Is there any way we could get the "unit", "commander" and possibly even "veterancy" guides updated? While I can understand guides for specific strategies not being updated, since they may no longer be viable in the current game; I think the guides on units/tech/commanders should be kept up-to-date, since they are likely a resource for new players (and forgetful experienced players).
Take, for example, the USF Unit Guide. It starts by saying "Up to date? YES!", but the unit costs are at least 2 years out of date, since it lists the M36 at "350mp/125f" (it was changed from 360/125 to 400/140 in Dec 2017). It's also missing core tech upgrades, like the Capt/LT vehicle unlocks.
There is similar out-of-date or missing information in most, if not all, of the unit guides (OKW is missing panzer auth, for example). In addition, the commander guides are missing many of the more recent reworks and new additions (OKW is missing Grand Offensive, Overwatch doc is missing JLI, etc.).
Additionally, while it would take a ton of work, updating the veterancy guide would be great, since there is currently no up-to-date source (that I know of), and the bonuses are never mentioned in game in terms of actual stat changes.
1. Okw only get 1 cmmdr like that because stock they already are very strong. Axis player just act like the p4 jagdp4 and panther are up and subpar. Allies need such commanders more then okw does.
1. nope its not... they against the 60TD meta. That's what we have talked abount in 1001 thread here.
U know okw get one commander and it becomes instant the meta? well ... not because there roster is so good.
Let's be honest; it's mostly because any time OKW gets a new or adjusted commander, it's almost always wildly overpowered.
SpecOps was meta for ages because of the Commander Panther's armor/HP bonuses and insane aura (especially when it stacked (iirc) with the Ost Command P4), IR-STGs and uncounterable recon flares.
Then it was Overwatch when JLI were insanely overpowered, combined with that doc's high levels of utility (and sector strike being really strong).
Then it was Luft because Falls were incredibly overpowered with their 4x FG42s, stealth deploy, snares, nades, cloak, ambush, etc. all stacking with VA.
Now it's Grand Offensive because basically every ability is incredibly strong. You get the very efficient PFs, IR-STGs, cheap Smoke/Recon, Panzer Commander (eh...), and a Command Tiger. After the previous commanders were nerfed, this one was clearly going to become the new mainstream choice.
2. Again people downplaying axis units, i am gettin tired of that. An ok stug.... no mention of the p4. Ost t3 is sollid.
People think stug should be at the level of su85 ff and jackson while they face mostly lower levels off armour that allies face.
2. What lower lvl's ? u said that u can fight jacksons with stugs. We have the heavy tank and TD meta .... idk where u want to put stugs.
STuGs and Ostwinds are great, but Princeps is right; like every other medium in the game, the current TD-spam meta basically invalidates them fairly quickly. The Ostwind is still somewhat viable into late-game, since AI is always nice to have, but the STuG falls off the map unless you're spamming them (4+ of them).
With that said, OST T3 is still very solid, since you can leverage it to secure a win, or enough resource gain to get Panthers out before M36s - at least in 1v1 and 2v2. In the bigger team games it has a really limited useful time-window due to the much higher income rates.
3. Like it or not the kt is the only nondoc superheavie tank. Alongside the only nondoc elite inf.
The kt used to be i win with very little micro needed to get value out of your fuel. The tiger is in many docs and is quite easely available so its an easy dicision to make. In turn forcing allies get td,s and extra at guns early rather then heavies or mediums.
3. so the super heavy Tank thats hits the field when there are vetted TD's and at guns.. YES there u got ur value.
Forcing? Jackons counters everthing axis get with armor. It is just too good and a know brainer not to get one. Its the easy mode .... why going for combiend arms when u can have the super TD.
Yea, the KT isn't an "I win" button anymore; at best it's an "I want to show off how much I'm currently winning by" button, and at worst it's an "I have no idea what I'm doing" button. The current TD meta, especially for allied factions, is so strong that most will skip mediums and go straight to TDs, since they invalidate basically every vehicle Axis players have, short of Panthers and JP4s, if played well. It also means that by the time OKW has all 3 trucks and panzer auth researched, Allied players will likely have 2+ M36s/SU-85s/FFs, which will make the KT a pointless purchase. In almost every situation it's a better idea to get a few JP4s instead, or some other combination of AI and AT.
Because there's now 2 threads on this (poll and this one), I'll basically copy my post from there:
TD;DR: stop buffing meta TDs to counter even more meta TDs; nerf them all to bring back interesting medium tank play.
2. Anti-blob. You A-move those squads of whatevers, frontally mowing down my MGs, I target your blob, you get wrecked, you ragequit.
And this
It may be that this was caused overall by the power creep over the years, as squad survivability versus explosive weapons is essentially unchanged since release, while the variety of HE sources has increased greatly.
I think it's because the ratio between small arms fire damage and explosive weapon damage is completely lopsided in favor of explosives.
My take is that infantry has power-creeped so far over the years that they've essentially become "Laminated Glass Cannons". Why the 'Laminated' description? Because their survivability against other infantry seems to also have gone up somewhat; but not enough to match their DPS increase.
Essentially we have a situation where infantry combat is slow enough in the early game to be playable; an 80% HP squad actually fairs a decent chance against a 100% squad with proper positioning/micro, and a single squad in green cover can hold off two squads in yellow cover for a significant amount of time. However, by late game (when vet 3, double-bar, LMG, etc. squads become common), that 20% HP difference almost always translates to an instant loss - and even if it doesn't, infantry DPS is so high that the engagement will only last a handful of seconds, even in yellow cover. Additionally, this has powecreeped so far that what were initially "hard" counters to blobs (i.e. MGs) aren't anymore, since an average blob (3+ LMG squads) can usually win frontally.
As a result, by late-game, infantry isn't the optimal counter against other infantry, like it is in the early game. Instead it's vehicles and explosives, and because vehicles are free to use (i.e. firing a p.werfer is free) and repair, the usual MP trade we see in early game is replaced by an "MP Tax", where one player can make the other lose a ton of MP for essentially nothing. This is then further exasperated by the high MP upkeep in late game (partly thanks to those vehicles), which makes maintaining infantry exceedingly difficult. Essentially, by late game, we're left with a "blob or don't bother" situation.
Provided this assessment is true (I think it is, others might disagree), there are essentially two options to fix the problem:
1. Increase infantry resistances to vehicles and explosives (not ideal)
2. Reduce infantry DPS across the board, so that late game infantry fights stay at the same pace as in the early game. Then reduce the ubiquity and/or effectiveness of vehicles/explosives against infantry.
These options might seem very similar, but the reduction in infantry DPS would actually play a key roll: it would reduces the speed of the game, and make what are now 'soft' (or even ineffective) counters in the late game (i.e. MGs) 'hard' counters. Because of this, positioning and cover become dramatically more important, which brings back the infantry gameplay many people enjoy from the early game while also drastically lowering the stakes; a flanked MG wouldn't result in an instant squad wipe.
From there, we simply reduce the 80-damage AoE for tanks (no more 5-model wipes per shot) and use damage tables to reduce the damage of rockets/arty against infantry as well.
TL;DR: Reduce late-game infantry DPS so that the engagement time between squads stays about the same as in early game, then lower the effectiveness of vehicles/arty against infantry via damage tables. This makes infantry vs. infantry more viable (MGs would be effective late game), reduces arty spam and other "insta-wipe" vehicle usage, while not changing any other aspects of gameplay.
I dont think theres any way to just "buff" stationary accuracy. You can make the moving acc multiplier worse, but then that means your nerfing the unit on the move. If you buff the main accuracy values, thats a buff to both stationary AND on-the move, which is what vet bonuses do if I have this correct
I am fine with buffing the main accuracy values with vet, should be at 2 or 3 imo
Not that I support the idea, but I think it would be possible to have a "stationary only" type buff. If we start by duplicate Spotting Scopes, but change it to give increased accuracy instead of sight, it would disable when moving, meaning that moving accuracy would stay the same. Then all that needs to be done is changing its name (to something like 'stationary sights'), and having it apply by default as a passive upgrade.
I'm not entirely sure if it's possible, since I've never used the mod tools, but it seems viable.
