Thread: Centaur4 Nov 2015, 20:42 PM
Centaur:
-better damage vs infantry in the open
-better anti-air
-better armor
Ostwind:
-better mobility
-better damage vs infantry in cover and garrison due to aoe
-better anti-vehicle (I think?)
They have their ups and downs, but I don't think that just saying something about 2x damage covers it.
everything is correct except vs vehicles....Centaurs flanking a P4 can sometimes win heads up. Ost Flakpanzer can't do that to cromwell (chosen as similar to P4) |
So what do you think Hannibal (and everybody)? Chengeles less damage to the ML-20 (not the crew), or my idea of camouflage, or something else?
I think 10% health left after a Stuka strike would be reasonable. Wipe the crew. That way if an Ostheer player really wants to he can hit the ML20 every few minutes and ensure that the crew doesn't stay vetted up for very long. Also if Soviet didn't want to lose his physical gun he would have to rush to repair it. Then finally even then soviets might lose his artillery piece anyway since an ally could follow it up with a cheaper off map artillery strike or use a Stuka/Panzerwerfer |
Thread: Centaur4 Nov 2015, 18:00 PM
I've had no issues with the centaur as of yet. I bring it out a bit later on in the game now (20minutes~) in order to stop JU-87's raining havok down on me and cover a VP alongside infantry. It's still an incredibly effective Anti-Air unit and worth it's cost in that respect for shutting down Lightning war play. The quick veterancy it gains from destroying planes makes it quite deadly I find. If the opponent isn't using a doctrine with Air Support I haven't found reason to use it yet.
Rushing Centaur I can see being a pretty bad idea though now as I don't feel it holds any mid game weight anymore. That whole Aimstrong strategy doesn't feel good now.
Agreed. It's mandatory for Brit to keep one at all times in 3's and 4's because one of the Ostheer will certainly have some form
Of plane off map. Also, it's quality armor means enemy mediums like PIV G and J will often bounce so they are very hardy units provided you don't YOLO enemy AT walls and such. |
LOL generally speaking the brits has better version units at every way except pwerfer and sexton.Such as cheap 6 pounder AT,vickers, long range mortar pit,sniper can anti vehicles ,5 men basic infantry,dubble brens,medium tank cromwell,fast vet speed on tanks,cheap heavy tier tech cost,better offmap abilities,better elite infantry,etc.
Precisely why comparisons in a vacuum fail. Every unit must be looked at through lens of the general make up of the army it is a part of as well as what it's opponents can field.
For instance if I was the US, I would be happy to pay a higher price than UKF for one of their Churchill's Precisely because it fills my biggest weakness late game. But considering how strong the USF is in early infantry, light armor, etc it wouldn't be good balance to let them field such a unit for late game even if one existed historically (which it didn't). |
I agree with this, I understand that coh can never achieve 100% realism, nor could it probably achieve 50% Realism, its just how the community and the game design was built. Though take war thunder for example, I use to play that game physically as much as I possibly could, along with several of my friends because the developers put realism first, though unfortunately for us, as the community grew, Gijan needed to appeal to a broader range of players, and started to get a much more arcadey feeling, even though they still stated historical accuracy was still their number one priority. How ever such games as IL2, Men of war, Silent Hunter 3, and Red Orchestra 2 still catch that realism first notion and personally I still enjoy those games very much because of that. Never the less, I do think what does it for me with coh is that it does have its arcadey feeling, and I can just hop into a game and have a different experience every time, not getting pinned down in 3 seconds or having no chance against suppeior Russian or German armor, it allows even the underdog to come in and turn a battle around, not just based on Tech or skill alone, but a combination of the two. That is why I prefer coh most of the time over more realistic games, as it just has that special spark, back in the days when I was just a kid playing battle station pacific 24/7 on xbox  .
Great post. wish more people would read OP's fully through rather than just ignore Half my post and comment on the other half.
EDIT: This reply was meant for Ninja's post one before. |
this is a l2p issue
Against a CAS commander it isn't at all. You literally can't reasonably field enough AA to prevent recon plane from revealing howitzer then the Stuka dive bomber can't be shot down so you are screwed and entire large segment of multiple commanders is erased which is dumb. There should be counter play upon counter play to all units and strategies. For instance shocks melt infantry so you can counter by suppressing them and keeping them afar with MG's and maybe get a sniper to cause MP drain on shocks. That opens up options to SU who can get an M3 and try to dive in from flank on sniper and MG if nearby there isn't Gren to snare the M3 and so on and so forth as counters continue down the line and players are rewarded for anticipating enemy counters.
Enter CAS,
1. Call recon plane after first howitzer barrage reveals there is an ML-20.
2. If necessary use fuel to munition conversion for enough munitions to call in Stuka strike
3. Profit!
And what is the counter play available to soviets if they anticipate this....none! except don't build any ML-20's. I have no problem with CAS being a doctrine that is good at hard countering artillery so first instance make its strike more vulnerable to AA fire so an SU player can have a chance to shoot it down or make it only clear the crew and take down weapon health 60-70%. Current state is indefensible |
Thread: Centaur4 Nov 2015, 00:05 AM
It sucks right now, no hard feelings, save the money and get a fast cromwell or a Churchill is much safer way to go.
I'm still using it with great success in all game modes. It simply isn't so amazing that it justifies spending no fuel on anything until you get the centaur at 10 minutes. Now I get T2 out with sniper and engineer like normal then tech 5 man squads and weapon rack before T3 and Centaur. I think it's pretty close to being spot on. |
Pretty fun watching you qq on the forums rather than learning to play
6 pounder is a direct clone of the pak fyi, kinda funny to see people get salty over it and call Axis AT crap in the same post.
don't agree with everything by OP but just bc 2 units are equal doesn't mean it isn't IMBA. UKF has superior infantry late game with dual bren possibility plus squad size upgrade. Wehr is supposed to make up for that with superior support weapon teams and ATG as well as slightly better armor. This is still true vs SU and USF but it isn't true vs UKF. So against the UKF, unless you go Ostruppen you are at a disadvantage in every way except for a slightly better sniper although Wehr sniper can't damage armor. |
He's not joking. First Fahu, now Cruzz...
RIP in piece
FAHU didn't do all the awesome things Cruzz did. Did he say why and if he was just taking break or is this indefinite? |
He is gone forever. RIP
please say you are joking because I haven't seen him for awhile on forums. |
United States
![[CFIS] Dartarius flag](/images/replay/okw_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
