While the reinforcement feature of the halftrack is ok as it is with any other reinforcement unit, the quad upgrade isn't strong enough to warrant its purchase.
The combination of a severe damage nerf and removal of the suppression on the move has resulted in an weapon upgrade that functions largely as a downgrade to its stock utility.
I would recommend one of three things:
-Buff damage output to the quad mount, but keep everything else
-Bring back suppression on the move, but keep the low damage output
-Allow reinforcement when upgraded, but at 1/4 normal speed
M5 quad underwhelming
23 Oct 2018, 08:45 AM
#1
Posts: 783
23 Oct 2018, 08:48 AM
#2
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
All the other AA HTs suppress and deal massive damage.
Kind of ironical that one AA HT that arrives latest to the party(cost is questionable, muni vs fuel), isn't all that effective and certainly isn't effective enough to ever justify its purchase over T-70.
Kind of ironical that one AA HT that arrives latest to the party(cost is questionable, muni vs fuel), isn't all that effective and certainly isn't effective enough to ever justify its purchase over T-70.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
23 Oct 2018, 09:23 AM
#3
Posts: 232
All the other AA HTs suppress and deal massive damage.
Kind of ironical that one AA HT that arrives latest to the party(cost is questionable, muni vs fuel), isn't all that effective and certainly isn't effective enough to ever justify its purchase over T-70.
It is effective you have to keep it still for max damage its a perfectly balanced unit. The t70 is flat out OP which is why you think it is underwhelming. It's not the quad that needs fixing its the t70.
23 Oct 2018, 09:30 AM
#5
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Personal comment do not help a Balance thread to be productive.
On the issue of Quad I guess one could test making suppression a timed ability while reducing the mu cost for the upgrade.
On the other hand the AA capabilities of the units are OP and should be toned down.
On the issue of Quad I guess one could test making suppression a timed ability while reducing the mu cost for the upgrade.
On the other hand the AA capabilities of the units are OP and should be toned down.
23 Oct 2018, 09:46 AM
#6
Posts: 5279
I disagree that the AA is OP given its the only AA option the Soviet have. Is-2 and isu both have pintle but they are kinda expensive to count... Other factions have pintle to increase the odds or even multiple units that they can pick. M5 is also one of the least durable. It's got a job and it does it. But it has glaring weaknesses too
#stalinwept
23 Oct 2018, 10:07 AM
#7
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I disagree that the AA is OP given its the only AA option the Soviet have. Is-2 and isu both have pintle but they are kinda expensive to count... Other factions have pintle to increase the odds or even multiple units that they can pick. M5 is also one of the least durable. It's got a job and it does it. But it has glaring weaknesses too
Try testing in cheat mode and see how fast it can shoot down planes compared to any other AA weapon.
The fact that Soviet have little AA power is why I suggested lowering the mu cost.
23 Oct 2018, 10:17 AM
#8
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
M5 quad is the best AA option in the game though. It´s relatively cheap while being the most potent AA gun.
Unlike all the other AA tanks or LV you don´t get it for AI duties but for shooting down planes. That makes it more specialized and a decent fit for Soviets who lack any other source of AA support. Only thing that I´d suggest is maybe reduce the muni price of the AA upgrade to 70.
I dont think buffing the M5 HTs performance vs infantry makes any sense as long as it´s in the same tier as the T70. Better to keep the T70 the main AI soviet LV while keeping the M5 a specialized and easily accessible AA counter for 2v2+.
Unlike all the other AA tanks or LV you don´t get it for AI duties but for shooting down planes. That makes it more specialized and a decent fit for Soviets who lack any other source of AA support. Only thing that I´d suggest is maybe reduce the muni price of the AA upgrade to 70.
I dont think buffing the M5 HTs performance vs infantry makes any sense as long as it´s in the same tier as the T70. Better to keep the T70 the main AI soviet LV while keeping the M5 a specialized and easily accessible AA counter for 2v2+.
23 Oct 2018, 12:05 PM
#9
Posts: 98
I would advocate for the muni cost decrease to the quad upgrade. 100 muni is way to steep for for moderate anti-inf power and the only AA unit the sov gets.
As mentioned, the unit is best kept in the rear lines, covering your support weapons and shutting down any attempts at flanking with inf.
Its close range DPS is quite high, so you can really shred squads that have been suppressed by running up close.
As mentioned, the unit is best kept in the rear lines, covering your support weapons and shutting down any attempts at flanking with inf.
Its close range DPS is quite high, so you can really shred squads that have been suppressed by running up close.
Please bear in mind that I only play team game modes.
23 Oct 2018, 12:13 PM
#10
Posts: 192
I must say that i'd like to use it as a suppression plateform with the cpt to have a synergy that would help contain blob, in a 1v1/2v2 perspective so you can play calliope in those matchup without trolling or only use recon, lmg 1919 and calli.
