Weak start game is map dependent
Weak mid game? hell no!
Strong late game. You damn right!
Its getting to the point where ever time i see you. i cant resist the urge to tell you to "learn to play"
Osth, is not as ez as OKW this patch. seriously though, camp, camp, and CAMP. over arching mg42's, pak wall,lmg grens,fausts,p4 spam, tiger, WHAT ELSE DO U NEED?
Honestly, If you are having trouble with EZ mode axis this patch. Learn how to play.
Well I L2P 6-7 years in coh1 and in coh2 since beginning. You sound like everything bothers your easy spaming soviet mode it's not balanced. If you say Axis is "EZ" mode, I can figure it out what your Axis experience may be. |
Haahahahaha Im waiting for the thread titled:
Nerf Mg42 plz
Me too! |
The numbers in red explain why IS2 isn't the best against infantry. Shots can miss by 5.7m which is beyond its far range area of effect (3.0). Also the reload is about mid to slow.
And the other numbers show just how good is now over Tiger, for the same price. These 2 tanks were never balanced and they won't ever be. One patch, Tiger stronger. Next, IS2 stronger. And so on. For how shitty is Ostheer currently they could though at least give Tiger some advantage. |
|
Well, lets' put it like this: OKW is the strongest faction from AXIS side. Why? Because Ostheer is simply crap right now. Why am I saying this about Ostheer?
Because (taking examples from latest patches):
1. First, they nerfed Tiger;
2. Secondly, they increase fuel price for PZIV and through that, reduced the Ostheer middle game to stugs and maybe Ostwinds. Yeah, sure, they adjust the scatter ad distance but this is nothing compared to the fuel price increase. If you build PZIVs you will find that your tanks are not enough to stop the allied tanks avallanche. Apropos, did anyone see that snicky change to Ostwind (it performs worst now)? I'm curious...
3. "Le coup de grace" they simply made fun of grenadiers wich currently are more shitty than they ever were, and I'm not talking just about the lmg.
In my opinion Ostheer has a weak startgame, a weak middle game (because of point 2 above) and a strong late game (because of panther and brumbar buff), but who cares about the late game if you cannot keep the pace and are overwhelmed in all game stages before?
|
Endless argument about who was the best during the war. I'll just add one grain of salt to this: Germans have won the soldier victory, while the Allies have won the diplomat one.I guess odds aren't really in your favour when your high command have erratic decisions, split you one day only to regroup you the next with a new objective, then halt everything to help a useless ally 3000kms away.
All the while being under air pressure from basically everything that could fly from USAF and RAF, destroying your industry power. Still, Wehrmacht held their ground, advanced and conquered in every corner of Europe. Their weapons were ahead of their timeframe (as the war began, and were matched / outclassed in the end only), their soldiers were trained professionals who had plenty of time to prepare the 1939-1941 offensives while most other armies relied on conscription. The difference was very high and explains most of the first lightning victories.
That being said, the fact that it required intensive effort from almost everyone on the allies side + resistance of the first conquered countries to stop the german war effort only highlight how fierce it was. Noone think the allies were the underdogs, germans were, and by far, despite having started the whole thing. This vision of the faction is, i think (and also the esthetics), the reason why people prefer playing with them. Wehrmacht was just a tool for the nazi party, and was betrayed. People admire the tool, but that doesn't mean they admire the owner.
I couldn't say it better. True in every single word. |
are you saying mp40 was better than ppsh ? stuka better than sturmovik ? etc.
Plus you don't really get to zerg the germans in coh 2
Certainly not. But the STG44 was. Better than STG 44 from russian side was kalashnikov, but that was after war. And kalashnikov, for the people who doesn't know, was designed BASED ON STG44. Just compare the pictures of weapons, you don't even need to verify the historical data. Russians STOLE all the projects that they put hands on the occupied countries, even from Romania if you can imagine from where an entire IAR-80 and IAR-81 planes factory was stolen (even the dusters!). So, the improved IAK models appeared. Lolz.
Stuka vs sturmovik? In what way "better"? It was the first dive bomber from the war, yes. Sturmovik wasn't even a DIVE bomber. It was a light bomber, comparable from that point of view with ME110E. |
No, we have to put on our historical bias-o-vision and start chanting Deutschland Uber Alles while hugging our adolf dolls to suggest that the axis had everything better than the soviets.
German tank design was usually second stick at any given point of the war; the only high points were the introduction of the Tiger and Panther (both massively overrated and horrendously unreliable). At all other points either the Brits or the Russians had better vehicles available.
German infantry was nothing spectacular in and of itself it just happened to have (mostly) competent and modern thinking command at the time. All nations had their crack troops, all nations had their rank and file, all nations conscripted.
Etc. etc. etc.
This whole 'Omg germans super advanced wunderkind army' is an insult to history in the name of painting the villains as bigger so the allies can enjoy underdog victor status and it really, REALLY bugs me.
I will ignore your flaming attitude and tell you that I don't want to derail this tread into a pissing contest. There is little to talk with someone who learned in school that soviets, british and americans were the best in everything, germans being just stupid nazi and read nothing more than that. Of course, I could invite you to put on paper every single german and allied tank/vehicle/weapon and compare their technical features. Overall you will discover that: germans had the best tanks, planes, artillery and an equivalent (if not superior) infantry.
So it's understandable why you and other players do not accept a faction as OKW. It is to realistic, to close to what german army was. Best units, best machines but to few and with no resources (fuel, raw materials). |
Not anymore...
Oh, so that was the problem in fact. |
1.I agree the Pathfinders need a buff
2.Yes
3.I am fine with this as long as the MP cost of Falls and Obers gets reduced; if they have to pay for their LMG.
4.I have seen a few suggestions for this in other threads, but not often
5.Agreed, this is the alternative to 3, the OKW arty costs should be reduced then, as should the Panzershrek upgrade
6.See 3
7.http://www.coh2.org/topic/22753/okw-puma
8.http://www.coh2.org/topic/23825/limit-king-tiger-to-1-built-per-gamehttp://www.coh2.org/topic/22243/why-isn-t-the-king-tiger-doctrinal
9.http://www.coh2.org/topic/22873/jagdtiger--the-gamebreakerhttp://www.coh2.org/topic/19656/world-of-jagdtiger-online
As for the end part of your post, see my signature.
Manny thanks for sparing me of searching these topics.
Again, some people don't understand OKW achitecture, that's why they are crying OP all day. Comparing one unit to another, without considering all other factors is just wrong. |
|
Currently, I have to admit USF are a little shitty. |
_Hiena_
xingyuguan
Relic Entertainment
