Hi Guys,
First time poster, loooong time CoH player here.
... A sturmpio rush into a key building like the church, ...
If you're playing as Soviets then using Maxims is one counter, but they are so easy to flank.
My main question is - why do OKW start off with a 300mp, extremely high DPS unit? When by comparison combat engineers cost 180mp and have no combat effectiveness early on?
SPs are close range unit, and they are not durable. If you play against OKW you will notice how they try to get close to your infantry with SP to get max effectiveness. Your job is to keep distance and fight at a range where they are not effective. So get in cover and fight from a distance.
If you play soviets dont do conscripts. I would also suggest to watch replays from other good soviet players how they play 1v1. Usually they go T1 instead of T2, and build sniper+penal or penals only instead of support weapon spam. |
Yep. It works precisely that way.
What's even funnier is that the OKW Panther will fire more accurately with combat blitz on and moving, than with combat blitz off and stationary.
OKW Panther accuracy modifier when moving: -35% = 0.65
Combat blitz accuracy bonus +100% = 2x
Thus, with combat blitz on, OKW Panther accuracy modifier turns to 0.65 * 2 = 1.3. That's a 30% accuracy bonus, compared to being stationary. Not bad, eh?
I think thats what "combat" stands for. :-)
I wonder if it applies on stand still vehicles too?! Because the -50% received accuracy make things even funnier.
Basically your stand still Panther with combat blitz has twice the chance to hit anything, while everything have half the chance to hit the Panther. Too bad i rarely build Panthers with OKW, i would always use blitz in combats.  |
This isn't specific to 2vs2 games, but one of the most "wrong" things which also apply for team games in this game is that mortars/isgs and pack howies can be so effective compared to the effort you need to put into using them. The amount of damage/micro tax on your opponent is far too much when compared to the actual effort put in by the player that is using them. The mortar pit takes this to an extreme where you don't even need to retreat, reinforce and reposition anymore. Instead you repair and brace every once in a while.
I would like all indirect auto-firing weapons to have their auto-fire accuracy, frequency and scatter nerfed heavily, but leave the barrage properties mostly untouched. This would reward players that use barrage often and discourage a set-up-and-forget or build-and-go-afk mentality. Remember that barrage is cast on a point and that point will be the only point being barraged until you order something else, thus making it dodgeable by moving after a mortar round is being hit and you notice that your opponent is using his barrage. This becomes a game of forcing repositions and repositioning early/preemptively/reactionary according to the situation.
The aim is to put mortars into their correct role for denying support weapons and garrisons/emplacements. Currently (imho) mortars are doing that kinda fine, but (big PLUS) they contest all units that are stationary for more than 4-ish seconds. The main victims are obviously infantry sections and grenadiers. You can't just repositon because you noticed that a barrage is coming in. Instead, the mortar is autofiring, which is shooting too accurate single mortat shells every ~4 seconds. You just can't account for that and reposition in these intervals. As I said, sections and grens suffer the most from this, but when applied to a large scale game like 2v2+, this creates a very volatile game pace/environment where units are forced to move constantly and this eventually promotes moving around constantly and eventually end up blobbing.
I believe that this is a large contributor towards the lower axis winrates that we are seeing these days. Basically the niche and strength of stationary and low model count units is being condensed to a point where it is barely or very hardly exploitable and on the other hand flanking/constant clusterfuck (what allies are just better at) is being promoted.
This is further embraced by the strength of late game indirect fire but this is not the focus of my post.
just my 2 cents
Exactly... i have 100% agree with this!
In one of my latest games i had to realize the mortar flare ability on soviet mortars are more useful than the barrage. I just dropped a flare, give sight for my mortars auto-fire, and they were so accurate i don't even had to control them at all. It's just shocking how could it be so rewarding with basically zero-control. You just have to put them in range, and give them sight.
The fact that OKW has no early game - cheap mortars is a serious handicap.
|
The idea sounds interesting. However:
1) It will end up hurting low-member squads even more.
2) There is no way to implement this properly using modding tools. If there were a way, somebody would have also come up with a solution to the Tommy vet3 bug (apart from removing the scoped enfields).
1.)
Yes, in case of 4 men squads its a bit problematic. But with this idea, we could move schrecks back to volks instead of SPios. SPios are too squishy for a 90MU weapon upgrade. Giving them the schreck was a bad idea at the first place. Volks could keep it if they lose 40% of their AI instead of 20%.
Pgrens are different story. I think they should either be an exception and keep their current form, or should have separate upgrades for schreck and MG42s (like old grenediers in CoH1). I know it sounds harsh, but it could address the issue where OST is lack of elite infantry. Honestly, PGrens are no contest for allied infantry now. They are lack of upgrades, and even with their good veterancy bonuses, Rifle and IS veterancy is just simply better.
2.)
How about making enfields not require any slots... just changing the regular rifle profile to those on vet3? But yes, the main issue is the lack of some sort of slot-item priority list. |
If squad loses 2 models it will be completly unable to fire (holding 2 LMGs).
All you need is a one incendiary sniper shot or one good mortart hit and you have to isnta retreat since you don't have enough men to use LMGs.
How it that an improvement?
5 men squad...
If you lose 1 man nothing changes.. you keep fighting with two LMG, only lost a rifle.
When another man dies you roll for weapon drop.
- If the weapon is dropped you remain with 3 men fighting with 1 rifle and 1 LMG.
- If the weapon is NOT dropped, you end with 3 men fighting with 2 LMG.
3 men could handle 2 LMG in case they dont drop the 2nd weapon.
|
this basically the marginal improvement of adding a lmg. you can have a similar effect just by nerfing the lmg.
and people rarely keep fighting once a squad is down to two men. It's the line of safety for most people.
Yes, but this would also address the issue of cheap squads and 5 men squads performance with AT weapons. Like sappers with 2 PIAT, Rifles with bazooka. Volks with schrecks.
My problem is there, the squads keep majority of their AI performance even when they have an AT weapon. 5 men squad upgraded with an AT weapon lose 20% of AI capability now. With my idea they would lose 40% of AI if they upgrade with an AT weapon. Without losing the efficiency of the weapon itself. |
Yes, but what you propose will make a game even more broken (buggy).
Would you mind explain it with some details? |
Bad idea, when you drop models? If you drop one Tommy you force the squad to fight with one bren? Limit to one is the better and easier solution.
Depends..
5 men Tommy squad with 2 bren = 4 men fighting with 2 bren + 1 with rifle
4 men Tommy squad with 2 bren = 4 men fighting with 2 bren
3 men Tommy with 2 bren upgrade = 2 bren (if the weapon is not dropped)
3 men Tommy with 2 bren upgrade = 1 rifle + 1 bren (if the weapon is dropped)
2 men Tommy with 1 bren upgrade = 1 bren
1 men Tommy with 1 bren upgrade = 1 bren (if the weapon is not dropped)
1 men Tommy with 1 bren upgrade = 1 rifle (if the weapon is dropped) |
No. Don't try to fix what is not broken.
Double weapon upgrades are broken... |
|
What do you think about the idea of making weapons that require two weapon slot, force 2 infantry member to fight with that weapon?
In other words, if we give a Panzerschreck for a volks squad, right now they would have 4 men fighting with KAR and 1 man with the schreck. The schreck is a 2 slot weapon, so i suggest to make 2 member of the squad fighting with that single schreck, and 3 with the KARs.
Or in case you give two LMG for a riflemen squad. Instead of fighting with 2 LMG and 3 Garand, now they would fight 2 LMG and 1 Garand.
So 2 slot weapons would make 1 man fight with the weapon and render another man to be inactive... or do the reload if you like so.
This would close the gap between vanilla and upgraded infantry. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
