USF Indirect Fire Nerf
Posts: 150
My personal experiences playing against USF (1v1) have been pak howie white phos barrages into my base, double scott drive by killing anything in range, followed by a human wave of paratroopers + riflemen. I think its honestly retarded playing against a faction like this, especially when I can dominate the early game but still get destroyed later on because of untouchable indirect fire. Notice how priests have stopped being used and been replace with pak howies? I wonder why...
A lefh or ml20 static emplacement can still be countered with appropriate call in arty or counter barrage. But a pak howie has the same killing power but with the ability to move? Tiny bit dumb if you ask me. In fact there have been games where my lefh on counterbarrage was destroyed by a pak howie LOL
Here's some changes that I propose,
Either;
Increase pop cap on pak howie
Reduce speed that pak howie can move
Remove vet 3 damage buff
Place a 30-45 muni cost on its barrage, so that usf players can't just spam barrages and still have vet riflemen with double bars at 15 min.
Scotts can be changed the same way. They can be used much more like a t70/fast brumbar than a support unit.
Add 30-45 muni cost on its moving barrage.
Decrease AoE damage.
Remove smoke canisters but increase its health by 120 so that it cannot be two shot by tanks.
Posts: 184
Posts: 150
You're trying to nerf things that are not problematic at all. It's the autofire on these units thats horribly strong, not the barrages.
Imo pak howie auto fire is fine because its auto fire range is low enough for it to be dived and retreated
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
Posts: 359
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
But then again, balance is made for 1v1 and 2v2 for good reason, as these provide more controllable environments where you can make the right conclusions for nerfs and buffs.
I think especially Ostheer suffers from the Scott. Cloaked double Raketenwerfer are crazy good against USF tanks, but Ost always has to dive a tank to push the Scott and suffers more due to smaller squad size and the heavier reliance on static weapons.
I think broadening the AoE damage as DerbyHat suggested might be quite nice and more consistent for both sides.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
1v1s are not the real problem, I think it is 3v3 and 4v4, where they are incredibly strong. There I usually build 2 of them, they almost always pay off. For 1v1 and 2v2 I usually build none or just one unless the Axis players turtle like hell.
But then again, balance is made for 1v1 and 2v2 for good reason, as these provide more controllable environments where you can make the right conclusions for nerfs and buffs.
I think especially Ostheer suffers from the Scott. Cloaked double Raketenwerfer are crazy good against USF tanks, but Ost always has to dive a tank to push the Scott and suffers more due to smaller squad size and the heavier reliance on static weapons.
I think broadening the AoE damage as DerbyHat suggested might be quite nice and more consistent for both sides.
So perhaps OKW players should focus on building early stuka instead of rushing panthers like every single team game scrub, with utter disregard to whatever happens on field or what enemy does?
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
But as I said, Ostheer suffers most, and they don't get an early StuKa
Posts: 2066
So perhaps OKW players should focus on building early stuka instead of rushing panthers like every single team game scrub, with utter disregard to whatever happens on field or what enemy does?
Yeah, one should rush some at vehicle and the other should rush stuka.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
StuKa is one way to counter.
But as I said, Ostheer suffers most, and they don't get an early StuKa
Its about team games, there is no reason to not have OKW in team.
Posts: 785
And the pack howitzer is still fine and still fragile as can be. The only nerf I could see for it is some teardown/setup time nerf so it becomes more easy for call-in artillery to murder it, but the crew already have a 1.25 RA modifier (the only such gun crew to possess it) and bunch up closely so as to be killed easily by direct or indirect aoe options, or infiltration units. Maybe a small munitions cost for the HEAT barrage as well, since it otherwise makes the regular barrage totally pointless, being more or less a straight upgrade.
Posts: 3053
Imo pak howie auto fire is fine because its auto fire range is low enough for it to be dived and retreated
Then you don't really know what's up here. Autofire is always always always a much bigger issue with hitting infantry than barrages are because it takes zero input given that it's in range and is a lot more accurate than a barrage for hitting individual squads. Barrages have never been the issue with indirect, it's always been autofire. Personally, I'd like to see all autofire nerfed across the board and barrages buffed somehow (maybe RoF) excluding scott because it's supposed to be long range fragile mini-brummbar (so autofire is it's main function).
Also I don't recall pack howie getting a damage bonus at vet3. You might be thinking of the 3 shell HEAT barrage at vet2.
Posts: 911
Literally 1 pz4 shot will decrew a pak howie lol. I don’t understand how axis players can’t deal with them in 1v1s. I can understand the frustration in team games where there is much more to push through before you can dive it but they’re easy to deal with in 1v1
A tank which comes at 300 fuel can decrew a pack howie which comes at 60 fuel is supposed to mean what exactly?
Posts: 2358
Literally 1 pz4 shot will decrew a pak howie lol. I don’t understand how axis players can’t deal with them in 1v1s. I can understand the frustration in team games where there is much more to push through before you can dive it but they’re easy to deal with in 1v1
Maybe you never played axis at all and you should, in order to clean a little those glasses full of bias
Posts: 150
Then you don't really know what's up here. Autofire is always always always a much bigger issue with hitting infantry than barrages are because it takes zero input given that it's in range and is a lot more accurate than a barrage for hitting individual squads. Barrages have never been the issue with indirect, it's always been autofire. Personally, I'd like to see all autofire nerfed across the board and barrages buffed somehow (maybe RoF) excluding scott because it's supposed to be long range fragile mini-brummbar (so autofire is it's main function).
Also I don't recall pack howie getting a damage bonus at vet3. You might be thinking of the 3 shell HEAT barrage at vet2.
Yea its probably the HEAT barrage, iirc it does give a damage bonus. I know autofire is what everyone hates but this is just my opinion on how the pak howie can be changed to provide more leeway for axis players to get around it, I proposed changes to barrage because you would rarely if ever see a pak howie autofiring into someone's base, meanwhile I've had multiple games already where I get white phos and heat shells dropped in my base. Back on topic, other than a 380 MP investment, the opportunity cost of the pak howie is almost 0, you are neither giving up the chance to get a vehicle nor anti-tank capabilities. (Captain unlock comes with aa truck and AT gun.) Not to mention it costs 100 muni to get a double zook RE to ward off any scout car/ flame HT dives. It's easy to turtle for a few minutes to get it out and bam you're back on course with map control because any fights you take against infantry in cover is almost instant win.
I mean there are a lot of other indirect ways to fix this other than nerfing the pack howitzer directly.
E.g. Buff Ost healing so that aoe damage affects them lesser letting inf squads get back out on the field faster (change healing to aura) LOL JK DONT KILL ME PLEASE
Posts: 789
You're trying to nerf things that are not problematic at all. It's the autofire on these units thats horribly strong, not the barrages.
+1
Even pack homie AF is fine, but Scott autofire is NUTS
According to coh2.db
Compare it to the StuG E
Both 75 fuel
Scott: 60 range, StuG: 50 range
Scott: turret, StuG: no turret
Scott: 100 damage, StuG: 80 damage
Scott & StuG accuracy: identical
Scott health: 400. StuG health: 480
I’m pretty sure the stats are out of date b/c I’m pretty sure the StuG E has 640 HP
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
Asking out of interest.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Compare it to the StuG E
Scott & StuG accuracy: identical
Accuracy is only relevant when targeting vehicles.
When targeting infantry, scatter is what matters and the StuG ausf.E has way better scatter than the Scott.
Scott:
Scatter angle 6
Distance offset 0
Distance ratio 0.125
Distance max 10
StuG ausf.E:
Scatter angle 5.5
Distance offset 0
Distance ratio 0.075
Distance max 3
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
Accuracy is only relevant when targeting vehicles.
When targeting infantry, scatter is what matters and the StuG ausf.E has way better scatter than the Scott.
Scott:
StuG ausf.E:
You forgot AoE. That's also crucial.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
You forgot AoE. That's also crucial.
I didn't forget anything. I was only comparing accuracy, which he mistakenly stated as being identical while it isn't (versus infantry).
Livestreams
52 | |||||
37 | |||||
5 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.483190.718-1
- 4.587233.716+3
- 5.1095612.641+19
- 6.891399.691+1
- 7.280162.633+8
- 8.1004649.607+5
- 9.304113.729+4
- 10.379114.769+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, uk88group
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM