Login

russian armor

How is the game state for people right now?

19 Feb 2019, 13:04 PM
#21
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

Riflemen need a little buff


Riflemen buffs would completly brake the game at this point. USF was weak before all the changes but now they are actually the best allied faction for 1v1 and 2v2 (depending on map and match-up). No way should they get a buff to their mainline infantry.
19 Feb 2019, 13:13 PM
#22
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2019, 12:39 PMVipper
In my personal opinion the game is going in wrong direction with powerful infantry early on that can brutally and frontally attack the enemy.

Or powerful light vehicles that simply hold too much shock value.

The use of combined arm has simply been lowered.

The fire fights simply last a sort period and do not actually allow tactical movement to have meaningful impact.

I can agree on the infantry, but will have to disagree on lights, as long as they have no place post early game and basically have a window of effecitveness measured in up to 5 minutes, minus exceptional, super conservative plays, in which case they last long, but don't have much of an impact due to how careful you need to be with them.

Puma and SU-76 are pretty much perfect lights that are useful both, when they arrive and later on.

And fights need to be short out of cover, otherwise you'd have CQC inf steamrolling everything.
19 Feb 2019, 13:20 PM
#23
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

1CP Pathfinders makes them incredibly awkward to put in builds: the early CP tracker isn't a consistent timer.

The current cooldown based solution is much better for preventing easy Pathfinder spam.
19 Feb 2019, 13:23 PM
#24
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

Generally agreed with Katitof. The infantry balance seems good now, outside of a few outliers. JLI get too hard to hit, Assault Guards and Assault Grens are bad, cons don't scale. I am also skeptical about Falls being too damaging, but I also don't see them often enough to get a decent sense of counterplay.
19 Feb 2019, 13:56 PM
#25
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2019, 13:20 PMLago
1CP Pathfinders makes them incredibly awkward to put in builds: the early CP tracker isn't a consistent timer.

The current cooldown based solution is much better for preventing easy Pathfinder spam.

CP 0 units are map depend.

For instance they can spawn allot closer to the front-line from "rail and metal" on south side than in the north.

A far better solution imo would be for this units to become build able from HQ so that it does not upset the built times of faction allow numerical advantage.
19 Feb 2019, 14:01 PM
#26
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2019, 13:56 PMVipper

CP 0 units are map depend.

For instance they can spawn allot closer to the front-line from "rail and metal" on south side than in the north.

A far better solution imo would be for this units to become build able from HQ so that it does not upset the built times of faction allow numerical advantage.
cp0 units in t0 i like it
19 Feb 2019, 14:19 PM
#27
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2019, 12:39 PMVipper
In my personal opinion the game is going in wrong direction with powerful infantry early on that can brutally and frontally attack the enemy.


I don't think this is bad per sé, as it creates a lot of diversity and tension. Personally I really liked how the Commander Revamp Patch has greatly increased the number of viable units and strats because it has added a huge amount of variety.

Around the time of GCS2 the game was perhaps too balanced which just made matches rather boring (same meta used every match) and dragged almost every game into an hour long slugfest.
19 Feb 2019, 15:01 PM
#28
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2019, 12:39 PMVipper
In my personal opinion the game is going in wrong direction with powerful infantry early on that can brutally and frontally attack the enemy.

Or powerful light vehicles that simply hold too much shock value.

The use of combined arm has simply been lowered.

The fire fights simply last a sort period and do not actually allow tactical movement to have meaningful impact.


I can't disagree with that, my feeling is that we went from late game heavy call-in meta to light/medium call-in meta to infantry call-in meta.

But my biggest concern is about the Balance team not willing at all to remove the 100 manpower OKW get for free early game and reduce by 100 the total cost of their trucks. This would solve so many issues in one shot.
19 Feb 2019, 15:40 PM
#29
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I don't think this is bad per sé, as it creates a lot of diversity and tension. Personally I really liked how the Commander Revamp Patch has greatly increased the number of viable units and strats because it has added a huge amount of variety.

Around the time of GCS2 the game was perhaps too balanced which just made matches rather boring (same meta used every match) and dragged almost every game into an hour long slugfest.

Not really.

As clearly demonstrate by Reckon company unit have times frames and many of this units are simply too early for their time frame.

One can easily increase diversity if allow the option to scale in the same time frame with mainline infantry or if these unit provide an early advantage that is diminished in time.

When it comes to stale meta that has to do more with certain units or abilities being OP or with certain built being safer. It does not have to do with power level of early infantry.
19 Feb 2019, 16:18 PM
#30
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



Riflemen buffs would completly brake the game at this point. USF was weak before all the changes but now they are actually the best allied faction for 1v1 and 2v2 (depending on map and match-up). No way should they get a buff to their mainline infantry.


What?
How are they better than Soviets?
Specially vs OKW.
20 Feb 2019, 00:38 AM
#31
avatar of Flyingsmonster

Posts: 155

My only gripe is the changes to Recon. I'm used to it by now, and I'm OK with the AT gun being gone and CP3 airdrop rework, but I feel like the changes to the pack howie were unnecessary.

That, and the increase in price of I&R Pathfinders is too expensive. They should be a cheaper unit, maybe 270mp is a reasonable middle ground. I'm fine with the delay to spawn them too now that I'm used to it, I played Recon all the time when they were 1CP and had no problems with that either, even though I always wished they were 0CP at the time. If they decrease the price of I&R AND Airborne Pathfinders I'll be very happy. Right now at 290mp I don't have much incentive to build either unit outside of getting one squad for its LOS when I need that.

Outside of this, the game is pretty decent, not too many issues in any factions, and there's been a lot of positive changes lately, such as giving UKF a snare through Royal Engineers, and the changes to JLI.

20 Feb 2019, 00:54 AM
#32
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

My only gripe is the changes to Recon. I'm used to it by now, and I'm OK with the AT gun being gone and CP3 airdrop rework, but I feel like the changes to the pack howie were unnecessary.

That, and the increase in price of I&R Pathfinders is too expensive. They should be a cheaper unit, maybe 270mp is a reasonable middle ground. I'm fine with the delay to spawn them too now that I'm used to it, I played Recon all the time when they were 1CP and had no problems with that either, even though I always wished they were 0CP at the time. If they decrease the price of I&R AND Airborne Pathfinders I'll be very happy. Right now at 290mp I don't have much incentive to build either unit outside of getting one squad for its LOS when I need that.

Outside of this, the game is pretty decent, not too many issues in any factions, and there's been a lot of positive changes lately, such as giving UKF a snare through Royal Engineers, and the changes to JLI.



I'd honestly rather have IRs back at CP1 and costing 250mp myself.
21 Feb 2019, 03:02 AM
#33
avatar of kingdun3284

Posts: 392

21 Feb 2019, 04:05 AM
#34
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

http://coh2chart.com/ axis is op in team game



That is very out of date.
21 Feb 2019, 08:19 AM
#35
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

http://coh2chart.com/ axis is op in team game

Unfortunately, Relic hasn't been able to update their database since 16.5.2017. The charts aren't up to date anymore.

Dem reading skillz.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

572 users are online: 572 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM