Login

russian armor

OKW's early game over-dominance

PAGES (11)down
7 Apr 2017, 03:13 AM
#61
avatar of Ulaire Minya

Posts: 372

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2017, 02:18 AMNano


You can say that yes you can dominate early with forward HQs with OKW but it soon comes to an end when multiple players start smacking buildings with indirect fire. Teamwork is the real key to dealing with it. Unfortunately team work is not something that happens very often in pub 3v3 or 4v4s.

There's nothing stopping the axis players from getting indirect of their own.
7 Apr 2017, 03:35 AM
#62
avatar of Cafo

Posts: 245

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2017, 02:18 AMNano


If you don't give OKW nades essentially as soon as the game starts they will have 0 non doctrinal methods of clearing out garrisons. It's a dumb situation but that's the the reality of it.



You could say the same for usf, but i put this on the wrong thread anyway, i meant to put this on the upcoming update thread. OKW is basically a better usf.. which is dumb
7 Apr 2017, 03:47 AM
#63
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954



But for the love of god just play 20 axis games just to see what it's like facing Calliopes, Kattys, landmatresses, Mortar pits, 120mm mortars, Pak howies, auto repairing emplacements, Bofors with barrage, USF retreat points that can move, Brit ones that can equip units with LMG's and Soviet t-34'76 spam.





Apologies for an overly aggressive response but the general consensus of players who play ALL the factions is that axis lose out in team games specifically because of weaker artillery/indirect fire and worse 'emplacements'. Axis also tend to have smaller squads meaning indirect fire wipes them faster. (I'll leave tanks out of this one).



I have played more than 20 games as axis, both in randoms and arranged teams. A lot of what you're saying isn't true. The win rate for the top 250 arranged teams in larger games (3v3 & 4v4) has been the balanced between axis and allies for the last several months. It hasn't changed that much since the last patch but probably will be very axis-favored after the UKF armor nerf and arty cover becoming worthless.

Soviets have the ML-20, B4, 120MM, Katy, and easily the worst win rate in 4v4 random. They're the only faction with no way to heal near the front. If any squads have to retreat, it takes an eternity in COH2 time to get the squad back to the front, particularly on maps like Red Ball.

Claim all you want that you were traumatized by a pack howie. Anyone who has used one in the last several patches will know better. Pack howies rarely kill enough models to justify their purchase price and pop cap. Upkeep on them in a long game will be around 900 MP, plus the 350(?) purchase price. Please go play a 4v4 random and post the replay with you killing 40 models with one.

After that, play another 4v4, do this with a Calliope and then post the replay:
[url=][img="http://i65.tinypic.com/119oz8i.jpg" alt=""]
because you should be able to better with a Calliope than a scrub like me does with a Walking Stuka.

UKF players who go multiple emplacements might be annoying, but are more of a liability than anything else. If someone sees this and doesn't get walking stukas then they deserve to lose. Get two of them to Vet 5 and no amount of brace or repair will keep any emplacement up. Having the fire barrage on a separate cooldown is icing on the cake.

The meta for USF is Calliopes and bazookas because they have no counter to the JT or Ele. Your only way to win the game is to strip away the infantry support with Calliopes and push the elite armor off with bazookas, and hope that the axis players are bad with their rocket artillery. Loads of fun for everyone.
7 Apr 2017, 04:29 AM
#64
avatar of Nano

Posts: 212

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2017, 03:35 AMCafo


You could say the same for usf


That is also true, but with USF you get mortars and smoke at t0 which are a big help. There is no such luck with OKW, even the field gun at T1 is bad against garrisons and due to it's bugs it some times cannot even shoot buildings.

I'm not saying the current access to flame nades so quick is good, but if you take it away think of how absolutely damaging that would be to OKW to fight garrisons. They are silly design problems.



There's nothing stopping the axis players from getting indirect of their own.


This is true but less relevant. OKW players losing buildings is a significantly bigger deal than allied. You do lose the point but you also lose production which is unique to OKW.

