The problem here are buildings in general, they have way too much impact in the game early on regardless of what unit is inside it.
Yes, that is absolutely not exclusive to Sturms. At least their far DPS is non-existant so you can attack them from afar with impunity if they are holed up in a structure.
Several other units are even more annoying in buildings, such as rifles, Maxims, tommies, Vickers, MG42 if supported a bit, upgraded grens, or heck even Volks thanks to their early game durability. I completely agree that early game play very often revolves too much around garrisons. But so long as they are nigh on impervious to small arms apart from a big blob, it's going to stay that way. |
I disagree with people who start out by attacking my game knowledge in an effort to put me on the defensive. If you read through the thread I am only arguing with the people that attack me personally as opposed to the argument.
You said I should send my engineer to cap the cutoff. Doing this retards my tech upgrades and has no guarantee of working while a spio has a much better chance of success with far less punishment if it fails.
Giving you tips on how to counter a so-called OP startegy is not "attacking your playstyle" mate. Seems like you put yourself on the defensive for no real reason.
Instead of assuming that you're right and getting salty when people express a contrary opinion (you know, what forums are for), why don't you analyse the arguments, look at the winrates (which are not in OKW's favor in anything save for 4v4, and they get stomped in tourneys), watch replays of your games, and maybe re-examine your conclusion that Sturmpios are OP and breaking the game? |
|
USF has the least amount of trouble early game against OKW by far. Rifles eat Volks for breakfeast, lone Sturms can be taken down quite easily by dual rifles if need be, and Sturm + Kubel combo is a pain but you have the numbers to play around it until the Captain or M20 rolls out.
If this was a balance problem, the numbers would reflect it, and they simply don't. Yes, Sturms are powerful, but they are far from invincible superunits early game, they're fragile and costly to reinforce, and once the early game passes they lose a lot of their combat potential due to dying so fast. |
ever tried to get one in 1v1 / 2v2
have you ever tried that once?
I actually use them in 2v2, and I do find them a bit OP. The alpha strike and squadwiping potential is ridiculous, and it pretty much instakills garrisons.
It doesn't win games by itself, But it sure helps more than it should.
Oh and I actually display my playercard, so now's your chance to come up with another argument for a change. |
|
Brits were by far the worst faction before the AEC was injected with more steroids than Arnold. It now stands as a complete crutch unit that carries their overpriced infantry into the lategame.
Bring the AEC down to Puma level (as in, nerf its AI damage primarily) and Brits should be alright if they get a couple small buffs to their infantry.
Then we can look into the performance of the Cromwell, which is too good for its cost. But that's not a huge issue. |
Spios as starting unit are mostly fine.
If there is one thing to complain about, its the free 100mp OKW gets at start over all other armies.
Yes. Spios alone are manageable, just stay out of their range until you can 2v1 them (or as US just get better cover), and if he concentrates forces around them cap elsewhere. But the MP advantage means that the dual Volks or Volks + Kubel isn't far behind which is a very potent early game force.
Still, this isn't a game breaker. OKW would have a way higher winrate if Sturms were that powerful early game. |
Well this turned into a flame op and insult him without actually explaining it, just going to delete it if no one is actually going to discuss. I saw maybe two valid posts in this swamp of comments?
What did you expect? You say that your post is "thought on the features of every faction" yet all your changes, with one exception, are Axis buffs or Allies nerfs, and many of them aren't anywhere near problematic anyway (Zis barrage, really? in many situations it's a total waste of 60 ammo). It's not a "thought" on "features", it's "balance changes I want to see", which isn't really the same thing.
On top of that, you used a lot of anecdotical evidence, which also highlights that your opponents made some pretty bad plays such as parking a KT in range of 2 fully upgraded Fireflies. That's not a good indicative of balance. |
|
This looks suspiciously like a poorly disguised "buff axis, nerf allies" thread.
If you did kill a KT with 2 Tulips, you expended 300 munitions (50 for each launcher + 100 per shot) into a KT that was immobile, using the KT's hardest counter. I'm not sure how this is balance problem anymore than a Sturmtiger shot evaporating a USF blob worth thousands of MP and munitions if the USF player doesn't GTFO. |
I have to say, I really hate when people do that (not you in particular, people in general). Its always like "Na uh, I didn't say that, can't you read? Show me where I said/wrote that" That is not how language works. Even if you do not overtly make a statement like "x is y", you do know perfectly well that the way you chose to say that makes a very strong assumption to read it as "I do not think the AEC is OP/I do not think the AEC is a problem."
I think that some kind of cowardliness people today choose to use in their favor, hiding behind a semipermeable membrane of words/text where your opinion can leave, but no criticism can enter.
Everyone who takes language in spoken and written form always literally is bullshitting himself.
Agree completely. I don't like this kind of overly defensive posturing either.
I'll also echo Dusty; anyone who thinks Arty cover, in all its insta engine damage glory, and the AEC are balanced have their heads up their own asses. Close the Pocket isn't even comparable, as it requires a lot of setup to use and is only even usable in large team games with mediocre players who don't realize what's going on until it is too late. |
Really dude? Aside from the obvious polemics, since when are Volks better than Grens in the AI department?
Conscripts beat (unupgraded) grens at close range, but struggle vs Volks at all ranges, and that's without putting flamenades into the equation.
Ostheer also usually uses a Gren + MG42 combination, which conscripts can counter or (more commonly) work around to a degree. OKW usually opens with 3 Volks, maybe a Kubel in the mix, which along with Sturmpios usually run over the poor conscripts unless a skill disparity is present. So while Grens deal more damage, they are more easily countered by conscripts because the two units are somewhat assymetrically balanced, whereas in terms of combat stats Volks are almost simply better than conscripts early game and push them around no matter how the engagement happens unless the OKW player makes mistakes.
Thus, Maxims, which for less micro than conscripts require will give you far better result vs Volks, and also serve to deter the Volksblob in a pinch which concripts are hilariously impotent against. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
