Login

russian armor

New Jaeger Light Infantry v. Pathfinders

18 Sep 2014, 15:11 PM
#21
avatar of Brachiaraidos

Posts: 627

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Sep 2014, 13:52 PMJohnnyB


Hm. Forgive me if I still think that the FUEL HANDICAP is justifying all you guys are considered to be "OP". Why does it matter if JLI perform better than Patfinders? Why does it matter Fallschirm are such usefull units? Why does it matter Obersoldaten are performing better than most of Allied infantry? Just build some fucking tanks already and you will overcome all these Allied "weaknesses" and win by a mile. Why is it so hard? What, you want to have the capacity to build as many vehicles you want AND to have better or equivalent infantry also? Don't you think this wouldn't be ok?
Oh, and if an OKW player doesn't allow you do build a tone of tanks, maybe it's because he is a skillfull guy or because you suck at COH2. It's as simple as that.


Lets break this down into a few concise reasons as to why this is a pointless, meaningless post full of tripe and more tripe.

A) My player card is right there. Say I suck all you want, but my ranks are all around 100 for game modes I play at any given time (With Wehr a work in progress. Picked it back up for the first time since beta). Normally, I would boast them all around 30-70, but I've been lax in playing lately.

B) Fuel disadvantage? Man you are funny. That fuel 'disadvantage' comes with the cheapest teching costs overall (even if you do the stupid thing and 'adjust' the prices) and those techs also come with a free massive gun, medic bunker and repair bunker. Most OKW vehicles are also cheaper than their allied counterparts anyway- compare the T-70, Stuart and Luchs. Take note of which is cheapest, and which minces infantry like there's no tomorrow. And OKW come with the most overbearing AT of any army ever- soviet style mines, every one of your core infantry gets a shreck, racketens are T0 and cheap and retreatable (and their vet is seriously, seriously nasty). If you're getting rolled by allied armour spam because OMG SO FUEL POOR, maybe take your own advice and have a god hard think about how terrible you're playing?

C) The reason it matters how infantry preforms in relation to its cost is painfully obvious, go away.

D) As a final note, OKW also get arbitrary buffs to the few vehicles it shares with the Wehr. Both the Puma and Panther for the OKW are more accurate (and get nicer vet) than their counterparts. Just to further put a nail in that retarded 'omg fuel poor = massive handicap' argument. Their fuel handicap is trivial when you factor in their actual DESIGN, rather than try compare them to the existing vCoH2 armies and just point at the fuel disparity like some sort of braindead chimp.



So yeah. The massive difference in effectiveness of JLI and Pathfinders is exactly as relevant as stated before.

It's a well-written post but I don't think you should compare individual units. Compare the whole doctrine. And you'd probably need to factor in each faction's base infantry too. Rifles > Volks. If both elite inf call-ins in AB were superior or or equal to JLI, that would combine with USF's core infantry superiority and there would be a serious problem.


And volks are cheaper than rifles, and OKW elite infantry is more expensive than american elite infantry.

No army has unique weaknesses in the manpower department. For units that only cost manpower, we can compare them as liberally as we want. OKW has perfectly normal manpower income and reinforcement costs, ergo for a unit that costs 10MP more there's no justification for such a large disparity. Every army pays for better infantry by paying more MP and having to use more to keep them fighting. Volks < Rifles because volks are 45mp less each and are 5mp less each to reinforce. That's a big difference over the course of the game.

JLI >>> Pathfinders but JLI do not cost notably more and are equally expensive to reinforce, which means pathfinders (for the same valued investment) get shafted.
18 Sep 2014, 15:47 PM
#22
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1



- Wall of text - .


Ye, I see you played many games as OKW, and I see they are exclusevely 2v2. I love relying on my Ostheer ally to give me some fuel paradrops and to build me some caches. You know, OKW cannot build caches. Allied can boost their fuel income, but OKW cannot do the same without suffering AMO penalty.
But I really understand why you think the way you do, not playing 1v1 makes you feel the fuel shortage problem at its minimum. Of course in 3v3 I feel much better with OKW, for instance.

And don't get to cocky with your leaderboard place. My friend who barely plays COH2 reached place 180 in random 2v2 with soviets (just to give you a hint about allied cheese).

As a conclusion, I'm not saying current OKW status is deplorable, au contraire, now it's quite fine, because it really has the solid start game that HE NEEDS ANYWAY. The OKW status was worst in the past.

But whiners are simply pissing me off and makes me wonder "how much cheesier you want your allied game to become"? they simply aren't right trying to judge OKW as any other faction. To put it into a nutshell: nerf all the OKW units you want but give it a normal fuel income PLUS ability to build caches. And everything would be fine and balanced.
18 Sep 2014, 16:02 PM
#23
avatar of Cruzz

Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41

I'd love to see caches removed from allied factions, it would improve the quality of random games immensively.

I have a decent number of OKW games and a decent rank with them and agree fully with what Brachiaraidos just said. With the super cheap tech, if anything you end up having MORE fuel available in the first 15 minutes of the game than an ostheer player would. But even more importantly you've got so much manpower to spam your overpowered infantry...
18 Sep 2014, 16:57 PM
#25
avatar of Kamfrenchie

Posts: 41

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Sep 2014, 15:47 PMJohnnyB


Ye, I see you played many games as OKW, and I see they are exclusevely 2v2. I love relying on my Ostheer ally to give me some fuel paradrops and to build me some caches. You know, OKW cannot build caches. Allied can boost their fuel income, but OKW cannot do the same without suffering AMO penalty.
But I really understand why you think the way you do, not playing 1v1 makes you feel the fuel shortage problem at its minimum. Of course in 3v3 I feel much better with OKW, for instance.

And don't get to cocky with your leaderboard place. My friend who barely plays COH2 reached place 180 in random 2v2 with soviets (just to give you a hint about allied cheese).

As a conclusion, I'm not saying current OKW status is deplorable, au contraire, now it's quite fine, because it really has the solid start game that HE NEEDS ANYWAY. The OKW status was worst in the past.

But whiners are simply pissing me off and makes me wonder "how much cheesier you want your allied game to become"? they simply aren't right trying to judge OKW as any other faction. To put it into a nutshell: nerf all the OKW units you want but give it a normal fuel income PLUS ability to build caches. And everything would be fine and balanced.



cool, so OKW has a solid game start that can easily go toe to toe with allies early game, then OKW can transition into superior armor and vehicles...

About your advice with tanks, can't you even acknowledge that with volks carrying shrecks and racketen being very good, tanks hardly solve all infantry problem ?
18 Sep 2014, 17:06 PM
#26
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

I'd like to see 0cp Pathfinders and 2cp Paras to give more starting option for USF.
18 Sep 2014, 20:01 PM
#27
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130

Jonnyb does make a good point that the okw perform radically different in 2 vs 2 situations especially if the ostheer partner has luftwaffe supply doctrine. but Brachiaraidos his arguments are completely valid in a 1 vs 1 situation.

However neither unit is good enough to replace standard infantry units and they both equal.
19 Sep 2014, 08:58 AM
#28
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1




cool, so OKW has a solid game start that can easily go toe to toe with allies early game, then OKW can transition into superior armor and vehicles...

About your advice with tanks, can't you even acknowledge that with volks carrying shrecks and racketen being very good, tanks hardly solve all infantry problem ?


Yes, on paper you are right. But in my early OKW games I used to start with T2 (assuming that T2 means the building with jagdpanzer, leigh and searchlight HT), thinking that raketen and schrecks will supliment any AT need untill mid-late game. Reality proved I was wrong, volks are not panzergrenadiers and raketenverfer has a such small range and it's easily killable (has nothing to do with the PAK 40). To explain better: compare the binom 1 schrecked pzgrens squad + 1 pak 40 with the binom 1 schrecked volks squad + 1 raketen and tell me which is the best.
In addition, from middle game start, you cannot relay on infantry or team crew based AT weapons like volks and raketen, you need vehicles.

In fact the most reliable build is starting with T3 and Puma, then, depending on situation you continue by building T2 or T4 (T4 being the sign for an agressive play).
19 Sep 2014, 11:47 AM
#29
avatar of Kamfrenchie

Posts: 41

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2014, 08:58 AMJohnnyB


Yes, on paper you are right. But in my early OKW games I used to start with T2 (assuming that T2 means the building with jagdpanzer, leigh and searchlight HT), thinking that raketen and schrecks will supliment any AT need untill mid-late game. Reality proved I was wrong, volks are not panzergrenadiers and raketenverfer has a such small range and it's easily killable (has nothing to do with the PAK 40). To explain better: compare the binom 1 schrecked pzgrens squad + 1 pak 40 with the binom 1 schrecked volks squad + 1 raketen and tell me which is the best.
In addition, from middle game start, you cannot relay on infantry or team crew based AT weapons like volks and raketen, you need vehicles.

In fact the most reliable build is starting with T3 and Puma, then, depending on situation you continue by building T2 or T4 (T4 being the sign for an agressive play).


well on the other hand, raketen + volk is much cheaper than pgren + pak isn't it ? you could probably add another raketen or volk for the price.

I've seen reketen die fast, but most of the time i think they have decent life expectation if not flanked, combined with the retreat capabilities.
Plus OKW has cheaper mines than ostheer doesn't it ?

Thing is, if the OKW has had decent fuel, a puma is most likely nearby + 1-2 rak +2 volks.

And the most effective soviet vehicles against infatry are the most fragile: m3 and t70. It's just easy to lose those to bad pathing.

T34 performance ranges from great to "WTF are you guys drunk?" Sometimes I kill several soldiers with a tank shot, and i've been able to squish many ennemies including entire ober squad, other time infantry men get repulsed from the t34 by some kind of magnetism and the gun can't hit shit.
19 Sep 2014, 14:26 PM
#30
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post18 Sep 2014, 13:52 PMJohnnyB


Hm. Forgive me if I still think that the FUEL HANDICAP is justifying all you guys are considered to be "OP". Why does it matter if JLI perform better than Patfinders? Why does it matter Fallschirm are such usefull units? Why does it matter Obersoldaten are performing better than most of Allied infantry? Just build some fucking tanks already and you will overcome all these Allied "weaknesses" and win by a mile. Why is it so hard? What, you want to have the capacity to build as many vehicles you want AND to have better or equivalent infantry also? Don't you think this wouldn't be ok?
Oh, and if an OKW player doesn't allow you do build a tone of tanks, maybe it's because he is a skillfull guy or because you suck at COH2. It's as simple as that.



OKW get elite infrantry that dont require upgrades to be usefull. Obers get lmg with out having to buy it. falls get 4 falshijaegers without u having to buy them. not to mention that falls and jeager can teleport to any ambient building...

Boo hoo poor fuel. u can convert you know...

You must be a really bad player..

L2p.....
7 Nov 2015, 02:56 AM
#31
avatar of itaperuna

Posts: 72

People dont realize that the fuel disadvantage works in the capacity to spawn tanks....even with cheapest tech.
U can see 3, 4 or 5 sheman but u never see 2 panthers from a okw player.

Im talking about 1v1.
So this disavantage have a huge impact despite the shit that somebody writte here.
7 Nov 2015, 08:05 AM
#32
avatar of Looney
Patrion 14

Posts: 444

If not for the fact that OKW is dead and USF is the one true faction right now, I'm inclined to say OKW needs jeagers to stay viable and Pathfinders are fine. But then again, I'm a USF fanboy, so I'm just going to say that pathfinders need a buff. Cause they are overpriced, or jeagers are too cheap.
7 Nov 2015, 10:29 AM
#33
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17887 | Subs: 8

What is up with all the necromancers recently?
7 Nov 2015, 10:49 AM
#34
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

What is up with all the necromancers recently?


It's what happens if people don't celebrate Halloween properly. The Necromancers and the Lich Kings awake.
10 Nov 2015, 19:17 PM
#35
avatar of WireInEye

Posts: 23

Hi comm_ash,

I guess they have different roles:

Pathfinders - "recon squad with excellent sight range and long range firepower" = scout/spoter or/and "fire support" for rifles and/or paras with snipe shots.

JLI - "disrupting enemy supply lines and ambush tactics, ideal for harassing enemy supply lines and flanking attacks" = deployed from ambient building then kill support weapon crew nearby deployment then dismantle support weapon then run away and/or decap point booby trap it and run away.

To your comparison (and set aside cost(10mp), 1CP difference):

Pathfinders:

-2 scoped rifles that crit soldiers below 40% HP + 2 M1A1 carbines
- they do more DPS than JLI from 0 range up to 19 range (www.coh2-stats.com), they snipe better than JLI.

-Cloak in cover
-Lay Beacons
-High Sightrange
-Can equip 2 more weapons if you float muni

JLI:

-3 Kar98k rifles + 1 scoped G43 rifle with crit on units below 70% HP
- they do more DPS than Pathfinders from 20 range up to 35 range (www.coh2-stats.com), they snipe worse than Pathfinders.

-Cloak in cover with Vet
-Booby Trap Point
-Spawn in ambient buildings - they need this for the role which Lelic gave them
-Sprint
-High Sightrange

-Infiltration Nades - comes from doctrine/commander this occupied one commander ability slot and is shared with all other infantry (except support weapons)

-Scavenge - comes from doctrine/commander this occupied one commander ability slot and is shared with all other infantry (except support weapons and (not sure) Obers)

Conclusion: Half of JLI abilities come from doctrine and are shared this is why they are better than Pathfinders.

List of bias topics connected to this:
- OKW shouldn't share doctrinal nades/scavenge
- USF shouldn't share weapon racks
- Abilitie (pick some mentioned above) is OP
- Doctrine is OP
- ...
Let's rage begin :D


10 Nov 2015, 20:56 PM
#36
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

This is an old thread, but I think it relevant to post in since much has changed since then.

JL are still outright better than Pathfinders. The differences in doctrine don't provide enough of an excuse for the power of these units compared to Pathfinders. JL have the ability to snipe models reliably, and can appear wherever you need them. Spawning behind AT guns instantly has them paying for themselves. And if you can salvage you just gained some fuel and munitions.

Pathfinders biggest draw is their ability to pick up bars, which turns them into weapon piantas. If they do engage in combat they appear to randomly drop models because of this increased DPS combined with their RNG sniping mechanic. To make things clearer to players Pathfinders should not be able to equip weapons, and their sniping power increased. We might also consider giving them better cloak, as was stated. Their current reinforce cost and small squad size make them feel like expensive and very underwhelming elite infantry.

To Lemon's point (with the caveat I know its from more than 1 year ago) about indirect fire, I just don't see it. USF struggles to provide indirect fire in most situations. If they are lucky a Pak howie is nearby to provide support, but if you are invested in airborne you are already extremely spent on MP leaving little room for that. Besides Wehr gets great LoS from just pios now and has far more indirect fire options. The LoS alone is not sufficient to justify their in game differences of these units.

JL's vet 1 ability needs to be removed. They should gain cloak at vet 1.

@Wireineye
JL's ability to drop models, ability to spawn in ambient buildings, and their better vet alone justify a higher price than Pathfinders. Their slightly worse sniping at max range over Pathfinders is rarely an issue since infantry battles rarely play out at max range. JL also have spring so they can close gaps, or get out of the way to maximize their chance to be at an ideal range.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

766 users are online: 766 guests
7 posts in the last 24h
22 posts in the last week
136 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45032
Welcome our newest member, lanawatt
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM