Situation from my game that happened yesterday:
Flanked 120mm by 2 squads of PGrens, grenades out and CQC. 120mm team really dont give a f...k about 2 PGrens, just retreating.
I think, that mortar, which better in range, damage, abilities than stock 82mm team, must havent survivability like a god damn terminator. Strong long range unit virtually immortal for flanking by Axis assault units! If we imagine same situation, when GrW or ISG get flanked by 2 squads of conscripts - it well be death sentence for artillery team.
Were not interested in playing in your head games mate. |
|
Relic has the opportunity to implement cloud-based shards of on-demand servers that spin up to accommodate players' physical location and then start matchmaking them from there. e.g. AWS regions for those who want to do more reading.
If they don't do this, then we're all still royally fukd when coh3 comes out.
Will Relic embrace modern day cloud networking and matchmaking for coh3? doubtful, because they're using the same coh2 engine and I saw a vid where a dev proudly said 'we started coh3 immediately using the coh2 engine' - and I thought, that's a big FU to your international players already.
Let's see if they do a big dev reveal post about their networking tech. Absence of that says it all. |
|
Bofors is nothing compared to the flak HQ. It's easy to kill.
However I don't think the Flak truck is OP at all.
Both buildings are trivial to deal with. |
I am not saying it should be just as vulnerable to axis indirects as other mortars, what I'm saying that you practically cant counter it with your indirects even if you play right\enemy plays wrong. Even ostheer counter-barrage dont work.
There is a difference in being "hard to counter" and "almost impossible to counter".
Don't want to be rude here but this is nonsense. You're blowing it out of all proportion, I almost feel like telling you to get a grip on reality.
You can deal with it in a hundred ways, it is not that hard to do. Nowhere near 'almost impossible'. |
In 3v3 there is always a JP4 wall sooner or later on most maps. You won't play it in the tourney because a Panther is generally a better choice. Much more mobile and counters every tank, hard. JP4 is more difficult to use and a more defensive tank, used to solidify the position. In 1v1 there is no such thing as solidifying. In 2v2+ there most certainly is. In 3v3 it's most common.
With 60% penetration and a couple of seconds between shots, no tank wants to stand in the line of fire for too long. With a bit of luck on JP4 side, your tank goes bye-bye.
So yeah, it's OP in teamgames but not because of it's stats or whatever. JP4 should have lower armour IMHO since it has such low target size and becomes a 5-shot tank with veterancy. But the main strength of JP4 is in map design. Put 1-2 JP4s on a map like redball. Combine it with a stuka and a KT and you have an impenetrable fortress that will only ever be pushed back by 2 opponents combined. Such nonsense would not work on 1v1 maps and some 2v2
Relic needs to talk to you about 2v2+ game modes. I've noticed your knowledge on team game strategies are top notch.
Edit: both you and Lady Xenarra contribute great analysis. |
6-7 men Conscripts don't fit properly behind a small sandbag, that's why they get larger ones.
The big ones are indeed a bit tricky to janky to place sometimes, I agree. But overall I think that is okay.
Volks bags can go right up against any cap point's centre. Cons ones often have to float away from it.
That's a bug, not a feature. |
There is something like that (general received suppression increase), but it's not nearly enough as everyone here will have experienced the hard way.
1 maxim vs 4 gren-blob, a good example of a dead MG.
|
I disagree. I think it's an example of a good asymmetrical balance.
If you go T1 you aren't *denied* AT guns. You're basically gambling that you can beat out the enemy with superior firepower and inferior numbers. You give up a fast. AT gun and in return you get AT infantry that can hold their own against LVs. And then from there you supplement those troops with tanks that pick up the slack in AT and AI.
OR if you realize that you're not going to ne able to do that you still get the option to build T2 and get an AT gun.
That's a 1v1 scenario. In other game modes, sovs that go penal find their one AT unit facing early p4's with no AT gun support |
|
One of the worst examples of asymmetrical balance is soviets with their AT gun. If you go T1 you lock yourself out of getting the AT gun, unless ofc you have the room in-game to go that route (in which case you're already winning, and it's a case of 'win-more').
Definitely agree with the ideas above that 'Assymetrical balance should NOT be denying one or two factions something'. |
Most streamers (myself included) are in the top 1-30 area, meaning we get obscenely long queue times
How long are we talking here? Min to max |
yuenchey
Relic Entertainment
