Login

russian armor

Fallschirmjäger is very OP!

PAGES (25)down
12 Sep 2019, 22:27 PM
#81
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

What i dont get, why even touch fallshrims, they were perfectly fine before the patch.
by perfectly fine u meant UP ?
12 Sep 2019, 23:38 PM
#82
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

What i dont get, why even touch fallshrims, they were perfectly fine before the patch.

Because Overwatch with free vision flares + JLI + best skillplanes in the game that insta pin and kill tanks and also Spec Ops with the call-in command panther and uncounterable recon and 15 MU granade avalanche were overshadowing the Luftwaffe so people didn't play it. This appears to have been good enough reason to buff Fallschirmjager. They were pretty expensive pre-patch but were excellent anyway. For some reason nobody talks about the infiltration commandos that cost an arm and a leg to call-in and then reinforce, it's 370+2x35=440 MP to have fully operational commandos. I remember seeing pre-patch Falls with ~60 kills. They were always good, but they had to compete with Obersoldaten for attention and Obers have also always been excellent.

Also handbrake is broken on 251 HT for OST, doesn't work atm. Also I noticed that several tanks I shot several times each with pak40 on ice and none of them sank. It was Oka river (winter). Dunno, maybe another bug.
12 Sep 2019, 23:47 PM
#83
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 888

All they needed to do was lower the Fallschrimjagers price from 380 MP to 340. That's it. There was no need to change their arrival to 2 CPs or do this wierd weapon upgrade change.
12 Sep 2019, 23:56 PM
#84
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783

The changes were necessary.

It was not good in any range, no point really in using it before.

Now it is better except it got quite some unnecessary buffs which the Vet (that enhances the performance more than necessary).

Vet is the current issue since it stacks its efficiency more significantly.

Nerf vet and I think it would be more fair and square.

Since Vet 0, it does loose to different kinds of Allies elite units, so its not OP but when it Vets, that is the problem.

Vet bonuses need to be looked at and adjusted accordingly.
12 Sep 2019, 23:57 PM
#85
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 888



FG42s are automtic rifles, like the BAR. Actually theyre one of the most advanced weapons of WW2, and had virtually no recoil despite firing the powerful 7.92x57mm cartridge even in fully automatic from the standing posture. An inline stock and quality muzzle brake help with this.

The internals of the gun would go on toninlfuence the M16 and the M60 post-war. It was way ahead of its time for WW2, but very few were made and issued, and of course only to Fallschirmjager units.

Whats wierd is CoH lets you get 4 per squad, but CoH is worse for realism than that in many more ways.


The FG42 was an awesome weapon, way ahead of it's time. It was much better than a BAR being much lighter and more controllable. It makes perfect sense for Fallschrimjagers to be able to fire on the move, in fact it would be dumb not to have it that way.

Are Fallschrimjagers they OP right? Maybe, I haven't faced them yet but I did use them to stomp a USF player the other day. I only built Strums and Kubels until they make available them called in 3 units.
13 Sep 2019, 00:07 AM
#86
avatar of spajn
Donator 11

Posts: 927

Prepatch falls sucked, they were just an other flavour of obers that required much more micro to be as effective AND you wasted a commander pick just to be able to. The buff was straight up necessary. Just increase the vet req a bit and it's fine.
13 Sep 2019, 00:12 AM
#87
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

The changes were necessary.

It was not good in any range, no point really in using it before.

Now it is better except it got quite some unnecessary buffs which the Vet (that enhances the performance more than necessary).

Vet is the current issue since it stacks its efficiency more significantly.

Nerf vet and I think it would be more fair and square.

Since Vet 0, it does loose to different kinds of Allies elite units, so its not OP but when it Vets, that is the problem.

Vet bonuses need to be looked at and adjusted accordingly.
no vet is fine, they lose to commando at vet 5
13 Sep 2019, 00:31 AM
#88
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

no vet is fine, they lose to commando at vet 5

You managed to lose with pioneers in a CQC test vs regular pathfinders. I don't trust you with tests anymore.
13 Sep 2019, 00:45 AM
#89
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474


You managed to lose with pioneers in a CQC test vs regular pathfinders. I don't trust you with tests anymore.
......... i posted them look above

Btw just so u know, pathfinder have carbine which have almost double the close range dps than pioneers mp 40s , instead of being an asshole do ur test , and check stats

Sometimes ur biased opinion might get in the way

U and kirrik should prove something before saying someone else test are rigged cause they don’t like the outcome

U better check that anti vaxxer /flat earther mentality of “test are only ok if they fit my narrative”
13 Sep 2019, 02:28 AM
#90
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276

Rest of their changes are fine, the damage either needs to come down slight or the defensive buffs they get from vet need toned down.
13 Sep 2019, 03:03 AM
#91
avatar of SturmTigerVorgo

Posts: 307

13 Sep 2019, 03:18 AM
#92
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

I like how many of the people saying that falls are fine are known to have axis bias or have axis dp's... or both
13 Sep 2019, 05:11 AM
#93
avatar of Acidfreak

Posts: 281

Falls too OP but Shocks, Rangers and Paratroopers are OK. Makes sense.

And btw in that video you lost to players with better rank and players that didn't even use Falls. So not sure what your point is?

Shocks are useless right now. They are no longer in that 'sweet spot' anymore. Especially after the buffs to ass grens, and falls. They are performing lackluster.

Also svt conscripts are performing better than airborne guards. Like what the hell?


My opinion is that if they want to keep this OP falls damage output then they need to take away panzerfaust. Otherwise they are literally shredding everything.
13 Sep 2019, 05:35 AM
#94
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Could, in lieu of sprint, add a damage reduction to valiant assault and increase their target size slightly to compensate. This means they retain their glass cannon design but can perform more forgivingly at a cost.
13 Sep 2019, 05:48 AM
#95
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911


You managed to lose with pioneers in a CQC test vs regular pathfinders. I don't trust you with tests anymore.


Pathfinders have deceptively high close range damage with their carbines.
13 Sep 2019, 06:41 AM
#96
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

falls buffed too much

need to nerf far dps and first strike bonus
13 Sep 2019, 07:04 AM
#97
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

Once again: every elite AI specialist which triple your squad make exactly the same!!

13 Sep 2019, 08:05 AM
#98
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

After testing Falls in actual games now I have to say they are not even close to OP.

In late game they are very strong against infantry but still very vulnerable to random wipes from arty and vehicles. At 2 CP without the extra FGs and vet they are underwhelming compared to Allied call-in infantry that arrives at the same time.



13 Sep 2019, 09:09 AM
#99
avatar of Infi.ESA

Posts: 48

honestly, in 4v4 and 3v3 I never saw anyone using falls in games with player skills lvl 16+

it was not their price, it was the doctrine itself and the weak performance in combat. in 4v4 u have to fight vs large blobs and falls have never a chance to get in close range for a fight they can win. the buff was really needed, the new gun is a good answer and finally the falls can do some effective damage on mid range.

i was yesterday playing falls and nobody on the allied side was complaining. I guess when u play lvl 16+ the ppl are relaxed because they know how to counter them. most of the haters here are low lvl players which have no idea what to do vs a falls blob, thats all.

allies dont need to cry, falls are weak at beginning and just get their guns in late game which is fair enough if u see the new buffs for rifleman and have to face brit blobs and maxim spamm. also falls are really weak to any medium tank, they die way to fast.

all in all this buff was needed to give the whole doctrine a new meaning, otherwise it would be still just not used. im just wondering if they will nerf them back because of all the crying now on allied side. if they do it, doctrine is dead again......

13 Sep 2019, 09:14 AM
#100
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 03:18 AMgbem
I like how many of the people saying that falls are fine are known to have axis bias or have axis dp's... or both
but all here saying they need a little price increase tho ?

i know u need to build ur victim persona but .......
PAGES (25)down
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

443 users are online: 443 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
4 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49210
Welcome our newest member, Shunnarah
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM