Company of Heroes 2 Not so Balanced US Forces need real Buff

Now that's a beautiful post that can explain why so many people "hate" on Volksgrenadiers, they should go back to doing 10 damage per shot among other things really, they have too much value for their cost.

The fix isnt that simple imo. Vet 0 volks vs vet 0 rifles/IS are probably right where they should be. Lowering damage like that just messes up an established dynamic that already works well and makes sense. I described the changes id like in another thread though.

The fix isnt that simple imo. Vet 0 volks vs vet 0 rifles/IS are probably right where they should be. Lowering damage like that just messes up an established dynamic that already works well and makes sense. I described the changes id like in another thread though.

Which one? I wanna read your thoughts on the matter.

Why not give Volks grenadier kar98 profile but cap the squad RA to .9 and make them 260

Lol.

If you look at ZombiFrancis' last post, he just said that he was basically agreeing with me and that you were wrong. Surprised at how you read a post in which the poster backed up my claim and said that yours was wrong, then decided that he was agreeing with you. Guess you'll see whatever you want to see; not surprising since you either completely make up stats or present them entirely out of context.

The fact that Vipper, ZombiFrancis, and a player who is top 10 on the 1v1 leaderboards for the factions he plays (even with frequent computer crashes, sucks losing 3 entire ranks from a single crash) all disagree with you should you give you some idea where your argument stands.

Individual volks models have (negligibly) better dps at max range than riflemen (both at vet 0). Individual volks models have better dps at all ranges than cons. Individual volks models have better dps than infantry sections at close range. Argue cover bonus all you want, but everyone knows that the cover balance is situational while the extra model that a volks squad gets counts for a lot and isnt conditional. Lets not forget that infantry sections and riflemen cost 30 manpower per squad more, and that penals are generally outnumbered because you have to construct a t1 first.

You would expect riflemen to beat volks because they cost more and because the entire faction that theyre a part of was built around them. You would expect infantry sections to win against volks because they cost more. The fact that volks have slightly better dps per model than riflemen at long range means youre factually incorrect, and means that volks have a situation where theyre better than a squad that costs more and makes up a larger portion of its faction's power budget. The fact that volks will beat an infantry section in cover at close range, or an infantry section out of cover at long range also means that they have scenarios where they punch above their weight.

You're saying that WFA core infantry has better dps than volks. I've replied that it depends on whether youre talking about per model or per squad. It is an undebatable fact that the theoretical dps of volks is better than the theoretical dps of infantry sections and riflemen in certain different mixes of range, sometimes per model or per squad.

Vet complicates the argument, but everyone (or nearly everyone) agrees that volks have better vet than the other WFA core infantry. Everyone (or, again, nearly everyone) agrees that the stg upgrade is far more accessible and far more efficient than the other WFA core infantry weapon upgrades.

It's really hard to get a decent/productive discussion going when youre dripping in condescension upon your first reply and constantly making up (literally making up) stats to support your views (ex: "it's not relative AT ALL if both long AND close range dps are higher for allies, it means that the dps curve is always higher"; again, volks FACTUALLY have a higher theoretical max range dps than riflemen and have a higher dps at close range than infantry sections). As much as I'd like to put the argument to rest, it's obvious that at this point, you'll just form a reply and fabricate some entirely new "facts" to attack me, after which 2 other posters and I will tell you youre wrong (just like this time). It's taking me far more effort to disprove all of these literally made up stats than it takes for you to just pull them out of nowhere, so I'll stop here.

And this point is nonsense nontheless

1)"you would expect infantry section and rifles to win because they cost more"

They do, people should stop expecting them to do it in negative cover against volks in green cover.

2)"volks have theoretically more dps at extreme range"

All the engagements never stay at max range, AND any upgrade make the squad much better at long range while further boost close range.

Volks dps: 1.94/4.94x5= 9.7/24.7
IS dps: 3.08/5.22x4= 12.32/20.88
Rifles dps: 1.84/7.66x5= 9.2/38.3

Wow a 0.5 dps difference max at a range infantry usually doesn't even stop moving
In a scenario in which rifles have already less RA.
Gamebreaking......

"Vet complicates the argument, but everyone (or nearly everyone) agrees that volks have better vet than the other WFA core infantry"
It's part of the core design of okw and the reason why i can't invest in caches.
Additionally, rifles and is get better RA from vetting and most of the extra are sight in cover and passive healing in a faction that has healing tied to a specific tier (that is nowhere as cheesy as the aura based healing)
Why don't you look at the whole scenario rather than conviniently cherrypick ?

"Everyone (or, again, nearly everyone) agrees that the stg upgrade is far more accessible and far more efficient than the other WFA core infantry weapon upgrades."
Stop using the "we say" argument, start usung stats.
Cost efficiency ? Sure ?

http://www.stat.coh2.hu/weapon.php?filename=riflemen_bar_30_06_light_machine_gun_mp

Bar dps: 5/14.70
Rifles removed: 1 garand
Cost 60

http://www.stat.coh2.hu/weapon.php?filename=volksgrenadier_mp44_smg_mp

Stgx2 dps: 1.99/8.27x2= 3.98/16.52
Rifles removed: 2 kar 98k
Cost 60

Cost efficient...sure

"again, volks FACTUALLY have a higher theoretical max range dps than riflemen and have a higher dps at close range than infantry sections)."

Talking about making up ahahha
Stats are up there, for those that still looks at them.

lol did you even read my post? I was comparing your statement that usf shouldn't be complaining about not having nondoc bigger tanks to okw complaining about not having a nondoc mg or generalist tank. I also stated I did not agree with the addition of the usf mortar. My argument does not mean that I want okw to not have the mg34 or the p4 and it's not like the only alternative to the current p4 is the sturmtiger; you could have a short barreled p4 or ostwind or something to fill the same anti infantry role. To be clear, I am not saying this should happen, just that it's not "p4 or sturmtiger hurr durr you're stupid" as you paint it.

I honestly think you see a post from someone who doesn't agree with you and extrapolate whatever you want from it.

1) check if you aren't tired
2) re read my post
3) here is your post
"

*Cough cough nondoc mg for okw argument cough cough add p4 nondoc for okw argument cough.*

Sorry what?"

I didn't say any of what you said, i said that a normal thing like switching units from main roster to commander IS DIFFERENT from making a unit that didn't even exist.

You compared the addition of doc units in roster with the addiction of a unit that didn't exist when i said that usf transformers shouldn't exist BECAUSE you felt it was necessary to bring up the addiction of the two most underwhelming units in game performance-wise or cost efficiency-wise to counterbalance it.

None of those two units break the "expensive as fuck vehicles and shitty teamweapons" rule and they were added because of roster units being too strong, not because someone on a forum said "we need the untimate nondoc at ai vehicle", we don't care if the faction shouldn't be focused on high durability"

Nackson were getting good buffs (not that now it isn't viable, just overlaps with m10).

Talking about proper reading:

"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."

I agreed with tank destroyer overhaul, i disagreed with the "IT NEEDS A MECH WITH LAZERSSSS".
Despite this you complained about panzer 4, so it was CLEAR you wanted king tiger made in USA.

Which one? I wanna read your thoughts on the matter.

"Is usf bad or do i suck," or something.

Tl;dr of it is: volks vet 1 +10% acc removed/changed to something else (not other combat stats)
Flame nades given a fuse, and i think they could really use other changes afterwards as well
Stgs increased to 90 munis so that players actually have to (hopefully) choose between stgs, flame nade spam, and med crates

Reasoning is in my actual post, too lazy to copy it over, sorry about that

And this point is nonsense nontheless

1)"you would expect infantry section and rifles to win because they cost more"

They do, people should stop expecting them to do it in negative cover against volks in green cover.

2)"volks have theoretically more dps at extreme range"

All the engagements never stay at max range, AND any upgrade make the squad much better at long range while further boost close range.

Volks dps: 1.94/4.94x5= 9.7/24.7
IS dps: 3.08/5.22x4= 12.32/20.88
Rifles dps: 1.84/7.66x5= 9.2/38.3

Wow a 0.5 dps difference max at a range infantry usually doesn't even stop moving
In a scenario in which rifles have already less RA.
Gamebreaking......

"Vet complicates the argument, but everyone (or nearly everyone) agrees that volks have better vet than the other WFA core infantry"
It's part of the core design of okw and the reason why i can't invest in caches.
Additionally, rifles and is get better RA from vetting and most of the extra are sight in cover and passive healing in a faction that has healing tied to a specific tier (that is nowhere as cheesy as the aura based healing)
Why don't you look at the whole scenario rather than conviniently cherrypick ?

"Everyone (or, again, nearly everyone) agrees that the stg upgrade is far more accessible and far more efficient than the other WFA core infantry weapon upgrades."
Stop using the "we say" argument, start usung stats.
Cost efficiency ? Sure ?

http://www.stat.coh2.hu/weapon.php?filename=riflemen_bar_30_06_light_machine_gun_mp

Bar dps: 5/14.70
Rifles removed: 1 garand
Cost 60

http://www.stat.coh2.hu/weapon.php?filename=volksgrenadier_mp44_smg_mp

Stgx2 dps: 1.99/8.27x2= 3.98/16.52
Rifles removed: 2 kar 98k
Cost 60

Cost efficient...sure

"again, volks FACTUALLY have a higher theoretical max range dps than riflemen and have a higher dps at close range than infantry sections)."

Talking about making up ahahha
Stats are up there, for those that still looks at them.

Well, guess we can finally tell for certain now that hes trolling. Im going to stop replying to him and feeding the troll and ask that everyone else do the same so that we can stick with actual productive lines of conversation

Well, guess we can finally tell for certain now that hes trolling. Im going to stop replying to him and feeding the troll and ask that everyone else do the same so that we can stick with actual productive lines of conversation

I should have censored stats i knew it =)
They don't bite tho, don't be scared of facts.

2)"volks have theoretically more dps at extreme range"

All the engagements never stay at max range, AND any upgrade make the squad much better at long range while further boost close range.

Volks dps: 1.94/4.94x5= 9.7/24.7
IS dps: 3.08/5.22x4= 12.32/20.88
Rifles dps: 1.84/7.66x5= 9.2/38.3

Wow a 0.5 dps difference max at a range infantry usually doesn't even stop moving
In a scenario in which rifles have already less RA.
Gamebreaking......

The DPS from that site is not very accurate, the DPS for 1 of those weapon should be closer to these values:

volksgrenadier_kar_98k_rifle_mp 4.55 4.01 3.46 3.04 2.70 2.43 2.08 1.81
tommy_lee_enfield_rifle_mp 4.77 4.59 4.27 3.98 3.72 3.48 3.17 2.89
m1_garand_rifle_rifleman_mp 6.76 5.85 4.33 3.41 2.81 2.35 1.98 1.67
riflemen_bar_30_06_light_machine_gun_mp 13.98 13.98 10.46 7.99 6.97 6.03 5.17 4.38


The VG K_98 does 12 damage so it overkills needing 7 shots to kill an entity and its DPS should be considered lower.

Volks should just have a normal grenade.

Stg upgrade should exchange out all rifles for a combination of smgs.

Stg upgrade should exchange normal grenade for lava nade.

/2015 balance discussion.

^ If volks can be upgrade to Volkstrum like this, should lower their target size after upgrade too and be able to skip some tech to rush OBer more faster than this to compet against superior double upgrade Brits and USF.

^ If volks can be upgrade to Volkstrum like this, should lower their target size after upgrade too and be able to skip some tech to rush OBer more faster than this to compet against superior double upgrade Brits and USF.

I certainly wouldn't have opposed such options.

A schwerer hq that costs less but must unlock/side tech the flak gun wouldve worked well. It would've made a sort of pseudo t3 with just obers, with the t4 proper unlocking the panther, etc along with the flak hq gun.

I certainly wouldn't have opposed such options.

A schwerer hq that costs less but must unlock/side tech the flak gun wouldve worked well. It would've made a sort of pseudo t3 with just obers, with the t4 proper unlocking the panther, etc along with the flak hq gun.

It would eventually break mech meta togheter with a few battlegroup hq units buffs/changes.

But don't give volks smg AT ALL, DON't EVEN TRY, we don't need them to overlaps with stumr.

If Strum so great at close range, Why no one start with triple Strum in CQC maps I wonder ? Kappa ...
They only good when flanking, cannot fight head-to-head against any CQC units. Strum spam bleed MP al lot. And how to fix broken Volks if not touching Obers. Why people use Obers when Volks trade of too well and scaling too well at all stage all game mode.

If Strum so great at close range, Why no one start with triple Strum in CQC maps I wonder ? Kappa ...
They only good when flanking, cannot fight head-to-head against any CQC units. Strum spam bleed MP al lot. And how fix broken Volks if not touching Obers. Why people use Obers when Volks trade of too well and scaling too well at all stage all game mode.

Part of it is what you mentioned, but im pretty sure a larger reason is that sturms take extremely long to build (40 seconds iirc) and extremely long to reinforce while also scaling relatively poorly as a combat unit.

Part of it is what you mentioned, but im pretty sure a larger reason is that sturms take extremely long to build (40 seconds iirc) and extremely long to reinforce while also scaling relatively poorly as a combat unit.

Scaling poorly ?

Part of it is what you mentioned, but im pretty sure a larger reason is that sturms take extremely long to build (40 seconds iirc) and extremely long to reinforce while also scaling relatively poorly as a combat unit.

That's true, but if they can payoff and scaling well like Penals everyone will go for it (penals is problem too but its whole SU problem).

Scaling poorly ?

WOW !!! That is the great veterancy !!! But how to gain it with low MP bleeding is the question Kappa.

WOW !!! That is the great veterancy !!! But how to gain it with low MP bleeding is the question Kappa.

Flamethrower is the answer

Flamethrower is the answer

I need a doctrine for proper scaling, the worst doctrine in coh 2 history after hit the dirt one kappa

Volks should just have a normal grenade.

Stg upgrade should exchange out all rifles for a combination of smgs.

Stg upgrade should exchange normal grenade for lava nade.

/2015 balance discussion.

Still getting wrecked by Company of houses with those changes.
You'll have to change ISG to not been long range afk cancer and make them actually do something against garrison. Lowering requirements and effectiveness of flame barrage on Stuka would had help as well. IIRC maxim spam was also one of the reasons they got lava nades.

Lava nades should had been part of SP, replacing the slot of stun nades.
AR weapon type shouldn't be effective/equal to Bolt action rifles at long ranges. This means Bar/STG type of weapons.