they have has been nerfed.

Where as the Land mattress is just... ugh, ridiculous for how cheap it is and is easily better than a Pwerfer. Infact its 1 volly is nearly the equivelant to 3 pwerfers after eachother.

If we were talking about the pre-nerf LM, I'd agree with you. Since it's been nerfed my experience with it has been pretty lackluster. Have you tested them side-by-side?

If we were talking about the pre-nerf LM, I'd agree with you. Since it's been nerfed my experience with it has been pretty lackluster. Have you tested them side-by-side?

It's still pretty good. Definitely cost effective. And that is after not 1 but 2 nerfs. Of course the usual allied fanboys were saying even before the first nerf that it was totally fine...

Most things here are not quite right.
A) Crit repair does not repair a tank and is thereby not part of the discussion surrounding repair options/speed. It is however an entirely different problem which should have been addressed a long time ago either by removal or a price increase. The only thing that can be considered correct here is that USF might actually repair a medium tank faster since they do have the vehicle crew to do so and do not rely on a builder unit.
B) The point was regarding repair options for tanks. While again the t70 is problematic in its own right, it is not part of the argument. The bren carrier can as well not be used to enforce your point as it crutches on that ability since there is no repair available until the faction techs up.
C) There is one such option for each of those factions. For the brits it is part of 3 out of 8 commanders. For Soviets it is part of 3 out of 21 commanders. Both abilities render the tank combat ineffective and immobile which is why repair at the front is sorely ill-advised. Even more so with the Soviet ability since it does not conceal the tank as well.
D) Brist and Sovs have the same stock ability to repair in combat as Ostheer does and the same risks associated with it. The only differences are the ones covered in C) which are doctrinal. To take these into account has again got nothing to do with your inital point as it is akin claiming that Ostheer would have better ways to save their tanks with panzer technician.
The two exceptions are OKW (truck repair and increased repair speed with sweeper upgrade and better builders) and USF (vehicle crews).

You seem to have totally missed my point here. instead of repeating pretty much what i said about each ability. (im assuming everyone here plays the game so didnt feel the need to list the commanders ect). my point is that they have good alternatives to having to need a bunch of pio's.

Also... repair crit IS valid here, if your engine on your KT gets blown, you gotta repair that sucker to 90% hp before it will fix the engine. Meaning as i already stated the allies have way more combat effective time in the field. and the USF can just shrug off mines totally wasting the ammo of the Axis players.



Yes the self repairs render the tanks ineffective. and can be risky to use so its situational. Either way, a random mortar shot isnt gonna 1 shot your 300mp sturm pios


Maybe if you had more than 50 games as Axis, or less than 800 games as Allies you'd realize how imbalanced it is and be less bias...

Sure:
- No garrison clearing (except for emplacements)
- No smoke (until Cromwell)
- No snares (ever; except for AEC, which is the same thing)
- AEC hard-countered by 444 or Puma (you can force AEC by spamming MGs)
- Tommies suck HARD at flanking (if a Tommy squad flanks your MG don't retreat: just move and reposition. Tommies won't be able to hit shit while they are chasing you)
- No non-tech call-ins to ruin your day (once you've jumped at the jugular, there's nothing they can do to get out of it)

-No garrison clearing except for Vickers and WASP.... The most badass garrison clearer in the early to mid game.
-No smoke except for smoke on almost all vehicles and in the mortar pit.
-No snares. Yes this is a definite weakness.
-AEC is a hard counter for the axis light vehicles as much as they hard counter it.
-Tommie's have great flanking ability once you have the gammon bomb.

Good thing katitof Posted here and made clear that everything is fine, I was worried for a second that the game May be unbalanced

Same.

-No garrison clearing except for Vickers and WASP.... The most badass garrison clearer in the early to mid game.
-No smoke except for smoke on almost all vehicles and in the mortar pit.
-No snares. Yes this is a definite weakness.
-AEC is a hard counter for the axis light vehicles as much as they hard counter it.
-Tommie's have great flanking ability once you have the gammon bomb.

The following things hardcounter a WASP (which make it a terrible investment):
- 2 MGs firing on it at the same time
- 1 MG42 hitting vet1 can take up to 3 WASPs at the same time; solo; and the enemy doesn't even have the time to react
- The obligatory rushed 222 (no escape for WASP, and no snares to save it)

Vickers does cause a bit more more damage vs garrisons than MG42. However, when it's a garrison fight MG-vs-MG, it's a question about who sets up first. Until vet1 that is: MG42 has the clear advantage with the incendiary rounds. See a pattern, here?

As I said. Smoke does not become available until the Cromwell. When you build a mortar pit, you sacrifice your offensive capability to the point that you have no more use for smoke anymore.

In direct confrontation, the AEC is greatly inferior, statistically, to both the 444 (moving accuracy, turret traverse, etc) and the Puma (range), to the point that it can be easily bumrushed frontally (remember the no-snares part)?

Can you actually link to some examples the Gammon bomb being useful as a flanking device? This is too mindboggling for me. Tommies are the single worst unit to be picking a fight at close range.
Show Spoiler

Rangers are great, don't get me wrong, but they aren't better then shocks in effort vs result equation.

Double rangers with thompsons seems to cut trough anything soft axis can throw them headon except MG.

Shocks on the other hand seems to need have the "surprise" push to close range to be more effective, in other situations they seem to bend under Gren-Lmg easily.

But then again rangers need AT units nearby building a nearly, the most perfect synergy with jacksons

I know that the rant of some Axis fanboys here is way too much over the edge but I honestly think that you have to be a fool to say that Axis and Allies are on the absolute same level in terms of winning possibility right now.

If you simply ignore all Katitof + Australian Magic posts, I think this board can develop some very interesting conversations. Sadly there are no many topics where they are not.

Double rangers with thompsons seems to cut trough anything soft axis can throw them headon except MG.

Shocks on the other hand seems to need have the "surprise" push to close range to be more effective, in other situations they seem to bend under Gren-Lmg easily.

But then again rangers need AT units nearby building a nearly, the most perfect synergy with jacksons

+1

I know that the rant of some Axis fanboys here is way too much over the edge but I honestly think that you have to be a fool to say that Axis and Allies are on the absolute same level in terms of winning possibility right now.

If you simply ignore all Katitof + Australian Magic posts, I think this board can develop some very interesting conversations. Sadly there are no many topics where they are not.

+ 1

If you simply ignore all Katitof + Australian Magic posts, I think this board can develop some very interesting conversations. Sadly there are no many topics where they are not.

Quite frankly if you did that this place would become an echochamber. Ignoring opinions that don't agree with your own doesn't help conversation.