The stun grenade bug abuse need to stop.
Inf. squad can't retreat of do anything while in an after the end of the stun.
I've just lost 1 vet 3* captain and 1 vet 3* inf. squad(at full health) because of that bug and the «smart» using it to win easily.(Even if i retreated them the moment i saw the grenade coming, i was caught in the stun blast and the both died from a lonely green commando unit fire.
The Germans were systematically using that «legit tactic» to win most inf. engagements...
Please Relic Fix that bug.
Thanks.
|
Removing tank crush from medium is a really bad change :
1)Affecting mostly allies;
2)Sherman + smoke was a solid way to battle inf with at-weapons;
3)It remove realism;
4)It remove a fun component from the game;
5)There from the beginning of Vcoh.
Removing it from tank destroyers only could be acceptable, but really not essential neither realistic.
Please revert that change.
Thanks. |
Some fresh air, at last !!!!
Thanks Relic ! |
This is irrelevant. Units you build with these factions won't come from off-map, they'll appear next to the building that built them, the only disadvantage you have is no ability to build your structures closer to the field. This is offset by the fact that you don't need to dedicate a unit to actually constructing the structure.
This makes no sense if you actually think about what you're saying logically. Say you have to walk a unit for 15 seconds in order to get to where you need to build your T1. That means your first T1 unit is delayed by 15 seconds. However, once that unit is done being built, it appears at the T1 structure. If it had appeared off-map, it would have had to make up that 15 second walk itself anyways (actually it probably would have been longer, since off-map spawn points are usually fairly far behind HQ buildings). Your first unit's timing is a complete wash, and every subsequent unit hits the field 15 seconds quicker than it would have otherwise. There is absolutely zero downside for the player.
__________[HQ]------------------>T1 = 15 seconds
[SpawnPoint]----------------------->T1 = > 15 seconds
That's what makes it a strategic decision. Strategic decisions have consequences. Sheltering the player from strategic decisions and their consequences is one of the main reasons why CoH2 struggles as a strategy game.
None of this is even remotely relevant to the discussion or any of my points. These are map design issues that have no bearing on how units are fundamentally produced and fielded.
The first point is fair, but I'd argue that it is more a map design problem, just like your above complaints. Fixing shitty design with even shittier design is not a solution, it's a bandaid. The second point is intended behaviour. Players should be forced to make strategic decisions, and those strategic decisions should have consequences. If you fucked up your building placement, well, you look a gamble and it didn't pay off. Players should be forced to make those sorts of decisions, and they should impact the outcome of the game.
+100 |
They said on the official forum that new war spoils system is coming sonner then later.
Thanks |
Rolf , that was great !
Thanks !!!! |
In 4v4, you are forced to engage in the early battle to fight for the fuel point. Otherwise you will lose probably. Due to the less variation of USF starting units, the non-doctrinal combination of the first engagement (usually first three to four units) must be ( Rifleman X3, REX1 or Rifleman X2,RE X1,grenade and smoke) since the unreasonable price and build time increase of RE. Unfortunately, USF is forced to lose the first engagement by the stupid game design as the early OKW unit combination is too strong. After losing the fuel point, USF has no chance to fight back due to the lack of artillery to break through the OKW FHQ sim city.
I have tried to analyze is there any way for USF to win the first engagement when versus OKW ,but it seems impossible:
First unit 1v1:
Rear vs strum
Rear lose
Second unit 1v1:
Rifleman vs Kubelwagen (Keep moving backward to remain max distance if riflemen try to get close, then riflemen will keep losing model and can't even make a scratch on kubelwagen )
Rifleman lose
First + Second unit 2v2:
Rear+ Rifleman versus Kubelwagen + strum
OKW win of course as rear can't deal any damage at max range and most probably get 2 to 3 model left before the rifleman come in the first unit battle)
Third unit 1v1:
Rifleman vs Second strum or second kubel or volks
Rifleman lose except fighting with volks, but the third unit 1v1 battle will not happen most of the time as USF has lose in Frist + Second unit battle already. The situation will become 1v3.
Not to mention more extreme case such as kubelwagen spam. While USF has no way to win before captain or .50cal except paying for a no-late-game commander which include WC51.
Thus, USF needs more different units at the early game. For Soviet and UKF, they can simply choose to build MGs to counter OKW bullshit tatics.
I agree;
On Hill 331, 4 Okws vs any 4 Allies mix will be able to get both fuels if they want, unless 3 allies go for 1 fuel... On that map 2 Wer +2 Okw are evenly more powerful, if both Wer are able to build bunkers fast...it's gonna be are if players are evenly skilled.
Thanks. |
OK i fixed it you can remove this thread, thanks |
After playing and watching more matches, here what if think of the 4vs4 balance :
Allies : Overall balanced
Brits:
Average over performing in regard of their Advanced Emplacement Regiment cmdr, especially the counter «no micro» battery.
US :
Rather ok
Soviets:
Under performing in regard of alternative to maxims spam : Conscripts don't scale enough, T1 rather weak, and T34-76 under used.(should be back in T3)
Axis : Overall balanced
wehrmacht :
Slightly under performing, but good unit design and great cmdr.
OKW :
Slightly over performing : too great veterancy scaling, but lack of variety play wise leading to weak bloobing tactic usage.
Conclusion : Great game in 4vs4, balanced enough to be fun !
P.S. My previous feelings were inaccurate and erroneous because i was watching and playing too many Soviets matches who are under performing. (Sorry)
Thanks.
Please add you own findings ! |
Probably true on an individual basis. As far as overall balance, allies rule.
Well the charts will tell us soon whose mostly winning.
Thanks. |