Profile of LoopDloop

I put this in balance but I'm more just wanting to have a discussion than actually move towards asking for changes or anything like that.

Theoretically, mortars (and other mortar-y like indirect fire options) are meant to counter static play right? Or at least work in tandem with hmgs to suppress and then shell helpless infantry. So why are most of them (poor soviets) so freaking good at killing lots and lots of mainline infantry just on autofire? I think the worst offenders are of course the mortar pit (the worst the worst) and ostheer mortar, as they are both really accurate with a relatively high rate of fire (or really high for the pit) on autofire, but other options are still very lethal as well.

On top of this, they don't really require a lot of micro to kill stuff unless you're actually using them in their intended role, countering static play and other indirect fire, since most of them (rip usf) have pretty long autofire ranges and will usually be able to shell infantry on the front lines while still being very safe from said infantry.

I just kind of want to hear other people's views on these points, I'm not going on a witch hunt to nerf all indirect fire.

Mechanized is a fun commander, but it's a YOLO strategy, high risk-high reward.

You do have a fair point surpression is the best way to force OKW to actually use tactics and not just brute force into you every time, just without the M1 ATG I am not sure how to actually kill the Luchs.

Yeah that's the problem. You really have to catch the luchs out of position and hit it with an at nade, which usually isn't actually super hard as rifles are everywhere anyway. For some reason a lot of okw players get really greedy about trying to kill the m15 with their luchs and often badly overextend, especially if your riflemen and zooks are hidden behind a shotblocker.

My point is that balance currently seems to go like this: A community figurehead will target something they don't like then garner support from the usual parrots, and we'll see patch notes/mod changes reflective of that. Those changes are usually over the top, and switch up meta only enough for another flavor of cheese to dominate, people get fed up with that - rinse repeat.

The approach to balance should be more about changing as little as possible with each patch, so that new versions of the game don't have their own blatant over the top and over performing units that are targeted and over nerfed in the next patch. I get this approach may not be the most appropriate for CoH2, because from my understanding Relic doesn't intend to release more than 2 patches in a year - but the current mad dash to drastically change things up each patch just means longer wait times to fix issues created by those patches. Also, this community clearly lacks the ability to come at each topic objectively, another huge flaw in the philosophy that community driven balance can work.

That all being said I will agree that being able to silently park behind a shot blocker and fire through it is a bit cheesy, but as you stated it's comparable to demo charges and goliaths, which at times can also seem cheesy. I don't think that's reason to remove them or change them so that they function differently then they currently do, that just invites more blobbing. And we all know how much this community hates blobbing. There's definitely a solution to making the unit more "fair" while letting it maintain it's role - but finding that solution is going to require more thought than "remove from game".

One thing to note is that sometimes they nerf the over-the-top bullshit so people end up looking around for new over the top bullshit. Take dshkas for example. They weren't changed one bit in the patch that brought them into meta but suddenly everyone's using penals with lend lease because maxim got nerfed so cons maxim was no longer viable. What you say still has merit though, even taking the same example. Dshkas came into meta because maxims were over nerfed and as a result are not very viable.

I agree with your points, however saying that in the current live version Allied artillery is weak is stretching realms or reality here. The calliop and land mattress and kattyushas are capable of delivering very good artillery and are superior to the non doctrinal artillery form OKW and Ost.

Now yes they are doctrinal, but so are the units we are discussing in this thread. It seems there is a general consensus that countering doctrinal tank destroyers with other doctrinal units (artillery in my example) is somehow unreasonable.

As for the powerful off maps, the Brits have the most powerful ones in the game, they are totally insane. Stuka loiter goes into the same window as well. As for Soviets having nothing in the late game. Vet 3 shock troops run through everything, as do penals. I play Soviets a lot lately and penals shit on everything at vet 3. They only come into trouble vs mass vet 5 stg volks and lmg obers. Guess what, Allied artillery wipes them pretty easily!

I do see what you're saying, and I agree with it, but only to an extent. My reasoning for this is that it offers a way around, but still doesn't counter the unit. If it countered the unit, it would allow you to make armor and use it to an extent. Artillery counters paks and machineguns in this sense, but doesn't counter heavy TDs in the same way, since you still will be locked out of using armor in the main battlefield.

IMO soviets have one of the best and most versatile lategames out of the allied factions.

With the Bug that doesn't let Bazookas apply Death Criticals, meaning they need an extra shot to kill something like a Luchs, I've stopped using LT unless I need the M20 to kill a Sniper.
I love the LT and the M20 + .50cal, but until that's fixed, Captain is once again the way to go.

Huh. That's an odd bug. I just find the stuart super underwhelming and not having any sort of suppression or anti infantry light vehicle really hurts.