Login

russian armor

Why Ostheer is currently not much fun in my opinion

PAGES (7)down
16 May 2016, 19:44 PM
#121
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2016, 19:14 PMwouren


I had this in a table at first, but I closed the tab to restart and I don't really have the energy to remake it.

Here are some stats for damage against a normal piece of armor 1 target size 1 infantry:

AEC: 18.9 near - 11.26 far
UC: 9.44 near - 9.35 far
Utility Car: 22.73 near - 3.17 far
222: 20.85 near - 3.92 far

Q.E.D. mothafockaaaaassss


How about you mention the fact that the 222's MG is bugged as fuck right now, which basically turns its damage output down to 1.77 far, 4.02 close? Oh wait, that wouldn't serve your cherry-picked point, now would it?

P.S.: Not to mention that if we would want to cherry-pick, we could turn the whole thing on its head by comparing armour: The UC (which costs exactly null fuel) has more armour than the 222 (9 frontal armour vs. 10 frontal armour on the UC). QED? No, just stupid cherry-picking of stats that on their own are meaningless...
16 May 2016, 19:48 PM
#122
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17885 | Subs: 8




Premium Commander, not everyone (including me) has it.
No insult to you, but I do not accept strategies that can only be played by a small amount of players.
It's the same with Osttruppen. Very viable against UKF, of course, but sadly not available for each and everyone.


I'm sorry, but if this argument had any kind of rational grounds we'd have all paid commanders banned from tournaments.
16 May 2016, 19:48 PM
#123
avatar of wouren
Senior Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 1280 | Subs: 3



How about you mention the fact that the 222's MG is bugged as fuck right now, which basically turns its damage output down to 1.77 far, 4.02 close? Oh wait, that wouldn't serve your cherry-picked point, now would it?


You might want to figure out what you are talking about before you post. The point I was making was that the damage is very high for the AEC against inf.

Sorry if I sound salty.
16 May 2016, 19:50 PM
#124
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2016, 19:48 PMwouren


You might want to figure out what you are talking about before you post. The point I was making was that the damage is very high against inf for the AEC.

Sorry if I sound salty.


Your point still doesn't work, because you cherry-picked a single data point from several vehicles, each of which is meant to perform differently. I didn't want to accuse you of any fanboyism or any team-favouring behaviour, I was trying to show that your argument is badly chosen, not that your point in and of itself is flawed...
16 May 2016, 19:57 PM
#125
avatar of wouren
Senior Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 1280 | Subs: 3



Your point still doesn't work, because you cherry-picked a single data point from several vehicles, each of which is meant to perform differently. I didn't want to accuse you of any fanboyism or any team-favouring behaviour, I was trying to show that your argument is badly chosen, not that your point in and of itself is flawed...

The single data point is the damage that the vehicles do against infantry. I don't know what would convey the point that it does damage against infantry more clearly. I possibly should've included more vehicles in my analysis, but at this point we're on a tangent to a tangent to a tangent (no, seriously) and I'm kind of losing interest.
16 May 2016, 20:30 PM
#126
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2016, 19:48 PMKatitof


I'm sorry, but if this argument had any kind of rational grounds we'd have all paid commanders banned from tournaments.


As I mentioned before, I am by far no pro player whereas the tournaments are usually being played by players < Rank 100. These players play the game for more than just a hobby. They really want to be good/the best thus spending additional money is the consequence or playing the game far more often than the usual players and getting more warspoils as a result.

While "hobby players" are salty if they have to rely on extreme luck (war spoil) or pay ADDITIONAL MONEY to not lose all the time (light exaggeration). And that is why I don't accept mechanized assault as a counter strat. Sure it maybe is a good late game doc. But having to rely on a premium commander to play against a normal faction is rubbish.

The thread is called Why Ostheer is not much fun, not why Ostheer is not viable.

If you look into the stats, premium commanders dominate the tournaments. I understand players that do not want to spend more money into a full priced game, because 60 Euros (the price on release) is a lot of money. And if you need to spend more and more to keep yourself in the game, it will make players quick extremely fast.
17 May 2016, 22:57 PM
#127
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

I find that if the answer to playing for or against a certain faction is to choose a certain commander, there's something wrong. And if anyone wants to argue that I find that they'd still have to concede the fact that being forced/incentivized into a commander choice limits player choice and adaptability. It's also indicative of the pay-to-win perception of the game that still permeates within and without the community.

These aren't fun scenarios.
18 May 2016, 01:12 AM
#128
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

When I play Wehrmacht I always feel "outranged". I don't know why :)
18 May 2016, 02:20 AM
#129
avatar of wouren
Senior Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 1280 | Subs: 3

IDK I just don't get the same thrill out of wehrmacht. They aren't UP, they are just kind of boring.
18 May 2016, 02:31 AM
#130
avatar of momo4sho
Senior Caster Badge
Donator 22

Posts: 466 | Subs: 1

Light vehicles being too powerful and having too much of an impact on the game were one of the main talking points in the video GGMachine and I intended to release [ recorded, but most likely not being released ]. It's one of the reasons why Ostheer have to crutch on the current machination of Mobile Defense in 1v1. Now I don't really wanna jump in this discussion any further as it is taking too many dives into directions that will lead to poor outcomes, as they usually do. [ really got to get a focus on the specifics, are we talking about 1v1, 2v2, or higher, as they are vastly different, etc. ] I will shamelessly plug in that 1v1 is the most competitive game mode in this game, as in most RTS. pls dont shoot me
18 May 2016, 02:44 AM
#131
avatar of LuGer33

Posts: 174

If you look into the stats, premium commanders dominate the tournaments. I understand players that do not want to spend more money into a full priced game, because 60 Euros (the price on release) is a lot of money. And if you need to spend more and more to keep yourself in the game, it will make players quick extremely fast.

I don't understand those players.

The game came out 3 years ago. It isn't 1999. No rational consumer / gamer should expect that the price of the base game would also entitle them to all the additional content that's been developed and released over the past 3 years.

Relic didn't make new factions and commanders and units and abilities for free, and no one should expect to get them for free either.
18 May 2016, 05:38 AM
#132
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2016, 02:44 AMLuGer33

I don't understand those players.

The game came out 3 years ago. It isn't 1999. No rational consumer / gamer should expect that the price of the base game would also entitle them to all the additional content that's been developed and released over the past 3 years.

Relic didn't make new factions and commanders and units and abilities for free, and no one should expect to get them for free either.


I get your point but the thing is that Relic took the aspects of a full priced game and a free2play game together and mixed them very poorly.

I also like the idea to add new strategic options with commanders but they do not do it right. Succesful free to play titles like League of Legends add the possibility to buy those commanders (champions in LoL) with an ingame currency. You need to play about 20-25 games to buy a new champ.

I CoH2 they implemented the WarSpoil system which is just a poor excuse that they can think "yeah we have done something so players can't complain anymore". Half-hearted and based on pure luck. It took them 3 years to implement a system that should have been here from the start (the new war spoils mechanic). Meanwhile most of the playerbase is gone.

BTT: I like the idea of new commanders but Relic CLEARLY makes them overpovered compared to the old ones to get players to buy them. This is also sometimes the case with new champions in League of Legends, but LoL gets patched AT LEAST every 10 days (And overpovered stuff gets nerfs). I can't remember the last CoH2 patch. Meanwhile, emplacements commander sucks ALL the fun out of the game and you can't do anything about it.

I find that if the answer to playing for or against a certain faction is to choose a certain commander, there's something wrong. And if anyone wants to argue that I find that they'd still have to concede the fact that being forced/incentivized into a commander choice limits player choice and adaptability. It's also indicative of the pay-to-win perception of the game that still permeates within and without the community.

These aren't fun scenarios.


+1
18 May 2016, 07:46 AM
#133
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1



I get your point but the thing is that Relic took the aspects of a full priced game and a free2play game together and mixed them very poorly.

I also like the idea to add new strategic options with commanders but they do not do it right. Succesful free to play titles like League of Legends add the possibility to buy those commanders (champions in LoL) with an ingame currency. You need to play about 20-25 games to buy a new champ.

I CoH2 they implemented the WarSpoil system which is just a poor excuse that they can think "yeah we have done something so players can't complain anymore". Half-hearted and based on pure luck. It took them 3 years to implement a system that should have been here from the start (the new war spoils mechanic). Meanwhile most of the playerbase is gone.

BTT: I like the idea of new commanders but Relic CLEARLY makes them overpovered compared to the old ones to get players to buy them. This is also sometimes the case with new champions in League of Legends, but LoL gets patched AT LEAST every 10 days (And overpovered stuff gets nerfs). I can't remember the last CoH2 patch. Meanwhile, emplacements commander sucks ALL the fun out of the game and you can't do anything about it.



I share the feeling you explain but Ostheer faction is the least underpowered when it goes to Commanders available right from the bat. There are plenty of Ostheer (and Soviet) commanders available for free, we are not talking about USF/OKW/UKF with their 3 stock commanders. It is more than enough to have a good and versatile load of commander
Mechanized commander isn't available with the game but still remain mister comeback commander with his big bro' King Elite doctrine commander.
Should we also mention CAS doctrine given 2 times with events? This commander remains really powerful vs majority of players.

So while we are at it, what is your load of commanders as Ostheer? Mine, Festung Armor, German Mechanized, Mobile Armor.
And I primarily use German Armor: Scope on 222, Pz4 Command tank, Lehf available if necessary, sdfk250 to trollplay (but not only it counter well USF in general) and smoke barrage is always a nice ability to attack or retreat.
Second commander I use is Festung: Pak40 if the map allow it, armor smoke is always good, Pz4 command tank and railway arty.
I almost never use Mobile Armor, only to trollplay with Puma spam.
18 May 2016, 10:35 AM
#134
avatar of Ful4n0

Posts: 345

jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2016, 19:57 PMwouren

The single data point is the damage that the vehicles do against infantry. I don't know what would convey the point that it does damage against infantry more clearly. I possibly should've included more vehicles in my analysis, but at this point we're on a tangent to a tangent to a tangent (no, seriously) and I'm kind of losing interest.


it is really easy to understand what that guy was telling you...


I´ll give you an example.....my tank do 1000 damage every time he hits an enemy tank....


Enemy tank do 200 damage every time he hits my tank....

Now, enemy tank hit me 8 out of 10 shoots, while I only hit him 1 out of 10 shoots....


In addition, my tank fires each 5 seconds, but enemy tank shoot each 2 seconds...


Yeah my tank is a beast, he do 1000 damage!!!!

but after the engagement my tank is dead, and enemy tank is alive....


jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2016, 19:48 PMwouren


You might want to figure out what you are talking about before you post. The point I was making was that the damage is very high for the AEC against inf.

Sorry if I sound salty.


ehh, well, that guy said that AEC is not as good as it was in the past againts infantery, so no a great threat in the early game where he don´t usually have ligth vehicles and tanks, so no big treat there for the enemy faction.

And you answered with that table....if your answers is remotely linked to what guy said, then, you were trying to defend AEC being good againts infantery

If not, then, maybe, it is better you don´t quote others if you are not saying something related to the quoted guy.


anyway, I´m really noob, so maybe, I just missunderstanding something, if so, apologies....



Finally, yeah, giving a table with damage data is not a good indicator of if that unit is good or bad againts infantery...coz, there are lot of others parameters that affect the performance of that unit againts infantery, as accuracy, how fast it is shoooting, etc...

So , imho your damage table is really pointless as it is not a good indicator of the performance of those units againts infantery....
18 May 2016, 14:44 PM
#135
avatar of wouren
Senior Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 1280 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2016, 10:35 AMFul4n0


it is really easy to understand what that guy was telling you...


I´ll give you an example.....my tank do 1000 damage every time he hits an enemy tank....


Enemy tank do 200 damage every time he hits my tank....

