you are so lol...it is wrong what i wrote? No..it isnt.
if iam not under rank 1000 ..i dont allow write something in this forum?
Bist du dumm?
Du dürftest dann auch nichts schreiben...bist ja nicht mal top 100.
dude, it's true and we get sick of it. it's so damn annoying to see every thread turned into axis fanboy bs, and it's always the same people... highfive is right here. you keep saying people are allies biased but the one that is biased, is YOU.
This is what I'm suggesting, lets change most rocket arty to high risk high reward units similar to pwerfer, where they have to get closer to the action in order to deal any real damage. My theory for this is that most of the maps for team games are usually long and narrow, hence it is almost impossible to get through any flanking unit to deal with katy; not to mention, high ranking players will shift queue their artillery pieces back to base once its done with barrage. By increasing scatter at max range, players will be more incentivised to think whether they should barrage from max range and risk wasting their long cool down or to go in closer and have a chance of doing a lot of damage to enemies.
Such mechanic is already implemented: the further is the target the higher is the spread. The problem you guys might have is that while in case of alpha strike units like PW lower spread is always better, in case of area denial like LM it is sometimes better to have higher spread in order to lock bigger area. I can't think of any solution to that though other than decreasing max range of such units and that may make them useless.
You also need to consider that allied rocket artillery has low trajectory rockets that can't be shot from behind many shotblockers, like forests, becouse they simply hit them. PW and stuka, if well positioned, do not have that problem and it is an important advantage.
I certainly agree with the point about spread and range. Pretty much all rocket artillery is useless at max range except for the landmattress, which has very poor range and high minimum range.
I think they are for the most part too hard to dive. Incredibly fragile units but often killing them will require you to sacrifice a vehicle IF you can even find them. Locating a rocket artillery vehicle can often come too late to react when yo must micro your units immediately not knowing where a first volley will land. Subsequent seconds are used repositioning your troops more effectively and finally only AFTER PEOPLE ARE DEAD, you can see where the artillery is, but by then they are running.
If Rocket artillery was revealed when it fired rather than when it hit you, that would make it much easier to counter which i think is necessary since it is really not in any standard playbook to kill them. It takes a big misplay by your opponent to kill them 95% of the time.
This would also be a reasonable tradeoff between quick firing axis units and slow firing allied ones who seem to perform better presently without impacting the fire power or usefulness to skilled players.
TLDR: Rocket artillery should be revealed when firing not hitting, creates risk, does not affect effectiveness vs campers.
I certainly agree with the point about spread and range. Pretty much all rocket artillery is useless at max range except for the landmattress, which has very poor range and high minimum range.
I think they are for the most part too hard to dive. Incredibly fragile units but often killing them will require you to sacrifice a vehicle IF you can even find them. Locating a rocket artillery vehicle can often come too late to react when yo must micro your units immediately not knowing where a first volley will land. Subsequent seconds are used repositioning your troops more effectively and finally only AFTER PEOPLE ARE DEAD, you can see where the artillery is, but by then they are running.
If Rocket artillery was revealed when it fired rather than when it hit you, that would make it much easier to counter which i think is necessary since it is really not in any standard playbook to kill them. It takes a big misplay by your opponent to kill them 95% of the time.
This would also be a reasonable tradeoff between quick firing axis units and slow firing allied ones who seem to perform better presently without impacting the fire power or usefulness to skilled players.
TLDR: Rocket artillery should be revealed when firing not hitting, creates risk, does not affect effectiveness vs campers.
Good point. That change could be really beneficial to the game.
I have never hit more rockets on shot blockers than with the STUKA though, not high enough of a trajectory for me apparently
Probably becouse you haven't even try to shoot katy from position such close to the shotblocker It is true though, that for some misterious reason, it is really easy to misjudge stuka positioning.
Such mechanic is already implemented: the further is the target the higher is the spread. The problem you guys might have is that while in case of alpha strike units like PW lower spread is always better, in case of area denial like LM it is sometimes better to have higher spread in order to lock bigger area. I can't think of any solution to that though other than decreasing max range of such units and that may make them useless.
You also need to consider that allied rocket artillery has low trajectory rockets that can't be shot from behind many shotblockers, like forests, becouse they simply hit them. PW and stuka, if well positioned, do not have that problem and it is an important advantage.
Agreed.
Also imo stuka(although not as bad) and especially werfer are still wipe machines. Allied rocket arty tends to just gib support weapons causing some mp bleed but preserving there vet. And Vet support weapons this patch seem more important than ever. Pwerfer and make a quick alpha strike and wipe a vet 3 squad almost instantly or support wep. Werfer by far the most effective rocket arty this patch i think. 2 of them in 2v2 is insane you can almost never cap a point with out a good chance you lose the squad caping.
I agree and I will quote myself from another thread here:
There's one thing I would like to suggest which is a general redesign of light indirect fire. It's cancer. Moreso in team games but random mortar shells wiping squads are just too much for a competitive environment and this shit happens on a regular basis.
I would propose making mortars more responsive overall and changing them as follows (I'm only looking at non doc, so we can get that straight first. As was said before, one problem with the game in general was it's lack of coherent design decisions and the gap filling with commanders which has done a lot of damage to the balance (see doctrinal flamers, M10 vs Jackson etc.).
All Mortars should have their core function in effectively combating team weapons (forcing pack-ups, retreats and repositions) and softening garrisons/emplacements (but not outright hard-countering them). Further, all of them should have smoke.
OST and Soviet: Ost and Soviet both have a mortar in an early tier and rocket artillery in T4, but that's it.
Therefore I'd say these two mortars should have a "quick barrage" and a "long barrage", where the difference between two barrages is that the long one takes longer to get started, but overall has a way longer duration, like 8 shells or something, making it best suited for anti garrison and anti emplacement (softening them up!). The short barrage should be kept very responsive, since it will mainly be used to force team weapons away and thus it consists of about 4 accurate shells.
For flavour we have the vet abilities which can stay as is, I see no big deal here, except make that flare shell work properly please, since it's been bugged since forever.
The late game rocket artilleries on Ost and Sov should be heavy blob and emplacement/garrison killers, but they are not the main concern here so allow me to skip that part for now.
OKW is in a similar spot with ISG and Stuka, but their timing isn't as distinctively spread apart like for Ost/Sov. I don't know how to fix the ISG without making it UP/OP, so maybe give it slightly more AOE first to make it more consistent and appyly similar changes like for the Ost/Sov mortars.
USF are bloated with indirect fire and I would suggest giving the mortar only the quick barrage option and leave it at that, plus smoke obviously. The long barrage should go into the Pack howie, but apart from this distinction it's getting fuzzy, since there's still the Scott which could be/stay a long range squishy Stug-E type of unit?? This is a part in my proposal that could use some more work, but I can't think of anything good right now. Maybe making the Pack howie a doctrinal airdrop and replacing it's role with the Scott would be good like it was already suggested here.
UKF is also in a wird position, but you already have great ideas for it and I'd go with the little mortar pit that you drafted there. Maybe have the long barrage locked behind being inside the mortar pit and otherwise treat it like USF mortar? There are base howies for late game heavy artillery so I don't see much of a problem there.
That's all the factional indidrect fire units covered, but here's the most important change of them all which should be applied to ALL of them:
Nerf automatic firing! Either increase the delay between aiming and firing, increase scatter, decrease rate of fire, decrease auto-fire range or maybe all of that to preserve their role as anti team weapons and soft garrison/emplacement counters. As of now, they add inconsistency by wiping squads randomly and just increase the "explosive noise" on the battlefield.
I'd hope they'd be more micro heavy and thus more rewarding compared to their passive use, which isn't all that worse than microing them heavily as of now. This is my personal pet peeve with this game and I hope It's okay that I post my ideas here, but since this area of the game needs some major work IMHO, I thought it could be done in a mod and you asked for ideas, so there you go!
TL;DR
Make mortars fit their role (anti team weapon + soft garrison/emplacementcounter) more distinvtively and make them more rewarding to play with and against (by rewarding micro and punishing negligence), all by nerfing their auto-fire heavily and splitting the normal barrage in two distinct versions, each sercing a specific puprose each which have been mentioned above.
As an Allied player, I understand the need to have strong indirect fire option to counter team weapon spam, but when you invest 135 fuel into a tech building and you place it down on your cutoff near base sector and it still gets wrecked; It's just a bit unfair isn't it?
So don't place it there and defend your cutoff with units like everyone else? So tired of hearing that using the flak HQ for defending a main area of the map is part of OKWs "design". You know what else was a part of their design? No stock MGs. Well you get one now, and while it can't kill models for ****, its just fine at suppressing.
Like of all the reasons to suggest indirect fire needs a rework, this is the last one I would point to. For me its how much infantry killing they do with little to no micro. I think auto-firing needs a little nerfing (across all factions mortars) to encourage manual barrages more, but the ability to destroy an aggressive flak HQ is the last thing I want to see nerfed.
So don't place it there and defend your cutoff with units like everyone else? So tired of hearing that using the flak HQ for defending a main area of the map is part of OKWs "design". You know what else was a part of their design? No stock MGs. Well you get one now, and while it can't kill models for ****, its just fine at suppressing.
Like of all the reasons to suggest indirect fire needs a rework, this is the last one I would point to. For me its how much infantry killing they do with little to no micro. I think auto-firing needs a little nerfing (across all factions mortars) to encourage manual barrages more, but the ability to destroy an aggressive flak HQ is the last thing I want to see nerfed.
I'd like to see autofire eliminated and just having attack ground and barrage, with any special abilities such as smoke, HEAT, etc, tied to the barrage.
I do wish they had nerfed the auto-attack range of the 120 to match the auto-attack of the ISG.
In 4v4 randoms, I think I've lost the majority of the trucks that I've built outside the base, at least in competitive games.
I agree and I will quote myself from another thread here:
There's one thing I would like to suggest which is a general redesign of light indirect fire. It's cancer. Moreso in team games but random mortar shells wiping squads are just too much for a competitive environment and this shit happens on a regular basis.
I'd like to see autofire eliminated and just having attack ground and barrage, with any special abilities such as smoke, HEAT, etc, tied to the barrage.
This is the most broken part of the game. Mortar is meant to dislodge static units from garrisons and heavy cover. It is not meant to wipe full health squads on the move in autofire mode. Turns the game into a complete joke and a waste of time.
In real life it would take several mortar shots to get close to a target, yet every game I lose a squad moving thru a field to autofire no sight bullshit. #EsportsNeverReady
Such mechanic is already implemented: the further is the target the higher is the spread. The problem you guys might have is that while in case of alpha strike units like PW lower spread is always better, in case of area denial like LM it is sometimes better to have higher spread in order to lock bigger area. I can't think of any solution to that though other than decreasing max range of such units and that may make them useless.
You also need to consider that allied rocket artillery has low trajectory rockets that can't be shot from behind many shotblockers, like forests, becouse they simply hit them. PW and stuka, if well positioned, do not have that problem and it is an important advantage.
I am aware of that mechanic, and I'm proposing that the max range scatter be increased even more for all rocket arty units, axis and allies.
Perhaps, just increasing the cooldown of barrage and reducing the vet 2 cooldown bonus would be enough? I feel that the "low trajectory" rockets don't really factor much into team games; On maps like road to kharkov, minsk pocket, rails and metal. I'm not as worried about land mattresses as they are relatively slow and easy to catch out, however Katyushas don't really risk much for the player using them. As long as allied team has sufficient infantry and anti-tank, katyushas just help to control the map even more, even more so that forward reinforce points such as the OKW battlegroup has already been nerfed. Team-weapon centric strategies are basically fish in a barrel at that point, including the current state of soviet sniper + guards combo.
Post patch, most artillery feels way less harmful than before in my opinion. If you place your OKW truck so aggressive that it can be destroyed by indirect fire without the enemy having to push then it is your own fault. I usually place my Medic HQ in my base (in 1v1) and the Flak HQ at the fuel/cutoff to defend it.
The Flak HQ didn't get an "extra anti air ability" - The ability to target airplane is now just toggable with a 30 seconds cooldown. In this time, the flak WILL NOT shoot at infantry. So it is now either/or and not, shoot down the planes and then immediately fire at inf again.
L2P or learn to give constructive feedback. But reading "huhuhu I can't win easily while playing Axis" is getting extremely annoying because you want to turn every single CoH2.org thread into this fanboy bullshit.
its the easy cheesy playstile which allie faction have...its nearly boring to play them, cause of no trouble with extrem wiping from sqauds, no hitting tanks, arty that do shit, call ins that not really effective..allof that u dont know as allie player.
want to kill a KT? here you get 2 penals and a TD. done
Well I hope you were there screaming when the ISG was pinning, squad wiping and spammed. Or how the OST turbo mortar can still wipe squads without any micro at all.
I don't have any of these issues in 2v2 games. But as the games scale to 3's and 4's it's just an arty party. Though, it's kind of always been that way just the brits and their arty grenades are getting nuts.
LimaOscarMike: My laptop can't even run COH3. Should I get them on my Series X or is it dead yet? Last Saturday, 05:10 AM
Rosbone: One of my last major gripes about Coh3. Price is still too high I feel for growth. But progress is always good. Last Saturday, 04:43 AM
Rosbone: I am not 100% sure but I think Relic actually fixed up the skirmish menus a little last patch. If so, thank you and keep it coming. Last Saturday, 04:39 AM
Lady Xenarra: Does anyone else think that USF needs buffs? It feels like they’re on life support sometimes 01 Apr 2025, 02:36 AM
Willy Pete: @Rosbone Ahh I missed that memo. I still think its a bad decision though. Adds frustration for players and isnt gonna make them that much money 27 Mar 2025, 15:46 PM
Rosbone: It is also good they left it free until after the free to play weekend. Points for that. 27 Mar 2025, 09:34 AM
Rosbone: But I agree, the cost to get a full decent Coh game pushing $115 US is not the best idea. Especially when it needs so much more work for casuals. 27 Mar 2025, 09:32 AM
Rosbone: To be fair, it was a thank you to early fans right? They said it was not free for long and it would become a pay DLC at some point. 27 Mar 2025, 09:30 AM
Willy Pete: Re-releasing free DLC so they can charge new players money for it. Brilliant marketing strategy 27 Mar 2025, 04:31 AM
Soheil: Coh2 still broken server ? 25 Mar 2025, 18:27 PM
Rosbone: Congrats to Relic. Looks like Coh3 has finally usurped Coh2 s the popular Coh. You smell terrific. . 24 Mar 2025, 02:46 AM
Nickbn: and again someone else replies. I mean come on guys. Give @adamírcz a chance 22 Mar 2025, 14:00 PM
Willy Pete: @Nickbn you didn't ask a question, and this is a chat box... 20 Mar 2025, 13:11 PM
Nickbn: @Rosbone it's incredibly rude to speak on someone elses behalf, especially when a question is directly adressed to them. I understand your passion for the subject at hand but I want to hear from him. 20 Mar 2025, 10:16 AM
Rosbone: @Nickbn No, I am just saying people should not be using any Relic owned forum since they have proven they ban anyone who says true things about Coh3. 18 Mar 2025, 19:01 PM
Nickbn: @Rosbone do you speak on his behalf? I didn't know. In that case keep us updated please. 18 Mar 2025, 16:47 PM
Rosbone: #RelicModdedEchoChamber 16 Mar 2025, 17:54 PM
Rosbone: @Nickbn True except, the only people on the Relic Discord/Reddit/Steam are brain washed monkey zealots. They wont even understand what @adamírcz is talking about. Anyone else is banned. 16 Mar 2025, 17:54 PM
Nickbn: @adamírcz might be a better idea to voice this to relic directly than to voice it here, in a shoutbox of a nearly deade fansite #justsaying... 16 Mar 2025, 16:36 PM
aerafield: @adamírcz aren't the first two disconnects free every day? 14 Mar 2025, 19:26 PM
Rosbone: It is so unlike Relic to punish its fans and community. 14 Mar 2025, 12:07 PM
adamírcz: So, I just got a leaver penalty without even getting onto the loading screen because of the game disconnecting, bravo Relic 14 Mar 2025, 10:45 AM
Rosbone: It is an indicator of the very short sighted capitalist view that plagues any company where leadership does not understand the product. 13 Mar 2025, 20:00 PM
Rosbone: They dont care about Coh3 or Coh in general. They are just trying to grab cash by ripping off the small user base they have. 13 Mar 2025, 19:58 PM
Rosbone: Just making mistake after mistake after mistake. 13 Mar 2025, 19:57 PM
Rosbone: It is clear they crapped out an unfinished game. And are now barely supporting it as they make new smaller games. Coh3 is stillborn. It will be meh for at least another 2-4 years. Meaning they killed the whole franchise instead of growing it. 13 Mar 2025, 19:56 PM
Rosbone: For a thing they could fix in minutes. Literally minutes. 13 Mar 2025, 19:53 PM
Rosbone: If I did play coh3 and was mainly a skirmish player, I would be pissed and probably stop playing. And it has been like this since release. Why? I would not tell my friends to buy a game I am not even playing. Lost sales and angered users. 13 Mar 2025, 19:53 PM
Rosbone: I am just saddened how Relic keeps hurting themselves by not fixing 5 minute things like menus. Why anger users with stuff that could be fixed in minutes??? 13 Mar 2025, 19:50 PM
Rosbone: I was wondering why people think I was raging. I think it was when I said "because coh3 sucks so bad". That was not my opinion. Just a general feel from top players/streamers. I dont play Coh3 and have NO opinion of it. 13 Mar 2025, 19:48 PM
OKSpitfire: You can rage as often as you like btw, you usually manage to make it pretty funny. 12 Mar 2025, 11:18 AM
Rosbone: So it was a systemic failure across multiple disciplines and check points. 12 Mar 2025, 04:30 AM
Rosbone: Knowing how companies work, I imagine a new hire making the menus. The API they are using is complicated and things were hard to figure out. But at some point QA or management should have addressed these things. Usually within 6 months of starting. 12 Mar 2025, 04:29 AM
Rosbone: @theekvn I dont hate Coh3 or Relic. I just dont understand how you work on Coh3 for like 7 years and the menu system is worse than if a Programming 101 student made it. Feel free to explain it to me. 12 Mar 2025, 04:07 AM
theekvn: + 33% dmg rear hit was best deal ever. 12 Mar 2025, 04:00 AM
theekvn: KT just need fuel debuf from 15% to 50%, Ele arc of fire- aim time improve and they are good to go 12 Mar 2025, 03:59 AM
theekvn: and please Rosbone,I know you hate Coh3 to the bone due to your drama with relic, Still, Can you give a proper point of view instead of raging ?. 12 Mar 2025, 03:54 AM
theekvn: you rather go 76 to unity Whizbang 2.0 or go home. 12 Mar 2025, 03:52 AM
theekvn: also US tier 4 is 145f and Sherman pen 140 nerf is too much. 12 Mar 2025, 03:52 AM
theekvn: Whizbang lock behind CP, meanwhile stuka is techtree progress 12 Mar 2025, 03:51 AM
KoRneY: @aerafield It's possible that it is underpriced for what it is capable of now, no need to go full retard and take it immediately as a massive problem. It costs 60 more MP than a pz.3 and in 2v2 the barrage can be quite strong. 07 Mar 2025, 19:14 PM
OKSpitfire: I do like that they made the Stuka more expensive instead of nerfing it into the ground though. Found it pretty unsatisfying to use before that buff a while back.... 06 Mar 2025, 16:35 PM
aerafield: USF already is by far the shittiest faction in terms of countering blobbing and turtling, now they supposedly have one overtuned tool locked behind a BG and it's immediately a massive problem? 06 Mar 2025, 13:33 PM
Lady Xenarra: I think post-2.0 Whizbang buffs, the price is too low esp since the Stuka got nerfed in cost too. Speaking of which, how exactly is one supposed to successfully dive this Sherman in disguise? Med tank spam running into SSFs? 06 Mar 2025, 12:13 PM
OKSpitfire: A powerful, doctrinal unit that outperforms stock stuff? Colour me shocked! 06 Mar 2025, 10:49 AM
Willy Pete: Cool you wanna lose your stock lategame arty too then? 06 Mar 2025, 03:20 AM
Lady Xenarra: WTB Whizzbang for DAK instead of Stuka, 5 fuel cheape, 60MP more expensive and next to impossible to dive. 05 Mar 2025, 20:27 PM