Login

russian armor

USF and MP bleed

PAGES (9)down
2 Sep 2021, 02:40 AM
#61
avatar of y3ivan

Posts: 156

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Sep 2021, 02:27 AMVaz
It's not more men that's needed, it's more effective fighters. Throwing more bodies at elite stock AI doesn't really help.


historically, this fits to 1944/5 USF strategy.

having extra 1 men in the squad gives 20% staying power in the frontlines. and MP reduction will help with the trade off. This is not inclusive of nerfs to certain overperforming OKW units.

secondly I believe USF infantry early game vs Axis is at a good spot. This is the last thing that needs changing
Vaz
2 Sep 2021, 03:13 AM
#62
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1145

the bleed is only about the late game. At this stage anyone with access to elite infantry usually has a few squads. So what you are saying is true, it just doesn't help at that point. Nerfs would do more, but then we have a problem with elite infantry not fulfilling their role and then is it just some discriminitory okw nerf or axis nerf? Fighting shocks, commandos, gaurds, and paras are no picnic either. I think this is why coh1 had upkeep upgrades for USA. They knew usa was going to lose the efficiency war in that game. knights cross could get to unkillable level just like obers, the best you could do is make them retreat if you can't 1 shot them with arty or a vehicle. Even then you need to outnumber the squad 2 or 3 to 1 and you will STILL take severe losses. So the upkeep change helps, I don't know how well 6 man rifle squads are going to sit with the community and then there is the issue of getting pop capped, which happens to me a lot. The pop cap is why efficiency matters, you need to be effective with your 100 cap.
2 Sep 2021, 03:35 AM
#63
avatar of rumartinez89

Posts: 579

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Sep 2021, 03:13 AMVaz
the bleed is only about the late game. At this stage anyone with access to elite infantry usually has a few squads. So what you are saying is true, it just doesn't help at that point. Nerfs would do more, but then we have a problem with elite infantry not fulfilling their role and then is it just some discriminitory okw nerf or axis nerf? Fighting shocks, commandos, gaurds, and paras are no picnic either. I think this is why coh1 had upkeep upgrades for USA. They knew usa was going to lose the efficiency war in that game. knights cross could get to unkillable level just like obers, the best you could do is make them retreat if you can't 1 shot them with arty or a vehicle. Even then you need to outnumber the squad 2 or 3 to 1 and you will STILL take severe losses. So the upkeep change helps, I don't know how well 6 man rifle squads are going to sit with the community and then there is the issue of getting pop capped, which happens to me a lot. The pop cap is why efficiency matters, you need to be effective with your 100 cap.


Instead of 6th man what do you think about a Rec Acc reduction of 5-10% for all infantry. That way they become more efficient and doesn't promote only Rifle builds.
Vaz
2 Sep 2021, 05:00 AM
#64
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1145

That would reduce the problem in the late game more.
2 Sep 2021, 06:19 AM
#65
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3474 | Subs: 1

Hey guys, don't you see the relation between the scott nerf lasf patch and the current issue? Scott is the tool to control late game elite infantry, the tool is broken and elite infantry can roam freely vs USF. Balance team is responsible, they know it and like it so don't expect them to do something about it.
2 Sep 2021, 13:38 PM
#66
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Sep 2021, 01:44 AMy3ivan
why not add squads size upgrade at T3 (major)? cost 100MP and 15 FU

riflemen 5men -> 6men, Reinforce cost 27MP -> 25MP
Rear echelon 4men -> 5men, Reinforce cost 23MP -> 20MP
HMG 4men -> 5men, Reinforce cost 22MP -> 18MP
57mm AT gun 4men -> 5men, Reinforce cost 22MP -> 18MP



That's the more OP shit I've ever heard of lol. And we're living in an era of Sturmtiger.
2 Sep 2021, 23:26 PM
#67
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1191 | Subs: 1

Without access to stock lategame anti-elite infantry/ anti-blob, USF rifles just die. Its somewhat alright if you keep your vet 3 squads alive, but if you lose a single one and have to rebuild it, you lose. USF lategame AT is mostly fine with the Jackson, but something needs to be done about lategame AI now that the Scott got nerfed. Shermans are nice, but unviable against lategame OKW especially.

I personally don't think a "logistics" upgrade that makes rifles a bit more cost efficient lategame would be a terrible idea. Maybe lock it behind all the other USF techs (IE all 3 officers + the two side techs.)
3 Sep 2021, 05:45 AM
#68
avatar of y3ivan

Posts: 156

if looking at pop cap efficiency USF is at good spot at pop cap, riflemen 7 pop which is a big plus compare to penals at 8pop. I dont even know when was it changed.

Soviets comparatively, conscripts at 7pop, penals at 8pop and T34/85 at 14pop. Soviets are not even that good either. However thats another topic to discussed.
3 Sep 2021, 22:57 PM
#69
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



That's the more OP shit I've ever heard of lol. And we're living in an era of Sturmtiger.


i believe this is codguy's alt and itll take a lot to convince me otherwise.
this whole thread isa joke from wanting extra models on one of the best infantry squads in the game, to complaining that elite AI infantry will beat said infantry, to the claim that a single okw player can fight off 2 entire armies by themselves....

if you told me these people have never played the game i would find it tough to argue....
3 Sep 2021, 23:01 PM
#70
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Without access to stock lategame anti-elite infantry/ anti-blob, USF rifles just die. Its somewhat alright if you keep your vet 3 squads alive, but if you lose a single one and have to rebuild it, you lose. USF lategame AT is mostly fine with the Jackson, but something needs to be done about lategame AI now that the Scott got nerfed. Shermans are nice, but unviable against lategame OKW especially.

I personally don't think a "logistics" upgrade that makes rifles a bit more cost efficient lategame would be a terrible idea. Maybe lock it behind all the other USF techs (IE all 3 officers + the two side techs.)


if only there was some way to increase rifles DPS output substantially. it would have to concentrate DPS on a single model to make the lower target size of unvetted units matter less, and maybe fire on the move to keep with the USF theme? maybe even allow squads to carry 2 of them? i doubt relic would ever go for such a crazy strong bonus like allowing any squad in the faction, including free ones get 2 AI weapons that fire on the move, increase DPS at all ranges and concentrate DPS on models but id be willing to start a petition if i knew people would sign it.
Vaz
3 Sep 2021, 23:52 PM
#71
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1145

You think bars are the answer? LMAO. How many bars needed to stop a vet3-5 ober/fall? Falls practicly kill the squad in 1 volley of fire. If I had time for some cheat mod, I'd do it here. How many vet3 2x bar rifles do you need? I'm guessing obers need at least 3 if not more once they can apply suppression.

How many bars do you think you can get without map control?
4 Sep 2021, 00:58 AM
#72
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Sep 2021, 23:52 PMVaz
You think bars are the answer? LMAO. How many bars needed to stop a vet3-5 ober/fall? Falls practicly kill the squad in 1 volley of fire. If I had time for some cheat mod, I'd do it here. How many vet3 2x bar rifles do you need? I'm guessing obers need at least 3 if not more once they can apply suppression.

How many bars do you think you can get without map control?


you use armour, indirect and focus fire against fully vetted AI specialists. you should be doing this long before you feed these units to max vet.

the cure for your problem isnt breaking the game so that it works for you but instead to stop being bad and blaming the game.

under no circumstance should a 280mp unit, even with 120mu be anywhere comparable to one 50% more expensive. no amount of "balance" will make that a possibility, nor should it.

BAR rifles will beat anything BUT axis dedicated AI squads. thats LITERALLY the point of the dedicated AI squads.

again, stop being bad and figure out how the game works instead of expecting one unit to counter its own hard-counters.
4 Sep 2021, 01:36 AM
#73
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1191 | Subs: 1



if only there was some way to increase rifles DPS output substantially. it would have to concentrate DPS on a single model to make the lower target size of unvetted units matter less, and maybe fire on the move to keep with the USF theme? maybe even allow squads to carry 2 of them? i doubt relic would ever go for such a crazy strong bonus like allowing any squad in the faction, including free ones get 2 AI weapons that fire on the move, increase DPS at all ranges and concentrate DPS on models but id be willing to start a petition if i knew people would sign it.


It would be a nice idea, if USF lategame AI didn't keep getting nerfed when it is working right. I just watched a match with VonIvan and Sib, and they just struggled against lategame OKW. BAR rifles with vet 3 are fine in lategame, but as soon as you start losing them, it is GG if you don't have something doctrinal to save your ass, because USF stock lategame anti-infantry is either bad or very fragile.

As is, you basically go for calliopes or suffer. I would love a game where I didn't need to rely on rifles. I have advocated for other changes to US units to help them in this area. But if nothing else is done, then rifles do need something to help with the lategame bleed.

The same issue was occuring to grenadiers despite Wehr having the tools needed to deal with infantry lategame, so they received a similar buff to help them scale and not bleed out the user. Or do you think that was unnecessary as well?
4 Sep 2021, 03:38 AM
#74
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



It would be a nice idea, if USF lategame AI didn't keep getting nerfed when it is working right. I just watched a match with VonIvan and Sib, and they just struggled against lategame OKW. BAR rifles with vet 3 are fine in lategame, but as soon as you start losing them, it is GG if you don't have something doctrinal to save your ass, because USF stock lategame anti-infantry is either bad or very fragile.

losing your vetted units is SUPPOSED to hurt, thats why they put the fancy stars on them. this is the case for each and every single faction in the entire game. it, belive it or not is a game mechanic, and one core to the design of the game at that. rifles are lucky they can slap 120mu on a fresh squad and still kill things through volume of fire

As is, you basically go for calliopes or suffer. I would love a game where I didn't need to rely on rifles. I have advocated for other changes to US units to help them in this area. But if nothing else is done, then rifles do need something to help with the lategame bleed.

you should try one of the other 4 factions then if you dont want to rely on rifles. usf was designed SPECIFICALLY to rely on rifles.


The same issue was occuring to grenadiers despite Wehr having the tools needed to deal with infantry lategame, so they received a similar buff to help them scale and not bleed out the user. Or do you think that was unnecessary as well?

out of curiosity, are these grens you speak of capable of double arming BARs? are these grens not also 25% smaller in squad size resulting in a much more wipeable squad? do these grens beniit from a mobile retreat point and AOE heals? are these grens not have to be static and thus more vulnerable in order to make use of their weapon upgrade?

its comparisons like this that really make it appear you dont understand the game or game design.
you cannot simply cherry pick things like grens getting a late game survivability buff and ignore that they are the squishiest mainline in the game
4 Sep 2021, 05:45 AM
#75
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1191 | Subs: 1



Lol, it seems I have touched a nerve. I'm not even going to bother responding to the ad hominum attacks about not having played the game. The reason I brought up losing rifles is because other armies don't get hurt nearly as much by having a unit wiped lategame as USF with its rifles. I feel like you kinda agreed with said point by talking about how much US is reliant on rifles. I have no issue with rifles being an important core of the faction.

The point is USF struggles with MP bleed lategame, and this was a suggested fix. If you have another fix, please go ahead and state so, otherwise just say you don't think any changes are necessary. In my opinion at least, the reason USF got upkeep reduction upgrades in COH1 are specifically to fix this issue with an army reliant on a single unit type in lategame, and that such a help may be necessary in COH2.
Vaz
4 Sep 2021, 11:10 AM
#76
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1145

That's all he's got is ad hominum. He completely twisted around my words to make it seem like I'm looking for rifles to get buffed to ober level, which isn't even close to my point.
4 Sep 2021, 15:51 PM
#77
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1



Lol, it seems I have touched a nerve. I'm not even going to bother responding to the ad hominum attacks about not having played the game. The reason I brought up losing rifles is because other armies don't get hurt nearly as much by having a unit wiped lategame as USF with its rifles. I feel like you kinda agreed with said point by talking about how much US is reliant on rifles. I have no issue with rifles being an important core of the faction.

The point is USF struggles with MP bleed lategame, and this was a suggested fix. If you have another fix, please go ahead and state so, otherwise just say you don't think any changes are necessary. In my opinion at least, the reason USF got upkeep reduction upgrades in COH1 are specifically to fix this issue with an army reliant on a single unit type in lategame, and that such a help may be necessary in COH2.



This is quite wrong though.

In the late game Vet 0 Volks are trash, Vet 0 Cons are trash, Vet 0 IS are trash, Vet 0 Grens are also trash. It's a concept that applies to every faction - veterancy matters. A reinforce cost reduction tech is reasonable but additional men is too insane. Even for 6-man Cons adding 1 extra man with no weapon slots is already a huge impact. And 5-man Grens were so OP a couple of patches ago.
4 Sep 2021, 17:06 PM
#78
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 471

I don't think USF needs any more buff to the rifle. 2 bar rifle is already doing very good job. If elite inf. is required, we have airborne. (Ranger for sure needs some love. CP3 unit with only 1 skill - grenade - without dmg modifier...)

Any buff to riflemen will likely to ruin the game balance.

The problem is that USF (and UKF) doesn't have effective anti-blob weapon. Yes USF got sherman, but it is not that effective in big game mode thx to narrowed and AT centralized battle field. m8a1 scott used to do the job but as we all know it got nerfed to the ground...
4 Sep 2021, 20:50 PM
#79
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1191 | Subs: 1




This is quite wrong though.

In the late game Vet 0 Volks are trash, Vet 0 Cons are trash, Vet 0 IS are trash, Vet 0 Grens are also trash. It's a concept that applies to every faction - veterancy matters. A reinforce cost reduction tech is reasonable but additional men is too insane. Even for 6-man Cons adding 1 extra man with no weapon slots is already a huge impact. And 5-man Grens were so OP a couple of patches ago.


I understand that losing vetted squads lategame sucks, but what I am trying to convey is that no faction is as completely crippled by it as USF lategame. Losing a volks squad lategame is room for either another elite squad or something else, since the bulk of OKW lategame is carried by supporting units. UKF and Ostheer work similarly, while Soviets can far more easily replace loses thanks to the way the 7-man upgrade works. None of these factions relies as heavily on its mainlines as USF (and that is by design).

But I agree that no extra models should be added. I only think a reinforcement cost decrease is needed, or conversely maybe a logistics upgrade that reduces manpower upkeep (though not as much as was given in COH1).
4 Sep 2021, 21:44 PM
#80
avatar of Geblobt

Posts: 211

Rifle reinforcement is ok. I think bars should cost 50 Muni and the tech cost should go from 150 to 100 mp.
PAGES (9)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Diversity Cup

Livestreams

Germany 204
United States 6
Korea, Republic Of 3

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

248 users are online: 2 members and 246 guests
capiqua, DooMaSS
20 posts in the last 24h
122 posts in the last week
621 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36213
Welcome our newest member, Holzmj03
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM