Login

russian armor

nerf the fking pathfinder and Howitzer

PAGES (8)down
21 Oct 2022, 15:36 PM
#41
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2022, 21:37 PMLooney


Speaking from 2s experience only. I feel like the MG42 pio opening vs the USF rifleman opening is actually pretty viable.

The USF player is outnumbered until the officer arrives. Getting a single rifle squad suppressed until that time means you almost lose 1 third of your attacking power. Which kinda makes it hard to win that crucial first engagement to hold down the fuel + cutoff.

Imo another reason why people prefer going paths.


I would argue that your take is true.

USF in general rely very much on early game aggression/pressure to counteract their obvious lack of basic battlefield tools.

On those cases a decent OST player would defend their point well due to MG42. I never argued that.

I argued as to why it's important that pios get vision bonus.
21 Oct 2022, 16:21 PM
#42
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289



I was never "away". Just started teaching on my university and have to keep up with lectures.

Noone argues the machinengewehr42 is the best mg in game. However it's static and early game is prone to flanking. That's why pios have vision. Devs said so themselves (won't bother bringin up patch notes, let vipper handle that).


No one argues because its obvious. And axis mains wont listen anyway.

For its timing its beats all other mg's by miles in terms off stopping power. Its closer the .50 and duska then it is to a maxim or vickers. That you wont acknolidge that is telling. Just because it can be flanked (like all others mg's) doesnt make it weak or as good or bad as other mg's.

The mg42 got moved to t0 because early game ost suffered againt usf. That change was a good one. The pio vision bonus from the first second of the game is over the top.
21 Oct 2022, 16:42 PM
#43
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

The Ostheer/USF win ratio in 1vs1 for the last patch is 49/51 and 47/53 for top 200, that is an indication that Ostheer do not need a nerf vs USF.
21 Oct 2022, 16:59 PM
#44
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 786 | Subs: 1



>realize dragging and setting up takes """time"""
>realize you are too late
>mg42 goes down


god has given you a wide firing arc, relatively instant suppression and your """long""" setup time is shared by every single machine gun that costs 260 manpower. and neither of the competition has a 42 sight range engineer squad

you can be outplayed and thus lose the engagement with an mg-42, but that doesnt mean that the mg-42 isn't really fucking good, it means that you fucked up while playing
21 Oct 2022, 17:10 PM
#45
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2022, 16:42 PMVipper
The Ostheer/USF win ratio in 1vs1 for the last patch is 49/51 and 47/53 for top 200, that is an indication that Ostheer do not need a nerf vs USF.


That has more to do with pathf and pack howi/scott then anything else imo.
Without paths those numbers will change quite bit i think.

Putting the 42 vision range behind a bp is the right choice imo. If we ever get a patch ofcourse.
21 Oct 2022, 17:55 PM
#46
avatar of Willy Pete

Posts: 324

Pios vision is fine imo

G43 fussies vision on the other hand.... But that is for another topic

Mg42 would be borderline OP with or without 42 vision on pios. Mg42 is mostly to blame for path spam, at least in my experience. US needs to hevaily outmicro/outwork Ostheer if they dont choose paths
21 Oct 2022, 20:26 PM
#47
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



That has more to do with pathf and pack howi/scott then anything else imo.
Without paths those numbers will change quite bit i think.

That is a very big assumption on your side and if true a big reason to change pathfinder since their performance is hiding other issues.


Putting the 42 vision range behind a bp is the right choice imo. If we ever get a patch ofcourse.

not really relevant to to Pathfinders.
21 Oct 2022, 20:48 PM
#48
avatar of Looney
Patrion 14

Posts: 444



I would argue that your take is true.

USF in general rely very much on early game aggression/pressure to counteract their obvious lack of basic battlefield tools.

On those cases a decent OST player would defend their point well due to MG42. I never argued that.

I argued as to why it's important that pios get vision bonus.


Right I was kinda responding off topic, only replying to the hmg + pio being "the most passive and weak starting" bit.

Agreed, the pio vision is needed for Ost imo. If you lose the 222 and you don't have spotting scopes you're kinda screwed.

It would be nice if pathfinders were changed a bit, maybe to a supportive role. Give them a smoke offmap, sprint ability and remove the scoped rifles. Buff rifles a bit far range and make the officer unlock 200mp again instead of 250. So you at least have the same army value in the early game.

22 Oct 2022, 07:53 AM
#49
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2022, 20:26 PMVipper

That is a very big assumption on your side and if true a big reason to change pathfinder since their performance is hiding other issues.


not really relevant to to Pathfinders.


Rifles not being cost effective has been said for quite a while. That people will use better options is only logical. That also leads to threads like this.

Rifles are often not replaced when lost because how much they cost/drain your recourses and they face stock and probably vetted axis elites by that time. That and rear echelons being almost impotent is the underlying issue.

Back to pio,s vision. If your mg 42 gets flanked in the first minute or 2 its not a weakness that needs to be covered by bonus sight from the first second. The mg 42 supresses near instantly most of the time. So if the bonus vision kicks in later its more balanced when there is more going on and to micro.
22 Oct 2022, 09:19 AM
#50
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



Rifles not being cost effective has been said for quite a while. That people will use better options is only logical. That also leads to threads like this.

And just because it has been "said" by some people it does not mean it true but not really the topic of this thread.


Rifles are often not replaced when lost because how much they cost/drain your recourses and they face stock and probably vetted axis elites by that time. That and rear echelons being almost impotent is the underlying issue.

Or that is simply an indication of how good USF elite infatry are


Back to pio,s vision. If your mg 42 gets flanked in the first minute or 2 its not a weakness that needs to be covered by bonus sight from the first second. The mg 42 supresses near instantly most of the time. So if the bonus vision kicks in later its more balanced when there is more going on and to micro.

If you want to talk about Pioneer sight I suggest you start a thread about it since this one is about Pathfinders and howitzers.
22 Oct 2022, 13:08 PM
#51
avatar of Willy Pete

Posts: 324

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 09:19 AMVipper

And just because it has been "said" by some people it does not mean it true but not really the topic of this thread.

Rifles are definitely relevant to paths spam. That like saying volks arent relevant if someone made a thread about fussies

Even tho paths aren't meant as a mainline like fussies, ppl are certainly using them that way. Thats the key to playing airborne, build as few rifles as possible

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 09:19 AMVipper

Or that is simply an indication of how good USF elite infatry are

Both can be true. That's not a contradictory statement to "rifles aren't cost effective"
22 Oct 2022, 14:17 PM
#52
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


Rifles are definitely relevant to paths spam. That like saying volks arent relevant if someone made a thread about fussies

Even tho paths aren't meant as a mainline like fussies, ppl are certainly using them that way. Thats the key to playing airborne, build as few rifles as possible

Of coarse the cost efficiency of Riflemen and of Pathfinder is relevant as to what one will choose to build.

If Pathfinder are more cost efficient than Riflemen does not necessarily mean that Riflemen are an UP unit as some people seem to claim.


Both can be true. That's not a contradictory statement to "rifles aren't cost effective"

And again its not proof that Riflemen are an UP.

There is little to support the claim that USF as a faction is weak vs Ostheer or to support that riflemen are UP.

In any case Pathfinders should be fixed.
22 Oct 2022, 15:05 PM
#53
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 09:19 AMVipper

And just because it has been "said" by some people it does not mean it true but not really the topic of this thread.

that doesnt mean its wrong. That more then some players avoid rifles after they got wiped is an good indication. The overuse of pathf ties into rifles. You cant just state in a vacuum x unit is UP or OP.

Or that is simply an indication of how good USF elite infatry are

yes that is true. Just other factions use/replace their mains more then just their stock or doctrinal elite.

If you want to talk about Pioneer sight I suggest you start a thread about it since this one is about Pathfinders and howitzers.

its sometimes neccesary to bring other units in to establish the claims or disprove them, you off all people should understand this

22 Oct 2022, 16:12 PM
#54
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


And this is what some other people have to say about riflemen:

Rifles only have a poor matchup vs okw. If you know how to use your ranges you will demolish grens, their only counter is camo essentially.


Bringing another unit in debate is one thing, ranting about how OP pioneers and suggesting nerfs them for several post in thread about Pathfinder is another.


Pathfinder still need fixing despite riflemen/pios/HMG-42 and Liz Truss.
22 Oct 2022, 18:19 PM
#55
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 16:12 PMVipper

And this is what some other people have to say about riflemen:



Bringing another unit in debate is one thing, ranting about how OP pioneers and suggesting nerfs them for several post in thread about Pathfinder is another.


Pathfinder still need fixing despite riflemen/pios/HMG-42 and Liz Truss.


Panthfinder need adressing yes indeed. But so do lots of other things including rifles. You just want paths nerfed and be done with it. Thats where the issue stops for you.

I bring in units or things related to the isseu. The issue with paths is mostly their vision from stealth wich increases the power of scotts and pack howies greatly. And they dont bleed you dry.
The issue imo with rifles i stated earlier.

I brought up pio's sight because to a less extreme fashion it does a simaler thing yet its fine and stock. I never said pio's are op. They give an already very strong mg an edge to early. I dont find it an issue later in the game.

I cant help it that you get so annoyed that as soon as some one says axis units need fixing too. You always jump in to try and disprove and state all is fine or up and do a 180° when it concerns allied units, then almost everthing about them is fine or op.

22 Oct 2022, 18:59 PM
#56
avatar of Willy Pete

Posts: 324

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 14:17 PMVipper

Of coarse the cost efficiency of Riflemen and of Pathfinder is relevant as to what one will choose to build.

If Pathfinder are more cost efficient than Riflemen does not necessarily mean that Riflemen are an UP unit as some people seem to claim.

Pretty sure its just being used as a supporting point. It doesnt automatically mean rifles are UP but it partially supports it. Airborne is by far the most popular, and its no coincidence that airborne builds involve leaving out riflemen as much as possible

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 14:17 PMVipper

And again its not proof that Riflemen are an UP.

There is little to support the claim that USF as a faction is weak vs Ostheer or to support that riflemen are UP.

In any case Pathfinders should be fixed.

Whats the proof that paths are OP? I agree that they are, but thats my opinion. Curious about what ur standards are for that proof. Cuz u have total certainty that paths need to be fixed, and yet rifles are cleraly fine to u even tho ppl avoid using them as much as possible

I think rifles are amazing early game, but their costs long term are punishing and they are by far the least forgiving mainline to lose. Are they UP? Idk, definitely not in 1v1. In team games tho I find them much harder to use than any other mainline
22 Oct 2022, 19:25 PM
#57
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1295

In team games tho I find them much harder to use than any other mainline


I play 4v4 alot (obv) and I just can't play USF for this reason. I always try to keep my units on the field and push the enemy etc. but I just never find a use for the riflemen. I'll be playing USF 20 minutes in and realize I have 2-3 riflemen squads back inside my base that I retreated and never reinforced and sent back to the frontline. They're just worthless in fours against Obers, LMG grens, g4usies, etc. I just forget about them. I do NOT have this issue nearly as much with any other faction.
22 Oct 2022, 22:07 PM
#58
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



Panthfinder need adressing yes indeed. But so do lots of other things including rifles. You just want paths nerfed and be done with it. Thats where the issue stops for you.

You are guessing want I want now, I suggest you stick to what I actually post.

This is thread about Pathfinder and howizters. If in your opinion riflemen need changes I suggest you start a thread about them.


I bring in units or things related to the isseu. The issue with paths is mostly their vision from stealth wich increases the power of scotts and pack howies greatly. And they dont bleed you dry.
The issue imo with rifles i stated earlier.

I brought up pio's sight because to a less extreme fashion it does a simaler thing yet its fine and stock. I never said pio's are op. They give an already very strong mg an edge to early. I dont find it an issue later in the game.

Pioneer and Pathfinders have very little in common, If you are not aware of it I suggest you try to spaming Pionners and what happens.



I cant help it that you get so annoyed that as soon as some one says axis units need fixing too. You always jump in to try and disprove and state all is fine or up and do a 180° when it concerns allied units, then almost everthing about them is fine or op.

Now you are assuming what annoys me, I suggest you keep your focus on the Pathfinders and Howizters and not me.
23 Oct 2022, 03:06 AM
#59
avatar of Willy Pete

Posts: 324


They're just worthless in fours against Obers, LMG grens, g4usies, etc. I just forget about them. I do NOT have this issue nearly as much with any other faction.

Yea i feel that issue. I dont play 4s much but in 3s i have this problem too, unless I get m1919s

Scotts help fight those squads but they r just another micro-intensive unit. Every good thing USF has needs a ton of babysitting, except when u have paths. Even tho they r squishy, the vision gives u so much warning of the danger/spotting for targets

On top of that they get ther bonus range at vet 3 so they get first shots in most late-game inf fights

23 Oct 2022, 09:26 AM
#60
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Oct 2022, 22:07 PMVipper

You are guessing want I want now, I suggest you stick to what I actually post.

This is thread about Pathfinder and howizters. If in your opinion riflemen need changes I suggest you start a thread about them.


Pioneer and Pathfinders have very little in common, If you are not aware of it I suggest you try to spaming Pionners and what happens.



Now you are assuming what annoys me, I suggest you keep your focus on the Pathfinders and Howizters and not me.


I am not geussing anything. You are doing excatly that.
You refuse to acknolidge anything that is not mentioned in the title of the thread. Even obvious underlying issues. Just "go make a thread about x yourself" every time. This is no way to fix anything.
While you also have quite a history of bringing in anything to prove a point.

The issue is with vision in general. Vision is very underrated and it actualy makes some units and synergies to strong. Paths and pio's to a lesser extent imo prove larger vision on main stay units being a problem.
Packhowi and scott on its own are ok imo. Vision wich pathf bring in abundance make the howi and scott much more effective. Rifles not being appealing esp in bigger modes make this even more problematic.
PAGES (8)down
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

509 users are online: 1 member and 508 guests
DIRTY_FINISHER
18 posts in the last 24h
44 posts in the last week
100 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44647
Welcome our newest member, Vassarh9
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM