Early Raketten costs OKW precious fighting power and arguably map control, as established in the other thread. Besides T2 would delay the Soviet teching by 160MP and 20FU so that's hardly disruptive. They can also get Tank Hunter doctrine to hardcounter the 251. I stand by my point about Soviet reluctance. I think they are generally spoiled by dominating build orders so much.
I have aknowledged that Panzer Tactician smoke should go, and that the flamers shouldn't be as powerful against retreating units. Other than that, I remain convinced that the rest of the 251's performance is fine and most of its effectiveness comes from reluctance to adjust build orders for hardcounters.
The building doesn’t counter flame ht though. That’s what the 320 mp at gun is for. I don’t think the flame ht is OP or anything, but frankly I don’t see how spending 480 mp and 20 fuel is comparable to 270. Bit of a ridiculous argument and not equivalent at all. Again, I don’t think flame ht is OP but you're dragging your perceived cross over the UC into the flametrack thread without any good reason. Also, if you really want to get into it, okw starts with a potent combat squad and does not have to construct buildings in the early game while soviets start with 4 man conscripts and the need to construct buildings right off the bat. Soviets will always have less very early game combat power. Raketen can also be safely used for early game capping because it can retreat. |
Im lost the raken is a t0 at unit that costs 270 and will remain useful/essential throughout the game. If the UC is such an issue then the raken is never a bad investment.
Early game combat power goes down but that's somewhat offset by the fact that you basically have an extra capping squad that can still retreat and will be useful throughout the game later as you said. |
|
I’d much rather see it cheaper with vet0 flanking speed than having a gimmicky HE shot.
Passive elite crews would also be great. Possibly the only way to make the ability not a meme. |
It definetly wont be OP literally lacks heavy arty call in panic units
And has way too much else. Plenty of commanders don't have heavy arty and the fact taht it doesn't have callin units doesn't matter because it has blatantly op suggestions like LT and CPT with flamers and E8 with HVAP and WP lol.
I'd rather see a thread on a reasonable and legitimately possible rework. |
I've been using the comet a bit recently, when I get an easy game or whatever, It's anti infantry seems ok-ish if you ask me, it's nothing compared to the churchill or centaur obviously but when it hits it'll nearly wipe a squad. If the comet is stationary it's gun isn't too inaccurate either and the phosphorous does deal a lot of damage very quickly, it just doesn't kill. It's just if it moves at all it'll whiff the shot to oblivion. It seems to me, moving accuracy is the main problem right now because a loopdloop said, it's a goddamn cruiser tank, it's supposed to move.
With brits getting snares, I kinda think and buffs to pen or range or whatever might end up with the Brits getting the best AT in the game again, especially seeing as fireflies are set to become really powerful next patch. Which might be a balance issue.
Huh I. mostly agree but in my experience the comet seems to only hit like 1 guy when it hits (very rarely two if the models are literally almost clipping). The AoE seems kinda bad for how often it misses even while stationary IMO. I’d be fine with the low AoE if it hit more often but it still seems to whiff a lot of shots on flat ground while not moving.
@supremehansfan and zombifrancis
I actually think the shorter range than the panther is a good way to keep the panther more superior in the AT department (as it should be). I think a cost decrease would actually be a bit OP because the comet is still very tough and decreasing it to okw p4 cost would not justify that toughness. IMO the only thing that needs to happen to fix it is a buff to its offensive capabilities, namely improved and/or more consistent anti infantry on the main gun and maybe better moving accuracy penalties. |
|
This commander certainly needs a rework, but this rework would be blatantly op. |
Having a main battle tank that is a good as a top TD vs tanks would be simply OP and would also overlap with the EZ8.
What I am suggesting is that 76mm is a bit better vs PzIV for the same price. The 75mm Sherman can kill infantry effectively even without the HE (and so would the 76mm if they where identical) and USF already have lots of AI available from other sources.
(The Jackson it self should not be a cost effective counter to PzIV.)
Yes, and I'm not saying that the 76mm in its current revamp state is not overpowered lol. I'm saying that your suggested changes would make it not very effective and I personally would find no reason to build it if it's just a shitty compromise between sherman and jackson that can't do either job as well as its counterparts.
You always talk about how the jacksons shouldn't counter the p4, but there isn't a tank that the JPIV (closest axis equivalent I guess) does a bad job countering. Even the stug also does reasonably well against everything but (ironically) jacksons for being very cheap. The SU-85 and firefly also do well against all armor, and the SU-85 can self spot and the firefly has tulips I don't see the problem with dedicated tank destroyers being able to kill tanks, and getting one means sacrificing the AI power of generalists. |
Getting closer, albeit smart aleck-ly, but the reason I posted it in balance is wondering what allies have to offset its effect ability-wise (or simply econ-wise) in particular because it makes unconnected territory act like connected, no?
Fuel airdrops. Or you could just build non doctrinal caches. Or you could just control more of the map. Or you could go kill the opel blitz. |
I think both ways have their benefits, its just that when you say X unit has A weapon, there isn't a whole lot of information there to go off of. Like pioneers also have MP40s but perform very different. It's just CoH2 being itself in the poor ways it conveys information, most infamously veterancy.
And just for the sake of more information you're unsure of, the LMG34 deals only 4 damage when wielded by non-elites, vs the 6 of elites. One of the few things I was able to get into former patches thanks to Mr. Smith.
+1 I think we can agree taht this game's statistics are a daunting mess lol. It does make sense to some degree that weapons perform differently in the hands of different soldiers though (but not to the extent of volks stgs vs sturm stgs vs pgren stgs obviously).
Wow I didn't know that. That's interesting. It still seems very good on pathfinders though. Do they count as elite for the purposes of the gun? I might just be seeing the effects of the sniper crit and the superior m1 carbines though. |
I mean to be fair one would expect the new mp40 to follow the performance of the existing ones, which is lackluster to say the least (not unreasonable giving the timing of the some of the units slinging them) this whole same name but working differently business is getting out of hand (look at hit the dirt on cons and hit the dirt on guards for example) you shouldn't need to keep track of which things of the exact same name function in what way. Christ. Call it the mp-40/II just to define it or something..
That's true. There's also 2 versions of the stg, m1 carbine, and kar98 too I think. It's all a bit unintuitive. |
Bleb Feesh
LoopDloop
LoopDloop
Relic Entertainment
