Login

russian armor

Bofors are OP

21 Jul 2022, 22:32 PM
#61
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 703 | Subs: 1



Bofors is trash because it's an expensive static shitpile in a game that emphasizes moves and flexible tactics. Same goes for bunkers, command hqs and other shit.


yeah except bunkers are far faster to set up, smaller, considerably cheaper, easier to get, can be gotten earlier than a bofors


you normally get 1 bofors, but you can shit out bunkers whenever you got the manpower and munitions to spam them, for the cost of absolutely no pop cap you can plug in your flank
21 Jul 2022, 23:53 PM
#62
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1460

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2022, 22:32 PMKatukov


yeah except bunkers are far faster to set up, smaller, considerably cheaper, easier to get, can be gotten earlier than a bofors


you normally get 1 bofors, but you can shit out bunkers whenever you got the manpower and munitions to spam them, for the cost of absolutely no pop cap you can plug in your flank


Yeah. People seem to forget that, unlike USF, OST is quite manpower and munitions easy. You will usually be floating enough MP and munis for a bunker spam. Especially the munis. Don't know how anyone in their right mind can claim that Bofors is anything but a static waste of resources.
Soviets can spam bunkers as of the last major update, albeit only with the commander (and a shitty one at that). OKW has the flak truck.
22 Jul 2022, 01:03 AM
#63
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 703 | Subs: 1



Yeah. People seem to forget that, unlike USF, OST is quite manpower and munitions easy. You will usually be floating enough MP and munis for a bunker spam. Especially the munis. Don't know how anyone in their right mind can claim that Bofors is anything but a static waste of resources.
Soviets can spam bunkers as of the last major update, albeit only with the commander (and a shitty one at that). OKW has the flak truck.


If only the bofors had actual health to survive a siege rather than to become an instant liability for any person who makes 2 mortars or 2 leigs
23 Jul 2022, 07:41 AM
#64
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 637

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jul 2022, 01:03 AMKatukov


If only the bofors had actual health to survive a siege rather than to become an instant liability for any person who makes 2 mortars or 2 leigs



Problem with Bofors in my opinion (and the mortar pit) is that they are extremely huge for no reason at all.
The OKW Flak AA (the Bofors for OKW) has proper proportions while the Bofors is enlarged making it the size of some tanks. If it wasn't so big it would be in a much better spot than it is now.
23 Jul 2022, 10:33 AM
#65
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 166




Problem with Bofors in my opinion (and the mortar pit) is that they are extremely huge for no reason at all.
The OKW Flak AA (the Bofors for OKW) has proper proportions while the Bofors is enlarged making it the size of some tanks. If it wasn't so big it would be in a much better spot than it is now.


Same thing with the 222 being taller than medium tanks, looks cartoony and is baffling to me
28 Jul 2022, 09:44 AM
#66
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2022, 22:32 PMKatukov


yeah except bunkers are far faster to set up, smaller, considerably cheaper, easier to get, can be gotten earlier than a bofors


you normally get 1 bofors, but you can shit out bunkers whenever you got the manpower and munitions to spam them, for the cost of absolutely no pop cap you can plug in your flank


Bunkers get killed with 3 atg shots and cost 60muni to upgrade (reminder: lmg42 costs 60muni, mines cost 60muni all of which are 5000 times more useful than a static bunker).

28 Jul 2022, 09:58 AM
#67
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1460



Bunkers get killed with 3 atg shots and cost 60muni to upgrade (reminder: lmg42 costs 60muni, mines cost 60muni all of which are 5000 times more useful than a static bunker).



Only on 1v1 maps can you actually bring out an AT and not risk losing it. Good luck bringing out the AT far enough on a map like Hill400 to take out a bunker guarding the VP. Bunkers can be a Godsend if placed properly, especially since OST is a very defensive faction with great team weapons, guarding the said bunkers.
28 Jul 2022, 10:01 AM
#68
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097



Only on 1v1 maps can you actually bring out an AT and not risk losing it. Good luck bringing out the AT far enough on a map like Hill400 to take out a bunker guarding the VP. Bunkers can be a Godsend if placed properly, especially since OST is a very defensive faction with great team weapons, guarding the said bunkers.


I never disagreed with the sentiment that bunkers are useful.

I only said that they are more expensive than they seem. 60muni can be better spent elsewhere.
28 Jul 2022, 14:25 PM
#69
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 703 | Subs: 1



Bunkers get killed with 3 atg shots and cost 60muni to upgrade (reminder: lmg42 costs 60muni, mines cost 60muni all of which are 5000 times more useful than a static bunker).



150mp and 60 muni without any tech restrictions or a sidetech unlock that costs way more manpower and fuel instead of muni and dies to 5/6 AT shots instead of 3


ukf buildings are in that place where they are simply ignored in 1v1s or they are made in team games and then bombed to hell by leig/wehr mortar spam abusers, or by W. Stuka/LEFH or brummbar rushers
28 Jul 2022, 15:32 PM
#70
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2022, 14:25 PMKatukov


150mp and 60 muni without any tech restrictions or a sidetech unlock that costs way more manpower and fuel instead of muni and dies to 5/6 AT shots instead of 3


ukf buildings are in that place where they are simply ignored in 1v1s or they are made in team games and then bombed to hell by leig/wehr mortar spam abusers, or by W. Stuka/LEFH or brummbar rushers


I left for 14 days yet you did not practice reading comprehension enough.

For the last time: I never said bunkers are downright useless.

What I said was that the 60muni requirement for MG42 could be better spent elsewhere.
28 Jul 2022, 15:48 PM
#71
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 703 | Subs: 1



I left for 14 days yet you did not practice reading comprehension enough.

For the last time: I never said bunkers are downright useless.

What I said was that the 60muni requirement for MG42 could be better spent elsewhere.


im saying they're piss cheap compared to the bofors and are spammable

you arent playing USF, you can afford to pay a relatively low price to seal off a flank or slow down the enemy, or get a reinforce + healing station up and running
28 Jul 2022, 19:12 PM
#72
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2022, 15:48 PMKatukov


im saying they're piss cheap compared to the bofors and are spammable

you arent playing USF, you can afford to pay a relatively low price to seal off a flank or slow down the enemy, or get a reinforce + healing station up and running


Don't usf have defense hills (forgot their name) that cost 125mp, 60muni to add .50 cal and if you put rear echelon you get free nades)?
28 Jul 2022, 19:28 PM
#73
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1460



Don't usf have defense hills (forgot their name) that cost 125mp, 60muni to add .50 cal and if you put rear echelon you get free nades)?


Defensive positions. Yes. They do have them. However, USF, being munitions starved due to 120 MP N times for AI that is still weaker against the LMG unless you somehow manage to charge in, taking 0 dmg; And an offensive faction at that, they are quite useless. The only real usage is using them on extra lane-y maps. However, with the flame nades from Volks, and a plethora of indirects. It will be a MP/muni sink in the end. When I started playing COH2, I'd use them more regularly. Mainly because in COH1 the bunkers were quite useful, so it kinda stuck. Little did I know that COH2 USF is the most micro heavy faction and building static encampments is a waste. Same goes for UKF, but their whole playstyle is wrapped around the static emplacements. Since they are static and cost a lot, they need to be OP, but if they are OP, then 90% of playerbase will be angry because it's extremely hard to counter things that do not move an inch. God knows how angry axis players would be at elves from WC3 with their walking buildings.

I've seen some plays involving the defensive position and nades... but it's mostly memes. Average damage per minute is probably less than 80.
After building them for 30 minutes, and using them constantly. That 45th constructed position with RE in them, will launch some random nade that will kill a full HP squad and you'll have a "Worth it" moment.
28 Jul 2022, 20:05 PM
#74
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097



After building them for 30 minutes, and using them constantly. That 45th constructed position with RE in them, will launch some random nade that will kill a full HP squad and you'll have a "Worth it" moment.


Haha true that's exactly what happened one time with me when I used smoke plus defensive position's free nades to dismount an MG42 garrison back in 2020 and since then I have a soft spot for them.
29 Jul 2022, 10:52 AM
#75
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 471



Don't usf have defense hills (forgot their name) that cost 125mp, 60muni to add .50 cal and if you put rear echelon you get free nades)?


Defensive position is BS it gets penetrated from the rifles for a 25mp difference.
29 Jul 2022, 14:43 PM
#76
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 703 | Subs: 1



Don't usf have defense hills (forgot their name) that cost 125mp, 60muni to add .50 cal and if you put rear echelon you get free nades)?


yeah but USF isn't an actual faction

While REs are absolutely trash units on their own, you can upgrade a squad with a rifle grenade, put them in a bunker, and have TWO rifle grenades firing at once. its situational but its funny regardless
29 Jul 2022, 14:49 PM
#77
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097



Defensive position is BS it gets penetrated from the rifles for a 25mp difference.


lmao i wish bro
3 Aug 2022, 15:05 PM
#78
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 471



lmao i wish bro


Wonder what you are laughing at.

The fighting position has 20 armor while the bunker has 35 armor.

Any small arms(penetration of 1) have 5% chance of penetrating FP.

You might want to say that means the bunker also has a 2.85% chance of being penetrated by small arms, but the CoH2 pen system ignores values less than 3%. So there is ZERO chance of small arms penetrating the bunker.



3 Aug 2022, 17:08 PM
#79
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1097



Wonder what you are laughing at.

The fighting position has 20 armor while the bunker has 35 armor.

Any small arms(penetration of 1) have 5% chance of penetrating FP.

You might want to say that means the bunker also has a 2.85% chance of being penetrated by small arms, but the CoH2 pen system ignores values less than 3%. So there is ZERO chance of small arms penetrating the bunker.





I don't doubt your statistics mate it's just that everytime I attack a FP it has an MG so you get suppressed so the chances of actually hitting it are nil.
4 Aug 2022, 12:01 PM
#80
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 471



I don't doubt your statistics mate it's just that everytime I attack a FP it has an MG so you get suppressed so the chances of actually hitting it are nil.


If you can't flank a stationary building, your chance of winning is also a NIL.
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
  • Oberkommando West flag Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

84 users are online: 1 member and 83 guests
sopamanxx
40 posts in the last 24h
265 posts in the last week
729 posts in the last month
Registered members: 34986
Welcome our newest member, muchab97
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM