OKW overhaul discussion

Actually rocket arty in general isnt the best tool for anti building... if you wanna take out structures use howitzers... otherwise the stuka is the best at the single role of building destruction

Stop repeating that rubbish.

Using the factory building next to the left VP on Essen Steelworks as a target, it takes:

2 volley from a Land matress at max range
2 volleys from a Katyusha at max range
3 volleys from Calliope at max range (Though the second volley brings the building well within 1hko range from any tank shell or mortar shell)
4 volleys from Stuka at max range
6 volleys from a Panzerwerfer at max range

HOWEVER, the caveat is this: A vet 4 Stuka can one hit kill a building for 100 muni using the incendiary barrage depending on your luck by setting it on fire.

It is extremely important to note. I chose the biggest building LENGTH wise and 3 of the rocket still lands far enough away to not do anything. If the building is smaller, it would take much more effort to kill it using the Stuka since even more of the rockets will be totally wasted.

Theyre better vs smaller especially wooden buildings which the kat would have trouble targeting... the stuka is also better vs emplacements as it takes only 2-3 to kill an emplacement at max range... the werfer takes more..

In wooden efa maps the stuka is especially lethal

Theyre better vs smaller especially wooden buildings which the kat would have trouble targeting... the stuka is also better vs emplacements as it takes only 2-3 to kill an emplacement at max range... the werfer takes more..

In wooden efa maps the stuka is especially lethal

In wooden EFA maps anything is lethal, lol.

Katy has no issue targeting smaller wooden building because the amount of rockets it would take to demolish it would also decrease massively.

Mattress might struggle depending on RNjesus though.

And finally, against emplacements. Yeah, if they dont brace like they always do, sure the stuka is more lethal.

Actually having used kats vs buildings ive generally found howis and stukas to be much more... efficient... than kats... at least vs non stone structures...

Ill conduct tests on this when i get back...

Actually having used kats vs buildings ive generally found howis and stukas to be much more... efficient... than kats... at least vs non stone structures...

Ill conduct tests on this when i get back...

Np, and just to make sure you know I am not getting at you or anything.

I do remember relic nerfing the stuka's ability to demolish buildings a while back so it isnt a building deleting device any more.

I remember an HP nerf and an aoe nerf but not a building nerf...

Np aswell... im only triggered by idiots that call JLI "balanced"

Now that the Ostwind is part of the overhaul, I might as well propose some minor buffs to make it (and the Ostheer one) more relevant again.

10. Flakpanzer IV Ostwind
This unit's performance is currently mediocre and as it stands there is no real reason to get it. It needs to do slightly better damage to be a viable choice over other vehicles.

• Improve AA capabilities so that it matches the OKW 251 Flak Halftrack.

• Increase rate of fire on main gun. Vet 3 cooldown and reload reduction should be moved to vet 0.

• Increase penetration so it can effectively fight Allied light armor. Penetration increased to ~80/60/50 from 55/40/35.

• Listed changes are for both OKW and Ostheer versions of the Ostwind.

idk if its penetration or accuracy vs light armor that plagues the ostwind... as light armor that doesnt decide to move actually dies fast to the ostwind... the real issue is when they start moving and the ostwind has to move aswell... damn thing can barely score a hit...

The accuracy is the same as most medium tanks (near 0.05; mid 0.0375; far 0.025) so that shouldn't really be the problem. The problem is that getting the 10 penetrations (40 damage) the Ostwind needs to kill lights like the AEC, Stuart or T-70 takes ages, while the Ostwind should be able to take these units down.

Right now it has a fair chance to bounce (55/40/35 pen versus 55, 70 and 80 armor) combined with a bad rate of fire means it simply can't really effectively fight lights at all. If it had guaranteed penetration with a bit better ROF, its performance versus lights should increase drastically.

The accuracy is the same as most medium tanks (near 0.05; mid 0.0375; far 0.025) so that shouldn't really be the problem. ..

Light tank have smaller size and are fast so Ostwind has to move further decreasing its accuracy while it is higher scatter chance with the low scatter max and the tendency to hit ground/world object reduce the change to actually hit light vehicles via collision. So I would say accuracy is an issue.

Actually the mechanism could be change completely to be similar with Centaur using accuracy to hit target and not AOE.

That could be done, but that would remove its unique profile and make the Ostwind basically a Centaur clone. And it's quite a drastic change that would basically reset its balancing. I think it's much better to take its current state (mediocre) and just tweak it a bit to make it good.

That could be done, but that would remove its unique profile and make the Ostwind basically a Centaur clone. And it's quite a drastic change that would basically reset its balancing. I think it's much better to take its current state (mediocre) and just tweak it a bit to make it good.

The current situation is simply silly and confusing
The 222, the luch, the Centaur and the Ostwind all use different mechanism they should simply become similar and simplified so that players had an idea of how these unit work.

One could also avoid also other things like the accuracy vet bonuses the 222 gets that only help the mg since the main gun can not really hit infantry and its rather pointless.

The current situation is simply silly and confusing
The 222, the luch, the Centaur and the Ostwind all use different mechanism they should simply become similar and simplified so that players had an idea of how these unit work.

I do not agree, that would dumb down the game significantly and make it more boring. Part of mastering a game like CoH2 is getting yourself informed about all the different mechanics.

I do not agree, that would dumb down the game significantly and make it more boring. Part of mastering a game like CoH2 is getting yourself informed about all the different mechanics.

There should be no different mechanics of similar units. Compare the 222 main gun and luch main gun.

The difference add complexity without any real reason or benefit.

I'm with vipper on this one. Things like a 2cm auto cannon in words is confusing when it functions differently on different units. It's like hit the dirt for the Soviet--on guards it improves their offensive capabilities but on cons it makes the immune to Supression, improves their durability and decreases firepower. It's confusing having things named the same and function different.

The 2cm autocannons on the 222 and the Luchs are not the same gun. The Luchs had an improved version with a faster ROF, which explains why it can function differently in game. The comparison to Hit the Dirt is off, as the 2cm guns do the same thing in a slightly different way: kill infantry. The Hit The Dirts have completely opposite functions and shouldn't be the same ability.

It's an integral part of CoH2 to have similar weapons perform differently anyway. The 88mm on the Tiger does 160 damage, then the long barrel on the KT does 240 while the exact same gun on the Ferdinand does 300. Then the 128mm on the Jagdtiger also does 300 damage, while the 122mm of the IS-2 does 160.

But diversity in units, mechanics and weapons is what makes the game fun and entertaining.


Also turning the Ostwind into an accuracy based vehicle would mean it would two-shot models, which combined with its high rate of fire would wipe squads for days. But then if you lower the damage you'll mess with weapon standardization again because it wouldn't make sense for a 37mm gun to do any lower damage per shot.

And again, changing anything fundamental about the Ostwind would completely reset its balance, when right now its already proven to be balanced yet slightly underperforming. I just don't get why you'd want to go the hard and long way with drastic changes when simple minor adjustments would achieve the same result. The core mechanics are beyond saving at this point. It's better to apply some band aids. Relic doesn't have the resources anymore for drastic changes. You're gonna have to accept that the majority of the game as it currently functions is here to stay at this point and there can only be small balance changes rather than complete overhauls.

... as the 2cm guns do the same thing in a slightly different way: kill infantry. ...

Their mechanism are completely different.

The different behavior add complexity for not good reason.

Actually the 222 cannon does very little damage to infantry most of the damage comes from mg.

...You're gonna have to accept that the majority of the game as it currently functions is here to stay at this point and there can only be small balance changes rather than complete overhauls....

These changes are simple and do improve the game. They are not overhauls, but even that theory hold little water since the game has see much more overhaul since Relic allowed other to work on the patch than before.

Their mechanism are completely different.

The different behavior add complexity for not good reason.

Actually the 222 cannon does very little damage to infantry most of the damage comes from mg.

It's just how the game is and how it's always been. Similar or the same weapon systems act differently in different roles for the sake of variety, balance and gameplay.

As another example, there are at least 8 different versions of the MG 42 with a wide variety of stats and effects.

These changes are simple and do improve the game. They are not overhauls

You want to change the way the tank's offensive armament works completely, I'd call that a pretty big overhaul. No one is going to know how such changes will make it perform and balancing that will take a long time. It would be so much easier to just work with what we got right now and slightly nudge it into the right direction so it goes from underwelming to decent/good.