Thread: ISU-15227 Apr 2014, 22:51 PM
All that whining aside, are you guys really trying to argue that Germans don't have anything to deal with ISU-152? Really?
Why are you obsessed with 1 shoot wipes? This unit was 2 shooting squads from the very beginning. Tiger can 2-3 shoot Conscripts now as well you know? With recent patch EVERY tank is lethal to infantry so it is to expect for a super heavy unit to do just that because IT IS NOT INFANTRY you should fight ISU-152 with. You need to use your tanks and don't you even dare to say that poor Germans don't have right tank for the job because that would be just silly.
Now as far as the game goes if you don't have respective tank force when ISU arrives I dare to say that you've lost this game long before this happens.
I have said since very beginning that ISU152's squad wipe abilities need toning down.
Also, there's a world of difference between 1shot and 2-3shotting. One offers the defending player no opportunity to react, the other does. That's not even counting the range disparity - conscripts being attacked by a tiger will know that the tiger is there. ISU152 can quite easily pop squads you thought were safe or otherwise aren't "engaged" at the moment and thus aren't taking a lot of your attention. The only warning you get is the announcer telling you that they died for the fatherland. |
Thread: ISU-15227 Apr 2014, 19:31 PM
I'm not sure how anyone can defend the ISU152 in its current state. Anything that is capable of 1shot killing squads at any regular percentage is just bad design in this franchise, regardless of anything else about it. If you want to get hyperbolic about it, consider if I had a unit at 16CP that cost 1000mp but every time it fired it killed 3-4 units. Sure it's expensive and comes late, but it's bad design on all fronts.
If there are other issues such as Elefant being too hard to counter, which I can somewhat agree with as just being another badly designed unit, then address those issues at the same time. No sane player wants to nerf and/or buff a single faction.
As an aside, anyone that refers to a faction as "we" or "you" immediately gets added to the ignore list. Play both factions or don't comment on balance. |
I have yet to make it worthwhile, especially considering its cost. I don't want it buffed so that we have another skillplane destroying all soviet armor in sight, but it could use a rethinking. Lower cost and lower damage combined with more effects like tank stun, crew blind, etc. or something.
And yeah, its target tracking is embarrassingly bad. It can hit stationary targets but that's about it. |
Check the DPS charts, Pgrens still have the second highest close range damage output in game. But again, they are most powerful at mid range as this is the range where their advantage is greatest relative to other weapons.
Thanks for the response.
I did not intend for this to be an Ostheer vs Soviet discussion, rather just focus on PGs in particular. Right now for their price point they seem a bit squishy. Their initial cost and reinforce cost tends to make me prefer regular grenadiers who are solid at all ranges and can be further specialized into long range (LMG) or medium/close range (G43). The 1.2 armor PGrens had before this patch felt right to me because it made them just a hair more resilient which matched their higher cost, imo. Their risk/reward ratio seems out of balance, but only slightly.
|
I am curious to see what others think of pgrens after the last patch. I have played about 10 or 15 games since patch and am struggling to find a use for them. In ideal conditions - medium/short range at cover where the opponent just sits there - they are okay, but I always feel like I would take a G43 gren over them even in that case.
Shreks as soft counter to tanks still seems viable, but vanilla pgrens feel a bit too squishy for their cost. Even when they get up close they don't feel that impressive compared to other infantry and they seem incapable of charging except in rare cases where you have ample cover to zig zag through. That relegates them to just playing defense and deterring charges.
The combination of increased small arms lethality and tank AI general increases have me rotating these guys out of any build orders where I'm not desperate for AT and floating munis, but I'd be interested to see if others are having any success with them.
This is in 1v1 primarily. If it makes any difference top 100. |
yeah, i thought about DLCs too, anyway coh2 is 10 euro in web, and the problem with it , the game isnot worth 10 euro, max 5-6 euro.
lol wow |
Not to be "that guy" but after the shafting the preorders / collectors edition for this game got, I wouldn't bother pre-ordering anything just on principle. |
Very interesting changes, will have to see how they play out. Exciting!
I wonder if something got left out for the ISU152. It seems to be just be a straight buff across the board in every respect. Better AT, better survivability, cheaper, still retains huge squad wipe ability.
StuG and SU76 changes are a bit perplexing. These two units were already pretty bad and changes on paper seem to make them worse, but will have to see how they synergize with all the other changes.
Blitz change looks to be very good.
Howitzer change pretty surprising too, I guess this is primarily aimed at the 3v3 4v4 crowd because they're completely useless in 1v1 and 2v2 unless you're just trolling. |
I still have too much PTSD from uber skilled players using cons spam with PPSH + HTD when its defensive bonuses stacked with cover and become almost literally invincible to small arms fire. Oorah into the cap circle, HTD, come at me bruh.
As it is right now it's still pretty decent if you know what you're doing. Considering it costs nothing to use it's fine being situational. Being able to crawl with it would probably be all it needs to be perfect. |
Making them cheaper doesn't help them scale at all anyway. If cons cost 200mp they would have a few seconds of advantage over grens coming out earlier, but long term that equates to approximately 2 free reinforces and then we're right back to where we are today.
|