Profile of Bulgakov

Axis wipe options seem to be more expensive, but there is a fair share of ones that are cheaper(booby traps for example), getting Stuka which wipes something with almost every barrage is also cheaper then getting Katy. Axis options of squad wiping are more expensive, but they are also much more lethal.

Most axis players scream imbalance when allied tank or shell one shots a squad and they scream that nothing should one shot squad and then we have unit like sturmtiger which erases anything it hits below 140 fuel cost.


I play RTS games since settlers 2/C&C times I got my fair share of experience with all different kinds of them.

He mentions CoH1. He didn't mention that infantry in general was much more powerful and durable there, pretty much only artillery was a reliable way of disposing them. CoH2 infantry lethality itself is much greater

AoE profiles were nerfed multiple times, you can nerf them to extremely low values and you'll still see squad wipes, because all entities stand in a single place. Ever wondered why pre WFA only squad wipes were caused by odd 120mm or ISU random hits and not by stuff like Ostwinds or rifle nades?

Hell, I've seen a pshreck one shot 5 models once, its certainly not because of its AoE.

He's been playing a long time at a higher level. Players like Nosliw, Hans, Cataclaw, Barton, Budwise - they understand RTS better than you or me. It's always worth taking in their posts.

I know the squad clumping is the leading factor in insta-wipes. I've already said so. I only suggested that Aoe could also be tweaked to help the issue. Squad spread is the main factor.


Axis does have wipe options. As I said - they are more rarely seen and in fewer numbers.

"Most axis players scream imbalance when allied tank or shell one shots a squad and they scream that nothing should one shot squad and then we have unit like sturmtiger which erases anything it hits below 140 fuel cost." This is flamebaiting. "most axis players"? "scream"? C'mon... If they're screaming, ignore them. Discuss it with the rational players but discuss it without emotional provocation.


(Sturmtiger could also be up for discussion. I'm not saying it is good or bad for the game. That should be another thread) In any case, Sturmtiger fuel cost has to be adjusted and you have to take into account that it's an extremely rare unit because OKW can rarely choose it over the panther. Allied one-shotters are not rare, they are easily available. They also fire every few seconds not once a minute.


But my main point is that it's bad for ALL ARMIES to regularly lose full squads to one-shot units.

The tanks I have seen 1 shot squads in CoH2 recently: Tiger Ace, King Tiger, Sherman 105, Sherman with HE, T34/85, ISU-152, IS2

Tanks I have seen 1 shot squads in CoH1 recently: None

I also remember playing a game as OKW recently against a Soviet, his T34/85s drove out of FOW, both shot at a 6 man, vet 4 Panzerfusilier, and it died instantly... this type of non-sense bothers me so much. To avoid getting wiped I would literally have to retreat instantly. Why am I being punished for no reason? Losing a vet4 6 man squad in 1 second is not skill or a mistake on my part. It's just stupid and punishes players for no apparent reason

Wow, Nosliw's here.

Big +1

Losing full squads to one-shotters ruins the gameplay for any army. Ost and OKW suffer a bit more due to their smaller squads but really it happens to every army. A lot of issue would be much less severe if this was dealt with.

This is a really trolley thread from a really trolly biased user.
He clearly said the officer has weapons that are overwhelmingly powerful and all that typical austerlitz exaggeration

You made a couple of points I can agree with - about maps and unit variety.


I think you may have misread Austerlitz:
Cookiez: "He clearly said the officer has weapons that are overwhelmingly powerful"
Austerlitz: "Free lieutenant with BARs and thompson arrives and gives usf automatic numerical advantage.This squad is worth nearly 1.5-2 unupgraded grenadiers squads due to the inherent weapons it comes with."

He didn't say they were overwhelmingly powerful. He said they were 1.5/2 times more powerful than a gren squad. To me that sounds about right. Would you say a gren is evenly matched with an Lt.?


But the key point that you might have missed is that not only do the officers come with effective weapons without a munitions cost, but also there is no tech-lull.


I'd be interested to hear your opinion, you seem unbiased for the most part. So: "The USF have a steady stream of strong infantry units in the early game with no production gap which lead seamlessly into light vehicles. This is one of the major problems with the Ost-USF match-up." What dya think?

Where actually did I claimed it was running speed again?

Because all I can see in my previous post is that wheels make heavy objects move with much less force applied then the same objects without the wheels.

Whatever you've studied, it certainly wasn't about literature, otherwise you wouldn't have so much trouble with reading comprehension.

Your reply about pushing a heavy wheeled object was in response to the topic on 120mm mortar. Someone said it moves too quickly when running away, you said it's ok that it moves quickly because it has wheels.

I read just fine. The comprehension issue is yours.



As for your comment on rifle grenades - I agree with you. They shouldn't be wiping squads so easily.

I think, instead of cluttering up the forums, you should consider playing the game- and instead of comparing each individual factor, compare the sum of its parts. I can compare volks > cons and JP4 > SU85 and KT > IS2 and Stuka > Kat+120 all day long but you'd have to be stupid to say that OKW > Soviets in terms of faction performance, where both sides play to the maximum potential.

I also wish Brachiaridos would stop cluttering the forum.


I had a thought but I'm not sure. Is it possible that grens and cons are actually pretty balanced, each having their own advantages and disadvantages - but that due to certain game mechanics (eg effect of crits on 4-man vs 6-man), map layouts and teching structure, grens have a harder time making full use of their advantages over cons?

1 example: Grens will beat cons when stood at a distance, both behind green cover and lose at closer range (correct if wrong, pls) Because of shot-blockers and Oo-rah, it is pretty hard to make sure you keep them at range.

Scenario: 1 Gren in green cover + MG in green cover. Conscripts appear from left side at medium range from behind shot blocker and out of MG arc. They oo-rah in to grens, taking damage, MG turns.

When MG packs up, new con squad appears from behind shotblocker on other side, oorahs in and throws molotov on MG, which is forced to retreat. 1st Cons has lost the engagement, retreats, leaving full-health 2nd cons to beat the half-health gren squad now without MG support. Cons win.

(The reverse situation with grens vs con+MG doesn't work because flanking and getting in close plays to the son+mg's advantage)


(To anyone thinking "molotovs cost an upgrade", please remember that building Ost T1 costs fuel / time / manpower.)

Add to this the fact you can fairly safely pump out 6-8 conscripts + elite inf without having to worry about a hard counter for a long time, while as OST you are forced to get AT pretty quickly.Soviets will almost always have more squads on the field, more capping power, more resources.


Solution - Map changes or MG suppression improved on yellow cover or more damage taken when oo-rahing or units firing from green cover do more damage or whatever.