|
Had a pretty close match on c17 winter. The enemy had a Tiger that scared all my armor away, so I gave him some space while i monitored him closely and repositioned my armor acordingly. I had two 34, medium version,and a SU-85. At the moment his tiger drove into a narrow street I rushed in with one T-34 to ram him up front, while the other two rushed to the oposite end of the street. The Tiger was rendered defenseless and pounded to pieces. One of those rare moments where your planning works perfect and the enemy goes right into your trap. |
|
I feel this is a great problem with support weapons this time around, you arent punished for leaving them outflanked and unprotected. The way it is now, the game encourages tacticly bad play, and honestly, it looks ridiciolus. I fail to see what was wrong with this aspect of COH1. It really worked well, why change it? |
|
Strange seeing people yelling at ping for asking about custom lobbies, and saying its been answered many times, when noun himself says that they will not give any answer. Pherhaps it wasnt such a stupid question after all? |
|
I agree with the criticism regarding the lack of matchmaking options and missing lobbies. Though a gamebreaker for me, it would be ok if there was any kind of statement clarifying this issue. Right now it all seems pretty vague. I have seen no verification that its actually coming or being worked on. I dont know wether we will see this in months, years or ever. Thats a serious concerne for me, as the lack of these basic features ruins the fun for me and I have stopped playing the game.
While I do apreciate the developers feedback on the forums, the way this issue is being ignored or 'worked around' leaves me worried that they arent working on implementing basic public lobbies, and that it is a designer decition to leave them out.
I know this isnt a big issue for many of you on this forum, but I beleive it is a gamebreaker for a lot of people, and I hope they will adress this soon, as I too want this game to be great, and atract a lot of players. After all, I care enough about the game to raise my concernes. |
this to me is what ruined vcoh. bad players will always lose units, but making the game so that one mistake costs you major setbacks (lost mg42, russian recrews with 6 man squad, need to pay 240 mp to get another mg42 or lose map control, fall behind in tech...) because my 3 man squad had a molotov thrown on them which killed them outright instead of forcing retreat (retreat meaning that territory is now my opponents and i have to retake it. smaller loss and allows for more tactical gameplay).
when i start losing whole units in 1-2 shots, i feel like i'm playing a coh/sc2 hybrid which is a horrible thought
edit: if i remember correctly support teams had alot more armor (pak did for sure) and there were less flame weapons. meaning the extra hp was not near as necessary
Isnt that how it should be? If you have positioned your MG so that the enemy can outflank and molotov you, you have obviously taken a risk, in order to cover a certain area, without securing your flanks. I think this should be punished.
In vCOH your MG would survive if you retreated imedeatly, but you couldnt hold your ground and wait for support, the way you can now. I think that was the perfect balance. |
|
Wish they had gone the other way and decreased sovjet crew sizes as well. Yesterday I had my MG outflanked by the enemy engineers, yet it could hold its ground without losses untill reinforcements came to "hush" them away. Now I know engineers arent exactly the best infantryunits, but I really wish they would make outflanking, and thereby protecting your weapons, more important again, like COH1.
Especially the russians are bad, as leaving Maxim og mortar outflanked is never really punished. Worst case it will have to retreat, most times it can hold its ground, and continue to bombard, untill reinforcements are brought up. |
|
Id love a remake of vire river valley! |
Unfortunately, there are even bigger issues here they need to pay attention to. Relic knows the casual player base of 3v3 and 4v4 "for fun" people, is huge.
As I see it, Soviet is now unplayable in 3v3 and 4v4 even WITH a strafe patch.
To have a chance of winning, Soviets must do far more coordination as a team than Ostheer does. This is because of how the teching system is designed. Ostheer always has a choice of support or infantry units early game, except for the oddball who skips T1 (a much rarer strat now) and thus any player can field units to counter the enemy.
This is not the case for Soviets. Some need to field support weapons, some need to use M3s and snipers to combat the German early game. This degree of coordination is not going to be found among casual players randomly playing 4v4. But it's the only way to play Soviets. It was passable before the Maxim was nerfed and the Ostheer MG given an extra crew member, which gave Soviets a strong early game presence, and if team tactics were used, nigh unbeatable by experienced teams (I happen to have one).
Maybe things will evolve so some people know to go support in certain positions, as was the case with Montargis in COH, but the game doesn't seem to make those choices obvious...
I don't want the patch reversed because I am a competitive player, and 1v1 and 2v2 are the best venues for competition. This patch has done a lot to balance the game. But I do want to see 3v3 and 4v4 remain viable.
I have only one radical suggestion...The only way to balance the game for casual, uncoordinated teams is to allow the use of both factions in automatch. I suggest automatch be reconfigured to allow for Soviet and German teams on the same side for THESE game modes only.
A start would be to have a lobby system to make coordination possible in the first place. Even casual players in COH1 would often discuss theire strategy and who would chose what doctrine and such, before the game started. Right now, the game just puts a bunch of random people of different skill, and with no chance to coordinate before the game, in the game. For a faction that requires coordination this breaks the game, especially when facing off against a team of four clan members with teamspeak  |
|
I think increasing weapon crews is a step in the wrong direction, as it makes flanking less effective, thus not punishing you enough for leaving your weapon outflanked or overrun. Id rather see a camoflague ability for the PAK, and a decrease in weapon team size for the russians to four, and german ones left at 3. As of now, weapon temas are really infantry with a heavy weapon, rather than a dedicated support role. |
Increase the effectiveness of infantry small arms fire. Infantry squads out of cover and flanked weapon support teams should be punished harder.
Couldnt agree more. You should be punished hard for leaving heavy weapons outflanked and unsupported. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
