Giving penals an upgradeable bazooka would also allow for much more flexibility in build orders.
+ 1
Posts: 248
Giving penals an upgradeable bazooka would also allow for much more flexibility in build orders.
Posts: 401
Posts: 525
Posts: 401
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedThat's the reason why there's so much confusion and back and forth about penal troops.
Posts: 401
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedIt is not the player's job to have to learn every detailed stat in the game.
Posts: 401
Posts: 301
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedPosts: 301
People may get upset that units dont do what they assume they would, according to history or their apparent title/graphic etc, but unfortunately CoH2 only comes so far as to historical accuracy.
Posts: 879
Posts: 647
Posts: 2181
im quite annoyed by the fact that the late game superiority of german tanks are more or less caused by the lack of infantry AT in the soviet army. because dealing with infantry is not one of the strong points of german armour.
most of the german late game tanks are AT but have enough armour/hp to spearhead assaults. however, most of the soviet AT are actually armoured, be it IS-2, t34s or SU85, the exact things that german armour actually counter. the only non armoured effective AT that soviets have is the ZiS but they are just as effective as US AT guns without AT rounds.
this leaves a huge vulnerability in soviet's ability to deal with armour. there is no mobile hard counters to german armour. AT guns don't count as they are limited in mobility and require constant resetting up, easily bypassed.
which leads to the usual, AT nades/button to disable german armour and then send in your own tanks to deal with his anti-tank tanks, which honestly, is quite a high risk no reward move.
where is that unit that can effectively cover against armour rushes? In coh1, US had AP rounds for frontal assaults and bazookas/recoiless for any tanks that gets behind the AT gun wall. they were effective against unsupported tanks who constantly showed their rear armour to them. this i feel, is the main cause of german armour superiority. not too much with german armour being OP, but more so with soviet with inadequately equipped, a bad design.
Posts: 783 | Subs: 3
And that was one of the major points I was trying to make in the original thread: it's bad design when a faction is only winning games because of its super units. Elite units in COH just did not totally alter outcomes the same way KV-8s, ISU-152s, shock squads and so on do in COH2. The only unit that comes close is the Calliope.
Posts: 879
Why is that bad design? Broodwar, which if we exclude the boring-ass MOBAs had perhaps the most entertaining RTS gameplay ever at a high level, had TONS of units that behaved that way. Siege tanks, science vessels, defilers, high templar all had extremely strong AOE or spells that could wreck your day.
And I disagree that this didn't exist in vCoH. Snipers, PE armored cars, vet 2 grens, the fast m8, the fast puma all completely negated everything you had on the field until you countered them.
I manage to win plenty of soviet 1v1 games with t1 t2 t3, AT guns and t34s with snipers is perfectly viable.
Posts: 783 | Subs: 3
Posts: 915
Posts: 401
Posts: 598
this leaves a huge vulnerability in soviet's ability to deal with armour. there is no mobile hard counters to german armour. AT guns don't count as they are limited in mobility and require constant resetting up, easily bypassed.
which leads to the usual, AT nades/button to disable german armour and then send in your own tanks to deal with his anti-tank tanks, which honestly, is quite a high risk no reward move.
28 |