There is no such thing as side armor in COh2. UNFORTUNATELLY !!
And I use this occasion to ask for it. We need Side armor values, different from rear armor values. Side armor values should be somewhat close to actual rear armor values, while rear armor values need to be lower. I am pretty sure that if the side armor would be implemented, we will see less whining from Allied fanboys. It would be realistic, it would be cool. Why don't they do it? Why this wasn't done from beginning?
Side armor is a must. It would increase the positional game and increase the tactical value of flanking. |
|
I wonder : What is the best squad wiping unit for its costs (mp,fuel, muni.) ?
ISU ? JT ? Stuka ? Panzer iv ? Tigers/KT ? T-34 ? Zis ? Sherman Bulldozer ? Reg Sherman ? Eng with demo charge ? Penal with snatchel ? Flak halftrack (Us/Sov/OKW) ? Pz II ? or another unit not listed here ?
If someone can give us numbers that would be great !
Thank you. |
I know, I keep repeating myself, but it is, truely, a matter which is quite dear to me: the random army button.
Come on, it can't be too hard to implement that feature. Coh1 had it. Why not Coh2?
I'm really happy just playing any army, I don't want to play only one. (You could say: 'Okay, just choose another army every game.' but it is not the same as being surprised which army to play).
Additionally (and maybe most importantly): You or your team can play against any Faction. So the waiting time should decrease.
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
Yes, it's a greatly needed option. |
|
The main problem with allies is that they are harder to play. Players need more experience with them than to play the Axis.
In 3vs3 and 4vs4 game modes, people without decent allies experience are matched too frequently into games that are beyond their game experience. Too often, they make their team lose because they lack the skills or they drop in frustration, claiming Axis is OP.
That lead to a lot of frustration for both the player and his teammates.
Solution:
Tune up the matching system so matching rules for allies are stricter. It's better for every one that they wait a bit more for a suitable game that they being instantly pitched into a game that are beyond theirs gaming skill.
So use higher values (prestige level, Elo rank, etc) for matching them into team vs Axis.
It's better not to have a game or having a longer delay than to be matched with a experience lacking player instantly for team game.(In all modes)
The game will be more fun for everyone.
Thanks. |
|
The Jackson is perfectly balanced as it is.
It must be used carefully with some spotting unit(s) to fully show it great potential. Never use it as a main battle tank, but use it as a long range mobile support unit that can destroy any axis tanks from afar. With it, you can move quickly where the enemy is pushing with armored units.
For full effect use them in pairs or best in trios.(especially in 4vs4)
Always use reverse to keep you gun at the enemy when backing.
Thanks. |
Don't forget we are talking about '44 - '45 german infantry. The panzerbusche was dead and burried at that time.
Let's make the volks squad to have 4 members. Plain and simple. Ok, they have great AT, great vet, BUT they won't be that durable. What do you people think?
Not a bad idea, i vote for it. 
And make Rak just a bit less durable the the US At-gun cause they can retreat.
Thanks. |
Thread: ISU-1523 Dec 2014, 16:59 PM
I don't know how many times it has to be said but: THERES NO SIDE ARMOR!  igh:
That true, there is no side armor... I did'not say it exist... i only say that a Jackson was shooting the side of the JT... I admit that saying side is totally irrelevant, but it was as it happen in the replay, but i was only saying that the poor Jackson did take 2 direct shots at the JT and did nothing. It was a case of bad luck, not a call to nerf the JT.
Everything i said is to show that the ISU-152 is fine at it is, nerfing it more will only lead to more imbalance between Axis and Allies in 4vs4. (The most played mode)
Thank you. |
Thread: ISU-1523 Dec 2014, 16:09 PM
Clarity is second only to the glaring issue of truth.
Besides that, what does Tiger wiping units have to do with Jagdtiger? Not to mention Sherman HE does it more frequently than a tiger.
I said what i said. i don't care if you don't trust me. But it was the truth.
I said that i never saw Jagdtiger wiping unit as easily as a vet 2 tiger did it. You can extrapolate what you want on that.
Coh2 is a game i like a lot, i only post, comment to try make it more fun. Try to review all my posts, maybe your gonna be able to better see who i'am and where i'm standing.
Thanks. |
Thread: ISU-1523 Dec 2014, 15:20 PM
It was a tiger vet 2, not a Jagdtiger that one shotted the conscript and the light at guns. It was using its mgs + its gun, but one unit died every time he fired its gun.
But that was a Jagdtiger that receive 2 shots from a Jackson to its side that did nothing.
Sorry if i did not expressed myself clearly enough.
And all i said is the sad truth.
Thanks |
OKW's design doesn't really make that much sense to me. They have reduced resource incomes but it doesn't seem to matter that much. A puma can arrive in about 6 minutes. A luchs can arrive on the field in about 10 minutes. A panther arrives in about 17. This is actually faster than Ostheer can field a panther. In fact if Ostheer attempts to field a panther they will probably lose.
After the first vehicle purchase however they have to wait a long time for a second vehicle as the resource penalty kicks in. This results in them having a zillion manpower to spend but no fuel to get more vehicles.
Since they have this surplus of manpower, a lot of units cost only manpower since it would be impossible to maintain their army otherwise. Obersoldaten are the biggest offender in that regard.
This makes holding territory considerably less important for OKW than other factions. That's why rushing straight for an enemy cutoff at the start of a game rather than back-capping is so effective.
That's where the big error is in my opinion. In a game that is almost entirely about capturing and holding territory, one faction doesn't actually need to capture and hold territory as badly as the others.
I am definitely not the first person to suggest that maybe instead OKW should have a manpower penalty instead of a fuel and munitions penalty. They will have fewer units, but the focus on map control will be restored and the focus on unit preservation will be higher than ever.
That a good idea !!! |
Canada
![VoltarDark [QC] flag](/images/replay/ostheer_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
