What do you mean "latest versions of the games" there hasn't been any significant changes to infantry combat outside of typical balance tweaks and none of those changes were aimed at increasing lethality to a large degree. If anything a lot of changes were aimed at changing units to be more consistent damage and less frustrating OHKs. What changes do you think made things too lethal? Otherwise this just comes off as "my reaction times are too slow, please nerf".
When I looked at the rank yesterday, there was something about 100 places in 3 against 3. And for all the time playing with friends, we were always in the 50-100 best. So this is clearly not the problem of my reaction. I'm not a number guy. I say what I see and feel and I see that the infantry is simply melting other infantry. |
I play high level teamgames where good players usually know how to punish blobs, so they are not really an issue. Still, blobs can always be effective. Lowering TTK would not weaken them though, it would just make them even stronger, because it would make using cover against them less effective.
CoH 2 is not a shooter. In the shooter, I'm favoring the fast TTK because it's your reaction speed and different controls. CoH2 is a strategy and it should have a lot more strategy and not be a piano simulator and punish by melting everything and everything if a little distracted. Infantry shouldn't die instantly. |
Ah yes, nothing more strategic than heavy cover versus heavy cover fights lasting up to literal minutes or infantry charging over open ground and barely taking any damage. It is not the other way around, fast TTK forces people to carefully plan their manoeuvres and positioning to either maximise the use of cover or to minimalize the damage on approach. If TTK was low, you could just blob and straight up overrun everything.
I have to ask a question. Are you playing this game or just numbers? Because entering the game now you can see a typical picture of a blob that walks and melts everything around. |
maybe allow for slow, medium or fast in game settings when playing multiplayer? if things are going too fast for you?
lamented the speed change in SC2
The fact that the infantry is simply melting other infantry is not normal. In all the years of the game, this was not. |
|
I noticed that in the latest versions of the game, the infantry is simply crazy melting other infantry. If you look at the versions of several years ago, there is no such thing. I think need to slightly slow down the pace of the game and either slightly reduce the damage for all infantry, or it can reduce accuracy or some other options. |
|
I don’t know about others. But I noticed a very strong FPS drop after the new patch. Slide show. |
Soviet self-propelled gunners and infantrymen rest at a halt in Krasnoye Selo. Operation "January Thunder". In the background on the right is a SU-122 self-propelled gun from the 1439th self-propelled artillery regiment. In the upper left corner of the frame, a modification of the GAZ-AA truck with a 37-mm anti-aircraft gun is visible. In the frame, two Soviet soldiers in German M40 helmets, the closest soldier is also wearing a SN-42 body armor. January 1944.
 |
I don't really understand how you could claim I'm ignoring the topic when you're literally quoting me asking people for ideas.
And as others have said already, and I'm getting tired of having to explain this, the 76's core strength is cost efficiency. Both in singular use, in acquiring critical mass, and in trading. This is what makes it a good unit. But it's up to the player to make good use of it.
Well, of course, only now you forget that this topic has been diligently ignored for many years. |
But the T-34 is STUPID cost effective. For 90 fuel you get an AI slaughter machine with some of the best MGs period. Its only problem is craptastic pen, all other Allied mediums get penned consistently. T-34/76s showed up consistently in the Pro scene. The T-34/85 consistently slaps OST P4s and stands up to OKW P4s with even better AI then the /76.
Its no good in big team, but no mediums are. The issue is the T-70 does the same job (markedly worse), but shows up way earlier. Its 70 fuel vs 90. Ram is quite good used as a last ditch with its new infinite pen. VERY gnarly.
A good Vet 1 would be a faster decap speed for the current capture ability. Crank that up so it can pop cutoffs in a reasonable amount of time. Don't juice cap speed.
It's not economical its cost is productivity cost, which is damn bad. Waste 90 fuel on a good machine gun? No thank you, there is a T-70. And the nerf of the T-70 is not a buff for the T-34-76, in other aspects the T-34-76 is terrible and is needed mainly only as an expensive stun ability. Pz 4 will arrive earlier than the T-34-76 (if everyone is holding the fuel point), or the same time as the Shermans and Cromwell. I will always prefer any other tank than the T-34-76. The only role when his "cost effective" plays is when you keep two fuel points for a long time and you just roll the enemy with a roller from the T-34. But if the enemy gave two fuel points, then in general, then you won. In other situations, the T-34 is simply pointless and it is better to spend its price on a Katyusha. |
The problem is that both the 76 and the 85 are already good and great respectively. If you can come up with a replacement vet 1 ability that is useful but doesn't buff their combat capacity we're all ears, because we couldn't think of anything.
And that is why you are so diligently ignoring this topic, despite having been talking about it for many years. And even more so, my tongue did not turn to call the T-34-76 good, this is the worst medium tank of the game. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
