No its not, not in a single way its a good mechanic. Not from pro-players perspective, not from the casual perspective. Abandonment is an example of pure, non-player dependant RNG.
Abandonment either gives one player a second chance when he player wrong or it punishes the player when he player right. Not speaking about situations when abandonment happens in the middle of the map, so it just as good as dead anyway.
But for instance I had games, where I miss player and let enemy dive my rocket arty, instead of being destoyed it got abandoned. Or when I dived to finish the enemy and in process my tank got abandoned.
Not even talking about the frustration aspect, but from a pure army value perspective. Because any tank is a huge boost to your army value and quite big res investment and the fact that one player can essentially get such unit for free based on RNG is just a bad mechanic.
CoH2 is full of RNG, but most of the RNG is predictable. Sure BS sometimes happens, like PIVJ being able to either deflect all shots or being penetrated all the times, but its predictable RNG.
Abandonment on the other hand is like downed plane killing your whole army, because RNG event decided that you need to lose the game, just because. Without your involvement and without any possible counter-play, because its either happens or its not.
Aside from "Wow, lol, cool haha" factor, abandonment has absolutely 0 possitive value.
I agree with everything you said and a possible solution could be ranked and unranked 1v1 since it is creates the largest swing in this mode. Leave the extreme RNG mechanics in the larger modes to keep the flavor and wild memes going. |
Tiger does not have a JP4 to cover it, while IS-2 could have an SU85, if it needs it of course.
Regarding commanders: 1 commander has incendiary, shox, stealth AT and kv8, another has radio intercept, t34-85, insane AI loiter and self repair.
Both commanders are far from bad.
About use cases: I suppose you ignored Storjager's comments and the replay I posted, where panther could do jack vs IS-2.
And about uselessness of spreadsheet: you have to understand where to watch and to what pay attention. Just saying it has little value, because some illusive commanders and unknown use cases does not clarify why IS2 is worse then Tiger. That sounds to me like Ulumu's comment about how Comment has better AI then KT.
Why wouldn’t the tiger have a JP4 to cover it? Or are you only talking about OST. |
|
You are not fully countering what he said. Your first point about the frag shells combined with a loiter requires specific circumstances when the ISU152 and KV2 can both handle the situation with less micro/overall investment. So the IS2 does not bring something different.
Since the game is not played in a vacuum your 2nd point makes sense however the 2Pak40 and 1 Panther will have an easier time dealing with the IS2 and 2 ZIS especially when vet gets involved and target weakpoint is used.
I understand what your putting out about OST and tiger but none of that applies to OKW which can field a Tiger and KT. Depending on commander OKW can do everything you say and more. Shit overwatch docterine you get AI/AT loiter in one along with the ability to make howitzer and JLI to spot for the abilities. You can use heat shells or even back tracking to your original statement you can equip a Panther with arty call in and force the zis to move while it and the PAK force the IS2 into submission. Hell, the other fusi doctrine has that artillery which can also be used as a breakthrough so its not unique at all to the IS2 doctrine. |
Which is perfectly possible just without this ability. Just let the squad get suppressed, and the others flank the MG. Any good player will try to switch targets to the flanking squads manually. It doesn't matter much if your middle squad is immobile by suppression or hit the dirt. It's immobile, so the defender will switch targets.
You either time the flanking maneuver well enough to make it or not, but this ability does not help.
You're actually taking your own squad out of the fight. Even before it got suppressed, which technically means that you allow the opponent to switch targets earlier than necessary.
They hated him for he spoke the truth.
The ability seems to be geared more for when the enemy has to approach you. You get defensive bonus but cant move so defending instead of assaulting would make sense. However due to being attached to SMG upgrade it has limited window of usefulness. It would probably work best against VG but they can just nade you and wait you out and sturms could just concussive nade and mop up. LMG grens would just look, wonder why, and then move on. |
|
It’s probably from when they added rear armor. My guess is the game treats the tank as two separate entities which is why they could never add side armor. |
|
I have lost games where I dominated and a vet0 panther just snipes me from far. Even when I outflanked them with the IS2(lol) the ROF is what did me in. That thing misses to much for how slow it shoots. I think it’s a good unit that forces escalation on OST but against OKW panther is always available so not cost effective. |
|
I noticed some weird shit like this a few months ago when OST would pop smoke and I would frantically attack ground. I think it works better with turreted tanks since I have never seen it with SU85. |
I wasn't talking to anyone specifically otherwise I'd quote. I'm saying that penals as AT infantry is fine as is.
You won't see penals AT in high level 1v1s because you lose a lot of AI power if you change it up and 1v1s are quite tight when it comes to staying power/bleeding.
In 3v3+ I've seen PTSR penals being utilized to great effect. Usually 2x PTSR penals which hold the line against any and all dives, one ZiS and then the bulk of the force is either cons or elite infantry (usually cons). In 3v3, the mode which I play, I also see a skip of t70 (due to the massed AT guns in 99% of games).
Sometimes PTSR work, sometimes they don't. You won't see them often because they are a reactive force. You get them as a reaction to the enemy playstyle. If the enemy is not building mass light vehicles, don't go PTSR, but just tech t2 and get ZiS before minute 13 or a fast T34 if you can afford it.
Can't tell you how many times I've seen mass 222 plays from Ostheer, even top level players. I've seen a premade x3 top 5 3v3 team of three Ostheer players which made (I think) about 12 222s in first 10 minutes on Lienne forest. All 3 of them built 4.
The tactic was:
Bunker down on one side so you get stead income, don't bleed.
Start spamming 222s
Once you have 10+ 222s, you win the game.
Thank FU** that my soviet player had 2x PTSR penals with maxims. Their tactic went down the drain. If it wasn't for PTSRs we'd lose. AT guns are useless against such a mass due to their agility, and Rifles from me and my other teammate were useless. Heck, tried to snare 3 222s, all 3 rifles died before the snare even went off. The animation is something special. My AAHT somehow survived and managed to kill 2 222s (got extremely lucky). They surrendered promptly.
See, a reactive force.
You won't just go PTSR penals like you would go for a ZiS gun. You build ZiS because you expect medium tanks to hit the field and you need something with range to keep them at bay. You upgrade Penals with PTSRs to react to the enemy LV phase, not because you plan to counter a future P4 and get overrun by infantry in the meantime
When you build a ZiS, you gain a ZiS gun, losing NOTHING. When you upgrade penals, you SWAP AI for AT. Hence action-reaction
Bro, your preaching to the choir. I firmly believe PTRS penals are good enough for what they are especially in team games when a misclick is less forgiveable due to sheer units on the field. I am more speaking on regular Penal squads in 1v1 they are unviable alone in top 200 matches. I have been playing team games lately and starting to remember some of the cheese that can be pulled off. |
Penals are in the best spot they have been since ever. Not OP, not UP, a quick AT squad if you need one. Stop with all this BS about penals being UP or useless or not needed. 3x PTSR on them is great.
Im assuming your talking to me? I think PTRS penals are fine, I was giving suggestions based on what OP stated. I think their AI in the LATE GAME is slightly UP, but since you said that can you point to a high level match between elite players where the PENAL player won without either T2 back tech or Commissar. |
Ok I take it back, seems that the vet guide is wrong again. Perhaps I should start looking through my favourite units and seeing what else is wrong \o\
They're 290 MP for a 6 man squad with those stats, not sure how much more generous one could expect for that price tag. Riflemen and IS are 280MP but are worse starting off.
No prob, I think conscripts and Penals were the only ones that were significantly adjusted. In the notes they say Penals change was to promote late game scaling/bleed. So its obviously a known issue however any changes may be to much. That why I think a minor buff only at VET3 would help, I think they are close but not quite where they should be. Cooldown/slightly more accuracy something to promote diversity. Also comparing them to Rifleman or IS is not really fair as both have the ability to get several AI upgrades, BARS/LMG/BOLSTER/VICKERS/BREN/SANDBAGS(durability). So although they start worse they end up better, hell Rifleman VET probably equalizes them at VET3 without any upgrades.
The biggest issue I find is everyone keeps focusing on starting performance that has almost no impact on late game where most matches get decided. 7MAN cons/LMG Grens scale amazingly despite that not being the case years ago. They kept getting buffed and now there is literally no point in making PG/Penals/Shocks, I hope COH3 allows for a bit more diversity in builds and strats.
In regards to CE having PTRS, that is nonsense that would give SOVIETS an unbelievable amount of AT in the current META. Most builds are 3-4 conscripts which have nades, CE with PTRS, Guards, 2 ZIS and what ever tank. That is insane especially with how spammable their mines are. |
Relic Entertainment