USF finnaly have mines FeelsGoodMan.
https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198050972280
https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198050972280
23 Oct 2018, 12:17 PM
#11
Posts: 1554 | Subs: 7
Let's keep personal remarks out of this discussion.
"Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
23 Oct 2018, 13:44 PM
#12
Posts: 1096
It really needs to be a suppression platform before all else as the T70 covers the role of damage output far better.
Maybe a slight decrease in cost however that isn't too relevant as Soviets aren't as munitions thirsty as other allied factions.
Maybe a slight decrease in cost however that isn't too relevant as Soviets aren't as munitions thirsty as other allied factions.
23 Oct 2018, 13:46 PM
#13
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Maybe a slight decrease in cost however that isn't too relevant as Soviets aren't as munitions thirsty as other allied factions.
Why people still believe that myth is beyond me.
Every single encounter needs you to use muni and most of soviet muni abilities got cost increase.
Just because there are no stock lasting muni dumps aka weapon upgrades other then PTRS does not mean soviets aren't consuming muni like any other army.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
23 Oct 2018, 13:57 PM
#14
Posts: 1096
Why people still believe that myth is beyond me.
Every single encounter needs you to use muni and most of soviet muni abilities got cost increase.
Just because there are no stock lasting muni dumps aka weapon upgrades other then PTRS does not mean soviets aren't consuming muni like any other army.
Meh, Compared to USF/UKF where I'm piling munitions into infantry weapons I seem to be able to raise the amount needed for the M5 upgrade with greater ease.
Sure they may be short of munitions in the beginning while you kit out Penals etc but there are no vehicle upgrades to buy (I'd rather there was tbh).
This is still including a healthy smattering of mines on the map too.
23 Oct 2018, 14:26 PM
#15
Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1
I think the reason people won't get M5 is not the unit itself, but the extremely good performance of T70. Even with your suggestions, I don't think anyone would go for an M5 as long as you can get a T70.
23 Oct 2018, 15:42 PM
#16
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
T70 soft counter Luch and can keep a Puma at distance with some good hit. Does the M5? nop. M5 could have a better synergy if moved into T2.
23 Oct 2018, 16:04 PM
#17
Posts: 607
I honestly think it's fine mostly fine. The 100 muni cost is indeed steep, but as a "Soviet main" I think it does its job pretty well.
Having said that, it does feel a little weird that a single 50 cal HMG suppresses better than 4x50 cal HMGs.
But eh, its AA is super good, and for that I think it serves it's own top-heavy role.
I think the only real issue with it is that it doesn't perform anywhere near what the other AA options do.
Ostwind and Centaur can fight and kill light vehicles and light tanks, and even damage mediums in a pinch. the USF AA HT can even counter a puma if you distract it and/or time the shots.
The quad can't really do any of that, and I'm not saying it _should_ be able to, just that if one goes into using it with the same expectation as those other AA units, they may find themselves with a bill for resources and not much to show for it.
Having said that, it does feel a little weird that a single 50 cal HMG suppresses better than 4x50 cal HMGs.
But eh, its AA is super good, and for that I think it serves it's own top-heavy role.
I think the only real issue with it is that it doesn't perform anywhere near what the other AA options do.
Ostwind and Centaur can fight and kill light vehicles and light tanks, and even damage mediums in a pinch. the USF AA HT can even counter a puma if you distract it and/or time the shots.
The quad can't really do any of that, and I'm not saying it _should_ be able to, just that if one goes into using it with the same expectation as those other AA units, they may find themselves with a bill for resources and not much to show for it.
23 Oct 2018, 17:38 PM
#18
Posts: 301
Soviet quad M5 excels at AA work, but does nothing against advancing infantry, as it requieres 3 bursts to supress infantry and yellow cover compleately denies it.
If its supression was a bit better it could become another tool to penal builds and an alternative to the T70 with its own flavor
Overall, the underwhelming upgrade for M5 makes them less desirable as, lets say, its ostheer counterpart
If its supression was a bit better it could become another tool to penal builds and an alternative to the T70 with its own flavor
Overall, the underwhelming upgrade for M5 makes them less desirable as, lets say, its ostheer counterpart
23 Oct 2018, 17:45 PM
#19
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Having said that, it does feel a little weird that a single 50 cal HMG suppresses better than 4x50 cal HMGs.
That's simply some gameplay over realism, just like the Panther's 3x MG 34/42 or Grenadier MG 42 doesn't deal any suppression as opposed to the team weapon variant.
23 Oct 2018, 17:59 PM
#20
Posts: 607
Well, yeah. It's still comically counter intuitive tho.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
27 | ||
 |
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
248 | ||
|
|
|
|
56 | ||
 |
|
|
26 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
580 users are online:
580 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM