No Point to Schwerer Flak anymore?

It was not behind the shed on the right it was back from the munitions point on the left. The point is though that this is not that specific. A similar thing happens in a lot of games where the minimal effort to seek out the schwerer is rewarded too generously with a win in most circumstances.

The fact we establish is that the schwerer is not that useful being outside the base these days after allied power creep in team games. Yet this "free" emplacement is often tallied as a large plus for okw in balance discussions. Why not at least console those realists who know it's too risky outside the base with a discount or production speed boost? The points about USF free units is valid. Their destruction does not destroy teching and okw is the only faction whose teching can be destroyed by off map arty.

Then it was not on the cut off. You went for the left fuel and held that position or, as normal, your partner went for the right fuel and VP. Any unit combination (as mentioned before) can take a forward building if your focus is on the opposite side of the map.

This games doesn't work equally on 1v1 and 2v2 onwards. A schwerer covered by a hedge, and nearby protected by the flak/MG bunker is the ideal location for it (which on several maps cover strats points like Crossing) and can't be easily nuked if you are strained out of resources. 2v2 onwards means you can focus on a single aspect and be backup by your partner, as well as saving munition to use offmaps kind off freely by comparison.

OKW tech can be equally destroyed as OH or SU (if they are close enough to the border of the base as to still be near the AoE of offmap ), specially when is meta to build it close enough so you can reinforce as far away.

If you are playing 3v3+: unless you have 100% control of a zone, don't build a Schwerer outside your base.
If playing 2v2: check what commanders they have. By the time you can deploy a Schwerer, unless they haven't choose yet, you should know what commanders they went for. If they have one of the few commanders which can easily nuke a truck, don't deploy it on sight range.

Smoke won't do anything against 120 mm, howie and mortars in general.

well there is your problem there champ!
smoke doesnt do damage to anything (well, some smoke does, but not the smoke on the leig) it lets you get past the enemy defenses the use OTHER units to deal damage

hopefully armed with the incredibly basic knowledge on how to use multiple units to support an assault you will have better luck against those dastardly combined arms allies.

im sure given enough time youll learn all the top tier tactics like using smoke and combined arms and the like, its something you can work towards

You need the flak hq to build the units that come from it. So there is a very important point to them.

Duhhh.... I'm talking about the flak and if you read anything more than the thread title you'd know that.

well there is your problem there champ!
smoke doesnt do damage to anything (well, some smoke does, but not the smoke on the leig) it lets you get past the enemy defenses the use OTHER units to deal damage

hopefully armed with the incredibly basic knowledge on how to use multiple units to support an assault you will have better luck against those dastardly combined arms allies.

im sure given enough time youll learn all the top tier tactics like using smoke and combined arms and the like, its something you can work towards

OTHER = VOLKS

Of course volks at the moment are well known for being the ultra OP terminator of doom (except they are coverfighters that will face bren and bar IS and Riflemen).

What a condescending toxic and biased post for someone too afraid to post a playercard

Also i'm enjoing how 240 mp mortar is mostly relegated to smoke dispenser despite being good at proper range for barrage and snowflakes will cry and beg all day but ultra expensive leig is just a smoke dispenser at any range and that is legit and balanced and players should work around it.

General balance in a nutshell and really speaks volumes about "combined arms" allies snowflakes.

OTHER = VOLKS

Of course volks at the moment are well known for being the ultra OP terminator of doom (except they are coverfighters that will face bren and bar IS and Riflemen).

What a condescending toxic and biased post for someone too afraid to post a playercard

Also i'm enjoing how 240 mp mortar is mostly relegated to smoke dispenser despite being good at proper range for barrage and snowflakes will cry and beg all day but ultra expensive leig is just a smoke dispenser at any range and that is legit and balanced and players should work around it.

General balance in a nutshell and really speaks volumes about "combined arms" allies snowflakes.

Okw units has a number of squads they can field and each and EVERY one of them is a threat, not just volks. Getting any one of them even close to an enemy mortar is enough to force it off. Hell, even a kuble dive put enough threat to make it move.

And gosh darn those squirrelly allied players...using cover... You know what cover does right? Ontop of the obvious defensive bonuses (and small offensive bonises for brits) it also makes them static. You know what units LOOOOVE static troops? Indirect fire, things like mortars....and the leig. Its not a 120mm, but it will contribute. And seeing as you listed the allied units as having upgrades i can assume your volks have STGs? And maybe the munitions for a cover denying lava nade? No?

And i dont have my playercard cause i dont care about it. Generally players who request them know they are wrong and are looking for a reason to simply disqualify other players opinions (kinda like you are trying to do) instead of the merits of their words and i wont be a part of that. Were here for discussion, all of us and a players ability to micro doesnt take away from their knowledge of the game, nor DOES thier ability to micro or even affinity to RNG provide them a trump card when they clearly dont understand tactics or the tools of the game.

I know what i know and admit when im wrong or dont know something and im sure their are players who will attest to that. My condecention comes from knowing what im talking about to a player who is seemingly pretending they do and discounting tactical options and using that as a reasoning for balance changes. Now back to the discussion

Nobody said the 240mp mortar is relegated to just smoke, but it has the option for it and good players will apply that to neutralize an enemy advantage or press their own. Is the LEIG underperforming? A bit. It has been most of its life (save for the dark days of auto fire supression...) Could it use a small buff? Probably. Make a thread about that. However its ability to smoke and punish units in cover remains and needs to be accounted for.

Ill admit i have no clue what you mean with your last blurb, if you sre calling me an allied snowflake you are sorely mistaken, i have an affinity to EFA, but generally prefer the ost (more diverse and engaging commander options) not that it matters

Okw units has a number of squads they can field and each and EVERY one of them is a threat, not just volks. Getting any one of them even close to an enemy mortar is enough to force it off. Hell, even a kuble dive put enough threat to make it move.

And gosh darn those squirrelly allied players...using cover... You know what cover does right? Ontop of the obvious defensive bonuses (and small offensive bonises for brits) it also makes them static. You know what units LOOOOVE static troops? Indirect fire, things like mortars....and the leig. Its not a 120mm, but it will contribute. And seeing as you listed the allied units as having upgrades i can assume your volks have STGs? And maybe the munitions for a cover denying lava nade? No?

And i dont have my playercard cause i dont care about it. Generally players who request them know they are wrong and are looking for a reason to simply disqualify other players opinions (kinda like you are trying to do) instead of the merits of their words and i wont be a part of that. Were here for discussion, all of us and a players ability to micro doesnt take away from their knowledge of the game, nor DOES thier ability to micro or even affinity to RNG provide them a trump card when they clearly dont understand tactics or the tools of the game.

I know what i know and admit when im wrong or dont know something and im sure their are players who will attest to that. My condecention comes from knowing what im talking about to a player who is seemingly pretending they do and discounting tactical options and using that as a reasoning for balance changes. Now back to the discussion

Nobody said the 240mp mortar is relegated to just smoke, but it has the option for it and good players will apply that to neutralize an enemy advantage or press their own. Is the LEIG underperforming? A bit. It has been most of its life (save for the dark days of auto fire supression...) Could it use a small buff? Probably. Make a thread about that. However its ability to smoke and punish units in cover remains and needs to be accounted for.

Ill admit i have no clue what you mean with your last blurb, if you sre calling me an allied snowflake you are sorely mistaken, i have an affinity to EFA, but generally prefer the ost (more diverse and engaging commander options) not that it matters

Generally speaking people who refuse to put playercards are compstompers, left the game ages ago (aka katitof) or never played the "OP X faction" (kinda like you).
When you go out for ultra provocatory/sarcastic borderline offensive and comdescending AS FUC toxic post you are asking for it, it has nothing to do with arguments.
Put your playercard in.

Speaking of arguments, you have none.
The only unit to be remotely a threat for med hq strats are sturm, volks and flak ht. Isg inability to succesfully outgun any kind of indirect fire even if less expensive makes already bad per se okw support weapons ultrahorribad.

Volks are coverfighter that are at any stage undergunned. They can hardly keep a midgame offensive. By the time rifle get bar sturm are the facto too squishy to be a threat, this is why noone is actually building sturm squad other than early one even post patch.

Now if at level 2 4vs4/3vs3 or whatever your opponents lets you get away by yolo moving bolt action infantry and pushing with flak ht, that's another issue.

"about to a player who is seemingly pretending they do and discounting tactical options"

There's no TACTICAL option you are talking about, you are just BABBLING and theorycrafting about a mass assault okw players should pull at the expenses of the enemy with unfit and inferior infantry while having access tp the worst of the worst indirect fire and support weapons, while the only working tool is stationary fire only 55 fuel vehicle.
They should use cover as smoke, except that volks are always better at long range and a long range unit to begin with, so you hardly even want to close in against allied infantry, and OFC this is a basic concept.
And kubel... Nobody is building it, not a single time in KotH post patch.
Please let me see your ACTUAL OKW experience. Nothing of what you said makes sense, and i wouldn't be surprised if you didn't even compstomp succesfully with the faction.

...
Volks are coverfighter that are at any stage undergunned. They can hardly keep a midgame offensive. By the time rifle get bar sturm are the facto too squishy to be a threat, this is why noone is actually building sturm squad other than early one even post patch.
...

Look I linked my playercard, I don't agree with you.

There does seem to be a general consensus out there that volks are bad, when it simply isn't true. In the early game they are on par with any other infantry out there, for their cost. You can afford to get more of them than most other factions can afford to get their stock infantry so you can create a numbers advantage. You also get sturm support, a unit which is massively effective in the right engagements, practice getting them into the right engagements and you will find them very effective at all stages of the game. Just because you don't need or want more than 1 doesn't make them a bad unit. This all translates to a VERY strong early game.

Late game with vet and upgrades volks do fine dps at all ranges, have good survivability, and have very little bleed, as well as passive healing, faust and flame nade. They are honestly one of the best stock infantry units in the game. Additionally, late game, they should be getting support from mg's, tanks, elite infantry, LEIGS / whatever to overcome the superior (when loaded with expensive upgrades and costing more to reinforce) allied infantry. No issues there.

Anyway, regarding flak HQ, its fine. There is a location on every map where you can place your flak HQ that means for mortars or AT guns to be in range, said mortars or AT guns have to be suicidally far forward, while at the same time the flak HQ covers either a cuttoff, a deep flank route or a key resource point. That is true of every map. Put your flak HQ there and get free area denial in your back lines. If they run at guns and mortars into range to damage your flak HQ, you lost the game for other reasons or you punish them because they had to move vulnerable units too far up the field. An offmap wont kill it without damage from another source.

The flak HQ also gives you a place to run to to save yourself from a diving light vehicle, and it also gives you free AA capabilities. Its fine as is.

There does seem to be a general consensus out there that volks are bad, when it simply isn't true. In the early game they are on par with any other infantry out there, for their cost.

First, the cost argument is utterly wrong. Cost doesn't matter. At any given moment in time throughout the entire match, any one infantry unit is fighting one enemy unit. That's the first principles rundown of the game's mechanics. Which means you cannot allow units like the current absurd Penal squads exactly because they have the upper hand against absolutely all other infantry squads, which means the Soviet player, regardless of their cost, will 100% of the time force away at least one enemy squad with a Penal squad, without ever, under any circumstances, being able to be forced off early themselves.

As for Volks, they are objectively bad, just like the 222 for Ostheer. Volks DO NOT DEAL DAMAGE until you upgrade them with STGs, and that actually reduces their long range damage, which destroys their intended "cover fighters at range" role in order to give them something to make them have some chance against hordes of SMG-wielding enemy infantry (hint: not a good chance).

Baseline infantry performance is the MOST important factor to consider when comparing squads, and a squad like Volks that deals no damage at all ranges with their rifles is an utter farce. The advantage they, like the other Western Fronts faction, receive in their beefy five-man squads capable of rushing through open fields into enemy fire and surviving, thus ignoring the game's core cover and TrueSight systems, is completely negated by their lack of damage output.

If you'll recall, Volks' rifle damage was buffed a long while ago. Why was it buffed? Because they were dealing NO DAMAGE. And they STILL don't deal any damage because they weren't buffed enough. This is easily observable. Go watch ten, twenty, thirty of the latest Propagandacasts or any other cast with OKW present in the matches, and observe the early game without Volks' STGs. It's absurdly obvious.

First, the cost argument is utterly wrong. Cost doesn't matter. At any given moment in time throughout the entire match, any one infantry unit is fighting one enemy unit. That's the first principles rundown of the game's mechanics. Which means you cannot allow units like the current absurd Penal squads exactly because they have the upper hand against absolutely all other infantry squads, which means the Soviet player, regardless of their cost, will 100% of the time force away at least one enemy squad with a Penal squad, without ever, under any circumstances, being able to be forced off early themselves.

There is also the issue of number of units on field.
If soviet goes penals, he will NOT have as many infantry squads as ost or okw, which means each individual squad will be stronger, but because there is less total squads, it'll be balanced.
If what you say was anywhere near true, USF would be completely and utterly unstoppable.

As for Volks, they are objectively bad, just like the 222 for Ostheer. Volks DO NOT DEAL DAMAGE until you upgrade them with STGs, and that actually reduces their long range damage, which destroys their intended "cover fighters at range" role in order to give them something to make them have some chance against hordes of SMG-wielding enemy infantry (hint: not a good chance).

That's bullshit.
Volks deal as much DPS as grens and STGs upgrade DPS at all ranges, long included.

Baseline infantry performance is the MOST important factor to consider when comparing squads, and a squad like Volks that deals no damage at all ranges with their rifles is an utter farce. The advantage they, like the other Western Fronts faction, receive in their beefy five-man squads capable of rushing through open fields into enemy fire and surviving, thus ignoring the game's core cover and TrueSight systems, is completely negated by their lack of damage output.

Again, that is bullshit as volks deal as much DPS as grens and grens aren't known for "dealing no damage at all ranges". You also have flame nades to screen any melee charges as well as HMG.

If you'll recall, Volks' rifle damage was buffed a long while ago. Why was it buffed? Because they were dealing NO DAMAGE. And they STILL don't deal any damage because they weren't buffed enough. This is easily observable. Go watch ten, twenty, thirty of the latest Propagandacasts or any other cast with OKW present in the matches, and observe the early game without Volks' STGs. It's absurdly obvious.

Again, they deal as much DPS as grens.
Its hard to accept, but try to.

First, the cost argument is utterly wrong. Cost doesn't matter. At any given moment in time throughout the entire match, any one infantry unit is fighting one enemy unit. That's the first principles rundown of the game's mechanics. Which means you cannot allow units like the current absurd Penal squads exactly because they have the upper hand against absolutely all other infantry squads, which means the Soviet player, regardless of their cost, will 100% of the time force away at least one enemy squad with a Penal squad, without ever, under any circumstances, being able to be forced off early themselves.

As for Volks, they are objectively bad, just like the 222 for Ostheer. Volks DO NOT DEAL DAMAGE until you upgrade them with STGs, and that actually reduces their long range damage, which destroys their intended "cover fighters at range" role in order to give them something to make them have some chance against hordes of SMG-wielding enemy infantry (hint: not a good chance).

Baseline infantry performance is the MOST important factor to consider when comparing squads, and a squad like Volks that deals no damage at all ranges with their rifles is an utter farce. The advantage they, like the other Western Fronts faction, receive in their beefy five-man squads capable of rushing through open fields into enemy fire and surviving, thus ignoring the game's core cover and TrueSight systems, is completely negated by their lack of damage output.

If you'll recall, Volks' rifle damage was buffed a long while ago. Why was it buffed? Because they were dealing NO DAMAGE. And they STILL don't deal any damage because they weren't buffed enough. This is easily observable. Go watch ten, twenty, thirty of the latest Propagandacasts or any other cast with OKW present in the matches, and observe the early game without Volks' STGs. It's absurdly obvious.

Your argument about cost is a bit insane. Cost is a HUGE factor in how balanced a unit is. A soviet player cannot match you 1 for 1 with penals early game, and mid/late game you should not be relying on 1v1'ing infantry squads to win engagements. Supporting units will decide those engagements (or should) more than the base infantry squads performance. Why not use your superior numbers and superior engineer unit to overcome penal squads, and force him to take undesirable engagements early, which you can do reliably because if he goes penals he should also be struggling for capping power early game. In these engagements you will find your volks trading well. And "trading well" factors in the cost of the squad initially and the cost of reinforcing models. Trade well consistently and it will inevitably translate to map control. Claiming cost is irrelevant is insane in any strategy game.

What are you asking for? That volks win 1v1 versus every other infantry unit? They already do win 1v1 depending on the engagement, the engagement is actually the overwhelmingly deciding factor on what squad wins already, and this is as it should be.

I'm not sure you know what you are talking about really, stgs upgrade dps at all ranges. Volks dps is fine, OKW is one of the two factions i play, i use volks all the time. Their DPS is fine. What decides the fight is the engagement, who walks into who, who has what cover, how many squads are present in the early game.

If soviet goes penals, he will NOT have as many infantry squads as ost or okw

This is the crux of the issue. So many people are brainwashed by this "argument."

Yes, they DO have just as many and often MORE units, because manpower is infinite and is only a matter of time to accumulate.

Unit cost does NOT regulate unit quantity, at all, whatsoever. Stop deluding yourselves and newbies with this nonsense.

This is the crux of the issue. So many people are brainwashed by this "argument."

Yes, they DO have just as many and often MORE units, because manpower is infinite and is only a matter of time to accumulate.

Unit cost does NOT regulate unit quantity, at all, whatsoever. Stop deluding yourselves and newbies with this nonsense.

You're the delusional one here. Literally everything you've said in the last 2 posts is wrong. Spreading this misinformation is just disgusting.

Maybe your volks don't do any damage because you are using them wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Play some allied games for once, it will help you be a better player.

You're the delusional one here. Literally everything you've said in the last 2 posts is wrong. Spreading this misinformation is just disgusting.

Maybe your volks don't do any damage because you are using them wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Play some allied games for once, it will help you be a better player.

"You're wrong" isn't an argument.

I stated in no uncertain terms why unit costs don't affect total unit quantity (because of the relationship between manpower and time). Of course, there are my direct observations as well, but I don't expect that to be sufficient when arguing something.

Then there's also the issue of Soviet infantry being completely universal, so even if a Soviet player spams ten Penals, he'll be fully capable of holding the entire map and taking on any and all armor that comes his way.

But I'm going to leave this here, because it's getting off topic.

My on-topic conclusion is that the Schwerer HQ poses no threat, just like nothing else Axis fields poses any real threat, to Allied players, while UKF get forward emplacements that are the bane of all Axis units on the entire map and cannot be destroyed (I'm talking surviving against two mortars and a Flammenwerfer), and USF get fighting positions that don't set them back at all if lost.

All the while Ostheer, at least, can never build a single bunker anywhere because of a) having to pay every last bit of manpower to field an army large enough to counter Allied aggression and b) being always, 100% of the time at zero munitions due to being forced to upgrade and use grenades at every opportunity to have any chance against Allied units.

"You're wrong" isn't an argument.

I have already explained why you are wrong.
Would it make any difference if Tobis copy pasted that into his post?

I stated in no uncertain terms why unit costs don't affect total unit quantity (because of the relationship between manpower and time). Of course, there are my direct observations as well, but I don't expect that to be sufficient when arguing something.

That relationship between menpower and time is applied equally to both players, the other player does not have a hard cap on how many squads he can put out outside of general 100 pop cap and the argument about outnumbering expensive squads with cheaper squads still stands.
If you do not have larger number of cheaper troops, that only means you personally have failed to field more troops as needed.

Then there's also the issue of Soviet infantry being completely universal, so even if a Soviet player spams ten Penals, he'll be fully capable of holding the entire map and taking on any and all armor that comes his way.

That is the benefit of having shittiest weapon teams in game.
This applies to USF as well, who are locked out of their support weapons from start.
Soviets are meant to spam something early game and transition into more of a combined arms when axis upgrades start hitting the field.

And penals, despite being 6 man squads are very fragile, they aren't going to hold much for long.

My on-topic conclusion is that the Schwerer HQ poses no threat, just like nothing else Axis fields poses any real threat, to Allied players, while UKF get forward emplacements that are the bane of all Axis units on the entire map and cannot be destroyed (I'm talking surviving against two mortars and a Flammenwerfer), and USF get fighting positions that don't set them back at all if lost.

Because your expectactions towards it exceed what it is supposed to do by a long shot.
You are using the general fanboy argument here "everything allies is OP, everything axis is bad".
You are incapable of understanding and countering opposing units, because you have never played with them yourself, that is why you see emplacements as indestructible, while I require 30 seconds per exmplacement to get rid of them.

If you think any emplacement can survive 2 mortars, you are beyond delusional, ost turbomortars will wreck any emplacements in a matter of moments. If you think brace makes it any other way, again, you are terribly wrong, you need a full counterattack on mortar positions to not lose emplacement, if you won't do it, nothing will save it.

USF fighting positions cost just as much as ost bunkers, if they do not set USF back with more expensive units, then they are not setting you back with much cheaper units.

By the way, ever wondered why no one ever uses fighting positions? Because USF do not have menpower for it. Stop treating 4v4 noob fests like balance hard points.

All the while Ostheer, at least, can never build a single bunker anywhere because of a) having to pay every last bit of manpower to field an army large enough to counter Allied aggression and b) being always, 100% of the time at zero munitions due to being forced to upgrade and use grenades at every opportunity to have any chance against Allied units.

That goes for all factions equally.
If you do not field army large enough to match opponent, you will be pushed back.
It applies to USF, UKF and soviets in equal way as it applies to ost and OKW. If you think otherwise, again, you just do not know better.
USF and UKF on top have MORE muni expenses then ost do, if they are able to pump their muni stuff and you are not, it means you played like shit and lost territories. Only soviets who do not go guards have muni float in CoH2.

Stop exaggerating, start analyzing your own replays and maybe after a couple of months you'll realize its not balance that is bad, but you.

Judging by your playercard, you are not super terrible player(there are plenty of much worse trying to make a balance case), but you're not on a level where balance matters either. What you are however is greatly inexperienced by limiting yourself only to OKW and ost.

If you want to know factions weaknesses, play as that faction.
If you want to know factions strengths, play against that faction.

Nothing short of the above will help you.

Imo Volks ST44 and Penal are badly designed.

Penals are not very fragile.

But all that are irrelevant to the Schwerer and it would be nice if you could return to the issue of this thread.

To get back on topic.

I agree that Schwerer placement is a tactical choice and you shouldn't put it further forward than you can defend it. However depending on your opponents doctrine, these days there are many powerful options that can wipe it quickly even if it's placed just outside of the base sector.

Therefore I do agree with some posters that it may be nice to have the option to rebuild after a lost Schwerer. For example, after it was built once, simply reduce the fuel cost to rebuild to 50.

There are other ways of achieving that like making the Schwerer tech unlock separate from the truck itself, but then you need to think carefully what you're going to do with the other trucks (whether you apply the same rule, whether you keep the same tech paths), and you also have to adjust the costs to get the right timing. So that's interesting but sounds like too big or complex a change at this stage. Or, some people said that the build options should not "re-lock" after destruction, like American tech units, but I disagree with that because (1) it's actually huge buff for OKW because now the truck can be pushed forward easily and (2) you fall into the trap of trying to make all armies the same piece by piece.

Anyway OKW are one of my weaker armies so don't take my opinion too seriously.

Duhhh.... I'm talking about the flak and if you read anything more than the thread title you'd know that.

It's a tech structure, what more do you want? The flak emplacement is free. Put it in your base, or risk putting it forward, your choice.

People demanding to see playercards but they are 1000+ in every faction lmao


Also idk but my Volks trade favorably against most allied infantry in the early to mid game. Early muni control into stag dominate unupgraded allied squads

I like the Schwerer as it is right now.

Giving it the USF Major treatment, where rebuilding a dead Major no longer costs fuel and reduced MP costs, just promotes losing the Schwerer to keep using as it as a disposable emplacement that can build units.

Giving its unit production abilities to the main half track in the base also promotes reckless placement.

Giving it production speed bonuses when deployed in base territory would be hardly fair, considering that it is still a tech building that makes T4/endgame units.

Honestly, I think this "problem" is attributed to leaning towards using the Schwerer aggressively rather than defensively. It's better to shove it in positions between VPs/hotzones and the base. Far enough to not be a primary target for a push, but close enough to force overextending infantry/light vehicle to retreat and allow for a counter-push.

If it's getting shelled 24/7 by anything that isn't a static artillery piece, then you've clearly put it too close.