Profile of general_gawain

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 919

General Information


Thread: OKW infantry vet vs UKF is broken10 Mar 2016, 20:06 PM It was pretty obvious that OKW infantry would overperform after fixing vet because infantry combat felt balanced lately without any vet bonus. In the last months all was balanced around broken vet. OKW profits the most, USF is second to this. Brits suffer the most, because of weak mainline infantry and their medicore vet bonus. Especially their doctrinal elite infantry - the Commandos - will get into serious trouble because they don't scale at all with vet regarding their combat values, they only receive a small accuracy bonus at vet2. While they were clearly overperforming as they came out they were balanced afterwards versus units with broken vet, no wonder a Commando squat with vet0 could take on "vetted" squads easily on release. Game will be more fun than ever before, especially in 4vs4: Real vetted blobs running around the map beeing back in no time after full retreat because of FRP mechanic. Well done. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: ostwind performance6 Mar 2016, 23:42 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Mar 2016, 23:20 PMPanzerGeneralForever I feel like the centaur outclasses it by a long shot Yes it truely does, but damage or rate of fire of Ostwind has to be managed very carefully. The reason is the difference in topspeed and accleration. Centaur is so slow that even a JagdpanzerIV will catch it if it tries to withdraw, so you have to be very cautious on advance to not overextend. So infantry is safe once it moves/retreats out of its fire radius. If the Ostwind would come halfway near to the dps of a Centaur it would be an absolut squad wiping machine, because it would chase all squads down. In addition you have to see it in the context of their factions. The current Centaur would be a lot more dangerous in the hands of Ostheer. Why? You could go for it first (instead of PzIV) while you could have still strong AT-options in form of double shreks, snares (faust) and PAK. That would be a very strong combination. Brits on the other hand would have to rely on PAK only if not going for Cromwell, its a lot more of a risky move for them. Thats the reason you see mostly Cromwells in current meta. Balance is a difficult thing, units can't be compared 1on1 without looking at the unit compositions although you are absolutely right about damage comparison. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Relic's Tendencies6 Mar 2016, 19:23 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Mar 2016, 18:29 PMKharn It's no secret why every USF player was picking this doctrine. When EVERY USF player stops using their doctrines and only picks one.. it's a problem. It was obviously overpowered. In case of the Calliope its a double effect. On one side it is the fact that it was clearly performing just to well for its price but on the other side it gives a type of unit to USF that this faction is totally missing: rocket artillery/reliable indirect fire. USF always had a problem of late game blob control or fighting fortifications. So Imo the heavy use of Calliope commander points to a flaw in game design. Every faction should have a late game non-doctrinal blob/fortification counter. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: ostwind performance6 Mar 2016, 18:41 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Mar 2016, 18:13 PMStug life yea but to me ostwind is too much rng reliant,some time i think that P4 is better vs inf. Yes, its performance can differ from one use to another because of RNG as you said, they could tone down this RNG reliance. I personally think Ostwind is best used versus USF. Especially a double Ostwind tech in a 2vs2 can really wreck havok on USF players if they get used together. It is just okay, far from op but it isn't up either. Maybe people think its up because there are other units that perform just to well for their cost. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: ostwind performance6 Mar 2016, 18:09 PM The Ostwind is not bad, it offers high mobility, AA and AI. But of course going for a Pz4 or a Ostwind first is a situational choice. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Hammer gammon are (still) too expensive.5 Mar 2016, 12:32 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Mar 2016, 13:53 PMPablonano Satchel cost 60, and its locked behind an specialist unit, thats why its better than gammon bomb Gammon is T4 and its locked behind a specialization, thats why its worse than satchel? There is always a counterargument In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Brits need a heavy tank2 Mar 2016, 23:12 PM Bring churchill back to hp and armor it had at the release and raise fuel accordingly. Then you have a real meat shield for your Fireflys. The churchill should be the brit tank which can stand a shrek blob frontally. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Sim City1 Mar 2016, 23:17 PM Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2016, 22:30 PMGundamZphyr7 It's far too late to redesign UKF so get used to putting up with emplacements since the faction's early and mid-game were essentially gutted to make room for them. Yes, Imo you are right. All discussion won't change a bit. They never removed a non-doctrinal unit before, so mortar pit and bofors will stay. They can't nerf it without kicking brits out of the game, so it basically comes down to the decission if you want to play this game or not. Although playing 3vs3 and 4vs4 a lot by myself, this modes will never be balanced. Think alone about FRPs ruining the infantry combat in every 4vs4, they will never adress this either. Edit: One more point. Because of the much higher ressource income in 4vs4 CP dependend units come much later in comparison to teching, making many units useless because their timing sucks. A problem thats not adressed for many years too. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet Reserve Army Strategy: F R E E S Q U A D S1 Mar 2016, 09:32 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2016, 02:55 AMCaptain QQ How are you producing that many tank hunters and still fielding enough cons to make the most out of rapid conscription AND put out a howitzer? Or at least a few 76s or 85s. The most important thing is teamplay. But let me tell my build first (3vs3/4vs4 AT team): T0 - 3 to 4 Cons Upgrade: Healing Upgrade: sometimes molotov (if there are many ambient buildings and opponents are defensive) Upgrade: sometimes AT-Grenade (if there are many Kubels/222 around) T2 - sometimes 1-2 mortars (if opponents are digging in) Upgrade: AT-Grenade (if not purchased already) T3 - T70, then another T70 or SU-76 from there more T70/SU-76 or T4 with SU85 or Artillery piece So its only a rough build order that variates slightly from game to game. You'll see no tank hunters in this build because I always call them on opportunity to kill a light vehicle/tank or finish off a damaged medium/heavy tank that would have escaped otherwise. So, lets move on to your question. Cons have cheap reinforce costs, partisans are expensive to reinforce and you can't merge with them. If you loose to many you can't afford tech and other more expensive units. So you want to minimize casualties in their ranks. The main threat is enemy AI infantry, so always try to bring your cons wit ppsh in first, use units like T70 in addition to target enemy AI infantry and force a retreat. The german shrek is so effective that your Partisans can take almost any german tank frontally. Once you get one salvo off, toss your AT-grenade in and finish it off afterwards. But as I said in the beginning: teamplay is key. Play with a mate that offers a lot of AI options like the soviet anti infantry commander to minimize your Partisan looses. If this works out you can afford higher tech units. If not you are nailed at T2 or T3. I had bloody tough games already were I never got past T2 and never got more than maybe 50 population (but my mates did for sure)because I was constantly manpower drained and floating a whooping 500 fuel, but we still won. Despite suffering heavy partisan looses they did this precious key actions, because they killed multiple low health Panther/Tiger/KTs and mined half of the map, heavily restricting enemy vehicle movement. The difference between axis heavy armor driving away with 50 health points left or getting destroyed is such a big one that it can totally compensate your heavy manpower loss. Just be an irreplaceable part of your team. In: Red Army Strategies
Thread: Soviet Reserve Army Strategy: F R E E S Q U A D S29 Feb 2016, 21:34 PM Not playing soviets very often lately but when I do I nearly always take this commander in AT games with my mates (if there are enough ambient buildings of course). AT Partisans back up your whole team strategy, you can tech with more risk, because partisans will save you if you get suprised by light vehicle/tank anywhere near an ambient building. I would back up comm_ash in going for T70 and SU-76 instead of M5. Best soft-skill about partisans is the ability to lay down mines. You will quickly have 4-5 partisans in a multiplayer game because there are many opportunities to call them. Use them to constantly lay down mines. 4-5 squads quickly mine a whole area. We won many games by wrecking german armor with the combination of mines/At-grenades and Shreks. Great commander especially for arranged allied teams without beeing p2w. In: Red Army Strategies