|
I also think that it is overprized.
Most straight up buff abilities are 70 mun but only effect infantry usually. I would like this to be 90-100 mun and adjust performance accordingly. That's still an investment, but it makes it easier to use since it gets less "all or nothing".
Slightly off topic:
I once read that this ability can actually worsen your troops under some circumstances. If I remember correctly, this was when you have vet 3 squads, because the ability allegedly overrides other buffs.
I don't know if this is true and it seems pretty weird and unique. But then again it's CoH2, so it might be possible. Does anyone know more about this? |
The 40% accuracy bonus Pfusiliers gets at Vet 2 negates that disadvantage completely as well. Compare Riflemen 30% at Vet 3, Rear Echelons 20% at Vet 1. Just for fun, Sturmpios get a 40% accuracy buff as well, at Vet 4, with Panzergrenadiers getting a wierd 16.7% at Vet 2 and then 20% at Vet 3, for a total of 36.7%.
Just a small clarification here:
Panzergrenadiere had 40% bonus at vet 3 previously. Part of the Panzergrenadier buff apart from them coming earlier was to split the bonus equally to vet 2 and vet 3. The accuracy bonus is not additive, but multiplicative, making 1,167*1,2 = 1,4004 bonus in total at vet 3, which is almost equal to the 40% they got before that. It may look weird at first, but makes sense at second glance. |
|
StuKa is one way to counter.
But as I said, Ostheer suffers most, and they don't get an early StuKa |
|
1v1s are not the real problem, I think it is 3v3 and 4v4, where they are incredibly strong. There I usually build 2 of them, they almost always pay off. For 1v1 and 2v2 I usually build none or just one unless the Axis players turtle like hell.
But then again, balance is made for 1v1 and 2v2 for good reason, as these provide more controllable environments where you can make the right conclusions for nerfs and buffs.
I think especially Ostheer suffers from the Scott. Cloaked double Raketenwerfer are crazy good against USF tanks, but Ost always has to dive a tank to push the Scott and suffers more due to smaller squad size and the heavier reliance on static weapons.
I think broadening the AoE damage as DerbyHat suggested might be quite nice and more consistent for both sides. |
Could be.  I play 1v1 alomst solely. I have problems with brits as I haven't played them in a year or more. Still they really seem a bit over the top.
Brits are strong, but (in my opinion) that's due to the IS and the bolster. I'd like to see the IS be similar to the grenadiers with different cover mechanics. Probably slightly stronger since they are more expensive and lack utility. Maybe buff their weapons, remove the bolster or just make the bolster work on the engineers (with reduced price as compensation). Then make the Bren be an MG42 cost- and stat-wise and have IS only have one weapon slot. Everything in a sensible way, but I always liked the idea that Brits actually play more like Ostheer, so the Axis face a different tactic than the "total offensive" of USF and SOV. Just like OKW plays more similar to the other two Allied factions than Ostheer.
But that would be another thread.
Maybe we can let this topic now die in piece, I think most of the arguments have been discussed. |
Couldn't agree more. Panzergrens are still very delicate. You invest a lot of manpower plus 100 munitions and they can be too easily wiped. A risky unit. What's more they completely, one may say, lose their anty inf capabilities when upgraded with shrecks. So they become sort of expensive support unit. But to the point: allied ikfantry anti tank options are more varied than those of axis.
That's also why I did not buy them. But I have not played OST very much since the patch, so maybe they're better now? I just feel that in most cases I'm better off with a PaK that costs the same MP, saves mun and has better AT although at the cost of mobility.
Well, the infantry based AT for USF and UKF is better in my opinion since they can put it on cheap engineer squads. Easier to reinforce and it actually buffs their combat value quite a lot.
Axis only have Panzerfüsiliere as a comparable unit. They're great with Panzerschrecks, but doctrinal. Sturmpios are also too expensive for AT in my eyes. |
Wow wow wow. I hope your calculations are correct. But what a tremendous piece of work
Anyway, chrchill is a bit too strong for ost imo. And it's not only due to repair speeds. Generally UK is pretty strong when against ost. And maybe the answer is to buff ost anti tank department slightly to deal with churchills. I also believe that stug is not the answer. You cant spend that much fuel and manpower ona units that wont help you against inf. As ost you are doomed then. Also firefly/jacskon/su85 will laugh at your stugs. It's just wrong tier at that stage of the game when churchills are around.
Thank you, I assume they are correct since the descriptions in the editor made sense to me.
I think we just slightly disagree. The Churchill is difficult to deal with, but I played it several times as Brits and I have to say it has quite some weaknesses, especially in smaller game modes where mobility matters. It needs a ton of support to not let it get snared and you're pretty much fixed to that point on the map with your main army, since relocating it takes some time. The latter is not a huge disadvantage in 3v3 and 4v4 since the map is just stuffed with units, but in 1v1 and 2v2 flanking is more prominent, so speed matters more.
I was mainly talking about 2v2 since I play that the most. Maybe that's where our difference comes from. |
|
+1 as well |
True. However, when a vehicle does get snared it is a perfectly valid option to finish it off with a satchel/satchels. Happens on high level play too. Also satchels and snares on an at weapon holding squads eliminate certain possiblities of engaging them. It is sometimes a good idea to force an at squad out of cover or just try to crush it with a vehicle. You can do it against shrecked pzgrens or pios but can't do it against, for example, ptrs penals. In my opinion some snare should be given to pzgrens after they equip shrecks because too often they get crushed or just killed by a closely approaching vehicle (dmg close on vehicles is simply higher). Sometimes good players just circle pzgens not allowing them to shoot. A but too cheesy for me.
The finishing satchel is then only possible for coordinated team games, since Soviets usually don't use Penals and side-teched cons in their builds, not even at my skill level anymore.
I think Panzergrenadiere have design issues. They were meant as the high damage elite infantry of Ostheer that specialize in AT or AI and can do their job very well. But I'm not sure if they're worth it since they cost so much MP to reinforce. But maybe I'm just biased due to the long time frame where they were pretty mediocre to bad.
Then again, you rarely need to push AT Penals out of cover since they do not do much damage to medium armor, while letting squadsreload their Panzerschrecks or Bazookas could be the end of your tank.
EDIT: I forgot mines of course. Yes, there you can finish a tank off with satchels. |
I'm not gonna cite your whole post for the sake of everyone's mouse wheels. I agree with your analysis of the Churchill's role, so I'm just quoting the last paragraph:
A single panther would not stop that from happening (A couple of stugs will). Thit shows that a panther is not efficient (and therefore not effective) vs churchills. Panthers are not hard counters. Braindead players comparisons are out of this scope please. Even when 1v1, a panther will have a hard time fighting off a churchill in tight spaces, but this case is very situational, like a flanked MG, meanwhile in open map snares and support units will kill any chasing panther. Loosing both units at best.
If a frontline is well defended vs AT (2 stugs, lots of ATG) is reasonable that a single churchill wont do, but there is no reason for churchills to be infalible either. Using artillery or flanking is the solution there.
I also agree with most of this. The main thing with break through units like the Churchill, but also King Tiger and to some extend the Tiger (in general they follow the same "slow but durable" concept, with firepower scaled to the price) is: You usually can't stop them on their offense unless you can heavily outplay your opponent. The question is how well you can mitigate and evade the damage. Because if you can fall back and kite the Churchill, your Panther should be alright for further combat afterwards while the Churchill needs to go back and repair. If you mitigated enough damage from your other units, you can start to counter attack.
So to which extend should a 165 fuel (plus side-tech) unit be able to enforce a different play style from your opponent? Well, since a 150 fuel Brumbär and 185 fuel Panther can enfore a drastic change in playstyle as well. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