/edit
Alternatively, nerf the moving accuracy by half the accuracy buff. For example (using simplified numbers), a 50% moving accuracy multiplier on a 50% base accuracy gives 25% chance to hit. But a 75% base accuracy with a 33% moving accuracy multiplier would also give 25% chance to hit. It's kind of counter intuitive to have vet make a stat worse, though.
Didn't vote because I don't agree with any of the options.
1. The Panther's Vet 0 stationary accuracy is actually pretty good, and in-line with (iirc) every other TD, if you look at the stats.
2. The Panther doesn't get accuracy vet bonuses like other TDs, which again, is fine. The problem is that OTHER TDs DO.
3. The main issue is actually moving accuracy. The panther has the speed to chase, but it has pretty terrible moving accuracy that doesn't get better with vet. This means that the speed it has it somewhat useless, unlike the M36, which has much better moving accuracy.
4. Stop power-creeping TDs, especially 'problem' TDs like the Panther and M36, which are already insanely 'meta', especially in team-games. The moving accuracy penalty is a multiplier for the base accuracy values, so any increases to base accuracy will increase moving accuracy by 50% of that buff, too (unless this buff would disable when moving). A more accurate panther means better ability to chase, which means Allies would need better AT solutions, which means mediums become even more pointless.
TL;DR - Let's keep the Panther the same, or even nerf it. Then let's nerf the M36, the Su85, maybe even the JP4 and FF. When all that's done, we can finally have some good medium tank gameplay. It would be nice to play a 4v4 and see only a few panthers/M36s, rather than both sides fielding a dozen of them, all while the Ostwind, Sherman, Flame-Hetzer, and every other interesting medium gets erased in one 'barrage' from the blob of TDs.
1st and 2nd place depend on the matchup, from what I've seen. Like AE said, Sov trades a lot better against OKW, and Maxim "spamming" (2-3 of them) is surprisingly effective early game, since the only 'mortar' is locked behind the less optimal med-truck, and the Luchs comes later than that (or even later, if going puma first). However, USF is stronger against Ost, simply due to the Rifle:Gren matchup, where rifles trade better and scale a lot better into late game. Then the M36 shuts down OST's reliance on vehicles in the late game.
Voted USF > Sov, though, because I'd rather play USF against OKW then Sov against Ost.
5. Optional "Only similar skill" toggle in match-making. It's annoying to qeue as a ~100 rank player and still get ~1k+ players. If it means 5x longer queue for me, that's fine; that's why it should be optional.
I just had a match of myself (ladder ~100), 2x 2700, and an unranked (20 total games, all factions/modes) against a 40, 250, 600, and 2500. This is just frustrating for everyone involved; the high skill players have teammates that can't manage "basic" things, whereas the low-skill players will be crushed by the higher ones.
I know that the 'search bracket' increases the longer it goes, but there needs to be some range limits. New players getting destroyed in supposedly "match-made" games aren't going to stick around.
Friendly advice to Sega/Relic... Path of Exile Mobile
In terms of marketing, this is how you announce a mobile game to PC players with some honestly and a sense of humor: 0:10 - "Mobile games are kinda BS" quote Jonathan Rogers Co-founder
0:39 - "Mobile fall guy" | Trevor Gamon
0:51 - Chris Wilson Co-founder, "We didn't just farm it out to an external studio...
While I agree PoE did it right (the entirety of ExileCon was great), there's a HUGE difference between PoE:Mobile and CoH:Mobile. Chris Wilson, Grind Gear Game's (PoE Dev) director, basically stated that it's an experiment. They've never incorporated PoE:Mobile into profit predictions or other forecasts, and they're not even sure how good (if at all) it'll be.
Sega/Relic/Feral, on the other hand, probably want this thing to succeed, and are probably counting on it making money.
Also, there's the release time-frame. PoE:Mobile has no release date - even at a vague level. If it's anything like the other major announcement of ExileCon (Path of Exile 2 / 4.0), it's likely not coming out in 2020, let alone 2019. Meanwhile CoH:Mobile went from announced to released in (supposedly) a few months - you can't really have that kind of window and start off with "these types of games are terrible", even if it is really funny.
In addition, more game companies should pay attention to how GGG announces and discusses things. Same could be said of Digital Extremes, the makers of Warframe. Both are incredibly transparent and have great community interactions.
0
Doomlord52
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
