Poor bastard, I bet you also use the flammhetzer.
Tisk tisk tisk, what a way to go.
The patch shifted the power of some of the normally unused docs. I love the flame hetzer, chasing retreating infantry is to most satisfying thing ever. It would be much better at 5-6 cp. |
I agree that they need to be standardized, but the main problem (imo) with emplacements is that they've become a valid play-style all by themselves. In 2v2, its completely reasonable to see a USF/UKF combo where the USF player creates a giant blob and the UKF player simply focuses on emplacements. On some maps this can end up with 2 mortars, a bofors and multiple repair forward bases covering 2 of the 3 VPs. That type of play just doesn't support the whole "mobility and positioning" aspect of CoH2 that I'd like to see at the core of the gameplay.
By reducing the survivability and possibly combat power, emplacements would still be valid units; it's just that they would be in a 'support' role (covering flanks, important points behind the front-lines) rather than the current "front line DPS/Tank" unit.
The brits might need a redesign due to this, but I don't think it would require that much work. Some unit stats would just need to be tweaked to encourage a more mobile play style.
+1, I was just saying that with out a snare the brits are forced to hide behind the AEC or bofors early game.
I agree that the bofors/emplacements should strenghten the "line" not be the "line" |
The changes to emplacements may be a bit harsh, and if such changes were made, they would need to be discussed with the community first (or tested in a beta). However, I feel the 'campy' nature of emplacements conflicts with the core "mobility and positioning" theme of CoH. (IMO) Emplacements should be used to support your army; a Pak44 should be positioned further back in your forces to support your units via its range; not in the front-lines to be a main 'attack' unit. The same should be said of something like the bofors (or OKW flak); it performs very well against most units, but should only be used to secure flank or key point behind your front-lines (i.e. to prevent a cutoff). Right now, though, the bofors is being used as a front-line unit, often placed on VPs, forward fuel points or other important areas, and is being used to deal a dramatically large amount of damage. This is only possible due to its incredible resilience.
A change to the survivability (and not damage) would result in the desired change; the emplacements being used in a defensive position and used to supplement damage. I only suggest damage changes (such as to the OKW truck) due to some of them over-performing against all types of targets. An emplacement should be good against mainly one type of units, not all types: AT-gun emplacements are great vs. vehicles, mortars are great against static units and structures, but units like the OKW Flak Truck and Bofors are great against anything within range. By removing damage to vehicles, the damage 'triangle' would be much more balanced: AT vs. vehicles, mortars vs. structures and static units, flak vs. infantry.
Emplacements just need to be standardized. Decrewing for some factions and not others is ridiculous. Schwer attack ground might be nice.
After the patch I'm ok with the british emplacements powerlevel. Paying for brace made a bigger difference than I suspected. I think that addressing the super cheap tanks would pretty much fix the simcity > tank spam issue.
I don't like emplacements but with out them the british need redesigning. |
|
I like going Kubel > Kubel > Volks against british. If you 2v1 infantry you can create a blees and then bring them back as they take damage to make some distance between them and you mp. But.... After the blobs form they are useless. Post patch I haven't used any kubels. |
No it sounds like you ground the games pace down to a halt, where everyone sits behind layers of mgs and mortars.
Are you taking the position supporting blobs? Most of his suggestions deal with my grievences, but a little harsher than I'd go on emplacements. |
If we're going to make KT rely entirely on HQ trucks not being destroyed then the only acceptable change is to considerably buff their durability. No one's going to risk trucks near the front if their only non-doc call-in relies entirely on them still standing. They're not exactly durable against even T0 infantry attack.
+1, I agree that this is a huge risk. If I'm playing some one of greater or equal skill level, I build my trucks in base. I can't afford to build a schwer 3 times in a long game. Sometimes 3 rifle squads run up smoke and attack ground with bazookas to kill my schwer. Why can't it attack ground? Or that some of the British call-in arty brings it down to a sliver of life, making it almost push button kill T4. I think it's more fragile than most people think.
Does it really cost more if we take into account all upgrades and tech? .....
+1
|
|
Interesting.
I have been going 4 volks 》t3 》luchs 》t2 》 then adapt to either blobs, spam or emplacements.
I have found that if I push our a quick luchs I force most players into zooks, guards or piats and then I can deal with all the inf just with volks. Or if I wait until the inf has committed to AI I can then surprise them with the luchs for a greater effect.
I found racketen work best in pairs. One covering the other and an mg covering them both. But they are so squishy I have to retreat them when ever there is a huge engagement or risk losing them.
For docs I like overwatch, firestorm and fortifications. |
It's pointless to use charts right now because:
1. USF Mortar.
2. Combined Arms bug.
3. Lack of adapt for OKW players.
4. Ostheer is ostheer...
1 - just change this mortart for 61mm...
2 - just lelic's thing.
3 - I still see plenty of players who go for 3-4 Volks into med truck and whine that they lose. Last patch has opened plenty of new great strats yet people somehow still go for triple/quadruple Volks into Med HQ while they can do huge amount of other, better strats...
Just for example. I find non-volks strat very useful in 2v2. You only need to survive till 2CPs.
2x SP, 1x Kubel + raketen or second Kubel into 3 Fusiliers with Mech HQ + Med HQ with heavy Mech HQ play into JT. Insta win on some maps. So just stop playing 4 Volks like before...
4 - Pz III commander please or add Pz III in T2 with requirment of BP2.
Ground attack for HMGs could help against USF blobs.
Weren't you the first to use the charts to prove that it wasn't an issue. |
|
What has everyone been using since the last patch? |
Off the top of my head, here are some Axis commander abilities I have either never seen used or see used very rarely:
Ambush Camouflage (I've heard of people using this with Panzershreck-equipped Panzer Grenadiers, but I've never actually seen it)
Counter-Offensive Tactics
Airdropped Medical Supplies
Riegel Anti-Tank mines (heard their good; can't recall ever actually having seen them used)
Artillery Field Officer
Mechanized Grenadier Group
The G43 interrogation function
And I have never seen a decent Axis player go Storm/Infantry/Jaeger Infantry
OKW:
Radio Silence
Breakthrough Tactics
Signal Relay
Emergency Repairs
Panzer Commander
Flak Emplacement (lol!)
And I almost never see anybody ever go Overwatch Doctrine ever so I can't even comment on that commander.
I play overwatch. Especially if I'm agressive with my trucks. |
Canada
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
![[U.S.M.]HunkUmbrella flag](/images/replay/soviets_flag.jpg)
[U.S.M.]HunkUmbrella
