The hardest faction to play with the biggest micro input is Ostheer.
I generally agree with this, especially for the early-mid game. In the late game it evens out, in fact I'd say that USF is harder to micro once armour starts playing a big role.
As for the OP, I agree that OKW is comparatively easy to micro since they usually have stronger tanks, less reliance on infantry abilities, and less usage of team weapons. |
|
The first thing is to make it harder for your opponent to get one in the first place. In a 1v1 game it takes a long time to get the necessary fuel so if you see your opponent is not teching up, building fuel caches or generally trying to stall for time, it's a good sign he's saving for a heavy. In that scenario you can be aggressive, and you'll have a small window where you can focus on anti-infantry and hopefully drive him off his fuel. If you do that well he will still eventually get the heavy but you'll have been able to destroy some of his infantry and gain a fuel advantage so you can outnumber and destroy the tank.
For actually countering the heavy you have to use various units together. Jacksons are great but require careful micro and sighting. Use the HVAP shells at opportune moments. E8s are also pretty good if your doctrine has them. Bazookas aren't very effective but can be useful as an ambush tool with another unit drawing the tank's fire. M20 has great mines but is expensive if you didn't already tech LT. 57mm isn't worth building. Pershing can be ok in some situations but doesn't really have the durability to go toe-to-toe. A good tactic is to drive you tank directly behind the tiger and block its retreat path, just beware of shreks/fausts.
Finally you need to learn when to be aggressive and go for the kill, vs. when to chip away and avoid a decisive engagement. You need to be patient but keep your armour in a good position so that you can quickly capitalise on events (e.g. tiger hits mine, overextends) and get the kill. Often times its enough to just contain the tank by damaging it every time it tries to push, and focus on holding the VPs and harrasing his exposed caps. This will either force him into not using the tank to its full potential, or making a big push out of desparation. |
|
It's fine that most allied mediums have better accuracy on the move. It's a reasonable compensation for their inferior durability and firepower. It also goes well with their more mobile combat style; all that extra mobility isn't much use when you have to keep stopping to fire. A big reason the t34/76 isn't much use right now is it can't use it's mobility to good effect because of poor accuracy.
The only tank that needs a look at is the Comet, it's already very strong for its cost. The good moving accuracy allows for very aggressive usage.
On a side note, a nice feature for CoH3 would be to have some kind of reload progress indicator so you can more clearly know when to stop your tank for more accurate fire. |
The balance preview fixes the flame HT. Cheaper upgrade, less instagibbing garrisons and faster aim time. Good changes.
Mostly agreed. In its current state the unit is a one-hit-wonder that's good for a cheesy surprise wipe but like any fragile close range unit is impossible to keep alive (useless vet bonuses don't help). The unit certainly doesn't need any more offensive ability, it needs either some better survivability or reduced munitions cost. |
|
OKW are fine for AT. Shreks, fausts, mines and Raketen are enough to handle scout cars and light tanks, then a well micro'd puma is a threat to most mediums, then once you get a JP4 or panther you now have all the AT you could possibly need. Yes the Raketen is vulnerable if unsupported, have you considered incorporating the new MG34?
You already have non-doc, non-tiered, no cost to unlock snare, mines, hand-held AT and AT gun. No allied faction has that. |
|
I've never seen partisans in a game.
Perhaps after the patch reduces Sov reliance on doctrines they may come into use. I don't have a big problem with them, they certainly aren't a threat the same way falls are. If anything I'd say remove the ability to call them in from buildings in fog of war, nothing more than that needed for what is already extremely niche unit. |
I always feel a pang when people talk about this game as something that is already dead. I don't know they are right, but knowing that there is the perception that this is a dying franchise in the midst if all of these full-scale balance changes going through constant feedback cycles (and they ended up delaying the implementation just because they wanted more feedback) is kind of sad. I'm not even saying it's bad to think such things, but if the game is dying on despite being on life support, then I might have to brace myself with the possible fact that my favorite game may be a relic of the past.
It's just that expectations were so high after CoH1, then people were disappointed at release but hopeful for improvement. Instead of a general upward trend balance and quality of fluctuated widely. Things are good now but with official support waning we are starting to accept that the game will never live up to our hopes (not that it ever really could have). So the current mood is a reaction to the realities of the situation, a refocusing of attention away from pie-in-the-sky ambitions (such as new units or engine changes) and towards making the most of the game as it is and implementing more realistic changes. |
|
OKW are easiest to play.
OH are hardest to play.
USF aren't too difficult but require aggression which new players are averse to.
SU struggle after Maxim nerf but you will already know the tech from campaign.
Brits fit well with the passive/defensive style of new players but require good map knowledge to succeed so I suggest avoid.
In low-skill matchup OKW or Brits are best with their strong tanks/late game.
In medium-skill OKW or USF are best due to strongest tank rushes.
In high-skill it depends on the map.
Dumb thread tbh |
Changing reverse speed would mean every vehicle designed to reverse instead of slug it out to have to be redesigned. A Jackson that can't reverse away from a P4 is going to flat out loose since it has less health and does less DPS.
It wouldn't matter much for the jackson that never bounces shots so doesn't matter which way it's facing. Sure, it makes turretless TDs more vulnerable to flanks but it also makes tanks more vulnerable to a well positioned and supported TD. All too often we see tanks reversing away on a sliver of health while the TD is too slow to follow. Reduced reverse speed would give JP4, SU85 etc. a chance for an extra shot, or a shot at the rear armour instead.
|
|
I like it. As you've said it's too late for such a change (especially after allied TD buffs) but a solid idea nonetheless.
I think this issue is also why snares play such a big role. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
