This is exactly why testing patches before releasing them is so important. Everybody seemed to try to convince me that it makes no sense to test patch before release. And here we are.
Conceptually? Nothing. Buildings make for good defensive positions. I've never liked their implementation though and cover negation not working both ways for them has always felt rather counterintuitive to me.
No cover negation for buildings might be counterintuitive but it is crucial to garrison design. This is becouse in general buildings don't give you combat advantages, at least compared to green cover. They give you smaller bonus than green cover and they also reduce your firepower. This is becouse they are supposed to slow down the advance of enemy forces. They have to give advantage up close though, as otherwise you would be able to run up to the building and overcome it in a matter of seconds. If that was the case, buildings would not be able to slow down enemy advance and thus would lose their sole purpose. That is why this somewhat counterintuitive mechanic is a must.
I think the importance of building counters is largely overestimated in ballance discussions. People seem to expect countering better positioned opponent with only one squad and a cheap ability. That only supports blobbers more and more.
The truth is, that even though there are some units and abilities that excel against buildings, the game is designed so that you don't really need them to fight garrisons. There are multiple mechanics that support players fighting against garrisons:
1. Firepower of garrisoned squad depends on the number of windows. It is the attacking player that chooses the side, so it is safe to say that it is equal to the number of windows in a side that has least of them, varying from 0 to 2.
2. Garrisoned squad members have a chance o being hit that doesn't depend on their position inside building. That means you can hit them through the walls. Together with 1st point, it means full health squads closing to buildings often lose less models than the ones inside.
3. Finally, garrison cover is worse than green cover at ranges over 10. Which means, that if you put your men in cover nearby a house, they will win the fight sooner or later. The first point often can make that process even faster.
To conclude, good positioning and local numerical advantage are the main anti-garrison tools that every faction has at their disposal. Anything beyond this is a factional benefit and should not be considered as required for a faction to stay competitive.
Some of the ideas that came from that mindset were wery damaging to ballance of infantry engagements. A volk granade is a prime example of ability that completely breaks the rules of infantry combat for the sake of countering garrisons. All that while sturmpios with high dps have always done just find against them.
In my personal "worst design in coh2 history" list, volksgrenadier flame nade is up there with flamethrower riflemen and snipers in m3s. And honestly, it doesn't really matter if okw needs a truck to get them or not. This ability should not be there in the first place, no matter the timing.
This game should show in your .org playercard in "disputes" column. It may be coused by lack of stability on your side or by unfair behaviour of your opponents. It is best to check the first option first.
Remember to restart your game often becouse of memory leak. Verify the game via steam as well as files can be corrupted.
If these two don't help, you can try talking to Sturmpanther. Remember to copy the temporary replay before playing next game if you want to share the replay for further investigation.
I think the importance of building counters is largely overestimated in ballance discussions. People seem to expect countering better positioned opponent with only one squad and a cheap ability. That only supports blobbers more and more.
The truth is, that even though there are some units and abilities that excel against buildings, the game is designed so that you don't really need them to fight garrisons. There are multiple mechanics that support players fighting against garrisons:
1. Firepower of garrisoned squad depends on the number of windows. It is the attacking player that chooses the side, so it is safe to say that it is equal to the number of windows in a side that has least of them, varying from 0 to 2.
2. Garrisoned squad members have a chance o being hit that doesn't depend on their position inside building. That means you can hit them through the walls. Together with 1st point, it means full health squads closing to buildings often lose less models than the ones inside.
3. Finally, garrison cover is worse than green cover at ranges over 10. Which means, that if you put your men in cover nearby a house, they will win the fight sooner or later. The first point often can make that process even faster.
To conclude, good positioning and local numerical advantage are the main anti-garrison tools that every faction has at their disposal. Anything beyond this is a factional benefit and should not be considered as required for a faction to stay competitive.
Some of the ideas that came from that mindset were wery damaging to ballance of infantry engagements. A volk granade is a prime example of ability that completely breaks the rules of infantry combat for the sake of countering garrisons. All that while sturmpios with high dps have always done just find against them.
Poland
0
ferwiner
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
