What I view as very pressing issues

M3s handle MG42s just fine.

Not to mention the eight - nine minute T70's that can destroy every single retreating unit by just going a little ahead of them and blocking retreat path. It's pretty rare for a shreck squad to win vs them in a 1v1 situation. This is made even more annoying by the fact you lose 360 MP / 120 Muni when you retreat whilst the Soviet player loses 160 MP / 55 Fuel...

I agree with a few points but I *strongly* disagree that the German MG is OP and/or has no counters.

M3s w/ flamers, snipers and mortars are all hard counters against the MG. And notice that these counters are spread between Russian T1 and T2 - so there's always a viable option.

In fact, as someone who played vCoH extensively I think that the MG42 is much less viable in CoH2, exactly due to the number of hard counters for it. In vCoH the US faction had no counter for the MG on T1, other than flank it. In CoH2 the German player pretty much has to build at least one Grenadier, otherwise gets owned by a single M3.

I disagree.

I don't see why a 240mp unit should cause a 100% engine damage on every vehicle no matter its size. I also don't see how this should be more skillful than managing combined arms AT.

For the first stages of the game it's absoulutely fine to have fausts/at-nades causing engine damage on the lighter vehicles but as the game advances there are other options for the job.

The soviets have cheap mines, guards, ram (yet I haven't tried it post patch) and still a chance to crit with at-nades.

Yes the Germans have fewer options but they also face fewer fast and heavy tanks( only T-34/74/85 and Is-2 pretty much). Their AT is also more mobile (P4, Panther, Shrecks, Stug).

So for me the skill lies in the evaluation of risks and chances. Can I afford the 33% risk of getting at-naded when rushing in my panther or not?

So I think the changes made by Relic regarding Panzerfaust and AT-nade are pretty much spot on and add a lot of variation to the gameplay as aggressive tank manuvers can be way more rewarding.

They should have it because it's a vital ability to the infantry-tank balance. Unless you want this to be a top-down game of World of Tanks you need to have a reliable infantry snare that can work with a level of consistency.

If we're worried about how powerful these abilities were there were other ways to nerf that made them more difficult to use but also maintained a consistent reward for players who got into the right positioning.

Now I can totally out position my opponent, he can overextend, I can nail him with one of these and it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that I outplayed my opponent horrendously because RNG said it doesn't matter. This is what I mean by skill cap being lowered.

It should work or it should not. Otherwise there is no point to them. Snares are intended to be reliable because gameplay is built on snares and how and when you can get them off. What Relic has done is remove a cornerstone of the RTS genre(And in particular, Relic games) for absolutely no reason that I can discern. Changing things for the sake of it.


And yeah, I realize I am remembering stickies wrong. Rather foolish of me to forget exactly how they worked. But I still stand by everything I said. Consistency is the name of the game but it appears the crucial changes are attempting to make everything important as inconsistent as possible.

Why should I use Ram now? Why should I use an AT Nade? If Ram doesn't work I've lost a tank. If an AT Nade doesn't work I've lost the engagement. I can't depend on either anymore because of these random factors. One would think I would win or lose things on my merits alone as a player, not what some random number generator decides. This is what I mean when I compare it to a game of dice.

There are some elements of randomness that one must accept in order to play this game, because it's how the game works as an RTS. Like mortars one hitting your squad on the first go. Or all the rifles in your squad focusing on one enemy model. That kind of shit. But there are things that simply do not make sense when you add randomness to them, and these are some of them.


As for the MG42, M3s are extremely easy for Germans to control. Sit back with a second MG42 á la DoW2 or just park a Grenadier next to them and gg.

The 100% guaranteed engine damage on medium and heavy tanks caused by Fausts and AT-nades just rewarded lazy or careless players who didn't manage to build up a system of AT-options.

When a Tank broke through they could just grab one of their t0/1 units and absorb the assault by killing the tanks engine.

Stuff like that is still possible but it's not that likely to happen anymore which is good because it forces people to use combined AT-systems.

Holding off a breakthrough and interrupting Tank assaults, that's waht mines are there for.

In fact, as someone who played vCoH extensively I think that the MG42 is much less viable in CoH2, exactly due to the number of hard counters for it. In vCoH the US faction had no counter for the MG on T1, other than flank it. In CoH2 the German player pretty much has to build at least one Grenadier, otherwise gets owned by a single M3.

As someone who played vCoH extensively, this statement is so ridiculous it makes me seriously question what on earth you were doing in vCoH if you felt this way. Rifles were gods walking the earth compared to conscripts (and compared to volks vs conscripts compared to grenadiers), and the vCoH MGs were worse in every single way than the current CoH2 ones (smaller arc, smaller squad size, took more damage, less suppression).

The 100% guaranteed engine damage on medium and heavy tanks caused by Fausts and AT-nades just rewarded lazy or careless players who didn't manage to build up a system of AT-options.

When a Tank broke through they could just grab one of their t0/1 units and absorb the assault by killing the tanks engine.

Stuff like that is still possible but it's not that likely to happen anymore which is good because it forces people to use combined AT-systems.

Holding off a breakthrough and interrupting Tank assaults, that's waht mines are there for.

not really though. faust/at-nades punished a lazy or careless player that drove his tank into the enemy lines unsupported. they will not kill the tank (unless the player has infinite ammo). you will still need something that can kill the tank off.

if you support your tank(s) adequately, they might be able to get off a faust/at-nade, but you will be able to repair it before he will have the opportunity to finish it off.

the way it is right now, where you have no reliable way of slowing down a heavy tank (other than button, mines don't count since your opponent has to actively drive over them), it gets pretty hard to trap enemy tanks without a vastly superior force.

the bottom line is: fausts/at-nades always had counterplay: kiting (the homing missile thing is bad imho, but that is another story). the nerf effectively makes the game more forgiving for less skilled players that are not good enough to kite, by giving them a chance at another shot of trying to kite away. i don't feel like that is a good change.

The 100% guaranteed engine damage on medium and heavy tanks caused by Fausts and AT-nades just rewarded lazy or careless players who didn't manage to build up a system of AT-options.

This is just absolutely false. They punished stupid players that overextended their units. There was no "laziness" about positioning, and there's nothing careless about the action of using an ability.

The only people benefiting from this change are bad players while everybody else is losing.

I don't think you understand the importance of a vehicle snare.

M3s handle MG42s just fine.

You can also drop smoke on them with a Mortar and force them to reposition (or just lose vision if the player isn't paying attention). This can give Conscripts time to get into better flanking positions.

As for the MG42, M3s are extremely easy for Germans to control. Sit back with a second MG42 á la DoW2 or just park a Grenadier next to them and gg.

So 2xMGs+Gren vs M3 Flamer is OP in your mind?

Do the math. At cost, that is working entirely as intended.

So 2xMGs+Gren vs M3 Flamer is OP in your mind?

Do the math. At cost, that is working entirely as intended.

I think his point was that either 2xMG, or 1xMG 1xGren effectively stops a single clown car flamer from killing more stuff than they themselves are worth. Flamers and scout cars are far less useful the longer the game goes on so an investment in them that doesn't pay off early on is a bad one.

Pffft.

I think his point was that either 2xMG, or 1xMG 1xGren effectively stops a single clown car flamer from killing more stuff than they themselves are worth. Flamers and scout cars are far less useful the longer the game goes on so an investment in them that doesn't pay off early on is a bad one.

Other than that, the problem is still flexibility, an MG and a Gren squad is what 90% of ost will field in early game, not something they have to build reactively

You can also drop smoke on them with a Mortar and force them to reposition (or just lose vision if the player isn't paying attention). This can give Conscripts time to get into better flanking positions.

got to try that, thanks

Am I the only one that hates using M3s ? I hate hard counters, meaning, I hate that there is only ONE working strategy against something.

I liked the faust/sticky change. Like a poster pointed out, they buy a lot of time when they work, the option is economically flexible and they are contending with higher tech units.

Engine damage on a vehicle is STILL fixed only as the last 1 hp of the tank is restore in my experience. So it's a huge deal to get a already damaged tank engine damaged. It's also very frustrating to deal with a SU152 or a Elephant getting "stickied".

But, it's also a age old coh way to deal with heavy tanks, disable their movement. Ideally Relic should tie engine damage chance to veterancy level of the gren/conscript squad since which would make sense within the confine of the game itself. Meaning: a vet 3 squad would have a high chance of damaging the engine.

However I don't think this is possible to code based on my limited knowledge of how COH1 worked.

Like OP I'd also like to see panzerwerfer range increase.. you get it with vet however so while relic ponders this I guess keep firing those rockets.

Ram I dont know about. It seems severe that you can end up with a complete fail and still "lose" your t34.

As someone who played vCoH extensively, this statement is so ridiculous it makes me seriously question what on earth you were doing in vCoH if you felt this way. Rifles were gods walking the earth compared to conscripts (and compared to volks vs conscripts compared to grenadiers), and the vCoH MGs were worse in every single way than the current CoH2 ones (smaller arc, smaller squad size, took more damage, less suppression).

You can't analyze the unit stats by itself and just compare the vCoH version to the CoH2. There is a context, established by the other units in play.

The MGs in vCoH might be worse, but if an US player went T1, his *only* option against them was flank. I've seen several times really strong Wehr play that consisted of a 3xMGs start. In CoH2, if you spam MGs you will be rolled over by a single M3 w/ flamer, or a sniper, or a mortar.

Yes, the CoH2 MG is strong, but the Russian side is packed with hard counters to it.
The German player is forced to diversify his army - thus making the MG *by itself* less viable than in vCoH.

Cyridius is spot on in his posts, in my opinion. Everyone posts "But the M3 can counter the MG42!"... well yeah, but that means I have the same build order EVERY TIME. Plus if the player is competent enough to back up their MG42 with a grenadier squad, then good luck. Now in most 1v1 maps you can go cap around, but with chokepoint maps (or maps where they can fortify in a building to cut off a large part of the map), then you're screwed. In 2v2, you're even more screwed. This is leading to boring gameplay. This patch should have nerfed the weapon teams instead of this other stuff they did. Flanking with riflemen worked, even when they holed up in a building. Flanking with conscripts NEVER works without molotovs (unless they leave the MG unattended for 2 minutes), even if I catch them out in the open. That's dumb. And god forbid they get one into a building.

Once they fix this issue, I'll be ok with the game again.

So much rage. Being patronising to the devs won't make you more audible.

Having a 100% reliable AT-nade + faust was, as PQ noted in the stream, killing vehicle flanking plays, especially with heavier tanks which are both slower and pricier most of the time (panther's an exception). I'd note that kiting the infantry is impossible when you have an SU-85 sitting around. The chance of engine damage on a heavy tank from a faust or AT nade to the front still seems reasonably good (from the devs stream), on medium tanks I think it's basically reliable. My main concern with it is the KV-8 but I think that concern is more a general balance one with that vehicle.

WRT ram: previously, T-34s were problematically weak against tier 3 and problematically strong against the more expensive tier 4, tigers, etc etc. You would ram a P-IV or anything stronger almost 100% of the time. Now you have more options against all German armour but also an incentive to not instantly ram anything just because you can. I take it you're aware of the greater amount of skill-based ram-related micro that's been added in with the patch? I believe that ram against P-IVs is still 100% reliable, right?

IMO, the genuinely reliable snares should be the ones that require, y'know, prior placement, rather than just oorahing conscripts at any vehicle not fast enough to get out of the way and then having the SU-85 bash away at it.

MG-42s have a lot of hard counters (sniper, M3 flamer, mortar) and some soft counters (conscripts in blizzard with molotovs, flanking conscripts, mortar smoke, maxims, ZiS barrage). More importantly, a lost/stolen MG-42 is an absolutely huge blow for the Germans. Not only are they much less able to decrew it but with the lack of molotovs, good snipers, etc etc they find it harder to displace it as well, and much much harder to steal. They may be a tad too quick on the suppression but I don't actually think they're that broken right now.

The suppression bulletin is probably too good right now but bulletin balance is kind of tangential to the core game, which needs to be nailed down a bit more before you can balance bulletins, I reckon.

Maxims are OK (they used to be insanely good vs. German T1 until relic raised the skill ceiling by making the MG vs MG battles dependent on using them well and by tweaking the set-up time, damage and suppression). They're not as strong as an MG-42 but they're much harder to punish, kill and steal. Soviet 82mm mortar needs to be a bit more accurate imo, otherwise I think the T2 building can offer you quite a lot.

Panzerwerfers are pretty good. Rare because T4. Quick recharge, reasonably accurate, high damage, indirect fire so don't have to go anywhere near an enemy's firing arc. All damage done in one barrage so you're not stuck firing at empty space for ages. Just as importantly, they're the reason T4 gives you another element for your army.

I've seen worse pathing. There are a few irritating reversing fails and vehicles getting hung up on trees (and fuck Pripyat Spring) but otherwise it's generally predictable enough. I thought blaming pathing was one of the main hobbies of DOW 2 players : p

On the RNG, CoH has always been a matter of playing the numbers, rolling with the punches, gameplay experience and creativity over clinical, accurate stat-based microing. Its version of the skill ceiling is very different to, say, Starcraft's.

----

@Pewpew,

Soviet mortars, maxims, conscripts with molotovs (especially on snow maps) and ZiS barrage can all soft counter MG42s with proper play. Snipers hard counter them as well. Yeah, tier 1 is *better* against MGs (especially on Langreskaya, I think) but it's not like T2 lacks options.

General curiosity: does a deflecting ram hit write off your T-34? (you still deal 160 damage, I believe)...

T2 is not a good option for countering 2x MG42 openings. It costs more fuel than the T1 (not a lot, but still a delay) and most importantly does not contain units that allow you to easily take back territory like the M3 - ie. forcing retreats. Mortar - you are completely relying on luck and it is less accurate than the German one - they simply move back out of the barrage area if needed. Maxims cannot "soft counter" MG42s anymore as they will get pinned before the MG42 9/10 times. ZiS barrage - spending 60 munitions and hoping enough hit to force a retreat before it gets overrun by infantry isn't what I'd call a reliable counter. T2 and you're playing serious catch up on lost ground with less ability to force off the Germans. This is why almost all games it's T1 for M3 w/flame engineers and/or snipers.

T2 is not a good option for countering 2x MG42 openings. It costs more fuel than the T1 (not a lot, but still a delay) and most importantly does not contain units that allow you to easily take back territory like the M3 - ie. forcing retreats. Mortar - you are completely relying on luck and it is less accurate than the German one - they simply move back out of the barrage area if needed. Maxims cannot "soft counter" MG42s anymore as they will get pinned before the MG42 9/10 times. ZiS barrage - spending 60 munitions and hoping enough hit to force a retreat before it gets overrun by infantry isn't what I'd call a reliable counter. T2 and you're playing serious catch up on lost ground with less ability to force off the Germans. This is why almost all games it's T1 for M3 w/flame engineers and/or snipers.

You get T2 after some conscripts rather than first thing. It gives you more things that are good at holding territory rather than things that are good at taking it. The Maxim soft counter to an MG 42 involves either flanking around the arc or distracting the MG42 with another unit, which is why it's a soft counter (previously it was basically a hard counter in that you could just plonk it in an MG 42's arc and wait for it to win). Once it gets the pin off, you're laughing. The ZiS, like any AT gun, requires support but its barrage is reasonably good at making an MG move so you can move conscripts in against it.

Yeah, if you see more than 2 MGs, the T1->T4 option is basically the obvious one, since you have a ton of hard counters to MGs and more things that'll actually kill the MG rather than just forcing it off. If you see 1 or 2, tier 2 is reasonably good.

I think the increased fuel cost is a red herring, given scout cars cost fuel as well.