USF only need some decent lategame unit
that
Company of Heroes 2 Not so Balanced US Forces need real Buff
18 Sep 2017, 19:10 PM
#141
Posts: 206
18 Sep 2017, 19:15 PM
#142
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
You do know you get xp for how much damage is done not how much you kill right? Next time look up its actuall damage in the game stats.
Wasn't complaining about the XP gain but the poor average killing value of the unit. A mortar is supposed to kill models, not just damage them.
18 Sep 2017, 19:23 PM
#143
Posts: 1660
that
No it doesn't, like ost doesn't need 5-6 man squad.
FBP planned reasonable changes to make jackson more similar to firefly and usf got pershing in a ultra good commander.
We can argue about balance like that, revolving around specific unit.
Other than that if you don't like the usf design feel free to play any other faction.
Please don't reiterate the "i don't care if i have semi auto rifles, free FRP, and best ai mediums in game i need a big tank because they have got it" argument
19 Sep 2017, 23:42 PM
#144
Posts: 3053
No it doesn't, like ost doesn't need 5-6 man squad.
FBP planned reasonable changes to make jackson more similar to firefly and usf got pershing in a ultra good commander.
We can argue about balance like that, revolving around specific unit.
Other than that if you don't like the usf design feel free to play any other faction.
Please don't reiterate the "i don't care if i have semi auto rifles, free FRP, and best ai mediums in game i need a big tank because they have got it" argument
*Cough cough nondoc mg for okw argument cough cough add p4 nondoc for okw argument cough.*
Sorry what?
 | Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
20 Sep 2017, 00:18 AM
#145
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
No that's a fact, called target size.
Volks have less taget size that any other mainline, aka less durable.
They don't outdps allies wfa mainlines regardless of vetting anyway.
Yeah, I know what target size is. I also never mentioned volks' durability, but whatever gives you an excuse to act condescending, I guess.
Ahh, whats more, you probably mean to say that they have a "greater" or "larger" target size, since "less" target size would mean more durable. Still, thats not even true because cons have a larger target size. Anyway, thats taking all of it out of context since infantry sections have a smaller target size but one less man, giving them a theoretical eqyal durability to volks against small arms fire (discounting the RA bonus from tbeir cover bonus). Not that you care, I'm sure actual facts wont stop you from making statements that rely on taking facts out of context (not that you get thsoe facts correct anyway) and acting condescending.
20 Sep 2017, 00:21 AM
#146
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
Wasn't complaining about the XP gain but the poor average killing value of the unit. A mortar is supposed to kill models, not just damage them.
Id argue that thats a snipers job, not a mortars. In my opninion, a mortars job is to force units to reposition. If the enemy does that, it will only do damage and not get kills.
20 Sep 2017, 00:43 AM
#147
Posts: 2742
*Cough cough nondoc mg for okw argument cough cough add p4 nondoc for okw argument cough.*
Sorry what?
That p4 really should've been a stubby when they decided to make that swap. I can't remember if that as pre-Brits or not though. Regardless that ship sailed long ago.
The non-doc Mg34 was exactly as necessary as the USF mortar. Take that in whatever direction you wish.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
20 Sep 2017, 01:03 AM
#148
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
The non-doc Mg34 was exactly as necessary as the USF mortar.
Mortar maybe. RE could have been given rifle grenade launchers instead, but having 0 ability to control mass infantry outside of throwing more men at it is a big no-no. Or we end up like Panzer Elite or vCoH Brits who need to throw more men at the issue if you're looking for a MP solution.
20 Sep 2017, 01:24 AM
#149
Posts: 2742
Mortar maybe. RE could have been given mines.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
20 Sep 2017, 06:01 AM
#150
Posts: 1660
Yeah, I know what target size is. I also never mentioned volks' durability, but whatever gives you an excuse to act condescending, I guess.
Ahh, whats more, you probably mean to say that they have a "greater" or "larger" target size, since "less" target size would mean more durable. Still, thats not even true because cons have a larger target size. Anyway, thats taking all of it out of context since infantry sections have a smaller target size but one less man, giving them a theoretical eqyal durability to volks against small arms fire (discounting the RA bonus from tbeir cover bonus). Not that you care, I'm sure actual facts wont stop you from making statements that rely on taking facts out of context (not that you get thsoe facts correct anyway) and acting condescending.
