|
On topic: I don't really see why OKW should have to pay for medics. If they go for t1 first then they need all the help they can get to maintain map control, if they go for t2 first then having to pay 50+ fuel to backtech to a tier structure with units that are now largely useless isn't a good deal either.
Off topic: Having a select group of community members take over control of official patching is a bad idea, it's too prone to groupthink, bickering, and people trying to impose their personal ideas on a large group of people. That sort of thing is fine for an optional mod, but if it's official it really needs developer oversight to provide an unbiased perspective. What they really need is a small team of experienced devs (not the clowns they have now) who have been involved with the game for a while, working in conjunction with community members such as modders, top players etc. Maybe it could be financially viable to continue low-key but steady support, letting the community do much of the heavy lifting in terms of maps, gameplay/balance/bug-fix suggestions, and occasionally releasing a new DLC commander to keep things fresh, but then I don't work at Relic so I have no idea if that would work. |
the ability to purchase two bren/m1919a6 far out weight the benefit you listed. double lmg blob is the stuff of nightmare, there's a reason why they are limited to one on the grenadiers.
Then that is something that should be changed with those factions.
However, I am against dual lmgs on grens but lmg and 2 g43s is acceptable. However, this will cause problems for the balanced OST vs SOV matchup. Hence the solution would be to slightly nerf the survivability veterancy bonuses of USF, UKF, and therefore OKW infantry to be just a bit more in line with OST and Sov inf.
The weakness of grens is not their lethality, it's their poor survivability under the weight of firepower they have to go up against. Returning the ability to get both upgrades is a bad idea, it might have worked at release but it won't work now. It will lead to an awkward balance situation ala penals as the squad is now effective at all ranges. It would upset the delicate balance between grens and cons, nerfing OKW as you suggested would do nothing to help cons vs grens in a 1v1 context. It would also encourage more use of tanks and indirect against grens, only now you are losing even more munitions when your squad gets wiped.
If G43s aren't being used then perhaps they need a look at to improve their viability but what OP suggested is not the way. |
The thing about blizzard is that they are the kings of updating and adding new and meaningful content to their games. While some people might complain, the quality of their patching is miles ahead of whatever relic puts out.
Sure, relic is better than before at the frequency of patching (coh1 days) but their patches always feel 60%-80% done. There's always something missing, wrong or just plain old fucked up. It may seem like a worthy effort to you newer players but us older guys are pretty worn out by it.
I agree, many RTS games (and games in general) are released in an unpolished state with the assumption that refinement will come post-release, but it's all too often that follow-through never really occurs. Without that most players will quit early and move onto the next big hype rather than getting invested in the series. |
|
How come Grenadier weapon upgrade is better than Bar or Bren despite costing the same munitions, how come Grens can get their LMG anywhere in territory but Allies have to go back to base, how come LMG is available as soon as you get BP1 but Allies have to pay fuel and MP for the unlock?
There are problems facing Grenadiers but this isn't one of them. |
|
DoW3 will do alright on release but I don't see it doing much for the genre in the long run. RTS isn't a ded genre yet but it does appear to be in a downward spiral with lack of appealing titles leading to less interest in the genre, in turn leading to less financial incentive for development of new releases. Seems like most releases are either remakes/'HD editions' of classic titles or 2nd-tier titles that offer an interest gimmick but lack polish.
People hold up SC2 as the pinnacle of RTS, as if to argue that if that game can't succeed, no game ever will. That's just not true, SC2 is far from a perfect game. For all its simplicity it still has a steep learning curve and despite the shiny graphics it retains an ugly and extremely 'gamey' aesthetic. From a single player perspective it has become excessively campy and suffers from Blizzard's tendency to rehash the same themes and plot lines.
So I think there is still potential for a successful RTS if it can get that winning combination of accessibility, innovation, polish and marketing, although of course that's much easier said than done. For CoH3, that would mean focusing more on its strengths, learning from past mistakes instead of repeating them, driving sales through good marketing (ideally timed closely with the next big WW2 movie/TV series), then supporting the game through thoughtful patches and worthwhile DLC.
|
|
If you're having trouble getting to the mid game try out some alternative openings. T1 start is good now however you will often need guards when using it, also make sure you get conscripts as well as penals and make medics a priority. Conspam works quite well against Ost players as you have more squads and excellent capping ability, plus it is quite flexible because you can transition to t2 units whenever you want. T2 start can be good as well, when doing it I sometimes send my engis out to cap a point or two, then bring them back to build the structure, this way you aren't waiting around for MP with only 1 unit out capping.
Conscripts aren't superstars but they aren't 'ass' either, 'oorah' is an extremely useful ability and one of those things noobs neglect but good players use all the time.
The thing with the luchs rush is it's predictable, if you haven't seen anything other than t0 units by the 6 minute mark it's time to start preparing for it. Luchs can be deadly if you're not careful but it doesn't do that much damage against units in cover, especially at long range so use that to your advantage. Zis is still good against luchs, one hit is enough to force it away and buy time til your hard counter. A Zis hit combined with a mine strike and some nearby conscripts can get the kill.
Finally it's not a matter of 't70 or nothing', yeah the t70 is great but if you don't get it early enough you may be better off going for SU-76 instead. SU-76 is useful the whole game and doesn't leave you exposed to a cheeky panzer, whereas T-70 will inevitably die at some point. |
I don't think there's any way to balance 4v4 for the simple reason that it's dominated by people who just have very little idea how to play the game and just want to see big battles without having to be responsible for winning.
That comes down more to bad map design which make it hard to manoeuvre and deny resources, so matches descent into a battle of attrition.
I agree that there are some inherent differences between 4v4 and 1v1, my comment was more criticizing the notion that we should only focus on 1v1, when in fact being able to have a good experience in any game mode adds a lot to the longevity of the game. |
|
I don't think the number of players has dropped off that much aside from the initial drop every game has after release.
The big problem now (and since release) is the lack of variation in games. 1v1 is all about the meta and there aren't that many options available, play enough games and every faction/map combo starts to feel the same. 3s and 4s are more unpredictable, but usually descent into a slugfest due to maps whichconcentrate all the fighting in one or two places and make it very hard to maneuver. The key for me is to play all game modes and factions, that way when I get sick of one thing I can go on to another that I haven't played in a while.
The last patch was good in that it opened up more tier options for soviets and USF, but it also pushed OKW t1 towards irrelevance so it's very much a 2 steps forward, 1 step back situation. People are starting to get frustrated because we feel like the game is so close to being in a really good state but with Relic winding down their commitment to the game it looks like we won't ever get there. Mods offer a potential to improve the game after official support has dried up but right now it seems like most of the work is being done by a few committed individuals rather than in a coordinated effort. That said I don't know much about the current modding scene so please don't skewer me if I've got that part wrong. It also doesn't help that some individuals spread the idea that having good experiences in 1v1 and 4v4 are mutually exclusive and that everything should focus on competitive 1v1 when players in those game modes represent a small fraction of total base. |
|
Just veto the map, it's the only solution. |
|
I don't think it's that big of a deal. Getting t4 vehicles out takes a long time for OKW, if you want to get healing before that stage it takes even longer. Trying to hold with just a raketen and one tier's units is pretty difficult.
Once raketen is fixed it will be easier for OKW to hold until their tanks, but for now the only change I think it should have is a range nerf for the AA. I'm fine with an AA structure that actually does a decent job against aircraft, but being able to do that over most of the map is a bit much.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
