Which is perfectly logical really. It's a continuation of its intended role as far back as vCOH. MGs were never meant to be used alone to guard some far-off place, they were meant to be a crucial unit that you support to great effect. The anomaly is not the current MG; it was the pre-nerf MG that could suppress two units in its large arc of fire with barely any micro from the German player's part. The fact that it's an MG doesn't mean it should sit in one place and destroy anything on legs that come at it. The repositioning game is and should be a key part of MG play.
Now, again, it still needs a buff. But a small one only.
Never meant to be? It always was, even from the beginning.It didn't get nerfed until soviet fanboys started crying about how they couldn't run straight in its face and kill it. An mg could hold its own if set up properly. The whole point of the mg was to deal with mass infantry. Now it cant even deal with one from the front, . If 2 inf squads run up to it from the front, it will only be able to suppress one unless they were blobbed up. What kind of weak sauce is that. Whats the point of even building one now? |
|
mg42 is great for people that want to run up to the front of it and kill it, is what I suspect you mean. As for as being useful for the person who builds it, it is weak sauce. |
I really only have one overarching observation.
COH1 is stressful as hell. It's chess in an RTS.
All that said COH1 doesn't seem to be quite as fun...It's like a puzzle, move this here, micro that correctly, is the sniper on hold fire...To me it's now a series of annoying complicated mechanics. And because manpower is SO crucial in COH1, everyone fights extremely conservatively, which basically makes the game pretty dull to play. It's chess to COH2s...checkers? Not quite, but something between the two. Intellectual interesting, really great game? Sure. A roaring good time? Not so much. The last game I just played in COH1 I was forcing myself to breathe, I was concentrating so hard...
I find coh2 more stressful.
With the price of at guns and long build times, high fuel costs of tanks,inability of mg42s to deal with more than one squad, even from the direct front, the time and resources it takes to get a 6 man mg out of a building, the necessity of being prepared to deal with wtf kill machines at every stage of the game.
Imagine instead of being pushed around by a bike/jeep you were being pushed around by flaming pios in a rolling suit of armor, 45 secs into the game. And then a stug that could outrange even your heaviest armor, and could just reverse away while you chased it. A call in p4 with a flame turret roasting full squads in 2 secs, even on retreat. And then having a at gun that cost as much manpower as tanks but misses more than it hits plus having exceptionally horrid pathing. |
Agree with this. They were too good in COH1 and were part of the Vire River Curse.
But it's a good point that they shouldn't be doctrinal. And they should be available to both sides.
Tank traps were only indestructible to tanks and small arms(except tanks with heavy crush). Engies and Pios had det packs to blow them up if needed. I think satchels and arty did damage against them as well.
The vire curse was from map design rather than a cause of strong tank traps. There were 3 funnels of death, tank traps or not, and were easy to defend. |
|
Even the tank traps sucks. I wonder who decided tank traps were op in coh and decided to nerf them. Not only are they weak but they are now a commander ability.... Coh was at 11 and got turned down to 4. |
|
I came back to try the new commanders but they were not enough. They are not why I stopped again. Coh2 just feels boring. No idea how the fun factor should be upped, competitive/balanced/unbalanced, none matter if people aren't first having fun. |
|
a tank in name yes, in function no |
|
You keep calling t70 a tank but in reality its a light recon unit. In the coh2 universe yes,it is a wtfkill machine, which I don't mind.
But what I do mind is heavy at inf not able to deal with a light armored vehicle.
The argument that you need two heavy tank destroying units to deal with one cheap,lightly armored vehicle seems out of whack. |
Looks like Nullist never touched vCoH.
Your PaK is your primary AT, your shrecks are along for the ride to counter flankers. Trying to crush every vehicle in your path with handheld AT (a formerly very, very squishy, very soft counter) will either:
A) Have you shot all to hell and forced to retreat.
B) Your PG blob hits critical mass and can run through four T-34s and a pair of Maxims and kill some/most of them while losing 1-4 men (micro be damned, this happens to me far too often--in the context of a 4v4 with your headset leaping off of your face with the TS shouting, arty going everywhere, and blobs of PGs and Panthers roaming the map, it's easier than you'd think to lose units).
Just...no, Shrecks shouldn't be a hardcounter to every damned vehicle in the game. Why has Relic made ATGs such useless things that EVERYONE overlooks them? Rarely if ever do I see a PaK. Even rarer, a ZiS-3. Y'all know what the 'Anti-Tank' in Anti-Tank Gun stands for, right?
In vcoh shreks were a counter to every vehicle period.. except that one time they super buffed the crocodile. Some games I only used stormtroopers with upgrades. Shreks were viable if you actually hit instead of shooting rockets at your feet. A inf only army and victory was possible in vcoh. In coh2 a shrek squad cant even deal with a light vehicle. This is why the core coh2 design is way off, or one reason anyway. The basics are watered down and the shock value stuff is over the top. Coh2 is suffering from what bad remakes of great movies suffer from.
Removing tank traps and making mines unaffordable led to players not having tools to counter early wtf kill machines and makes atguns more difficult to use. |
A simple fix to the commander bloat is to stop the automatic CP allocation once a commander is chosen, and allow for manual allocation across all three. Redundant commander abilities would be obstacles to unlocking late-game abilities and units, and add a component to choosing an efficient load-out.
Commanders would then become an adaptive and dynamic doctrine tree for players to customize and develop new strategies with. The linear one-track commander method is just, well, stale.
Love that idea, but i can see combos that might cause a problem.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
