Login

russian armor

[Feedback Needed] So explain to me...

26 Oct 2013, 17:51 PM
#1
avatar of =][=mmortal

Posts: 215

Edit: This thread is an evolving flow of my thoughts on the matter, but the point of this post is to draw community awareness to my belief that the current design of the game is subtly flawed and needs addressing, in particular regard to the soviet faction. Any tips or feedback you can give me on my attached replay is welcome too!

==============

You've probably seen a post claiming one side is too strong 100x here already, but I affirm this is not another clueless whine thread. I've sunk 500 games into high elo+ ostheer play, and among many others, have beat the streaming celebrities' soviet multiple times each. I have seen what works and doesnt, and know how to micro.

I'm genuinely looking for quality feedback on both my play and the state of the coh2 meta.

Check out this replay for a tough game and a perfect example of what I mean.
REPLAY HERE

Explain to me how to beat the synergy of soviet HTD scripts/at nades + guards + snipers + su85 + 30mun mines + munition float for whatever you want (cough strafe cough) in a 1v1.


Abstract
This is a long post because the situation is very complicated and requires numerous examples so you understand where I am coming from.

1. The soviet meta is fundamentally slightly OP when played by a pro because the units and economy synergize perfectly with their commanders and each other. The germans lack hard counters to certain units at various stages of the game, such as the inevitable t70 rush. Germans lack commanders, other than AG or ostruppen, that allow for radically different builds.

2. The imbalance comes from the sum total of small aspects about the many soviet units and meta that are strong acting in concert, and come to the fore when facing someone with good micro. Its less that a particular unit is game breaking than the entire faction under its current design is slightly OP because of how the parts all fit together.

3. New players will have trouble playing soviets because 1 on 1 units will lose to their ostheer counterpart. On the other hand a pro with good micro can use every unit's strengths and abilities at the same time for perfect combined arms. I don't believe the germans have an equivalent meta that flourishes in high level play and rewards skillful micro to that extent.

Everyone likes to claim german is OP because it takes less skill to use them... but that myth is brought back to reality when high level play just demonstrates the units arent strong enough to handle soviet role specialization (snipers, su85s, t70s) in a close match, short of a significant failure in play by soviet micro.

What I really want to see from this game in the future is the redesign of cheese units/abilities on both sides (looking at you ostruppen, precision strike, and t70s), what the german commanders in particular bring to the table meta wise, and the leveling of the economies to make a munition point just as valuable for a sov player as for a ostheer player. Risk/reward and unit counters at different stages of the game need to be looked into. COH is not a franchise like supreme commander where its fun to see units instantly pop to a flying death laser... the fun comes from being able to react and counter-attack.

I think when this incremental and gradual process moves along, the game will be more competitive and more fun for everyone. I don't favor either faction balance wise because both have rough edges that need smoothing. My point is that as far as I can tell now, the soviets simply need more changes or a redesign.

Relic and the community should admit this and make a coherent plan going forward to address the meta in the game. This thread is attempting to draw awareness to the need.

And at the end of the day its just my opinion, but I wouldn't post it without giving the issue careful thought and signing it as my honest opinion to improve the game for everyone, favoring neither ostheer or sov players


===================

MYTH: Soviet t4 rushes are countered by a competitive early game to prevent quick t4 unit proliferation.

REALITY: The reality is and has always been that soviet t4 is cheap enough to get with only a single fuel point held before or at the same time as german t3, or even t2. Not t4, but t3! Germans won't get t4 out except in a troll game or a desperate attempt to counter su85s like in my replay, which failed horribly.

Soviet early game is not hampered by teching as their t0 building provides all the utility they need to go toe to toe with t1 and t2 ostheer with doctrinal support.

For all intents and purposes the soviets have two t3s that they can choose between as they like. Many players would rush a t70 and then spam su85s because the cost of getting both buildings if you have 1 fuel reliably is basically irrelevant if you are holding your own.

1. Panthers cost twice as much mp as a su85 and 15 more fuel. Not including the fuel cost of the t4 upgrade and building. Panthers are not a hard counter to su85s IMO, which out range them and whose guns can penetrate frontal armor fairly reliably.

2. Soviets can afford to skip t3 because aside from a squishy and easily killed FHT (mines, guards, at nades, whatever), there is no rushed unit they need to be worried about.

3. People have been so busy spamming t70s/t34s that the old meta has fallen out of favor, not because its not OP anymore but because people got bored of it.

MYTH: Long ranged direct fire units are balanced

REALITY:
1. Weapon range is the single most important vehicle stat in coh2, and often with range comes weapon power per shot. The ability to shoot across the map from beyond a monitor's width of screen resolution negates any downside to move speed. This problem is not limited to the su85 alone, but the elefant is also stupidly long ranged.
2. Soviets have many long range options that feed each other, specifically snipers for AI and su85 for AT, with an su76 for fun if you want quick IDF. 120mm outranges 81mm mortars, and the precision strike ability is button to get a free kill on whatever squad is trying to cap a point or use a support weapon.
3. The unit cap is not that high in coh2, especially for ostheer with 4 man squad limits. Combined arms become extremely difficult to pull off when your squads and vehicles are picked off or forced to retreat one by one by snipers/su85s before even handling the rest of the support units on the field. Losing a vehicle or a couple squads from your attack to sniper units means you are permanently on the defensive and being pushed off the map.
4. Certain maps like langres, mowscow outskirts, pripyat winter and minsk pocket really emphasize the advantages of supported long range units.


Example One:
30 munition mines for a faction that doesnt require regular munition use to stay competitive leads to lane denial and map control, that in the long run, will lead to an even larger munition/fuel/vp? lead over the ostheer player. Lack of munitions will make it harder for an ostheer to field LMGs or rifle nades, which can be required to deal with conscripts using HTD and PPSH. The german completely lack a useful AI mine, especially at that price point. It would be much less effective against soviet squad sizes of 6. Losing 1-2 conscripts does not force a retreat like losing 2-3 grens does.

Example Two: No real hard counter exists for sov sniper teams. Soviet snipers are not vulnerable to counter sniping. Soft counters like AC and 81mm mortars are stopped dead by supporting units/mines and the luck factor. German snipers face more perils in use as they are a 1 man squad, squishy vs IDF (120mm precision strike anyone?, or just unlucky RNG), many IDF cdr abilities, zis IDF, su76 IDF, whatever.
Sov snipers synergize well with 30 munition mines because they can instantly pick off the survivors of a planned ambush with impunity and almost no time to react. In this example the soviet sniper's dps is fine, what is OP is the fact that 30 munition mines are not a risky proposition for a soviet player to use. The risk/reward proportion is out of balance for that item and sov snipers take advantage of that.

Example Three: Near and dear to my heart is the fact that without molotovs, ostheer are unable to reliably control key buildings on certain maps in t0. Every game devolves into a rush by players to stand next to a fuel/cutoff's building in case the enemy shows up. Jump inside, win. Difference is the germans can be forced out by soviet molotovs. If you dont rush your fuel defensively as a german, you WILL be cutoff 2 mins in and vulnerable to t70 rushes. GG.
26 Oct 2013, 18:02 PM
#2
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

I agree with your post, very nice. Especially I want to emphasize this part:


1. Panthers cost twice as much mp as a su85 and 15 more fuel. Not including the fuel cost of the t4 upgrade and building. Panthers are not a hard counter to su85s IMO, which out range them and whose guns can penetrate frontal armor fairly reliably.

MYTH: Long ranged direct fire units are balanced

REALITY:
1. Weapon range is the single most important vehicle stat in coh2, and often with range comes weapon power per shot. The ability to shoot across the map from beyond a monitor's width of screen resolution negates any downside to move speed. This problem is not limited to the su85 alone, but the elefant is also stupidly long ranged.
2. Soviets have many long range options that feed each other, specifically snipers for AI and su85 for AT, with an su76 for fun if you want quick IDF. 120mm outranges 81mm mortars, and the precision strike ability is button to get a free kill on whatever squad is trying to cap a point or use a support weapon.

The combination of Snipers and SU-85 is annoying and a game killer. If that´s decently microed, there´s nothing a German player can do about it.

Russian Mortars also have a lot of range and if an ISU-152 appears and parks behind AT-Guns and infantry and is used defensively, the only option is an Elefant. At-guns and SU-76 are the final blow and can give Russians further long range artillery options.

The range advantage of Russians is kinda ridiculous. I´m okay with Russians having more and better artillery options, that´s what their army was about. However considering tank combat, the range of the SU-85 is an annoyance.

A Russian tank outranging a German tank is bad design imo. Just because the SU-85 has a sticker on it which says: "tank destryoer" doesn´t mean it should get super range and accuracy. What about the advantage in optics the Germans had, longer barrels on their average tanks which gave a flatter trajectory and thus better accuracy on range etc. Actually it was the Germans which tried to keep the distance in tank engagements and the Russians rushing in, trying to engage on close range. They totally flipped the roles.
26 Oct 2013, 18:14 PM
#3
avatar of undostrescuatro

Posts: 525



Explain to me how to beat the synergy of soviet HTD scripts/at nades + guards + snipers + su85 + 30mun mines + munition float for whatever you want (cough strafe cough) in a 1v1.

1. The soviet meta is fundamentally slightly OP when played by a pro because the units synergize perfectly with their commander(singular) and each other. The germans lack hard counters to certain units at various stages of the game, such as the inevitable t70 rush. Germans lack commanders, other than AG or ostruppen, that allow for radically different builds.



my answer

3. Noobs will have trouble playing Germans because 1 on 2 units will lose to their comunist counterparts (prural). On the other hand a pro with good micro can use every unit's strengths at the same time for perfect combined arms. I don't believe the soviets have an equivalent meta that flourishes in high level play and rewards skillful micro to that extent.


now my serious non joke answer.

your tl dr is basically T70 t70 t70 t70 t70 t70.

its like the only thing soviets can do to germans. stomp them before they can do anything. t70s have counters, mines ,Shreks , p4 even an ostwind. i will see the replay later and comment on it. but don't take much of my advice. i asume my rank is lower than yours.
26 Oct 2013, 18:23 PM
#4
avatar of =][=mmortal

Posts: 215


your tl dr is basically T70 t70 t70 t70 t70 t70.

its like the only thing soviets can do to germans. stomp them before they can do anything. t70s have counters, mines ,Shreks , p4 even an ostwind. i will see the replay later and comment on it. but don't take much of my advice. i asume my rank is lower than yours.



My tl;dr is not t70t70t70, but I bring it up because its the current flavor of the month that everyone, new and old player alike, is using because there isnt a hard counter for it 10 mins in for the ostheer. It's just so effective!

Notice I say hard counter:

1. Mines blow it up in 1 hit 95% of the time, but that 60 munition mine is a key choice to make between an LMG, flamer, or a mine. Soviets are not faced with critical munition risk/reward choices early game, nor do they face a unit that requires planning play around aside from a squishy FHT.

2. Who has 120 munitions lying around in a 1v1 10 mins into a game? Oh right, soviets :p T70s will kite them, and snipe them on the retreat.

3. You shouldnt have a p4 or ostwind out 10 mins into a tough game if the soviet playing is doingitrite with his rush.

Soviets have countered the issue of mines or an early stug/pak by simply getting multiple and rushing them from an unexpected direction (aka not the main road)... see stalingrad blitz tactics guide.


Back on point the t70 IS OP IMO, however its a symptom of the overall soviet design, not the problem in itself.

Any advice you want to give is welcome, you might see something I missed. I honestly want all feedback and a discussion of soviet meta that doesnt devolve into "this unit is op" or "learn to play", but rather highlight the systemic failure in design this faction is victim of


26 Oct 2013, 19:06 PM
#5
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647

i watched the replay. i think you were too unflexible in your play, too reliant on getting up the panzer4 asap. im no pro, here's what i felt.

you played like any other at start, grens and mg42s. lmg42 upgrades, fast tech to t2, rifle nades and the standard response to the m3, the armoured car, not much i can comment, it is as predictable as can be and i would have done the same.

but guards and m3 threw off your play, armoured car was no longer a shock unit, it had to be redelegated to the guarding points or risk being taken out by guards AT rifle drive bys. the moment you saw that, it was a pretty much 'o shit, i need something better to counter that' and naturally, the 1st thing to your mind was a panzer4.

you hard rushed a panzer 4, yet it didnt take long for the panzer 4 to hit a mine and had to stop for repairs, which meant it was no longer a shock unit and had to be used like a medium tank thereafter.

once the su85 was out, it didnt take long for ur opponent to capitalize on his advantage which was to stop your next most dangerous asset, your infantry. then 2 snipers came out and it was an uphill battle for you, leading to a loss naturally.

that is where i thought, you pumped so much resources into getting out what you thought could decide the match there and then, yet only to later know that it was long predicted by your opponent, who had mines planted to stop flanks, which did hit jackpot, delayed a potentially dangerous panzer4 rush and bought more time for the su85 to hit and position itself on the field.

even when the su85 was out, you didnt stop building tanks and continued to pump out panthers and ostwinds. losing that rocket arty was just bad luck/micro, you had ur attention else where.

here's what i thought the problem was

1) t1 -> AC -> panzer4 is a cookie cutter strategy. any soviet player worth their salt would have saw that coming since yesterday, which he did and prepared accordingly.

2) failing to recognize t1 + guards would mean total reliance on soviet rifle infantry, there will be no support teams/shock troops hindering panzergrens from closing up and mopping up. ppsh conscripts are still no match for panzergrens and grenadier mixes. here was where i thought ur play was inflexible, hard pushing that panzer4 was a mistake, delaying it for panzergrenadiers and exploiting ur enemy's apparent infantry weakness would have won you map control and delaying that su85.

3) grenadier micro. although u were successful in dodging most of the molotovs, you had a grave habit of moving ur grenadiers too much, resulting in them not firing their lmg42 while ppshes were free to put on the dps. rifle nades were effective, almost too damn effective, which saved you from total conscript domination. again, early panzergrens would have meant the left was free for you to take. i would have dodged the initial molotov, then left the grens on attack move so they would immediately fire off their lmg42.
26 Oct 2013, 21:29 PM
#6
avatar of Array
Donator 11

Posts: 609

Fascinating thread and a breath of fresh air compared to the majority of threads focusing on one unit or strat. OP's post serves as a guide for those of us struggling against ostheer.
26 Oct 2013, 21:42 PM
#7
avatar of undostrescuatro

Posts: 525

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2013, 21:29 PMArray
Fascinating thread and a breath of fresh air compared to the majority of threads focusing on one unit or strat. OP's post serves as a guide for those of us struggling against soviets.


corrected
26 Oct 2013, 21:59 PM
#8
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476



corrected


What is your Problem? Even if you don't agree, atleast respect the time and depth this thread has, and don't answer with shit. I see, maybe it's hard for you to formulate your opinion/argument in the thoughtfull way of the OP, but then please post nothing... -_-.
26 Oct 2013, 22:13 PM
#9
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

Spending 97.4365% of Total games play as Ostheer, and Explain the Soviet myth

Good post indeed!

BTW, I also remember your "soviet floating with ammunition" post.
26 Oct 2013, 22:15 PM
#10
avatar of Blovski

Posts: 480

I see you've ignored all the corresponding advantages of the Ostheer in your write-up.

There are plenty of options for the Ostheer, whether that's going aggressive with an FHT and Pgrens during that phase of the mid-game where Tier 1 Soviets struggle a bit, putting down an Opel truck to get you ahead on the vehicle tech and allow you to keep the snipers pinned for most of the game, going for a PAK-43 or saving up for an elephant to ward off the SU-85s, getting a mortar halftrack to answer the snipers. If you feel incredicheesy, spamming Ostruppen more or less makes snipers pointless.
26 Oct 2013, 23:50 PM
#11
avatar of =][=mmortal

Posts: 215

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2013, 22:15 PMBlovski
I see you've ignored all the corresponding advantages of the Ostheer in your write-up.

There are plenty of options for the Ostheer, whether that's going aggressive with an FHT and Pgrens during that phase of the mid-game where Tier 1 Soviets struggle a bit, putting down an Opel truck to get you ahead on the vehicle tech and allow you to keep the snipers pinned for most of the game, going for a PAK-43 or saving up for an elephant to ward off the SU-85s, getting a mortar halftrack to answer the snipers. If you feel incredicheesy, spamming Ostruppen more or less makes snipers pointless.


The point of the thread isnt to obsess over a single unit's balance or lack there of, its to point out my belief that after having played this game for months since release that the soviet faction ultimately rewards good micro and play more effectively than ostheer. Naturally both factions need tweaking in their units to keep the game competitive (buff penals and m3, seriously). Su-85 have long been joked about as needing an elefant to counter. <- just an example, not the point of my thread

I think this is fundamentally due to a few things in particular, namely the non-linear soviet tech system, commander call-in utility, disparity between reliance on munitions, and weapon range advantage that gives the soviet a very strong position to fight from.

Some have argued that the germans are actually more flexible because they are forced to get t2 which gives them more unit options than a sov skipping t2, but the truth is the ostheer units are more generalist--the sov player has the choice of doctrines/tiers to decide which specialist units compliments his play the best for that game. As wongtp posted above, my push in the replay was for a p4 ASAP to counter the expected sov vehicle rush. Had my opponent rushed t3 could I have really held on by foregoing t3 and trying to hold for t4 or a heavy? Not in coh2, maybe in vcoh...but this isn't vcoh.

@UGBEAR
I stand by my record, and yes its pretty much pure ostheer play. But please tell me the part where playing germans doesnt require having to defend against strong sov strategies and exploit their weaknesses to win. You dont have to play 500 soviet games to know that a kv-8 is a shock unit that will murder-rape an infantry squad up close.

Soviets can float more munitions because their units are less reliant on expensive upgrades to perform needed roles. Cheaper unit ability costs and mines (molotov 15 mun, oorah 10 mun, 30 mun mine, etc etc) means the sov player has more ability to influence the battle directly through his own micro instead of relying on the passive strength of a unit shooting another unit. This is an example of why I say high level play gives the soviet player more opportunity to excel. The risk/reward of spending munitions early game is minimal for the soviet player as he can reasonably expect to hold his own mun point while harassing the other and is not forgoing the equivalent of an LMG on his conscript or med bunker upgrade by throwing a few nades.

=========================================

What I really want to see from this game in the future is the redesign of cheese units/abilities on both sides (looking at you ostruppen, precision strike, and t70s), what the german commanders in particular bring to the table meta wise, and the leveling of the economies to make a munition point just as valuable for a sov player as for a ostheer player. Risk/reward and unit counters at different stages of the game need to be looked into. COH is not a franchise like supreme commander where its fun to see units instantly pop to a flying death laser... the fun comes from being able to react and counter-attack.

I think when this incremental and gradual process moves along, the game will be more competitive and more fun for everyone. I don't favor either faction balance wise because both have rough edges that need smoothing. My point is that as far as I can tell now, the soviets simply need more changes or a redesign.

Relic and the community should admit this and make a coherent plan going forward to address the meta in the game. This thread is attempting to draw awareness to the need.

And at the end of the day its just my opinion, but I wouldn't post it without giving the issue careful thought and signing it as my honest opinion to improve the game for everyone, favoring neither ostheer or sov players


27 Oct 2013, 01:40 AM
#12
avatar of blitz1337

Posts: 184

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2013, 19:06 PMwongtp
i watched the replay. i think you were too unflexible in your play, too reliant on getting up the panzer4 asap. im no pro, here's what i felt.



2) failing to recognize t1 + guards would mean total reliance on soviet rifle infantry, there will be no support teams/shock troops hindering panzergrens from closing up and mopping up. ppsh conscripts are still no match for panzergrens and grenadier mixes. here was where i thought ur play was inflexible, hard pushing that panzer4 was a mistake, delaying it for panzergrenadiers and exploiting ur enemy's apparent infantry weakness would have won you map control and delaying that su85.

You forgot he had 2 snipers..... making PG's farily redundant

27 Oct 2013, 02:15 AM
#13
avatar of HS King

Posts: 331

Edit: This thread is an evolving flow of my thoughts on the matter, but the point of this post is to draw community awareness to my belief that the current design of the game is subtly flawed and needs addressing, in particular regard to the soviet faction. Any tips or feedback you can give me on my attached replay is welcome too!

==============

You've probably seen a post claiming one side is too strong 100x here already, but I affirm this is not another clueless whine thread. I've sunk 500 games into high elo+ ostheer play, and among many others, have beat the streaming celebrities' soviet multiple times each (except vonivan, t70 abuse ftw). I have seen what works and doesnt and know how to micro.

I'm genuinely looking for quality feedback on both my play and the state of the coh2 meta.

Check out this replay for a tough game and a perfect example of what I mean.
REPLAY HERE

Explain to me how to beat the synergy of soviet HTD scripts/at nades + guards + snipers + su85 + 30mun mines + munition float for whatever you want (cough strafe cough) in a 1v1.


Abstract
This is a long post because the situation is very complicated and requires numerous examples so you understand where I am coming from.

1. The soviet meta is fundamentally slightly OP when played by a pro because the units and economy synergize perfectly with their commanders and each other. The germans lack hard counters to certain units at various stages of the game, such as the inevitable t70 rush. Germans lack commanders, other than AG or ostruppen, that allow for radically different builds.

2. The imbalance comes from the sum total of small aspects about the many soviet units and meta that are strong acting in concert, and come to the fore when facing someone with good micro. Its less that a particular unit is game breaking than the entire faction under its current design is slightly OP because of how the parts all fit together.

3. New players will have trouble playing soviets because 1 on 1 units will lose to their ostheer counterpart. On the other hand a pro with good micro can use every unit's strengths and abilities at the same time for perfect combined arms. I don't believe the germans have an equivalent meta that flourishes in high level play and rewards skillful micro to that extent.

Everyone likes to claim german is OP because it takes less skill to use them... but that myth is brought back to reality when high level play just demonstrates the units arent strong enough to handle soviet role specialization (snipers, su85s, t70s) in a close match, short of a significant failure in play by soviet micro.

What I really want to see from this game in the future is the redesign of cheese units/abilities on both sides (looking at you ostruppen, precision strike, and t70s), what the german commanders in particular bring to the table meta wise, and the leveling of the economies to make a munition point just as valuable for a sov player as for a ostheer player. Risk/reward and unit counters at different stages of the game need to be looked into. COH is not a franchise like supreme commander where its fun to see units instantly pop to a flying death laser... the fun comes from being able to react and counter-attack.

I think when this incremental and gradual process moves along, the game will be more competitive and more fun for everyone. I don't favor either faction balance wise because both have rough edges that need smoothing. My point is that as far as I can tell now, the soviets simply need more changes or a redesign.

Relic and the community should admit this and make a coherent plan going forward to address the meta in the game. This thread is attempting to draw awareness to the need.

