I mean, there are 12 models, they shoot 2 mags each while standing still on a single squad.
thats 24 mags of FG42 on a single squad, yet they manage barely to drop 2 models. did i say anything untrue?
For the first part of the fight your Fallschirmjager blob was moving, and despite this you still did fantastic damage to the Assault section squad as it closed in, taking them down to 1/3 HP. Had it not thrown the WP grenade you would have wiped the squad fairly easily, though standing on the red cover road was a really stupid idea.
What are you wanting? The Fallschirmjager to instantly delete the Ass section squad as soon as they start firing?
They didn't "Barely" kill two models, they almost destroyed the squad. Do you know how damage actually works in CoH2? |
I should probably clarify that I'm speaking mostly from a 1v1 perspective, where I'd rarely build any of these units even with a ton of resource float. I know these are all much stronger in team games.
Unfortunately the game hasn't been balanced for team-mode scaling which does create a ton of secondary balance issues, but there doesn't seem to be much interest in addressing that.
Ideally they'd start by normalizing the economy between game modes by standardizing the number of strategic points on maps instead of 4v4 maps having 2-4 extra, and have some sort of cost scaling for caches, but none of that has been taken up either. Until then my balance concerns are for 1v1.
In terms of 1v1 I'd argue that OST absolutely has the advantage over OKW in terms of armour, honestly. The Pwerfer and Brummbar are very common in 1v1s, and the only other major outlying unit in OKW's favour is probably the Puma. |
Oh noooooo, 400 manpower and 40 fuel!!!! It should be a wunderwaffe!!! Theres nothing so expensive in the game, it has to be uncounterable!!!
It shouldn't be so binary. It's fine that they can be killed, but you simply can't /do/ anything with the unit if the opponent has an adequate offmap, and that's the issue. Conversely, if your opponent DOESN'T have an adequate offmap, the thing is practically untouchable.
Come on man, you know the point he's making isnt "It shouldn't be able to be killed", it's that the unit type may as well not exist if your opponent has certain offmap options. Static arty is a bad fit for the game. |
You mean like the pak howie that got stuck in a nerf cycle for like 3 patches in a row? Pak Howie is probably around 3000x easier to kill than a fixed howitzer but it kept getting nerfed because "it killed too much with zero micro input and was frustrating for ostheer weapon teams to play against".
Sounds like something else we were talking about.
Static howitzers are either exceedingly easy (if you have an offmap) or exceedingly hard to deal with, that's part of their issue.
Also: The pack howitzer outranging axis indirects is what's considered the issue with it, I think. The main "counter" to a mortar is another mortar, but if your opponent can just sit out of range, what are you to do? (it's also the fact that it does pretty mental damage, especially when it gets the ludicrous HEAT barrage). It's cheap enough that you can't really blow an indirect on it like you can with a static howitzer, and the fact it can pick up and move means indirects aren't even that reliable. Thankfully OKW have the Stuka, or I think axis would be pretty stuck vs Pack Howitzers. |
Thank you for the good faith comment, you atleast acknowledge its an aids ability with a huge micro tax against their opponent.
I would also like to see a big IDF rework. It such a huge component of war but implementations either come out as cheese, RNG cannon, laser guided munitions, or just plain shit.
The mortars in my opinion are finally mostly balanced and work well in all game modes AND they still keep some level of asymmetry that some people wont compromise on. Balance team should analyze what works for light IDF units and maybe try and translate that over. I know, I know, easier said than done but holy shit CB and maybe IDF overall needs a serious overhaul.
Mortars are "fine" primarily because of their short range, and the fact they only really work vs infantry. They're "vulnerable", but because they can move around this isnt really an issue for them, and the fact that they're "vulnerable" means a player can actually do something about them without having to REALLY go out of their way. The fact they don't do anything (meaningful) to vehicles also makes them have obvious weaknesses.
This is also helped by the fact that (almost) all factions have fairly equal access to mortars. The biggest outliers being the Pack Howitzer (being able to pretty strongly outrange axis mortars) and UKF, who are very vulnerable to mortars due to not actually having a mobile one of their own.
Howitzers being totally static means they simply need to have massive range, or they will get killed the second the enemy is able to push you. I made a thread suggesting what could be done about this a few weeks back, but it'd be a massive undertaking, sadly. |
The issue is that CB was removed off other units for being unbalanced and a no skill micro ability, why does it get left on Lefh? The static howizters aren't shit, theyre just not as good as a static howitzer that kills things without having to micro so you can spend your attention resource elsewhere on the map while your opponent shift-u's a bunch of reverse orders and hope to god it wont hit him behind the fucking base lol.
At bare minimum if CB is kept on the weapon the range needs to be shortened drastically for the ability. I think we can all agree a howitzer killing your base sector on certain maps is a serious balance/design problem? If not, Id like to be able to call my offmaps on their base sector again please.
I'm not actually sure, what else was it removed from other than the Panzerwerfer? In the case of the Werfer I believe it was removed because it was a completely garbage ability for that unit, not because it was too strong.
For OST's Mortar, CB was actually buffed a few patches back, gaining extra range over a regular barrage.
For Brits' base CB, it was certainly nerfed, but I think part of that is you couldn't even reasonably be expected to kill the "howitzer" that was doing the CBing.
CB hitting base sectors is a factor of what seems to be an oversight, not so much an intentional part of design. The thing with the "constant shift-uing" is similarly an oversight, I think, I'd think that CB is supposed to target the location the indirect fired from, not follow it around in the fog until it manages to properly lock-on... though really Sanders or someone would need to comment there. |
Yes doctrinal static artillery countering lighter artillery using counter barrage ability is an issue. I would also like to take this opportunity to raise awareness to the issues such as AT guns piercing tanks and MGs pinning infantry.
How do you imagine static artillery is worth it if the ability literally just clicks on opponents artillery location and continues to fire there for a minute? Static artillery is way less lethal and more susceptible to getting destroyed than mobile artillery counterparts. Like come on what do you guys want these things to be ? Just worse artillery option that requires commander pick and 8cp?
To be fair, it's only UKF and USF that get the mobile artillery pieces. SOV have static artillery just like OSTheer, with access to the ML20 (basically the same an an LEFH without CB), and the autistic RNG cannon B4, that either does literally nothing when it fires, or instakills a medium tank.
Also: Im reasonably sure the static pieces are more deadly than the mobile pieces (In particular the Sexton), it's just that the mobile pieces can reposition and fire from optimal locations (and subsequently retreat), and that they're rather harder to kill. |
All that micro and resources to counter one (1) unit that you click once and forget about. Super balanced.
That's just a gimmick suggestion. CB is more "countered" by simply having one of your indirect units fire a single shot, wait for the "bang" of the LEFH firing, and simply moving somewhere else and performing your "real" indirect attack.
It's a micro tax, sure, but doing that makes the counter barrage LEFH literally a dead unit, unless spending all those resources and 13 pop on an unit to make your opponent micro a bit is valuable. Despite the massive bonuses it gets, the fact it retaliates against /any/ indirect usage means it can be baited out/neutered in this way. In such a case the Axis player is genuinely better off using regular barrages.
CB kills in teamgames (where there can potentially be multiple LEFH), against static howitzers (Which obviously can't reposition), and if you forget that it exists and use an indirect unit when you haven't already baited out a counter-shelling.
Its an AIDS ability, I agree, though its partially a symptom of Artillery in general just being a terribly unfitting part of the game, and also that it acts unintuitively in the fashion that Elchino described earlier in the thread. I'd love it to be removed, but I'd also love artillery in general to get a major, major rework. |
OKW's stronger vehicle line-up and Ober synergy compensate for weak volks far better than Pgrens and OST's comparatively bad vehicles.
I'd argue that OST has a stronger lategame vehicle lineup than OKW does, but I can see this being up to personal opinion/playstyle.
The Brummbar and Pwerfer give OSTheer a distinct edge against infantry that OKW sort of lack in their vehicle offerings, which is kind of what the "weak" volks would be wanting to deal with. In terms of fighting vehicles, OST's infantry AT is superior to OKWs (nondoctrinally), Shreck Pgrens clearly outpacing a Shreck'd Sturm. Stug vs JP4 is a debate that could go either way, they both have their strengths and weaknesses.
OKW's big vehicular gimmick is the KT, which isnt exactly an unit used in every game.
Ober synergy is great, I agree, which is why I'd suggest Volks lean more heavily into supporting future Obers rather than being a "direct combat" unit that the STG upgrade seems to want to make them into. Obers' greatest flaw at the moment is their timing. By the time you can build them you are likely to have a "full" infantry roster, and at least personally I have trouble fitting Obers in without the expectation that I'll lose a couple Volk squads... which honestly I don't always have happen. I can't see Obers coming /sooner/ than they do now, though, as they're so incredibly powerful. |
The same could be said about ost being weaker. Do you have that data to suggest that they are performing poorly. I belive its likely more to do with the what storm said. People using 5 man grens and osttruppen and playing like its wfa faction.
Op's analysis is all I'd have to go on at the moment, which implies they're not as good as might be hoped. I'd still want to see more data before commenting concretely, either way.
Also: That's the thing, people HAVE been using 5man grens and Ostruppen and trying to play OST "like an WFA faction". It's been argued that this is because that's what /works/ for OST, and now that both 5man and Ostruppen can't be crutched upon, the faction isnt as strong as it appeared to be. I think it's possible this is true, but I'd want to hear what the top OST players have to say about it, really. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
