This game will be dead in less than a year. Probably more like 2 years with Relic scheduling. I would not put too much effort into it.
All will depend on COH3.
If it's like AOE4 and its dwindling player numbers, COH2 has another 5 years. |
where are you paying 14mp for a conscript squad? they still cost 20 per reinforce
3 ptrs cons doesn't 1shot a panzer 4 (especially not a p4J)
penal ptrs is expensive but sometimes your infantry just gets beaten late game by the enemy infantry, or the utility becomes valuable
you will not kill a tank with ptrs conscripts that hasn't been mortally wounded beforehand, or the enemy is simply bad for it to happen. Matter of fact tanks like the panzer 4, tiger or king tiger (or any other anti infantry tank) will bleed your troops out of cover
You are right, 20 mp is the reinforce cost for cons. On every other count you are mistaken or have a reading comprehension problem.
I never claimed that 3 ptrs cons 1shot a panzer 4. Not even close. What I said was that they have the utility to become a better AT squad than Penals will ever be. 3 cons with hoorah, snaring ability and 2 shots with PTRS each will rape the tank hard enough to allow the ATG to finish it off. I know because I have killed thousands of P4s, Tigers and KT without having dedicated Tank Destroyers ready. So what if the enemy bleeds your cons? They are cons ffs, that's their job to die cheaply for their utility. |
textbook alliedplayer schizophrenia
this would be an argument if allied TDs didn't have an (arguable) medium/hard disadvantage against tanks that are able to fire back, as all of your adversaries will always pen you and have more HP than you do
Panzer IV cost: 350 MP 120 fuel. Jackson/SU85/Firefly cost: about 440 MP 145 fuel with less teching up required.
You can literally win the game by becoming the first to pump out TD to rape enemy's P4 which by that point would be paper thin. No point in arguing about lategame where you are going to be stuck with TDs against the axis' beasts that you did not harass enough in the first place to stop their production.
worth mentioning that a panther (And stug for this matter) both already outrange an IS-2, and a panther is faster than an is-2 by default (getting only faster with blitzkrieg).
so?
since kiting enemy tanks is an alien concept to axis players, the panther can additionally sit in the IS-2s firing range and, while not outright beating it, repels basically all attacks done by it, hence why I made the thread a long time ago.
That's correct, since neither of those tanks are made for long range pens (even though IS-2 has 250pen against armor from far range compared to Panther's 220 but I don't even care). But what I really don't get is why do you whine when the IS-2 has self repair ability basically for free (since SOV are notorious for their crazy muni floats) AND an amazing AI and AT special shell that wipes in seconds? Panther sucks balls in the AI department and that's to be expected.
If your only problem with IS-2 is the IS-2 vs Panther matchup you are using it very very wrong.
apparently paks are bad despite having the objectively best AT stats in the game for towed AT, they could have a thousand penetration and somehow it would not seem to be enough...
Tell me how could a single Pak become a threat against a 340front armor 1040hp behemoth. |
|
The bane of existence for every decent axis player is the enemy's sniper. There, I let you in on the secret. |
|
I always build him when I happen to lose a vetted IS squad midgame and need a better source of firepower. His abilities are amazing too.
(Yes, I have been trying to play UKF for a while now). |
Point me where I didn't  You said stats were for march, while in fact they were for April and very few games were played, Based said that USF don't have highest allies winrate in 4v4, while they clearly do for the last 3 months.
Instead of blaming other ppl, you better off checking your own information for mistakes and, if they exist, accept like a big boy.
I never said they don't have the highest stats for allied victories. What I said was it's because people now came to realize how powerful Pathspamming is and decided to make it the norm for the game. As such, a huge spike of players started discovering the USF faction and get a few wins. If the same stats exist 6 months from now, I will hand it to you. |
You meaning change Basic Cargo + MG upgrade to Basic MG + Upgrade Cargo?
What a hot IDEA from you. I've never expected that you give a good idea to USF.
 |
So in this scenario ur getting at-nades and mollys for ur 1 conscript squad? Waste
AT overwatch is better against tanks, but can use the bombing run to delete buildings too. Can still damage infantry as well, decrewed 2 paks with 1 ptab bombing run last night
Higher accuracy? THe cons arent going to miss tanks anyway. If ur talking about that slightly better performance against infantry, whoopty do u took a penal squad and gave it ptrs. In my build order all my penals stay in AI role
Not saying the commander is the best, cuz he's not at all. But i think u are mistaken about ptrs consrcripts
The strength of the commander is not that cons are more accurate, but that cons are so expendable that it's ok to rush them in front of a fucking tank, lose half your squad, retreat to reinforce with 14mp a model whilst giving the axis player the beating of a lifetime. Especially if it's early game, and he only has a Panzer IV. 3 PTRS cons and he just lost his major power spike. Penals are way too costly (and way too good anti inf wise) to take on such a hard task of being the AT squad. The only saving grace for them is the mininuke they have against vehicles. If that were to be taken away, they would go back to being a very good early game semi elite anti inf unit (which I would be perfectly fine with).
I always equip this doctrine, because it's my ace in the hole whenever I feel like I am playing behind the axis players and know they are going to have a tank soon. Obviously it's not a first tier commander, but absolutely the perfect lifejacket style last resort. |
|
Huge potential for it, and I have had my fair share of losing the game because of the USF player outmicroing on me with it.
As others have said, it's a USF T70 and should be used this way. Avoid direct confrontations that may lead to snares, get close shoot canister, roll back, repair. Run around and bleed people.
Obviously, all its power is in its timing. If you get it post 12min mark it's a waste for sure. |
Balance is very map oriented, nowadays almost all maps favors long range engagement, change the Map pool to more medium/short range engagements and will see a lot of topics about how shocks/assaultsomething is op.
A balanced map should have one side of long range, and the other side with short range, something like that
The "perfectly" balanced map would be one where the action DOES NOT condense into a single area of it. As such to do this you need :
- As you said, more enviroment change. Ideally, the only open areas would be each side's fuels and munis so that they can be covered my a single MG/Bunker to allow the player's economy to run smoothly and invading it becomes a risk factor.
- Bringing back the manpower points, since they can act as a leverage against campers by cutting them not only supply, but men as well. Thus you accomplish two things, remove campers from the game and also make keeping every area count for the wider picture since that if you don't, you will lose your ability to replenish troops.
- Remove the maps with single chokepoints that players so freely choose to camp on. It's not only an idiotic gamble, it's also a huge drain on the normal flow of gameplay. I almost feel orgasmic when an enemy chokes my cutoff and then I go Close the Pocket on his meager forces comprising of MGs and Mortars only. That's stupid.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
