|
@Brachi:
ATG penetration and damage is fine. They are not "incarnate death" to amy medium tank or above.
Their efficacy in holding a narrow line of fire, compunded by slow mobility and vulnerability as an infantry unit, all adequately offset that. Range is not a proble either, as it requires scouting, as usual, as for any other long range ordnance.
Armor already has its due and proper efficacy vs infantry, based on its armor and the limited potential of infantry based AT. What sets Armor apart from AtGs, is mobiloty and AI efficacy.
Your Manpower vs Fuel comparison is invalid, because of the core nature of armor vs infantry. It is expedient, and good, for the meta to allow for hard direct AT on a manpower bsse in the form of ATGs, as offset by their mobility and AI vulnerability.
Your argument is furthermore invalidated, by the cold hard fact, that any Armor also has a Manpower cost. If a player invests in ATGs, no ,atter how mucn fuel he has, he will still have expended a significant MP cost, which throttles him from fielding Armor, even if he has the fuel. Fuel is secondary to MP. Mp is the primarynresource.
That is the whole poi t, and core design principle, of ATGs, not only in this game, but historically.
A line held by an ATG, should be dealt with by infantry and indirect fire means. Meanwhile Armor mobility enables it to either support such an action, or redeploy to a front where that ATG is not present.
Their problem, is reliability for hits.
ATGs hurt enough, when they hit, but its not a "nuke". Even medium tanks have MORE than enough time to withdraw from line of fire, before being setiously compromised. Vs a comptent opponent you get 1, max 2, shots, which bring even a medium tank to only 50% health or so. ATGs, even with better accuracy, are not a hard counter, they are merely a deterrant and involve the meta to instead bring in an infantry or artillery based response to enable armor action on that front therafter, or in flanking support to such an ac4ion.
CoH2 allows for direct, and sustainable, armor assualts, even on ATG emplacements. This is a factor of A) The relative effficiency of medium tanks vs infantry B) The fact that ATGs do not instanuke Armor, as they would IRL. As unrealistic as thisnis, that aside, it does not detract, but instead reinforces the importance of ATGs as a meta mitigator., ESPECIALLY in a game where fuel is such a directly co trollable resource.
If you manage to co trol ypur opponents fuel, what the fk is he supposed to do? He cant build vehicles, you are getting fuel at a doubled rate to his 0 income, and his infantry generally (Especially for Sov) is patently incapable of cou tering your armor, and evem that with huge model losses.
The importance of ATGs for the meta is imo extremely underestimated and understated in CoH2.
Nobody is proposing an instanuke. Just a hard facepunch and meta retaliation to fuel heavy armor builds, which proliferate far toonodten in Coh2, espcially with calli s that dont require buildings or tiering.
Even with improved accuracy, an unsupported ATG (especially and cruciqllynwithout ATNade/Faust support) is a foregone situation. You get 1-2 shots, and then the armor is already ontop of ypu and circling with a better rotation rate, higher bleed and efficay than you can match (which is well and fine, cos you paid the fuel).
ATGs need to hit. Period. |
Actually if the shot hits the ground where the vehicle used to be, that means the AT gun already rolled a miss. If the game calculated a hit, the shell would follow the target to the ends of the earth til it hit.
Oh yes, you are entirely correct.
But what factor is then leading to so many misses?
A scatter change would be problematic, as it leads to better infantry accuracy.
Something, Im not sure which stats, is causing ATGs to miss too often.
Lining up the shot is hard enough, not to mention the difficulty of moving ATGs around to conflict areas.
ATG penetration and dmg are good. The ptoblem is, for some reason, they miss, over and over.
@Brachi:
I eould agree that vehicle speed is largely a concern only for vehicle combat, where they are required to pursue targets, at speed, in order to hopefully finish them off. Speed is good for chasing and escaping, in vehicle combat. That is well and fine.
But ATGs, can do neither. They need to be a serious, reliable, AI and AoE vulnerable, slow and difficult to position, but almost assured hit vehicle response.
If an ATG is discovered or revealed to be covering a line, it should require a non-vehicle response. Currently, vehicles laugh at them due to the deplorable accuracy. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
