|
i actually think in 1vs1 Ostheer is in a better spot then ever, the nerf of heavies allows for the use of more aggresive infantry commanders at which Ostheer actually is pretty good at.
In 1vs1 Ostheer doesnt even need a Tiger to stay competitive, it's early to mid game is amazing. You have very fast infantry upgrates and mg42 + fastest and deadliest light vehicles. Round it up with an reasonable cheap t3 you can really apply some great pressure.
In 2vs2 and above things look a little bit diffrently, but still the nerf of heavy tanks gave Ostheer a lot of posiblities, just to name some.
5 men grens, sniper, camo units , lfh, Elefant. Sure the I-win Tiger got nerfed but it's not like Ostheer is out of options. |
A nice game showcasing the strength of flamehetzer, mp40 volks and the model 24 nade
plus the usual ele isu crutch  |
Strange poll.
ISU is cancer especially because it comes in OP doctrines that have too much good stuff. ISU+ Mark Target+ Guards+ IL2+Camo AT guns is just insane.
Elefant is cancerous too because spotting scopes should have never been combined with it. Then again Elefant is your only hope to counter ISU on narrow maps like Minsk for example.
IMO both ISU doctrines and Jäger armour should get nerfed. It would be the best way to make 2v2+ instantly better.
the bombs are kind of stupid in both commanders, they stop howitzer play, and heavies get countered by isu or ele ( since you need paks with the heavis in the isu matchup). Leaving players with the only choice to pick ele to counter isu and vice verso (since bombs + ram seems one of the best ways to kill ele) leaving a very stall 2vs2 meta |
|
i think isu armor should be lowered to be honest (at least rear), kind of stupid for a p4 to bounce rear, front armor could be looked at too, since panther seems quite inconsistent vs it, and its kind of the only counter wher has (exept ele) |
True but what other squads do brits have with good LoS? They don't have stock pio LoS ranges on their engineers. They have no Jaegers or pathfinders doctrinally. A pyro upgraded section is as close they get.
You could lock that LoS behind a doctrine but it wouldn't really be worth a slot on its own.
you forget that pyro sections stack with vet 1, making them to pathfinders essentialy (non doc) while usf has to get a doctrine. So your point is basically useless |
I didnt mean selfspot, sometimes i mix up terms, the ability for every single mainline to have extremely strong spotting range is beyond powerful because on a map like faymonvile where you're going to be hugging cover 60-80% of the time.
It means that for example i place the typical sandbag center and will see... any coming flanks from the northern front, the point left from there, meaning any flanks will be spotted almost instantly, and the flanks from the truck point. Now i'll admit this might not be 100% certainty in terms of testing, but i find that to be the case frequently and it makes for nightmares trying to push someone who's playing defensivly because he gets all the chances to prepare and move around as he wishes while you have to constantly use sightblockers, it also works excellently for units with great range like vetted up vickers (in trench) or simply giving your vickers constant max range firewithout having to expose it self or having your sections move forward that much more.
I think you are very heavily (maybe delibaretly.) underplaying the power of having your mainline infantry get amazing sight range. its partly why pathfinders are as powerful as they are, sight is a great tool. Which is why it's assinged to certain vehicles that come out early rather than later, having your tanks the ability to fire max range almost always is a great boon.
+1 basically |
Yes, and you're not going to spot opposing defending force from your own defensive position without scouting unit or moving sections out of cover forward...
1 squad can crawl up to Maxim, its impotent at stopping anything, blobs obliterate it and it can't even suppress 2 LMG ober squads before they wipe it.
Vickers also got pretty low suppression, but at least it might kill a nade throwing model first, giving it a chance to suppress the squad.
.50 cal is pretty good, but extremely rarely used due to how faction plays.
HMG-34 is only slightly worse then 42, which is in line of its cost.
HMGs do counter blobs, but they don't do it alone. You're going to have to use spotter to fully benefit from HMGs range.
60 range TDs also don't exactly shine with vehicle up their face, so scouting is needed too.
ofc you can, since mg42s get used offensivly all the time..., a good wher player supports his push by a mg42, and who said its a defensive force? The brit player stays behind cover on a vital enemy point and ofc it is a significant advantage to see what the wher or OKW guy is going to push at you before he can see your defensive positions
You can muster troops to support of flank the mg 42 |
How are you going to accomplish that, when extra sight works only in cover, when you're stationary?
You can't attack and defend with the same unit at the same time and lets be honest, even biggest pros do not advance taking pauses in cover.
Also, ost pios do that without having to sit in cover.
brits stay in cover on vital points all the time, so do conscripts its one of their main assets, pls dont tell me how to play the game  |
I know what he means but that is not self spotting. Self spotting is the ability of certain units to see (almost) as far as their own weapon range so that they do not need other units to spot for them in order to fire from max range. For example the Command Panther and the Puma both with 50 weapon and 50 sight range, or a Pathfinders recrewed M2HB with 45 weapon range and 50 sight range.
Infantry Sections can not self spot by definition because the maximum range on any of their weapons is 35 which is the same as the standard sight range.
Being able to see further is not self spotting and does not give an as significant advantage.
every Standard infantry can self spot in your regard, and i dont think we should argue semantics here.
And ye spotting mgs before they set up or seeing what force is coming and getting more troops there, or spotting for TDs is (not) a significant advantage, i wont even start that you can see every flank a mile away and can reposition, Becouse for some reason the small sandbags give cover in every direction while the russian ones dont
While in Teamgames this doesnt matter that much, in 1vs1 engagements this means that you dont get suprised by an mg while sitting in yellow cover or know that you have to soft retreat into green cover etc. This is actually a big deal since you can force good trades, while the opponent might instantly drop a model while spotting you in green cover and planning his further apporach.
This just emphasises like orangepest said, that infantry sections trade very good in a 1vs1 basis with inf sqads while also being able to be blobbed up like seeking did. Combined with bren carrier for the early game, aec and cheap tech this results in overperformance
|
The only one with out argument is you. I have presented a lot of arguments as you can see. Such as stats, link to VODs etc.
If UKF are considered super OP by all these people (proof where?) then why didnt they bother giving the balance team feedback during the months of testing? It's always the same, people dont help with playing the mod then cry about when a patch hits live.
i think orangepest said smth about vonasten and jove agreeing to him or so, but need to check out his stream search for it, and skip of all the rant (which i think is justified)
The problem as orangepest put it, is that you win in the open and you win in cover, as long as your not facing a very bad engagement you just win. Sure there are some maps (like elst) where there is a lot of medium cover and medium range engagements where you can get the drop on the brit if played correctly, but on other open maps your just screwed.
And ofc if you play absolutly flawless like a god you will win, but 5-6 IS bleed less mp then 5 cons which is a joke IMO |
1
Relic Entertainment