1) The discussion was about DURABILITY.
2) No cons have more durability at vet 3 than volks at vet 5,0.6 vs 0.81.
3) If you care so much about true statements, you may want to find out that IS additional cover bonus is just dps
4) triggered ? Why ?
20 Sep 2017, 06:03 AM
#151
Posts: 1660
*Cough cough nondoc mg for okw argument cough cough add p4 nondoc for okw argument cough.*
Sorry what?
So tools like generalist and mg shouldn't be goven to okw ?
The moment usf won't have mortar...
How the worst mg in game and an expensive as fuck generalist changed the shape of a faction which has its weaknesses in shitty team weapons and expensive as fuck vehicles ?
Both those tools were in okw commanders..
20 Sep 2017, 06:20 AM
#152
Posts: 284 | Subs: 1
MG-34 is needed for OKW to slow donw superior double upgrade USF and UKF mainline infantries.
Maybe HMG is not need if OKW can rush elite infantry (OberTerminator)more faster than this Keepo.
Maybe HMG is not need if OKW can rush elite infantry (OberTerminator)more faster than this Keepo.
20 Sep 2017, 06:52 AM
#153
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Id argue that thats a snipers job, not a mortars. In my opninion, a mortars job is to force units to reposition. If the enemy does that, it will only do damage and not get kills.
Tell that to Ostheer and Brit mortars then...
20 Sep 2017, 08:56 AM
#155
Posts: 911
*Cough cough nondoc mg for okw argument cough cough add p4 nondoc for okw argument cough.*
Sorry what?
Hey if you want to bring back non-doctrinal Sturmtiger be my guest.
And FWIW Mg34 and 150 fuel p4 are kinda terrible, they don't exactly add much.
Imagine my playercard is here
20 Sep 2017, 08:58 AM
#156
Posts: 911
Wasn't complaining about the XP gain but the poor average killing value of the unit. A mortar is supposed to kill models, not just damage them.
That's just like your opinion. There is a damn reasonable argument to why the best infantry in the game should not be supported by a mortar that is supposed to kill models.
Imagine my playercard is here
20 Sep 2017, 09:23 AM
#157
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
That's just like your opinion. There is a damn reasonable argument to why the best infantry in the game should not be supported by a mortar that is supposed to kill models.
I completely agree with you so why ISGs kill models so easily?
20 Sep 2017, 09:33 AM
#158
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
The main issue is that faction design has been changed from the original faction design but only weakness of the factions, in most cases.
For instance USF where designed to have strong mainline infantry weak support weapons. Their support weapons have received buffs but their mainline infantry has seen little changes.
Imo once USF mortar was introduced the smoke grenades should had been toned down (range, weapon disable of vehicles even out of smoke)or moved to officers and elite infantry.
But is main issue remains that WFA faction are superior to EFA.
For instance USF where designed to have strong mainline infantry weak support weapons. Their support weapons have received buffs but their mainline infantry has seen little changes.
Imo once USF mortar was introduced the smoke grenades should had been toned down (range, weapon disable of vehicles even out of smoke)or moved to officers and elite infantry.
But is main issue remains that WFA faction are superior to EFA.
20 Sep 2017, 09:40 AM
#159
Posts: 1660
The main issue is that faction design has been changed from the original faction design but only weakness of the factions, in most cases.
For instance USF where designed to have strong mainline infantry weak support weapons. Their support weapons have received buffs but their mainline infantry has seen little changes.
Imo once USF mortar was introduced the smoke grenades should had been toned down (range, weapon disable of vehicles even out of smoke)or moved to officers and elite infantry.
But is main issue remains that WFA faction are superior to EFA.
Or make smoke tier 0, link at nade to tech and remove mortar...
20 Sep 2017, 10:08 AM
#160
Posts: 1660
I completely agree with you so why ISGs kill models so easily?
What ?
0 user is browsing this thread:
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265
Board Info
886 users are online:
886 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50015
Welcome our newest member, MaddisondfBurgess
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, MaddisondfBurgess
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM