|
So I haven't commented in a while. I looked through several of these posts but not all... This is what I gather. People mostly agree that Grens need greater survivability. But that this could be done with other methods like spacing.
I disagree with that statement. I think mainline infantry needs 5 men: for recrewing, for staying in the fight, for handling attacks from snipers, etc.
Not saying this is the only and last change grens and mainline infantry/mortars/double LMG etc need. But I do think grens need 5 men. It was set up like that early on for some weird asymmetrical balance between Soviet and Ostheer and it just doesn't work in a 5 faction environment. There's no nostalgia there. CoH1 had a different combat system so it's really hard to compare. I just don't see the nostalgia argument holding any weight.
And I'm no Axis fanboy. I'm a big time allied player but I sometimes venture into the dark side (usually when I'm playing in team games with randoms). I just know from playing the other factions that Grens feel super fragile and have much less utility than the other frontline infantry. |
|
I just play armor company for this ability. I don't even use the tanks I just get the crew out so I can use thompson of death upgrade. I send wall of thompson crew into enemy and they are destroy. I works everytime use this tactic and you will be #2 on leaderboard (i'll still be #1).
|
We don't need every infantry squad to be the same. Volks and grens are already super similar now, they don't need to be identical.
Hey it's not my fault relic decided to make two factions out of the same nation. And those two factions already share 50%+ of the exact same unit. It's not like they could have ostwind and flakpanzer or Panzer 3 and panzer 4. No they are all the same just somewhat different stats/timings.
And there are differences - Volks would be cheaper, have STG44 upgrade, have thrown grenade. Grens would be much more expensive, have LMG or G43 upgrade, and have rifle grenade.
|
|
I was playing a bit of axis last night and I have to say I agree with all the complaints about grenadier weakness. Sure they can be played effectively and all that, but they just seem to not have the same power as other base infantry squads. Well mainly volks and rifleman. Cons have the own issues(as they always have, but that is a separate discussion).
So why not give Grenadiers a 5th man with a corresponding cost increase?
4 man squads are just too vulnerable to be mainline infantry. Lose 1 man and you've lost 25% of your DPS (unupgraded), lose 2 men and you have to retreat. Maybe some changes need to be made elsewhere too, but I think this would give Ostheer what they need.
The whole point of the 4 man squad was for some asymmetrical balance between Sov and Ost. Well now you've got three other factions in the mix and some of the balance systems for Ostheer and Soviets are just antiquated and need to be revisited. |
The discrepancy between user reviews and critic reviews that TB discusses is indeed quite intriguing. And I basically agree with his main argument, that if you like the stuff that MM makes you do, then you don't feel like it's "grind".
Like Shadow of Mordor, MM has taken the conventional open world formula and stripped out everything extraneous. Rather than being populated by lots of quests and backstory and whatnot, Mordor just concentrates everything on swording orcs. If you like swording orcs, you're probably going to be happy; if you were looking for a more story driven thing, you're probably not.
An argument can be made that Mordor and MM are a little too cut down. That they could have incorporated a bit more variety. This is fair enough, and maybe there is a happier medium to be found in future.
I still like what I've seen of MM a lot and intend to play it.
Finally got to playing this, and love it. It's exactly what a MM game should be.
I give this game a big thumbs up. It captures the mad max universe very well. I did find it to be a bit of a grind toward the end and actually still have a bit to finish. I like your comparison to shadow of mordor but I got bored wish SoM way faster than MM. The thing is once you get your Magnum Opus upgraded to a certain point the combat ceases to be challenging for the most part and since combat is 90% of the game it just gets a tad bland. Not saying I didn't love it, just that it's not perfect and I still haven't finished it months later.
Mad max is also one of the most realistic looking games I've ever played. The scenery is awesome and the day night cycles with dusk/dawn are incredible. Only thing about the sky though is that I wish there were perfectly clear skies.
|
|
I’ve only played 2-3 rounds so I have not had all that much experience with it so far. Have to say I’m mixed but mostly disappointed with it.
Graphics were nice and I was entertained by the gameplay but overall didn’t really feel like anything new and it definitely didn’t feel like they captured a sense of what WW1 was like in any means. Currently I feel that the game is neither an enticing online experience or an interesting historical simulator.
My biggest issue with the game is the bolt actions. I hate, I mean hate, that bolt actions are semi autos. One of my favorite MP weapons of all time was the Kar98 in CoH2. Yes, I realize that was a decade ago but I was excited for a return of open sights bolt action to MP. What better way to do that than a WW1 game? Rather than making bolt actions powerful they made them stupid and weak to cater to a “fast pace”. Bolt actions need to do instant kill for headshot and 80-90% damage on body shots.
SMGs also have far too much effective range. They need to balance it in that SMGs slaughter bolt actions up close but SMGs can’t even touch bolt actions at long range and do very little damage at mid. Instead they have some weird soft counter system where SMGs are basically assault rifles while bolt actions are semi-autos. Makes no sense to me. None.
I don’t care for the vehicles. They are overly powerful and far too maneuverable. Yes I get that it’s an MP game and the AT7 tank isn’t going to go 3MPH, but these tanks don’t even feel like tanks to me. Sure the mechanics of it are smooth but it’s way too smooth IMO. There needs to be some sluggishness/jerkiness just to give it that tank feel. And they move a bit too fast at top speed. Also, anti-tank options aren’t that great especially if the opposing team has lots of gunners in the tank and some infantry is supporting it.
And WHY, WHY is the announcer female?!?!
No, I’m not sexists it’s just completely out of place for a WW1 setting. Sci-fi or modern setting female voice is great but WW1. Feels off.
Just my thoughts for what its worth. |
|
I see two directions for CoH3. Although let's be honest it's a good 5 years off if it ever comes a all...
Option 1 - Pacific Theatre
-more infantry focused gameplay with fewer vehicles
-light naval play/amphibious assaults
-starts with 2 factions marines and Japanese army. Could be expanded to have a second Japanese faction and a commonwealth faction.
Option 2
Modern war fare set in Middle East.
-more infantry combat with light vehicles.
- helicopters/Airstikes could be called in.
-IMO modern war parallel universe would be great in the CoH style.
Option 3(not realistic)
Gears of war.
- squad on squad and cover system would blend right in with the DoW/CoH combat systems.
- could explore whole new multi level maps design(which could be a higher selling point if done right) with a subterranean and surface system
- never going to happen because relic would have to get in bed with M$. One can dream though. |
|
|
The US tank destroyer program. It was fundamentally flawed but by sheer coincidence worked in nearly everything else. Read the history behind it and it's almost astounding how officer politics produced a failure of an arm.
Added to that was that Leslie McNair (the man behind why it took so long for upgraded versions of shermans to reach the front, as wells as delays in the Pershing reaching the front and low production of Jackson ) was fatefully killed during the opening stage of operation cobra by the intense bombing that took place. Despite Bradley's best efforts to prevent friendly fire during that time some bombs fell on allied lines and Leslie McNair was killed by friendly fire. Not saying he was a bad guy either he just had very narrow minded thinking about the tank/anti-tank situation in 1943-44.
My contribution:
Project Habukkuk (Ice Carrier)
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/12/englands-proposed-secret-weapon-ship-made-ice/
|
|
There's a lot to consider here. And I think you are trying to compare it as if they were all fighting on a perfectly flat grass plain. Types of cover and direction of attack make all the difference in the world in this game. A conscript squad in green cover is going to do quite a bit of damage to a panzergrenadier squad charging down the middle of a road (negative cover). But if the P-gren goes around a house where the conscript can't see/shoot and the P-gren comes around the corner at close range it will waste the conscript squad.
In general I'll say this. If the infantryman is carrying a bolt action rifle hes going to do his best at long range in green cover and stationary. Most LMG are about like bolt-action rifles - best left in green cover and or stationary, most LMG can't fire on the move although there are exceptions. If hes carrying a semi-auto rifle hes best at mid range and can fire on the move. If hes got STG44, only fight it at long range, unless you have SMG. Even if you have SMG try a non-direct approach.
Flamers are different too because they do bonus damage to infantry in cover. They also cause infantry charging directly at them to seek ground when hit by the flame, so they are an interesting way to counter SMG equipped infantry. Well and then there are different types of SMGs, Thompsons actually have pretty decent range for SMG, grease guns and MP40s have terrible range but can do high damage at point blank. It's pretty complicated really.
I don't know. CoH2 combat system isn't like SC2 where you can just compare DPS. There are considerably more variables and combat mechanics at work. I'll say this too, all units are much more accurate stationary than moving. So use your abilities to force enemy units to displace and keep your stationary - while all the while watching out for the things that cause you to displace - grenades and such. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
