Why patch should not overbuff/overnerf units anymore

"An open mind is like a fortress; it's gates unbarred and unguarded"

Yeah, that's why I thought it couldn't have been a 40K line, seemed too similar to that one.

Yeah, that's why I thought it couldn't have been a 40K line, seemed too similar to that one.

But yours is another WH40K quote, google it, it's there word by word.

But yours is another WH40K quote, google it, it's there word by word.

I know that now, and knew of what Swiftsabre mentioned before, which caused me to my mind to be convinced that Smith's line would be misattributed to be considered 40K in spite of my initial guess until I just looked it up and realized it actually was a 40K line.

At the risk of coming across as having a too simplistic view. I never saw what the problem with StuG E was. By the time it arrives it is hard countered by a single ATG.

US Rifleman, Maxims or Tommy's with Brens ensure that no Axis infantry are able to de-crew the ATG.

If anything at all, it needed a slight price increase and that's it.

I am a firm believer in the KISS principle. Keep It Simple Stupid.

At the risk of coming across as having a too simplistic view. I never saw what the problem with StuG E was. By the time it arrives it is hard countered by a single ATG.

US Rifleman, Maxims or Tommy's with Brens ensure that no Axis infantry are able to de-crew the ATG.

If anything at all, it needed a slight price increase and that's it.

I am a firm believer in the KISS principle. Keep It Simple Stupid.

+1

Many issues in coh2 can be directly linked to spamming a strong unit or weapon. If someone wants to put all their resources into one type of playstyle it should leave them exposed elsewhere.

Stug e is not op imo. But spamming them is. The fact that it can be replaced almost immediately is flawed. Increase its cost, increase its popcap and increase its cooldown. Its meant to be effective, otherwise what is the point of calling it in.

Same goes for penal flamers. 1 penal flamer adds flavour. 3 or 4 penal flamers is just cancer. Increase flamer cost to 120 and even out vet power spikes.

Guards to also suffer from the same issue. Too easy to spam. Guards also are too durable.

See that's the thing though... I can't even tell you how many times I've seen players spam stug es to ill effect. I mean I remember watching high end players throw games like crazy because of stug e spam. Stug e spam shuts down infantry heavy play that doesn't adapt to anti infantry vehicles.

Usually what the issue is is that the stug e acts as enough of a crutch to bridge the gap until the tiger.

But again this occurs when the allied player refuses to deviate from heavy infantry usage, or invests in things like calliopes or crocodiles, etc.

What people are describing for the stug e is to effectively clone the stug from coh1 blitzkrieg doctrine. Honestly I think a stud could easily fit into coh2, but I couldn't say where or how.

I swear it's like gravity that the faction designs of the original factions of coh1 keep creeping in as superior choices for what we have to work with.

There is ample time to prepare for a stug E, unlike stuart and t70. The stug e will not chase you to your base and wipe your retreating squads.

Nerfing it as part of the Lv meta nerf is a little misguided and tbh if it is overnerfed what would be the reason to build it when a p4 would be more logical.

I think it´s pretty senseless to discuss only the current early game changes. Allies naturally have better early game than Axis which compensates later. Of course they have to perform better with their infantry. You can´t expect US infantry to be only on par with Ostheer when they don´t have tanks on the level of other factions lategame vehicles.

That design idea, while correct, is based on the assumption that Axis tanks actually are superior to their Allied counterparts. Which in the case of Ostheer tanks is simply not true, considering the state of the Panther and Panzer IV.

The aim of the light vehicles changes is not to nerf allies. Is to keep light vehicles useful thru out the game.

One would probably not built a m20 in the late game to lay mines because it was too expensive. So they unit need to become cheaper and thus their shock value should also go down.

Reducing the shock value on the units will also help prolong the infantry phase of the game and people will not have to rush expensive AT to counter the light vehicles.

So actually light vehicle have seen a change in role, from shock units to utility units and changes in their stats make sense.

On the other hand multiple nerf or buff on units that retain the same role is uncalled for.

Riflemen should not be on par with Ostheer because Ostheer have better support weapon but when distance between Osth support weapon and USF support weapon close so must the distance between Ost and USF infantry also close...

Imo buffing the weakness of a faction and bringing them closer to other factions does not actually improve balance but it messed up. One also needs to nerf the strong points of the faction to compensate.

That design idea, while correct, is based on the assumption that Axis tanks actually are superior to their Allied counterparts. Which in the case of Ostheer tanks is simply not true, considering the state of the Panther and Panzer IV.

I absolutely agree with you. With my post I wanted to emphasize that they should buff Ostheer lategame rather than mirroring all factions at every stage of the game. Thus the Allied infantry should be a bit stronger right now... or we risk keeping the shit lategame for Ostheer.

I still wait for stand fast nerf

I still wait for stand fast nerf

Not sure how this is related to topic but I think I have a better suggestion.
Swap "stand fast" with "Brace" adjust repair speed.

Benefits
1) the effectiveness of turtleling will reduced
2) bleeding MP while trying to repair emplacements will now cost MU instead

+1

Many issues in coh2 can be directly linked to spamming a strong unit or weapon. If someone wants to put all their resources into one type of playstyle it should leave them exposed elsewhere.

Stug e is not op imo. But spamming them is. The fact that it can be replaced almost immediately is flawed. Increase its cost, increase its popcap and increase its cooldown. Its meant to be effective, otherwise what is the point of calling it in.

Same goes for penal flamers. 1 penal flamer adds flavour. 3 or 4 penal flamers is just cancer. Increase flamer cost to 120 and even out vet power spikes.

Guards to also suffer from the same issue. Too easy to spam. Guards also are too durable.

this is exactly the problem overall. simply solution: unit limits, like they did it with heavy tanks. it was a wonderful change. just reminding you of multiple snipers, as if this wasnt full cancer..

Not sure how this is related to topic but I think I have a better suggestion.
Swap "stand fast" with "Brace" adjust repair speed.

Benefits
1) the effectiveness of turtleling will reduced
2) bleeding MP while trying to repair emplacements will now cost MU instead

I posted for some months about stand fast being op but no one listen.
What about tommies?they can still equip 2 brens?