7 Apr 2017, 08:33 AM
#65
avatar of Finndeed
Strategist Badge

Posts: 612 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2017, 03:47 AMGrumpy




Jesus Christ... Well first off the OP never states which game mode he is referring too, and second of all 2v2 is about as far as my experience goes, something I also said in a previous post on this thread.

Take a chill pill, smoke a split, blame a team mate... do whatever it is that relaxes you, please.
7 Apr 2017, 09:45 AM
#66
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
OKW need change, thay are to strong in early game with pio push and luchs spam into ostwinds or command panther. This synergy is to strong.
7 Apr 2017, 13:28 PM
#67
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954



Jesus Christ... Well first off the OP never states which game mode he is referring too, and second of all 2v2 is about as far as my experience goes, something I also said in a previous post on this thread.

Take a chill pill, smoke a split, blame a team mate... do whatever it is that relaxes you, please.


Maybe try taking your own advice about the chill pill. Read some of your own posts.

Back to original topic:
I'm not sure I really agree with the OP's view that OKW is dominant in the early game. It's hugely map dependent. Having the USF RE start in the middle of base completely screwed them over on some maps as OKW is able to secure important buildings on some maps that make the entire game an uphill struggle.
7 Apr 2017, 14:17 PM
#68
avatar of Finndeed
Strategist Badge

Posts: 612 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Apr 2017, 13:28 PMGrumpy


Maybe try taking your own advice about the chill pill. Read some of your own posts.

Back to original topic:
I'm not sure I really agree with the OP's view that OKW is dominant in the early game. It's hugely map dependent. Having the USF RE start in the middle of base completely screwed them over on some maps as OKW is able to secure important buildings on some maps that make the entire game an uphill struggle.


I apologized to voltardark for being a bit too aggressive in my response to him.

I disagree, Soviets are the weakest in team games, USF generally don't even need tanks to win. Arty and inf backed up with UKF tanks and emplacements can be an impossibly hard combination to fight for axis.

Crossing in the woods with 2 mortar emplacements behind the tree's and you pretty much lose my default.
7 Apr 2017, 15:18 PM
#69
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 879

Facing OKW? Camp in buildings. Win early game.

This design choice still ticks me off. Many maps you just have to yield half the map to Brits for the first 5-6 minutes if there are buildings. You can get them out with pio + volks, but it will cost you just as much in manpower as the Brit to do so usually, and if there's an MG you can't even do that.



7 Apr 2017, 15:21 PM
#70
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976

The worst case scenario is when Allies faced in 4vs4 an Axis team composed of 1-2 OSTs and 2-3 OKWs, they covered all theirs weakness. It's where the 3 problematic factors (see above) matter the most.

Things I've spotted when playing 4vs4 random automatch:

If i go alone (in 4vs4), the matchmaking seem better, as teams seem to be composed of mostly single player. Rather even.

But, If i go as a team of 2-3 (in 4vs4), we mostly face whole teams of 4 all the time, so it's very hard to win.

P.S. Plz don't tell me to play 1vs1, i hate it. I'm a team/coop player type.
7 Apr 2017, 15:47 PM
#71
avatar of Xutryn_X7

Posts: 131

The worst case scenario is when Allies faced in 4vs4 an Axis team composed of 1-2 OSTs and 2-3 OKWs, they covered all theirs weakness. It's where the 3 problematic factors (see above) matter the most.

Things I've spotted when playing 4vs4 random automatch:

If i go alone (in 4vs4), the matchmaking seem better, as teams seem to be composed of mostly single player. Rather even.

But, If i go as a team of 2-3 (in 4vs4), we mostly face whole teams of 4 all the time, so it's very hard to win.

P.S. Plz don't tell me to play 1vs1, i hate it. I'm a team/coop player type.

What about facing Allied AT?USF player spam infantry,rangers and so on,Soviet spam maxims and mortars(maybe zis) and usf player build vikers to mortar pit,bofors to comet.This is even worse than anything.Of course conscripts sucks but this is because they don't get a survivability bonus earlier than vet 3(same problem with grens) and another big problem are IS Received accuracy and Royal engineer(which for their cost can beat a sturmpioneer)
7 Apr 2017, 16:36 PM
#72
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954



I disagree, Soviets are the weakest in team games, USF generally don't even need tanks to win. Arty and inf backed up with UKF tanks and emplacements can be an impossibly hard combination to fight for axis.

Crossing in the woods with 2 mortar emplacements behind the tree's and you pretty much lose my default.


I don't think I've said that anyone besides Soviets were weak in team games. Last patch, they were badly OP in 1's and not that good in 3's & 4's.

Autofire for all indirect should have its range nerfed to 60 or less. That would go a long way towards solving the mortar pit problem. It wouldn't bother me if autofire was eliminated on all indirect.
8 Apr 2017, 01:26 AM
#73
avatar of Nano

Posts: 212

The worst case scenario is when Allies faced in 4vs4 an Axis team composed of 1-2 OSTs and 2-3 OKWs, they covered all theirs weakness. It's where the 3 problematic factors (see above) matter the most.


Ho wis any different when you play against 4 with 1 USF 1 Brit and 1 Sov, that's all weaknesses covered completely.

4v4 is heavy map dependent and which teams spawn where coupled with player skill. I don't really find it totally unbalanced per say.

No offense, but you talk like you literally never play Axis ever.
8 Apr 2017, 09:33 AM
#74
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 422 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Apr 2017, 13:26 PMDangIT
I understand that this faction is designed to have an early advantage. You want to dominate me early game, OK, I get it. But why does it have to be at this scale? Please answer the following questions;

  • Why does the kubelwagon cost no fuel?
  • Why is it able to both cap and kill? Why is it mounted with a free LMG34? Isn't %15 faster cap rate alone good enough?
  • Why do sturmpioneers are the starting unit?
  • Why does the best AI light tank in game had it cost reduced? LMFAO, Is this how you nerf the LV rush meta?
  • Why is the Mowing Stuka, the most devastating mobile arty in game, available after 10 minutes? And it costs less than a Calli?




Discuss this like a civilized human, without raging or intolerant behavior.


1) I'd say that kubels are pretty bad in combat unless you have two or more, which by the way will never scale into mid or late game at all. They are a harassing unit at best in combat, and will get dumpstered by any infantry squad in green cover, including RE.

2) Not all MG-34s are equal. Within the attribs, the accuracy, damage, and what have you all fluctuate wildly even between weapons that are supposed to be the same.

3) Sturmpioneers being a starting unit is actually a problem. They can match or smash any starting squad, although they fall off later as do most short-range units. As is though, they're also over-worked, since they do anti-tank, anti-infantry, minesweeping, and repairs, so they're expected to be everywhere at once. Starting off with Volks would bring OKW's early game strengths down to manageable levels, although I'd argue that they have to receive a buff somewhere else to counterbalance, such as an earlier MG34.

4) Compared to UKF, Pz.II comes around the same time as the AEC, or USF Stuart. The only reason why it feels so oppressive compared to the other units is that Allies rely a lot on their infantry (which scales much better than Axis, at least for UKF and USF). There's actually pretty low build variety when it comes to OKW. It's generally MedHQ + rush for Panther, or MechHQ + Pz.II + Puma and rely on call-ins. Prior to WBP, the latter wasn't as popular because it meant forgoing forward retreat + healing, risking more dead infantry and manpower bleed. Obviously the latter required some serious love for it to be considered worth the risk, although the player needs good vehicle micro to pull aggressive Pz.II play off.

5) Sure, it's available at 10m if you rushed it. But congrats, you have no Pz.II or Puma to fend off any light armor rushes, or if your Stuka zu Fuss missed because the Allied player spreads out and doesn't blob half your army value is sitting there unable to be used for the next minute. Rushing a Stuka is a big risk. It sets you back 100 fuel for your big cats, and you have no small cat (Puma) to fend off a dive from an AEC or Stuart.

The way I see it, OKW is a mostly fine as is when compared to USF, and somewhat lacking compared to Vickers-build UKF. As of live right now, they are on the weak side to early maxim from Soviets, although I'm aware this will be addressed next patch. Snipers still are hard to counter for OKW. Also, if OKW makes use of it's forward retreat, the player risks losing a tech building compared to a measly forward assembly. Majors can reposition. MedHQs are static and just have to take whatever sheisse is flying its way. OKW vehicles costs noticeably more than others in the same class. OKW has plenty of weakness you can learn to exploit.
8 Apr 2017, 16:38 PM
#75
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276

I would say in 4v4 OKW is a far superior faction. Synergy with other OKW and ost players seems to negate its issues. Due to the cost of their mainline inf its often a meta to see them have a 3-1 ratio vs solvs(if they go tier structure first), 3-2 for brits, and a 3-2 vs USF due to how fast they build and their price. Volks are better at long range giving them an advantage over USF as they have to close the distance to be effective. Raketen can be your 3 or 4th unit to counter brit bren.

OKWs kubal allows them to take the map rather quickly while also being a rather effective combat unit. Its armor means it can sit and fight it out with mainline inf as well as flank an MG such as vickers. The Sturms are very cost effective units that can help you early building clear and will win each first engagement as it typically with the opposing factions eng squad/Tommies.

In a vacuum you could call out the lack of a MG or early arty piece but it doesn't matter, as OKW gets such a large unit advantage it simply wont need it within the first 5 mins.
8 Apr 2017, 17:39 PM
#76
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

OKW need change, thay are to strong in early game with pio push and luchs spam into ostwinds or command panther. This synergy is to strong.


I disagree, allies have wat better starting positions and synergy than axis. Lose a sturmpio anf you lose it all. And any light tank will overrule the Pz2. The luch is too fragile for that. 2 bazooks, piats can deal with it just fine.
8 Apr 2017, 18:26 PM
#77
avatar of Xutryn_X7

Posts: 131



I disagree, allies have wat better starting positions and synergy than axis. Lose a sturmpio anf you lose it all. And any light tank will overrule the Pz2. The luch is too fragile for that. 2 bazooks, piats can deal with it just fine.

Actually the game was almost balanced 3-6 months before brits came,then everything was thrown away
9 Apr 2017, 09:43 AM
#78
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned


I disagree, allies have wat better starting positions and synergy than axis. Lose a sturmpio anf you lose it all. And any light tank will overrule the Pz2. The luch is too fragile for that. 2 bazooks, piats can deal with it just fine.


And why i must lose them, coz you its say ?
You whanna say soviet are better in early game ? or USF ?
If you light tanks fight 1v1 its you problem, i dont see problem to support luchs with infatry/raketen/shrek.
Looks if fine for that, coz arrive fast. Man, if you see piats or zooks, no reason attack it with luchs, you have infatry for this.
9 Apr 2017, 11:56 AM
#79
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1


Actually the game was almost balanced 3-6 months before brits came,then everything was thrown away


are you drunk? how was coh balanced at that time? okw and usf was broken at that time, thats why we still have balance adjustments for ALL factions, not just brits, still going on..
13 Apr 2017, 22:38 PM
#80
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976

Another problematic unit but from OST:

Sturmpanzer IV "Brummbär" (Non doctrinal)

it's very hard to kill, can rape at-gun and infantry squad vet or not very easily.May have smoke escape.

Why ? (from Coh2 guide): By using the Attack-Ground command on the Brummbär, the tank will fire exactly where you click on the map. Use this to fire shells directly into the center of blobbed infantry and cause maximum splash damage.

USA have the Buldozer (Doctrinal) that share the same purpose, but is less durable.

UK have the Croc (doctrinal) Great unit.

The problem : it's non doctrinal.
PAGES (11)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

902 users are online: 1 member and 901 guests
FK9DD
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49432
Welcome our newest member, weekprophecy
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM