Login

russian armor

The Reason Why OKW and USF Tend to Spam/Blob Infantry

18 Jun 2017, 20:32 PM
#21
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Yeah on second thought I agree OP.

WFA: biggest issue is one dimensional design even though units are lots of fun. Just spitballing ideas for USF that would lead to more freedom and less 3 rifle M20 armor company:

-give RE a M1919 Upgrade for 45 muni that grants them a free volley fire ability that's actually effective
-M3 halftrack in T0 behind 35 fuel Upgrade
-increase M20 cost to 30 fuel and decrease muni cost of mines and armor
-Wolverine in captain tier, extremely buffed AT gun in major tier, doctrinal Jackson
19 Jun 2017, 13:41 PM
#22
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

1. Ridiculous vulnerability to snipers (both USF and OKW)
2. Lack of smoke (OKW) or lack of recon options (USF)
3. FRPs
4. Blob healing that punishes single squads (2HP/sec for Ambulance vs 5HP/sec for AI medics), while making blob-healing way faster

The main reason USF blobs infantry is because the have to. There is absolutely no other way to reach the sniper (especically the OST one) without going for a breakthrough somewhere.

Fighting prolonged engagements vs Grenadiers in green cover is precisely what the OST sniper needs to to its job.
19 Jun 2017, 14:08 PM
#23
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

US absolutely does not have to blob, that is absurd. In fact, blobbing makes US weak vs OH, conversely, stronger vs OKW because OKW lacks any reliable suppression tools.
19 Jun 2017, 15:34 PM
#24
avatar of kitekaze

Posts: 378

US absolutely does not have to blob, that is absurd. In fact, blobbing makes US weak vs OH, conversely, stronger vs OKW because OKW lacks any reliable suppression tools.


Blob does not happen in early game. They are frequently found in team game but doing so in 1v1 is complete suicide.

In late game, crates tend to appear everywhere, and mg effectiveness suddenly become null. This is the moment USF blob shine, as they can double-equipped while cost less to reinforce (Compare to Brit).
19 Jun 2017, 17:22 PM
#25
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1


Believe it or not blobbing is an legitimate strategy, and there are proper counters. Aoe attacks, mines, and MGs.

Honestly, MGs could use a buff of their AoE supression
21 Jun 2017, 04:05 AM
#26
avatar of Euan

Posts: 177

I like this idea, it's mostly very well thought out, and though I don't feel qualified to judge the whole thing I do have some input.

As was said earlier in the thread, there is a certain logic to the design of the US tiers currently in-game, but I don't feel that logic is working well at the moment. LT seems hardcountered by OKW, and I don't really enjoy having to call in an Airborne AT gun every time I play it. I know there are some changes planned by the balance guys that will change that, but I like your proposal in the sense that it can actually make the USF a combined arms faction, rather than a YOLO rifles + more free squads + one or two extras kinda thing.

So, I like the way you split it up, but I think there is too much in the "partially-unlocked" LT tier - even if we are spreading out the tiers USF shouldn't get everything at once, because with rifles they will be too strong. The AT gun could stay with the Captain, since now there will be a possibility to go "half LT" -> Captain, and RE flamers or whatever should be moved into the full LT tier.

Pathfinders and Combat Engineers, I agree, would love to see those small changes which I think would be perfect for making them a viable alternative opening.

For OKW, most of it sounds good but non-doctrinal flamer sounds like a bit much, even if the starter unit is a Volks. The incendiary grenade is already very effective at clearing garrisons. I'm all for Opel Blitz, but it will be very hard and take a lot of extra work to balance (of course that's true for the proposal in general...).
21 Jun 2017, 04:14 AM
#27
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



Blob does not happen in early game. They are frequently found in team game but doing so in 1v1 is complete suicide.

In late game, crates tend to appear everywhere, and mg effectiveness suddenly become null. This is the moment USF blob shine, as they can double-equipped while cost less to reinforce (Compare to Brit).


Rifles cost the same as Tommies though, unless the Brit blob is Sappers, I don't see Brits at all anymore in 2vs2.
23 Jun 2017, 19:51 PM
#28
avatar of Bulgakov

Posts: 987





Believe it or not blobbing is an legitimate strategy, and there are proper counters. Aoe attacks, mines, and MGs. If snares were not as effective, then tanks and other vehicles would have a bit more breathing room, because currently their range is just does not allow them fight as they should.




No. The whole point of CoH was to offer a game that wasn't Starcraft-supablobb-yolo. It's currently a possible and very effective strategy but the core philosophy of CoH is that blobbing isjn't as fun/intellectually stimulating as careful positioning units. That's why MGs and suppression mechanics exist.


In fact, the counters you suggested above are evidence that blobbing was not supposed to be viable. They are there to punish it and keep it out of the game. Sadly they are insufficient.



As for the thread title:
USF are forced to spam/blob 'cos of teching, "on me" ability, BAR upgrades
OKW can't build fuel caches, so are forced into infantry tactics and will inevtiably be facing an enemy blob so single units cannot win. MG34 cannot handle allied blobs as well as needed so the best response is counter blob.

The question you should also be asking is about Brit 5-men double bren blobs (engies, tommies) and Penal blobs.

nee
24 Jun 2017, 10:42 AM
#29
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

In retrospect I feel Relic's original design with USF and OKW was that Rear Echelons and Kubels perform a "light suppression" option until HMG for USF and flaktrack/ doctrinal HMG and 2cm emplacements are up.

Of course that went out the window with both changes to unit access, and lack of addressing certain unit deficiencies.

I recall my first time playing OKW, I immediately tried to field flaktracks to make up for lack of support weapons; when I found that they performed quite terribly in relation to their fuel cost, I naturally resorted to HMG call-ins and Volksblobs.

On the subject of FRP merging I like the idea: given that the cost is not great and you're bound to get both upgrades anyways I think putting them together and forcing a fuel cost creates a much larger burden on the FRP option. I think 50 fuel may be too much however, I would say 30, something that cost a vehicle rather than a tier.

At first I didn't like the idea of locking units behind a T0, I come to like it because it creates less of a unit production burden on HQ trucks while still maintaining great deal of relevance because it works as providing vehicles; Initial Battlephase allows bringing in HMGs without having to set up HQ truck at a location you may not prefer, at the cost of actually having an HQ truck at the same time, and any OKW player can decide whether strategy to go for- locking down sector first, or attempt to set up shop. It is at least worth trying in a mod.

I particularly like the move for Obersoldaten, plus giving them AT rifles as an alternative upgrade. It would allow players to try to focus on a heavier infantry strategy, which in itself severely limits blobbing potential. At present I think a better idea might be to move Panzerschreck from Sturms to Obers, so that while there is good tradeoff in firepower, one has to actually churn out a more expensive and less versatile, smaller sized combat squad for that to work, and the upgrade locks out LMG34 (and IR StGs if you go for Spec Ops.
On the subject of Opel, I dislike the idea for two reasons: they count as units and clog up the upper right corner of your screen, and they are both super fragile as well as not securing the sector. They only really work as a complement to caches, rather than a replacement.
On the other hand, since Obers will be appearing earlier this may mesh well with their use of Boobytrap flag ability.
26 Jun 2017, 01:48 AM
#30
avatar of Nano

Posts: 212



No. The whole point of CoH was to offer a game that wasn't Starcraft-supablobb-yolo. It's currently a possible and very effective strategy but the core philosophy of CoH is that blobbing isjn't as fun/intellectually stimulating as careful positioning units. That's why MGs and suppression mechanics exist.

In fact, the counters you suggested above are evidence that blobbing was not supposed to be viable. They are there to punish it and keep it out of the game. Sadly they are insufficient.


I agree with him and with you (oddly). Blobbing is clearly not in the design philosophy of the devs but it should still be a tactic. New players who don't know the genre or game too well will naturally tend to do this, if they don't have some success they will just hate the game.

However, it is important that blobbing is easily dealt with by more skilled players, so the new ones should learn fast that it is not effective and need to adapt. Sadly though as you say the tools required to fight blobs for some factions just don't exist or are ineffective.

There was a suggestion to increase the AOE suppression of MG earlier too, that might work.
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

766 users are online: 766 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM