Personally I have found that at long range it's a toss-up between the 221 and M3, but at mid and close ranges the M3 win every time. 222 wins at all ranges, but it's still pretty awful that you need a 50 fuel tech, 15 fuel, 55 munition vehicle to beat a 10 fuel* vehicle.
*Due to Soviet starting with 50 fuel and T1 being 40, the first M3 is essentially fuel free.
M3 + maxim + Sniper spam 2v2 - Early game
19 Jun 2014, 17:22 PM
#61
Posts: 4928
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
19 Jun 2014, 18:00 PM
#62
Posts: 1130
And your solution? Nerf it into total uselessness. It also has no turret. It has less armor facing better long range DPS.
No forcing doctrine choice is a weakness (only a pure German player would say otherwise). T2 you do not NEED any particular Doctrine. Using Tier 1 YOU NEED a Guards Doctrine unless you totally outclass your opponent. T1 Soviets is a Pig with lipstick. The lipstick is exploitation of timing and mechanics. (M3 although worse comes sooner, Sniper can be exploited to early retreating due to faction design).
I dont like M3 play nor sniper play. I have no dog in this fight because I feel that T1 is a weak choice unless you are a top 100 player or a bottom 10K player. In the middle where Ost players are decent and Soviet players dont have super micro its playing Russian Roulette.
But what you propose is to make it absurdly useless. And we have enough useless units in this game already.
Nonsense. Before the new weapon profile patch the m3 was an excellent anti mg42 unit that drove a flame engi squad into the flank of the mg42. That hasn't changed in fact it got even better at it as it received more hp in the same patch. Reducing its damage will not make this unit useless.
And yes i would also say that forced to choose doctrines is a weakness provided that the guards doctrines are not equipped with the best stuff and lo behold they do come with the best stuff. and turretless is meaning concept if has a tail gun , 7 speed and a good rotation rate.
It doesnt need this kind of DPS and that needs to be nerfed heavily. If you play exclusively tier 2 i can understand that you dont know completely batshit insane op this unit is on some maps.
horrida flamma bella
19 Jun 2014, 18:04 PM
#63
Posts: 1637
snip
Yes I agree. Before the patch it was useful. And before the patch it didnt cost almost as much as a conscript squad in MP.
If they want to roll it back to where it was suits me. Just lower back down its cost.
Edit:
And the PTRS is garbage now. Its only good in a M3. Go try to kill a 222 with it outside an M3 post last nerf.
The DPLMG is great now though ill give you that. But its very expensive. Giving less muni to acutally button or doctrine dependant mark vehicle.
With that being said T1 seems to break the rule relic posed a little while ago where call ins should augment an army not replace things. Guards being required goes against this.
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
19 Jun 2014, 18:10 PM
#64
Posts: 752
It also has no turret.
Just pointing out that it does infact not need one, since the infantry occupying it have omnidirectional fire lines.
"You are competitive if play to win and make efforts to improve." -Basilone
19 Jun 2014, 18:14 PM
#65
Posts: 1637
Just pointing out that it does infact not need one, since the infantry occupying it have omnidirectional fire lines.
True but your not taking into account its no longer one unit in price nor performance. If this is included now you have a unit that costs much much more than the 221/222
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
19 Jun 2014, 18:38 PM
#66
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
There is NO reliable counter against this unless the Soviet team sucks at micro.
Look at this thread which lists SEVERAL threads attempting to find a solution. Nobody could come up with any strategy that could be replicated without a lucky RNG roll in any of the threads:
http://community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/company-of-heroes-2-general-discussion/53185-2v2-replay-for-balance-purposes
I would say theres plenty counters but it´s rather hard to define what is pure RNG luck/skill. I mean, everything on the game is based on RNG. Just like in other RNG games, you just try to minimize your weakness and increase your chances of winning.
1st mortar shell hitting snipers is lucky. Constant attack ground to cover, barrage, at sniper position. I would say THAT is FORCING your luck.
German sniper? It forces hold fire, which makes double snipers less effective.
The only problem i see is that going double snipers is always a feasible option, despite of game time. With the nerf on artillery, you have an easier time with that.
True but your not taking into account its no longer one unit in price nor performance. If this is included now you have a unit that costs much much more than the 221/222
And this is the reason people keep losing 222 against 1 M3 + Guards.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
19 Jun 2014, 18:42 PM
#67
Posts: 752
True but your not taking into account its no longer one unit in price nor performance. If this is included now you have a unit that costs much much more than the 221/222
I understand your point, but prefer to see it as you having actually two units which together synergise to a better performance than either part individually.
In that sense, there is no greater cost. You get exactly what you pay for as two units + their synergistic benefit essentially for "free".
"You are competitive if play to win and make efforts to improve." -Basilone
19 Jun 2014, 18:56 PM
#68
Posts: 1637
I understand your point, but prefer to see it as you having actually two units which together synergise to a better performance than either part individually.
In that sense, there is no greater cost. You get exactly what you pay for as two units + their synergistic benefit essentially for "free".
I understand what your saying. But so is a 222 and an HMG or Pak backing it up. Except when the 222 dies it doesnt hurt the other units.
So it goes both ways. Combined arms should be powerful. Another way to look at it is using an M3 with a garrison unit is combined arms
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
19 Jun 2014, 19:08 PM
#69
Posts: 503
Permanently BannedThe talk are good, but i think all will agree with one thing:
Guards with ANTI TANK RIFLE (HEAVY RIFLE, GIANT RECOIL), if the game have a bit realism, this rifle in a car, will not work...
In real life this rifle need a bipod, in the game the guys shot with then standing...
This is like if the MG42 shot standing, and dont need all that waiting to turn, etc...
The game need a ton more realism (much things).
Relic, please contract some military expert, because with that child (i think is) doing the work, all day will become a new balance issue topic (and i forget the mecanichs and rng's right now).
More realism > Less Balance issues.
Guards with ANTI TANK RIFLE (HEAVY RIFLE, GIANT RECOIL), if the game have a bit realism, this rifle in a car, will not work...
In real life this rifle need a bipod, in the game the guys shot with then standing...
This is like if the MG42 shot standing, and dont need all that waiting to turn, etc...
The game need a ton more realism (much things).
Relic, please contract some military expert, because with that child (i think is) doing the work, all day will become a new balance issue topic (and i forget the mecanichs and rng's right now).
More realism > Less Balance issues.
19 Jun 2014, 19:14 PM
#70
Posts: 17895 | Subs: 8
The talk are good, but i think all will agree with one thing:
Guards with ANTI TANK RIFLE (HEAVY RIFLE, GIANT RECOIL), if the game have a bit realism, this rifle in a car, will not work...
In real life this rifle need a bipod, in the game the guys shot with then standing...
This is like if the MG42 shot standing, and dont need all that waiting to turn, etc...
The game need a ton more realism (much things).
Relic, please contract some military expert, because with that child (i think is) doing the work, all day will become a new balance issue topic (and i forget the mecanichs and rng's right now).
More realism > Less Balance issues.
If you want realism so much, go play Men of War.
Your post history clearly indicates that you are in the wrong game for your taste as you constantly scream "realism this, realism that".
CoH2 is about immersive battles, not realistic ones.
Oh and more realism=NO balance.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
19 Jun 2014, 19:17 PM
#71
Posts: 807
Sorry, but COH2 is a realistic strategy game because it takes into account all strategy facts: green cover, distances, DPS, armor, experience, supression, and many more. The units' features are not entirely realistic and they can't be. If they where, Tigers will bounce every T34/76 shot while T34s would cost 100 mp and 15 fuel and conscripts nothing . So let it be like it is.
. So let it be like it is.
19 Jun 2014, 19:20 PM
#72
Posts: 503
Permanently Banned
If you want realism so much, go play Men of War.
Your post history clearly indicates that you are in the wrong game for your taste as you constantly scream "realism this, realism that".
CoH2 is about immersive battles, not realistic ones.
Oh and more realism=NO balance.
I like so much coh2 by the graphics, sounds, gameplay, battles (the good), and i think is good combine realism with balance, but the game are so much more for balance than realism...
Realism for one side, and balance for the other side (without a bit realism) is not balance in the final result.
Edit: SSHEINE, common, i want my mg42 running standing and shooting too, why only guards? Is a example. M3 with all that family, soo i want grens in my Panzer too (for a ride)... Huahua!!!
19 Jun 2014, 19:21 PM
#73
Posts: 17895 | Subs: 8
Then accept it that it is not and will not be a simulator-ever.
Realism ends where balanced gameplay starts.
You can't have both.
For realism, go MoW, for balance, go CoH2.
Realism ends where balanced gameplay starts.
You can't have both.
For realism, go MoW, for balance, go CoH2.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
19 Jun 2014, 20:04 PM
#74
Posts: 1637
The talk are good, but i think all will agree with one thing:
Guards with ANTI TANK RIFLE (HEAVY RIFLE, GIANT RECOIL), if the game have a bit realism, this rifle in a car, will not work...
In real life this rifle need a bipod, in the game the guys shot with then standing...
This is like if the MG42 shot standing, and dont need all that waiting to turn, etc...
The game need a ton more realism (much things).
Relic, please contract some military expert, because with that child (i think is) doing the work, all day will become a new balance issue topic (and i forget the mecanichs and rng's right now).
More realism > Less Balance issues.
Agreed. Guard would hit nothing. Of course all the tanks would be blinded by losing optics and immobile from losing tracks. And they would be exploding Grens because its basically a 50 Cal sniper rifle.
So its a balance thing once again. Would be kinda neat to red mist a whole model with a PTRS though
The PTRS's are fine as they are. Whenever i'm up against Guard Infantry, I always have to be careful with my vehicles or the Guards will completely destroy them. Good range, good damage and fairly cheap; if anything, the PTRS should nerfed since it's ridiculously good for the price. Even in the hands of Conscripts, the PTRS's are extremely potent.
19 Jun 2014, 20:23 PM
#75
Posts: 1705
I will say again,m3 gunner need sto do less dmg and most importantly squad members need to die if it gets hit by faust..so that there is a corresponding soviet MP bleed to match the MP bleed that m3 causes.
19 Jun 2014, 20:44 PM
#76
Posts: 4928
i want my mg42 running standing and shooting too, why only guards?
Well luckily for you:
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
19 Jun 2014, 23:13 PM
#77
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Sorry, but COH2 is a realistic strategy game because it takes into account all strategy facts: green cover, distances, DPS, armor, experience, supression, and many more. The units' features are not entirely realistic and they can't be. If they where, Tigers will bounce every T34/76 shot while T34s would cost 100 mp and 15 fuel and conscripts nothing
COH2 is as "realistic" as Battlefield on FPS. I would rather say it´s an arcade with tactical elements.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
20 Jun 2014, 02:11 AM
#78
Posts: 58
The problem isn't realism.
That's the problem. How some Soviet players think needing "a 50 fuel tech, 15 fuel, 55 munitions vehicle to beat a 10 fuel vehicle" is reasonable cannot be explained by modern science.
Personally I have found that at long range it's a toss-up between the 221 and M3, but at mid and close ranges the M3 win every time. 222 wins at all ranges, but it's still pretty awful that you need a 50 fuel tech, 15 fuel, 55 munition vehicle to beat a 10 fuel* vehicle.
*Due to Soviet starting with 50 fuel and T1 being 40, the first M3 is essentially fuel free.
That's the problem. How some Soviet players think needing "a 50 fuel tech, 15 fuel, 55 munitions vehicle to beat a 10 fuel vehicle" is reasonable cannot be explained by modern science.
20 Jun 2014, 02:23 AM
#79
Posts: 503
Permanently BannedThat pic is the LMG that is a mg42 balanced, dont pin but kills!!! (MG42 only pin, LMG only kills, lol)..
If get realism for all weapons, is not only the big AT RIFLE that will be good and destroy f. pieces... That way, the game will be 2more dangerous and soo need more tactical...
Maybe the game had to change a little in the matter of vision or something but it would be very good..
The problem is put stupid, nonsense or/and strange things for balance, no?
Like proximity mines (this exist on 2nd war?) or the heavy At rifle with more 6 russians or 1 sniper squad into a small jeep (and doing shots!) hehe
This is not only for sov faction, is more real put grens to get a ride into the tank than it with m3, but have the ger mortar that can fire to a 5m enemy with 100% precision...
But in general, a hardcore mod will be nice try..
If get realism for all weapons, is not only the big AT RIFLE that will be good and destroy f. pieces... That way, the game will be 2more dangerous and soo need more tactical...
Maybe the game had to change a little in the matter of vision or something but it would be very good..
The problem is put stupid, nonsense or/and strange things for balance, no?
Like proximity mines (this exist on 2nd war?) or the heavy At rifle with more 6 russians or 1 sniper squad into a small jeep (and doing shots!) hehe
This is not only for sov faction, is more real put grens to get a ride into the tank than it with m3, but have the ger mortar that can fire to a 5m enemy with 100% precision...
But in general, a hardcore mod will be nice try..
20 Jun 2014, 03:42 AM
#80
Posts: 4928
That pic is the LMG that is a mg42 balanced, dont pin but kills!!! (MG42 only pin, LMG only kills, lol)..
You want a squad that can just run around pinning everything on the map?
Then there's no use talking to you, you just want Germans to stomp every game.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
93 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.278110.716+16
- 2.270144.652+2
- 3.29446.865-1
- 4.558230.708+2
- 5.968565.631-3
- 6.253150.628+14
- 7.22491.711+11
- 8.8120.802-1
- 9.19078.709+4
- 10.13556.707+3
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
772
Board Info
457 users are online:
457 guests
6 posts in the last 24h
50 posts in the last week
152 posts in the last month
50 posts in the last week
152 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45284
Welcome our newest member, FreeZe
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, FreeZe
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM