You said it. Everyone talks about "the community, the modders, the mapmakers, the OTHERS...", but who is willing to spend his time fixing it?
This is not directed to you, but for those wondering "why we don't get new maps"? Well, someone has to spend countless hours working for "you" to enjoy it. Relic won't bother so, unless you do it yourself or know a group of people willing to do so, then it's just useless rant.
For example: we don't have a list of good maps, maps which need rework and maps which are plain bad. Do we have any list of "good/potential" workshop maps? It's just ez to ask for things.
And you said it as well. If Relic is willing to address map issues and the map pool, then I am pretty sure that can be put together rather quickly and easily. God knows the hours I've put into world builder and mod tools over the years. A chance for any of it to come to fruition would be refreshing. I'm sure that sentiment might be shared.
But hey, there's only been years of effort on this website and forums discussing this matter, maps, and this topic. That energy has come and gone with this game. People burn out doing that work for nothing.
Again, why you need a hard RETREAT POINT instead of MANUALLY soft retreating.
Unless you have sprint or, say, Oorah, you can't outpace your enemy and just take more damage and losses. And your infantry won't be able to return fire backtracking either because the infantry won't seek cover or run except to stay in formation. Retreat gives considerable bonuses. Not sure why there's question about that.
"so unless you pick already released community maps and polished them properly, forget about getting new ones."
Words from one of our mapmakers (during the 2v2 tournament/map release)
Oh yeah, I'm well aware of how all that went down. I'll admit it definitely set the precedent for the odds of future improvements to map making and the map pool being dismal at best.
Well, if it's hard then it's not worth doing, eh? I mean, seriously c'mon, it's worth the attempt. Lists have been made of competently made 3v3 and 4v4 maps before. There's no reason the community can't nominate some popular maps for rotation and/or send some messages through steam to mapmakers, inactive or not.
The problem with volks is not really the unit itself so much as the synergy with the luchs, medkits, and kubel (vs brits and USF).
5-6 minutes from game start you get a massive power spike with STGs rolling out, flame nades popping, immediately followed by the luchs- which can and will end the game if you don't have AT.
So you have a conundrum as the allied factions in that your infantry can no longer deal with volks, and yet you're going to have less infantry / team weapons to deal with the volks because you need to sink quite a lot of MP and possibly fuel to prevent the instant death condition that is the luchs. This is the steamroller that's such an issue now- volks are OP as part of this build but not otherwise.
Case in point - OKW T1 starts, which i've never ever personally had problems dealing with in recent months. Med truck starts get hammered by light vehicle play from LT and Sov T3, HMG spam (even as USF!), snipers, just about everything- unless used with fusiliers (which themselves are imbalanced).
Volks, of course, receive identical upgrades and unlocks after both med and mech, but with med truck allied factions can keep stacking on the anti-inf firepower and volks never become a problem then because OKW never gets the momentum.
This is very similar to how ostheer suffered vs USF back in the day- you needed a pak to avoid getting rolled by the M20, but the free LT meant that by sinking MP into antitank you lose all your map control to superior inf.
Well stated analysis. I agree with your assessment entirely. Faction design is not just one units performance and functionality.
I'll argue that Guards are/were versatile but not necessarily Penals.
Penals are strong on the AI department but their snare is not reliable (unless the opponent makes a HUGE mistake) and the PTRS kills your AI in order to survive against whatever light vehicle your opponent rushes.
I dunno, that there is a tradeoff doesn't change the reality of their versatility.
Guards could hold off vehicles, hold their own against against axis squads that weren't on top of them with smgs or obers. They got real honest nades too.
They're just not cost efficient any more in any of their roles. Their callin status with free ptrs was a huge part of their strategic value.
Since penals can get the ptrs there isn't nearly the same strategic choice to utilizing guards. The threat of ptrs is always implied instead of being a doctrinal choice.
If soviet t2 had been addressed instead of just nerfing/radically altering the maxim to effectively force soviets into using the new penals, we might've seen something other than the meta shift from a couple guards commanders to one bloody commander.
Mapwise: Relic is not gonna bother making maps. Community map makers have already told several times that it takes WAY MORE WORK to do a 4v4 which can't really be tested (cause it requires 8 people minimum) so unless you pick already released community maps and polished them properly, forget about getting new ones.
Steam Workshop disagrees. We are years deep in this game.
As in, the issue isn't that new maps need to be created, but new maps need to be in the rotation.
Also, many existing maps can be improved/altered so that they aren't so problematic.
The thing with new maps is that there aren't enough types of territory/resource points. Map design, especially on the 3v3 and 4v4 is utterly crippled because there is only one type of fuel point, munitions point, and standard resource point. Med and repair points and watchtowers are nightmares balance-wise and just avoid the problem rather than address it.
Point is, until there's more territory/resource point options (outside of using mods *coughmysigcough*) making new maps for 3v3 and 4v4 probably won't improve the situation.
He's obviously exaggerating. Sturm Pio with Shrek have gawd awful accuracy and a slow arse fire rate with out vet, but it doesn't feel that way with Piat Engies who seem to never miss.
One has to be super careful with light/med vehicles as Germans these days because of sticky nuclear tipped satchel and laser guided Piats.
That's the deflection damage you're seeing.
Zooks, piats, and PTRS usually come in pairs and have better rates of fire than schrecks. When they fail to penetrate they still deal a fair bit of damage.
I was watching people play vCoH the other day and I was instantly reminded of something important: no deflection damage from infantry AT. Maneuvering to get rear armor hits as infantry had so much more meaning. Infantry couldn't just chase and lob shots at front armor for essentially guaranteed damage.
I have previously toyed with the idea of giving reinforcing halftracks a rapid reinforce ability that would reinforce a squad completely in an instant but have a longish cooldown.
The ht would want to get in and out instead of remain in combat to keep reinforcing.
Though if it was a targeted ability it'd benefit larger squads more. I'd thought about an aoe effect that instantly reinforced squads in the same fashion but had no idea how to implement it cleanly or have it balanced.
But quite frankly, the mortar pit debate has been ongoing since coh1 opposing fronts. The fact that relic remade them for coh2 and doubled the mortars per pit should indicate how much weight community debate on the matter has with relic.
I mean, the old CAS skill planes was considered working as intended, mind you.
I mean, seriously c'mon, it's worth the attempt. Lists have been made of competently made 3v3 and 4v4 maps before. There's no reason the community can't nominate some popular maps for rotation and/or send some messages through steam to mapmakers, inactive or not.
0
![[WS]ZombiFrancis flag](/images/replay/soviets_flag.jpg)
[WS]ZombiFrancis
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
