Login

russian armor

USF Tech Changes Mod Changelog

PAGES (17)down
24 Nov 2018, 06:31 AM
#261
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Nov 2018, 06:02 AMGrumpy



The M20 would be much better if it came without the bazooka but included armor skirts.



M20 car : 240/20->250/30, skirt equiped basically, delete bazooka

top 50cal penetration 3/2/1 -> 7/6/5

vet 2 +15% accuracy -> increase penetration 30%


i siad already about M20
24 Nov 2018, 06:41 AM
#262
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Nov 2018, 06:31 AMblancat



M20 car : 240/20->250/30, skirt equiped basically, delete bazooka

top 50cal penetration 3/2/1 -> 7/6/5

vet 2 +15% accuracy -> increase penetration 30%



i siad already about M20


24 Nov 2018, 06:52 AM
#263
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810





anything problem?
24 Nov 2018, 08:13 AM
#264
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Nov 2018, 08:22 AMEsxile


Why don't you simply put them a 200mp each. You're not making this doctrine anymore viable by making it heavy munition sink. The only thing in it that doesn't cost/need munition are Pathfinder...

Just a question, why not dissociating the M20 from T1 and put it at T0 available when first officer hit the field. At the moment I see close to 0 reason to build captain first on 1vs1, the lieutenant got all the pressuring stuff while the captain is relegated to be a kind of support tier in team game. Having the M20 would make it more appealing in any game mode.

Nice to see that finally USF get CP from teching, M8 is maybe going to hit the field before the sherman now...



You need double Bars to make pathfinders worth a 290mp unit most of the time. So the entire doctrine abilities require a muni sink to preform.
24 Nov 2018, 08:53 AM
#265
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 366




You need double Bars to make pathfinders worth a 290mp unit most of the time. So the entire doctrine abilities require a muni sink to preform.


I have been playing around with pathfinders and I'll say don't.

Double equipping pathfinders do not transfer the bar to another squad member, if a member who has a scoped Garand dies, their weapon will also not transfer.

IR pathfinder are better in my opinion because they are cheaper, have artillary barrage (which is very decent) have one member that can transfer weapons after double bar upgarde and have one scoped garand to sniper infantry.
24 Nov 2018, 09:11 AM
#266
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I have been playing around with pathfinders and I'll say don't.

Double equipping pathfinders do not transfer the bar to another squad member, if a member who has a scoped Garand dies, their weapon will also not transfer.

IR pathfinder are better in my opinion because they are cheaper, have artillary barrage (which is very decent) have one member that can transfer weapons after double bar upgarde and have one scoped garand to sniper infantry.

Pathfinder synergy with BAR does not depend on them carrying the BAR. If a riflemen squad next to them has it the affect is similar, because it comes from the fact that BAR distribute damage across enemy entities reducing the time for critical threshold.

BAR on the other hand benefit allot by the 20% accuracy R.E. get a vet 1 and by the 14% range/20% accuracy Pathfinder get at vet 3.

24 Nov 2018, 09:42 AM
#267
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1




Becouse of the old history of pathfinders equipt with 2x bar (Price abuse i think it was) and current 0 CP requirement change i would highly suggest to give pathfinders 1 weapon slot expect of 2.

Don't think the weapon upgrade is accually needed becouse of intensive high ammo doctrine build. Of course that bar abuse will in effect block player from spamming p47 strafes, support weapons drop, or paratroopers upgrades BUT even though the abuse is really powerfull.

Therefore again i suggest to remove 1 weapon slot. It's not like pathfinders won't be effective without it anyway.
24 Nov 2018, 09:53 AM
#268
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Nov 2018, 09:42 AMStark

Becouse of the old history of pathfinders equipt with 2x bar (Price abuse i think it was) and current 0 CP requirement change i would highly suggest to give pathfinders 1 weapon slot expect of 2.

Don't think the weapon upgrade is accually needed becouse of intensive high ammo doctrine build. Of course that bar abuse will in effect block player from spamming p47 strafes, support weapons drop, or paratroopers upgrades BUT even though the abuse is really powerfull.

Therefore again i suggest to remove 1 weapon slot. It's not like pathfinders won't be effective without it anyway.

Generally speaking the CP 0 units in USF (new assult engineer also) seem to allow USF to add allot of pressure since the can have an army of 1 R.E. 1riflemen 1 Call-in pretty fast, especially vs ostheer.

On could have this abilities start in cooldown similar to Osttruppen and check if they need to increase that CD.

One can also have this unit start with lower quality guns and lock their weapon upgrade behind tech. That might also be a way to lower the CP for Paras and Rangers (CP to 2 (1?) weapons needing Major?)

24 Nov 2018, 10:30 AM
#269
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 366

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Nov 2018, 09:11 AMVipper

Pathfinder synergy with BAR does not depend on them carrying the BAR. If a riflemen squad next to them has it the affect is similar, because it comes from the fact that BAR distribute damage across enemy entities reducing the time for critical threshold.

BAR on the other hand benefit allot by the 20% accuracy R.E. get a vet 1 and by the 14% range/20% accuracy Pathfinder get at vet 3.



jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2018, 23:28 PMSelvy289

If the argument is they can be equipped with bars, I'll remind you they are ment to Excel at range. If I wanted to equip units with bars, I'll just go riflemen.

Look beside vetterancy requirements being higher, JLI are just becoming blantently superior to pathfinders and I just hate seeing units that are similar become so different in cost/performance.

That is because you incorrectly assume that bar will not benefit Pathfinder in long range, BAR more than double the DPS of the M1a1 carbine so it a great long range weapon for Pathfinders. In addition the BAR spread damage across the enemy entities especially against 4 men squad thus making critical kills from scopes Garand more frequent.

My suggestions where not about increasing their performance but bringing them inline with other units (Veterancy overhaul, reinforcement cost/time, pop )and I actually suggested a price increase when they are being deployed via spawn.



Back in the commander feedback you rebuttal me with how efficient they are on pathfinders when I specifically said they would be better on rifles, now your not, seriously? (not sure how to quote from other threads).

And again I can guarantee if anyone has used both variation of pathfinders, Ir pathfinders are better.





24 Nov 2018, 11:12 AM
#270
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1



I have been playing around with pathfinders and I'll say don't.

Double equipping pathfinders do not transfer the bar to another squad member, if a member who has a scoped Garand dies, their weapon will also not transfer.

IR pathfinder are better in my opinion because they are cheaper, have artillary barrage (which is very decent) have one member that can transfer weapons after double bar upgarde and have one scoped garand to sniper infantry.


Yeah its a little gimmicky having all units technically have a weapon entity. This also makes Pathfinders super likely to drop Bars which sucks.

I do like bars on them since they vet up very quickly once they hit the field and their vet has notable impact on the bar performance.
24 Nov 2018, 14:49 PM
#271
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

I like IR Pathfinders too, they just feel more practical, down to their lower cost and extra perk, helps they are in a Commander I enjoy.
25 Nov 2018, 01:29 AM
#272
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Nov 2018, 09:53 AMVipper

Generally speaking the CP 0 units in USF (new assult engineer also) seem to allow USF to add allot of pressure since the can have an army of 1 R.E. 1riflemen 1 Call-in pretty fast, especially vs ostheer.

On could have this abilities start in cooldown similar to Osttruppen and check if they need to increase that CD.

One can also have this unit start with lower quality guns and lock their weapon upgrade behind tech. That might also be a way to lower the CP for Paras and Rangers (CP to 2 (1?) weapons needing Major?)


Those are good ideas. Would definitely work for paths, but I think assault engineers are more or less fine. OKW sturmpios are pretty similar and have better dps at range (negligible but it's there) and are a starting unit.

Paras and rangers are 3cp though. I really wish they were 2 and had weapon upgrades locked behind 3. Paras at the very least should be with their bad target size.
26 Nov 2018, 06:00 AM
#273
avatar of JimboSlyce

Posts: 29

I've played a few matches with USF against the AI, and I've been experimenting with build orders in the live game that kind of emulate what the new tech changes might be like.

So far I haven't found a reason these changes shouldn't be implemented.

To the people complaining about homogenization:

The core gameplay of Company of Heroes was designed around combined arms strategies. It's one of the pillars of the game, the whole rock-paper-scissors interaction that all units have with each other. It's one of the cornerstones of a strategy game.

As new factions were released, Relic tried to make them more interesting by giving them unique means of countering certain units and removing the more traditional ones. I think everyone could agree that the factions have gotten substantially better since the more traditional means of countering units have been slowly added back in over time.

My advice: no more half measures. Every faction needs easy access to an AT gun, HMG, and mobile indirect fire (mortar or otherwise). Every faction needs basic access to a vehicle snare. Every faction needs basic access to equip their infantry with things like grenades.

This update moves everything in the right direction, but several questions remain.

Why does every Allied faction have to pay for grenades where Axis get them for free with tech?
Why are the means by which the USF and UKF acquire vehicle snares so punitive?

These are genuine questions, not rhetorical questions meant to incite inflammatory comments.
26 Nov 2018, 09:55 AM
#274
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Why does every Allied faction have to pay for grenades where Axis get them for free with tech?
Why are the means by which the USF and UKF acquire vehicle snares so punitive?

These are genuine questions, not rhetorical questions meant to incite inflammatory comments.

Why to Ostheer need to research battle phases?
Why do Ostheer need to pay for battle Phases for things that might not want to unlock and might never use like the bundle grenades for PG and their Schreck even if they do not build a single schreck?
Why do Ostheer doctrinal infantry need to tech to unlock grenades?
Why do Ostheer get no added bonus for unlocking T4 and UKF get for Hammer/Anvil?

Simply because each faction has currently its own design.
26 Nov 2018, 10:25 AM
#275
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

And yet tech costs overall are similar, yet one side needs to unlock weapons and abilities with extra costs delaying armor, while other side gets all the freebies, because reasons.
26 Nov 2018, 11:11 AM
#276
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Nov 2018, 10:25 AMKatitof
And yet tech costs overall are similar, yet one side needs to unlock weapons and abilities with extra costs delaying armor, while other side gets all the freebies, because reasons.

Is that an actual claim that Ostheer have an advantage of other factions due to their tech tree or is it simply the usual rant everything Axis is OP everything Allied is UP?

The "the other side get all the freebies" claim is simply wrong and misleading, Ostheer do not get "free" officer USF does, Ostheer simply do not get "all the freebies".
26 Nov 2018, 11:19 AM
#277
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Nov 2018, 11:11 AMVipper

Is that an actual claim that Ostheer have an advantage of other factions due to their tech tree or is it simply the usual rant everything Axis is OP everything Allied is UP?

The "the other side get all the freebies" claim is simply wrong and misleading, Ostheer do not get "free" officer USF does, Ostheer simply do not get "all the freebies".

Well, there is an undeniable resource difference between ost getting to T3(and getting all weapon and nade/faust abilities for free in the process) and other factions getting to their med tank tech + weapon upgrades + nades.

There is resource advantage for both axis factions in that regard if you do the math.

Healing is a side cost for all factions, so that doesn't count.
26 Nov 2018, 12:02 PM
#278
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Nov 2018, 11:19 AMKatitof

Well, there is an undeniable resource difference between ost getting to T3(and getting all weapon and nade/faust abilities for free in the process) and other factions getting to their med tank tech + weapon upgrades + nades.

There is resource advantage for both axis factions in that regard if you do the math.

Healing is a side cost for all factions, so that doesn't count.

Undeniable you are once more wrong:
Ostheer:
BP 1--100/40
BP 2--200/90
T1----80/10
T2----220/20
T3----140/15
PzIV--350/120

Total for first medium 1070/295


UKF
Grenade--100/10
Weapons--150/15
PCP------180/30
CCP------280/115
Cromwell-340/110

Total for first medium 1050/280

Actually it is cheaper to get a medium with UKF still getting grenades and weapons (and snares with the latest patch).

Pls actually to your math before making "undeniable" claims, it will save all allot of time.

Weapon upgrades and grenades do not come for "free" for Ostheer then need BP 1 that has 100/40 cost.
26 Nov 2018, 12:07 PM
#279
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Are you nitpicking again?
I don't see costs for USF and soviets there.
26 Nov 2018, 12:10 PM
#280
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Nov 2018, 12:07 PMKatitof
Are you nitpicking again?
I don't see costs for USF and soviets there.

Are you not aware of what you are typing?
jump backJump back to quoted post26 Nov 2018, 11:19 AMKatitof

Well, there is an undeniable resource difference between ost getting to T3(and getting all weapon and nade/faust abilities for free in the process) and other factions getting to their med tank tech + weapon upgrades + nades.
...

Other factions include UKF, I simply point out that what you wrote if actually wrong and misleading. (Yes I am aware that once you are proven wrong by facts, you will start using silly semantics arguments and try to pretend that you are not wrong. No matter what you argue you claim is false and misleading.)

If you want to to include Soviet and USF go ahead, stop being lazy and do the math yourself instead of accusing me of nitpicking. You can even start a new thread instead of derailing this one.

Until you do, do the math, have a nice day.
PAGES (17)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

632 users are online: 632 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49873
Welcome our newest member, Bigdaddygames
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM