Especially compared to the AVRE.
There shoudnt be any comparancent really. AVRE is superior in pretty much every single way. I've made a thread before when I compared them, and ST has faster max speed (but AVRE reaches max speed faster by like x2) and bigger AOE (which is still usually means nothing, because both AVRE and ST requare almost direct hits in order to wipe\kill stuff).
In every single other regard AVRE is hands down better, be it armor, ROF, reload and mechanics and turret.
Point is being that with AVRE as it is in the game, ST has no redeeming qualities over AVRE or payoffs for its disadvantages over AVRE. |
|
On open maps m1919 is better then bars, on maps with a lot of natural cover every where and sight blockers Bar might be better. Bar is just more universal weapon. Bars are better at close range, m1919 at long and preferably at mid range.
Aswell as m1919 is not the weapon you would blob, the same way you don't hear LMG blob complaints, because blobing inf that can't fire on the move is counter productive. You can equip one or two squads with LMG and rest with bars and have an all rounder army, while if you equip all your squads with m1919 you will end up with a static rifle squads, which is not the best way to play USF.
In other words m1919 is not a selling point of the commanders, like it was before. It's a strong weapon to use in combined arms, but having your whole army with m1919 requires very specific map and situation.
|
I like how you first accept that penal units were not used as Hollywood portrays just to ignore distinction between penal companies and battalions and feed right into Hollywood meme anyway.
There was nothing expendable about penal battalions, in case you haven't read it first time - they were made out of trained OFFICERS, not random potato farmers who said wrong word or ran wrong way.
This is not true. Penals indeed had trained troops and offircers who were thrown into penal battalions because of minor reasons. But it aswell were consisted of criminals and untrustfull soldiers. Not to mention that they were most of the time commanded by either members of communist party, who might aswell have been brainwashed fanatic of the party, just like some of the Waffen SS members or NSDAP members.
If you read history, even German veterans describe german penal battalions as something you dont wanna end up in, because you will most likely be killed, not because you are thrown into a meat grinder, but because tasts you were given were almost suicidal. And it was a common sittuation even when germany was winning.
During late stages of the war, sutiation with soviet penal battalions might have been better and they could have had more expirienced ppl in them, simply because soviet army was already winning on the EF aswell as by 43-44 Red Army started working properly. |
Wow touched a nerve there.
Only by your fanboy rage maybe, considering you instantly jump into personal assaults.
And if you think only double weapon upgrade on allied infantry (UKF,US) is enough to compete, think you should play more 1v1 or 2v2 and not blob in 4v4 yourself. 1x Bren, Bar or US lmg already competes and does better damage vs VSL if the RA is removed.
And what? My point was and still is, that right now VSL makes Grenadiers A-moving inf strate of the bat. Both USF\UKF need to invest into double weapons and possible side upgrades to become A-moving inf.
If Rifles with 1 bar, let alone IS with 1 bren are capable of fighing your VSL grens, then you really should play outside of 4 digit rank.
What I am against is giving to long-range infantry STG model for 60 munitions. I have read the patch notes and only thing agree there is the received accuracy bonus needed nerfing. I think you are not understanding what I am saying and what is even talked here.
What you are saying is nothing more then being over-defensive about ability, accusing ppl of fanboyism based on something you didnt like.
At very least VSL still improves firing rate of Kars, it still gives you free med-kits, it still gives you surviability and easier access to weapon capping. Damage is lower, staying power and unitility is still big. But ofcouse ppl who spam 4-5 grens into VSL and then suddenly feel like they are super pros, will cry about damage nerf.
If you want more damage, go with G43 PGs and LMG grens. |
lol, if you want to nitpick that actually you get faster upgrades on your allies. But of course you don't understand this as I think you never play OST. Allies butthurt here too much that they can't instant wipe with single grenade anymore grenadiers. My opinions still is for 60 ammo, the upgrade should give 5 man with G43 and free medikit. Remove all the other bonuses, that is already very balanced. It's not like this is core tech like allies can always get in any commander, this is in one single commander.
Faster upgrades on allies. Mkay. So rifles are always able to get double bar\lmg by the time you can get VSL. UKF can get double bren+bolster faster then you can get VSL as ost. This is what you are saying right? Because in case of an LMG upgrade, which puts you somewhat on the even ground vs tommy\rifles, VSL skyrockets grens combat perfomance over the vannila rifles\tommy perfomance. Soviets dont even have upgrades, aside from SVT in 1 commander and PPSH which become usefull only on vet 3 cons.
Instead of your babyranging and pointing fingers of fanboyism I suggest you to play the game outside 4v4 Axis.
And on a side note, you dont even understand how VSL works, if you suggest to remove all bonuses but keep everything else as it is.
Bonuses it provides, are the excact reason why VSL damage out-put is getting nerfed. Because guess what, if G43 in your world is so strong by itself (and the 5th model is a standant grenadier model), why G43 on grens is utter trash of an upgrade. |
|
5-men grens were bad design chose to begin with. And speaking of their perfomance, they were indeed very cancerous especially in team games, because of how easy they was to just A-move and blob.
At least Allies A-moving inf arent awaible as early.
But my point is, whole idea of 5 men grens are bad, I would have rather see 5-men pios and VLS giving something else but not the 5th model.
And honestly, if as Ostheer, you want AI on your inf, then you better stick with PGs G43. They are borderline OP in terms of AI power + there are few really nice commanders with G43 in them. |
I don't think Relic is the reason for fails like DoW3 etc., the game was made how Sega wanted it.
Depends really. I'm not familiar with Sega business model, but objectively speaking they are not that well known for making utter trash. EA is known for that, and they finnaly got what they deserved in this regard, with their main titles being acknowledged as a trash re-skins.
My point here is being that probably some ppl were hired or put into the possition they werent ready for. Same with DoW3. All ppl asked for DoW3 - return to the basicis and creating a game which would take best parts from DoW1 and DoW2, which both are more or less have playerbase till this day, while being completly different games in their core.
DoW3 with "modern ideas" just was a money sink for SEGA, which died few month after release. And its probably due to SEGA not baby sitting Relic and tell them what to do, like THQ did. Because they have a ton of good titles and companies working for them, they cant nor they want to babysit, its either "you make a good game because we trust you to do so or you are disbanded".
And THQ had to force CoH2 to release because of cash.
Actually I dont agree with this, THQ scrapped a lot of ideas and mechanics in order to get coh2 released, while SEGA probably said "fuck it just release it, you can finish it later". And Relic in general arent known for good directioning of their project. They can make beautiful games in terms of gameplay, visuals, sounds, UI and controls, but they lack anything past that. |
Probable implementation. It's not just copy pasting code from one side to the other and send it through steam.
I honestly just think CoH2 is an unwanted chield for Relic\Sega. They kinda dont care about it too much but at the same time they cant abbandon it.
This leads to the fact that coh2 most likely dont have any development team and x64 version was probably outsourced to microsoft or some one else.
In other words, relic\sega have to get ppl to actually spend their time implementing balance team changes.
Because honestly, at the very very very worst. Balance team most likely just providing giving relic excel document listing all the changed strings and values they changed them to.
Since, honestly I dont think, that if relic\sega cared that much, they woudnt afford rolling balance pathes every month, expecially when they are made for free for the community.
But nothing really changes here, since the birth of coh2 it was driven by the community. Whole coh2 story from start to finish is a big f* up from relic.
And I'm not even counting bugs and exploits, when relic employees were on balance pacthes, they just saw themselfs as gods, who knows better and almost never ever fixed their objectively broken shit or it took them insane amount of time to accept their fuck ups and roll fixes. |
And you really have only 2 options here.
Make both tiers have viable AI and AT options OR do something with accessibility to one when you got other.
You can't do both, but current status quo can't and won't stay either.
Well as I said, I wouldnt fiddle with accessibility, but rather make them cheaper, to keep resources investement the same as if you went for only one tier, or maybe just a little bit expensive and cut this expenses from T3, but make them both requared for T3.
Because ideally, this whole balance idea behind them as they are right now, is only somewhat working in 1v1. While even in 2v2 it goes into shitter like instantly. |
So I want to repeat this but Penals still have this massive issue of expensive back techs to get basic tools like support weapons.
We saw the OKW get some changes to their teching so it's easier to get Medics if they are skipped. Penals should get a similar treatment because imo their back tech is far more important to the late game compared to medics.
Something like significantly reducing the cost of T2 and T1 once a player gets T4 would still leave penals without AT guns until the late game where it otherwise becomes very hard to function without them. It would also technically give the option to get T1 for builds that didn't get it although there's often little reason to. Without something like this Penals are still just have this big issue of having to do an expensive back tech delaying their late game even further.
You cant look at OKW, this comparison cant be more wrong really. OKW got tech changes not to provide you with full access to backtech tier, but to give you access to medics, since its a basic tool, which never should have been locked behind chose. You still have to pay just as much, if you decide to fully unlock med track units.
Right now soviet T1 and T2 in their core idea, arent meant to be used at the same time without any resource punishment.
In its core this idea that "Either T1 or T2" is the opened pandora box. Because idealy both T1 and T2 units should justify skipping each other, and they are by far dont, well T1 at least. Because in any case, if you are unable to roflstomp your opponent with T1 and force him to surrender and completly baselock him, you will still need T2 at least for an AT gun.
Personnaly I think this is over-all bad desing, and T3 should requare both T1 and T2 to be build, with proper cost ajustment ofcourse. In this case at least whole soviet T1\T2 units can be balanced in context that you will always have access to them, because they are part of your tech and not self sufficient buildings, which ideally should provide whole roster of self-sufficient units.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