Now, enemy tank hit me 8 out of 10 shoots, while I only hit him 1 out of 10 shoots....


In addition, my tank fires each 5 seconds, but enemy tank shoot each 2 seconds...


Yeah my tank is a beast, he do 1000 damage!!!!

but after the engagement my tank is dead, and enemy tank is alive....




ehh, well, that guy said that AEC is not as good as it was in the past againts infantery, so no a great threat in the early game where he don´t usually have ligth vehicles and tanks, so no big treat there for the enemy faction.

And you answered with that table....if your answers is remotely linked to what guy said, then, you were trying to defend AEC being good againts infantery

If not, then, maybe, it is better you don´t quote others if you are not saying something related to the quoted guy.


anyway, I´m really noob, so maybe, I just missunderstanding something, if so, apologies....



Finally, yeah, giving a table with damage data is not a good indicator of if that unit is good or bad againts infantery...coz, there are lot of others parameters that affect the performance of that unit againts infantery, as accuracy, how fast it is shoooting, etc...

So , imho your damage table is really pointless as it is not a good indicator of the performance of those units againts infantery....


The damage table takes into account the target size and armor. That is why, despite the high base DPS of the six pounder, it can't do a lot of damage against infantry, because it's adjusted damage profile is under 1 for DPS. Tell me if anything else was unclear.
18 May 2016, 14:54 PM
#136
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063




Premium Commander, not everyone (including me) has it.
No insult to you, but I do not accept strategies that can only be played by a small amount of players.
It's the same with Osttruppen. Very viable against UKF, of course, but sadly not available for each and everyone.

Stock UKF commander ain't that good either: Royal Arty is pure crap, Cancer Commander >>> Royal Engineer and Vanguard/Mobile Assault is miles ahead Royal Commando so blame Lelic for power creeping.
18 May 2016, 15:07 PM
#137
avatar of Superhet

Posts: 132


Stock UKF commander ain't that good either: Royal Arty is pure crap, Cancer Commander >>> Royal Engineer and Vanguard/Mobile Assault is miles ahead Royal Commando so blame Lelic for power creeping.


I would rather that they made all commanders good and made you able to unlock 3 for free, than making 3 (or more, see Soviets...) ones sub-par or garbage so the DLC ones will look better. That'd keep the DLC aspect intact, it would make them able to release all commanders at once instead of slowly over time, and it would give more variety in commanders as is intended in theory. But some DLC ones are bad too, so I don't really get it...
18 May 2016, 15:29 PM
#138
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063



I would rather that they made all commanders good and made you able to unlock 3 for free, than making 3 (or more, see Soviets...) ones sub-par or garbage so the DLC ones will look better. That'd keep the DLC aspect intact, it would make them able to release all commanders at once instead of slowly over time, and it would give more variety in commanders as is intended in theory. But some DLC ones are bad too, so I don't really get it...

Regarding recent DLC, only the two OKW commander is meh, the rest all 2 new USF commander and all 5 UK DLC commander are very good and is the go-to choice in tournament. Crap DLC commander is more due to balancing (Windustry).
19 May 2016, 02:51 AM
#139
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

I always felt it would've been much more fun and dynamic if we got to use all three commanders, but had to SPEND CPs to unlock the abilities and units.

You'd still have to allocate the 12-14 CPs for those endgame units, forgoing the other, cheaper abilities in the other commanders for the time being, but create more meaningful player choice.

I mean, at this point it'd be laughably broken, but it would've been so much more interesting to have, well, more room for dynamic gameplay.
19 May 2016, 06:23 AM
#140
avatar of iceman

Posts: 148

Yes Ostheer is not fun anymore. I lost so many game playing them this past month its ridiculous, in 2v2s, I have over 2000 hours and bought game since release. Just amazing how Relic has gutted Ostheer. Tigers are worthless.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

United States 3
United Kingdom 158
unknown 8

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

557 users are online: 557 guests
8 posts in the last 24h
17 posts in the last week
137 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45024
Welcome our newest member, orgkonnect_
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM