Well the 4v4 maps are terrible really, just uninteresting. City 17 looks nice but it's just a support weapons fest until tanks come out. Montargis really was the best 4v4 map and I'd like to see it back...But what made it fun to play was the multiple fuel and ammo points which meant that for brief periods both teams might hold them, particularly one of the high ammos.
Perhaps what they should do with the 4v4 maps is actually remove ALL the fuel and ammo points so it becomes more a matter of defending OPs and tactics, instead of the current Ostheer-favored configuration. MGs lock down those fuels too easily, so my default response when playing 4v4s is sniper spam, which is a bit vulnerable to the proper counters unless I have helpful teammates.
|
Goddamn that works good. Just did it to TradeMrk. Map's a bit imba if u can fight off the initial Soviet push and put a bunker on that strat point. Very hard to come back from cuz of the strat points to cap to get to the other side...Not like Angoville where you only had to get one strat point and the other fuel to get back in supply when the "bunker the strat point!" tactic was common.
|
Here is what is apparently optimal Ostheer positioning on Kharkov to prevent early cut-off. What should the Soviet positioning be? Once you lose the initial engagement on this map it's over.
|
So...I went for a risky t1-t3 build. Which worked, until it didn't. Is there any way to stop 2 PziVs and a Tiger? Or is T1-T3 just too risky? I had an IS-2 and had a captured pak, but it did little good. I guess this build just really isn't viable at all. But AT guns are so useless and probably wouldn't have helped either. Is there any build sequence that beats this Ostheer unit composition? I suppose I could have gone T4 but that would have gotten me at best one SU85 and IS-2 vs Tiger and two pzivs. I did try backteching to at guns when I didn't have the fuel for SU85s.
|
Anyone got replays of repelling conspam on Kharkov? the early game is really, really hard.
|
I think the infantry combat system needs two changes currently to make it more interesting:
1) Increase the suppression of MGs again so they are useful.
2) Increase the cost of LMGs. I don't think they should actually do less damage than the current patch, but it will make the decision to get Pgrens or not a bit harder and force Ostheer to make some more munitions choices.
This would also do a lot to bring back a more vCOH flavor to early infantry battles, and stop the constant boring blob vs blob fights.
|
I think the issue is, as I've said before, is that Soviets are more micro-intensive, and need to use their abilities more. For instance, as Soviet you need to basically be constantly throwing Molotovs (and making snap judgements about where to actually toss - where the enemy squad is or where you think he'd move he's sees the throw) tossing AT nades, dodging, garrisoning/degarrisoning buildings, constant flanking. If trying to flank Ostheer tanks with T-34s, barraging with AT guns. If you want to ram something, you have to do a surprising amount of micro to get in range, get a running start, and hit from the back since the range was nerfed.
Contrast that to Ostheer. You could use rifle nades, but you don't have to. LMGs and Pgrens are arguably much better anti-infantry solutions, as you can't dodge them, and don't have to select-squad/click-ability/aim ability to fight well. At lower skill levels, this lowers the amount of squad micro dramatically. If your tank gets in trouble, you can reverse out, or pop smoke - no real need to flank and constantly micro tanks. Unless facing an IS-2 or ISU, you'll win with frontal facing most of the time and flanking SU-85s really isn't that hard if you know basic geometry. One of the only times Ostheer players are forced to have really quick reactions is getting fausts off and the former dominance of the M3 rush has trained even low level players to do this well.
So I disagree with the argument that balance trickles down. If one faction requires a great deal more micro then the appearance of balance among the top 10% is extremely deceiving, as those players have vastly superior micro and multitasking skills.
|
Hahaha...As an upper intermediate recently fallen on hard times, I find Soviets better against all levels. Ostheer is much easier against lower skilled players, but very, very hard against high skill Soviets. The MG nerfs have made it really very difficult vs good con spam, I'd really like to see the suppression rebuffed. Just so sick of conscripts running right up the MG before suppression hits and tossing Molotovs, or MGs refusing to open fire on a con squad from a building until the Molotov is actually thrown.
|
Wackiest, funniest game I've played lately.
It's all fun and games going straight to T2 until the KV-8 comes out...then the Brummbar.
My HQ goes down. I didn't know your dudes would all retreat OFF THE MAP if the HQ is down.
|
Ha, well I'm just playing Soviets now. So much easier. Walk up to mgs, throw Moly, profit, repeat. Buy T-34. The only maps Germans have a chance on are maps where you don't have a good chance of having your ammo cut so you can do something about the SMG-wielding conscripts in buildings and the guys lying in the grass picking their noses.
It's pretty boring really.
|