Profile of Jilet

Jump back to quoted post15 Nov 2019, 21:24 PMgeneral_gawain

Do you mean Assault Operation? That one is not as strong as VA or FMR... For 100mun only your Tommies are affected, Commandos in the same doctrine are left out (would be way better for them).

...

FMR basically let your shocks sprint into range, stop and shot, because they can't shoot while sprinting. Accordingly Penals can get closer to get a satchel charge off. Thus both squads will leave less men at their assault and more probabaqly do damage or force off enemy troops. Look at the CP requirements of the different abilities. FMR comes at 6 CPs and is meant to help these troops to get close when there is a lot of AI on the field that makes their live pretty hard. Imagine it would be there when you get your first shocks already... Oh man, that would be a whole different thing. If you want to nerf FMR I would make a ranged ability out of it instead of beeing global (like cover to cover). KW-1 buff recently made this doctrine somehow playable, nerfing FMR to hard will change that. While not beeing an aggressive early game doctrine it is not a good lategame doctrine either because it is missing a strong lategame tank or offmap. So what is its role? Its only real doctrinal powerspike is when you get your first KW-1 in addition to FMR, nerf one and its gone.

I always thought VA and cover to cover are the best abilities of this type. They come in somehow strong commanders while not beeing too expensive for their effect (affecting different types of infantry, especially units like rangers or falls).

Jump back to quoted post15 Nov 2019, 13:42 PMSander93

Basically we just forgot.

Changing Valiant Assault was a priority because of how well it synergised with the power of the improved Falls. I consider FMR with sprinting Shocks and Penals with +50% DPS to be overpowered too, but it's not as big of a problem as the commander is rarely used (as opposed to Luftwaffe now).

Jump back to quoted post6 Nov 2019, 17:15 PMdistrofio

Sure, both words (efficient, effective) seem pretty similar but they are not. Both are aimed towards a process and its results.

Effectivity is how well a job is done. If we are talking about a shooting range, a sniper rifle will almost always hit where you aim, also as dead center as possible.

Efficiency is how certain you are from getting the job done, also with the less amount of effort. I.e. A shotgun if we keep on the previous example. A single pellet hitting the target should do.

A cost-efficient unit is one that mostly trades resources, you might loose a tank in a 2v1 but both tanks you had were less expensive than the other one you were facing.

A Cost-effective unit is one that ensures you the job done, a sniper killing models is one of the best examples. Since the game has flanks, FoW and complex cover mechanics, units are indeed more or less effective at specific tasks. (AI/AT/preservation/mobility)

Thats why there are endless discussions of Squad1 vs Squad2 in the balance forums, people dont realize that unit have multiple tasks to perform and different effectivities at each one. But because unit preservation is paramount in CoH2 the cost-efficient units are often, but not limited to, the hard counters like TD vs Heavy Tanks