Profile of comm_ash

OK let me repeat the faction design, because people still whine over the fact that they need to build vehicles to kill obersoldaten and that a guard or cons squad doesn't beat a obersoldaten squad.

Think of this as a game with 4 different factions, which have all their unique bonuses and trade offs.
Soviets are more durable, they have 6 men squads, are cheap to reinforce and have the cheapest tanks. Yet they also have some pretty hard counters as units, like shock troops and sniper teams.
They don't bleed manpower as much as axis units do.
Okw have mainly 4 men squads and weapon teams that take long to reinforce , a resource penalty and yet expensive units. For that they get the hardest hitting units + vet 5.

OK, you can talk faction design. There are multiple incorrect statements in your post, but I will not address them here. Here I will refer to game design, specifically, the way resources are meant to work in COH.

Firstly, there is manpower, which is used to purchase any unit which will stay on the battlefield for an extended period of time, regardless of its job. Second, there is Munitions, which is used for 'one-off' abilities that are used to either directly upgrade a unit for the remainder of its existence, or to give a unit the edge in a battle. Finally, there is fuel, which is used to upgrade the scope of your army (tech) and give you access to the more powerful vehicular units in the game.

Units are meant to be countered by other units. In order to allow well-microed armies with differing incomes to stand a chance in a game, Relic implemented a system in which any unit, regardless of cost, can be countered by manpower only units. AT guns counter tanks, MGs counter large amounts of infantry, and indirect fire counters fortifications.

No unit in this game defies this logic. Tanks are powerful units, but can be stopped with no investment besides AT guns (and the nominal fuel cost to tech to the AT guns). Any infantry unit can be hard-countered by a single MG. There is only exception to this rule, and that is when munitions are expended to tip the balance of power in a certain way.

Obers fly against the logic of the game, in a way no other unit does. They cost only manpower, yet cannot be countered by a manpower only investment except with a MUCH larger investment than was spent on the obers. 1 Maxim will die from an ober squad. 1 US mg will die from an ober squad. This would be alright, IF the obers had at some point used munitions to increase their power in some way, but they have not. By arguing that obers are fie because they an be countered by armor, you are directly going against the implicit rules of COH2. This is why many people wish for obers to be changed in some way.

1. The Brummbaer has a smaller aoe value than the isu and it's far more inaccurate, and at least you are able to retreat from this thing instead of getting oneshotted on retreat.

2.The Panzerwerfer is a bad joke if you compare it to the katy, on max range it's just bad and can't hit anything, the ae of it's rockets is very bad too. Gets better on closer ranges though.

3. The Sturmtiger can wipe infantry true, but normally you are able to retreat your squads from it. And it doesn't shoot out of the fog of war and it's hard to hit vehicles with it, it seems you haven't played for a few patches to me.

And the most stuff you are calling here "oneshot" machines are easy avoidable so it's more a ltp issue.

Now, back to the isu, it's not overnerfed, it's very strong vs infantry, even though i would have liked a button for HE and AP more than this micro intensive unit. Against any fast moving target it's rather bad.

1. The Brummbar has 6 AOE, as does the ISU, this can be found on the changelog: specifically pages 1 and 4. The difference in scatter and anti-vehicle value is explained by the fact that it is a much cheeper vehicle, a little under 50% cheaper in terms of fuel cost, and it it much more mobile. I usually build 1 brummbar when I play wehr because I prefer teching straight to T4 over using tigers.

2. The panzerwerfer is not an area denial weapon like the katy, it is a one-shot assault weapon. You cannot use it at max range and expect single, regular infantry squads to be effective. It is best used with reliance on its maneuverability and fast fire speed to move into mid-range, pop a barrage, and pop back.

3. The sturmtiger absolutely can shoot from the fog of war, you just have to be smart with it. firing from behind a building means the enemy will have no sight and will not have any chance to react to the rocket. It can also hit vehicles fairly reliably with a little micro involved.

I am once again, not making a statement on the fact that the ISU was balanced before, I am quite happy with the changes it has recieved. I am merely pointing out that all factions have different units that allow them to get similar results.

All of these above observations were made through playing as the factions in question, and I would prefer if we did not resort to L2P and other pesonal attacks against my character while having this straightforward discussion. I am not attacking you, and I would prefer if you did not attack me.

Your comparisons are just plane wrong.
The ISU doesn't have a range of 40, like the Brummbär, thus you can easily avoid tank combat. You also seem to forget that bigger 6 men squads are rarely getting wiped.

The ISU, also doesn't have a reload of at least one minute, so you can't compare it with the Sturmtiger.

Same goes for panzerwerfer and stuka. High reload & can't spot for themselves. Especially the panzerwerfer needs to be driven close to the enemy in order to do any damage because of that horrible scatter.

I like the changes because it removes the units out of the game. No longer you can park your super unit behind a wall of at guns and mines and safely destroy the enemy force.
Now the emphasis lies again on tank combat, micro and baiting.

The ISU and Jagdtiger feel just out of place in the CoH mechanics.

I wouldn't consider these comparisons wrong at all. The ISU is lauded bacause it is a 70 range Anti-inf monster. I am not arguing that it is imbalanced. In fact, I was not even comparing this unit directly to any german unit. I was merely relying to sierra's post in which he states that there is no comparable AI vehicle for the germans, in response to which I stated that these units are just that. Germans have the tools, and they are good tools. They just need to be used more.

Light vehicles have paper for armor, that's what is implied in LIGHT ARMOR!

Nothing the Germans have even really comes close to instantly wiping infantry squads! (save for the Stuka zu Fuss, and that's only if you managed to hit the same squad with 2x or 3x rockets from the barrage!)


I can't comment on the Beta since I haven't played it, but I am playing live, have been for a very long time, and it's just SHIT!.

Infantry squads have paper for armor, that's what is implied in INFANTRY!

^Not a real argument, but whatever.

THe germans have plenty of options for wiping infantry. In fact, the germans have 3 nondoctrinal units to do so. The Brummbar has the exact same AOE value as the ISU, and it has a vet artillery strike. Then there is the Panzerwerfer, which fires 12 rockets at a single position from far range, and is usually either a wipe or heavy damage to any infantry in the area. Finally, there is the Sturmtiger, which can instawipe very large concentrations, shoot through buildings, and even cripple/ instagib vehicles. Germans have plenty of options, they just usually don't bother to use them in most games because they prefer to use Tigers.

EDIT: sorry, forgot to respond to everything: The Stuka can wipe squads with a single rocket, which is not hard to hit because it is deadly accurate.

ok axis sindrome i hear u. i dont like maxim spam tacticks but sometime its really only way.

Maxim spam is pretty terribad. I prefer penal spam nowadays into either partisans + T3, or guards + T3/4.

I honestly feel like relic kinda had a cool Idea going for soviets early on in design (ie restricted teching but best units at their jobs), but that this design faltered when the nerfs came to su85, t34, and general tech costs. I still remember the beta where soviets had t34s that could do extremely good AI, at the cost of AT while su85s could be used in a supporting role for AT.