And at the end of the day its just my opinion, but I wouldn't post it without giving the issue careful thought and signing it as my honest opinion to improve the game for everyone, favoring neither ostheer or sov players


===================

MYTH: Soviet t4 rushes are countered by a competitive early game to prevent quick t4 unit proliferation.

REALITY: The reality is and has always been that soviet t4 is cheap enough to get with only a single fuel point held before or at the same time as german t3, or even t2. Not t4, but t3! Germans won't get t4 out except in a troll game or a desperate attempt to counter su85s like in my replay, which failed horribly.

Soviet early game is not hampered by teching as their t0 building provides all the utility they need to go toe to toe with t1 and t2 ostheer with doctrinal support.

For all intents and purposes the soviets have two t3s that they can choose between as they like. Many players would rush a t70 and then spam su85s because the cost of getting both buildings if you have 1 fuel reliably is basically irrelevant if you are holding your own.

1. Panthers cost twice as much mp as a su85 and 15 more fuel. Not including the fuel cost of the t4 upgrade and building. Panthers are not a hard counter to su85s IMO, which out range them and whose guns can penetrate frontal armor fairly reliably.

2. Soviets can afford to skip t3 because aside from a squishy and easily killed FHT (mines, guards, at nades, whatever), there is no rushed unit they need to be worried about.

3. People have been so busy spamming t70s/t34s that the old meta has fallen out of favor, not because its not OP anymore but because people got bored of it.

MYTH: Long ranged direct fire units are balanced

REALITY:
1. Weapon range is the single most important vehicle stat in coh2, and often with range comes weapon power per shot. The ability to shoot across the map from beyond a monitor's width of screen resolution negates any downside to move speed. This problem is not limited to the su85 alone, but the elefant is also stupidly long ranged.
2. Soviets have many long range options that feed each other, specifically snipers for AI and su85 for AT, with an su76 for fun if you want quick IDF. 120mm outranges 81mm mortars, and the precision strike ability is button to get a free kill on whatever squad is trying to cap a point or use a support weapon.
3. The unit cap is not that high in coh2, especially for ostheer with 4 man squad limits. Combined arms become extremely difficult to pull off when your squads and vehicles are picked off or forced to retreat one by one by snipers/su85s before even handling the rest of the support units on the field. Losing a vehicle or a couple squads from your attack to sniper units means you are permanently on the defensive and being pushed off the map.
4. Certain maps like langres, mowscow outskirts, pripyat winter and minsk pocket really emphasize the advantages of supported long range units.


Example One:
30 munition mines for a faction that doesnt require regular munition use to stay competitive leads to lane denial and map control, that in the long run, will lead to an even larger munition/fuel/vp? lead over the ostheer player. Lack of munitions will make it harder for an ostheer to field LMGs or rifle nades, which can be required to deal with conscripts using HTD and PPSH. The german completely lack a useful AI mine, especially at that price point. It would be much less effective against soviet squad sizes of 6. Losing 1-2 conscripts does not force a retreat like losing 2-3 grens does.

Example Two: No real hard counter exists for sov sniper teams. Soviet snipers are not vulnerable to counter sniping. Soft counters like AC and 81mm mortars are stopped dead by supporting units/mines and the luck factor. German snipers face more perils in use as they are a 1 man squad, squishy vs IDF (120mm precision strike anyone?, or just unlucky RNG), many IDF cdr abilities, zis IDF, su76 IDF, whatever.
Sov snipers synergize well with 30 munition mines because they can instantly pick off the survivors of a planned ambush with impunity and almost no time to react. In this example the soviet sniper's dps is fine, what is OP is the fact that 30 munition mines are not a risky proposition for a soviet player to use. The risk/reward proportion is out of balance for that item and sov snipers take advantage of that.

Example Three: Near and dear to my heart is the fact that without molotovs, ostheer are unable to reliably control key buildings on certain maps in t0. Every game devolves into a rush by players to stand next to a fuel/cutoff's building in case the enemy shows up. Jump inside, win. Difference is the germans can be forced out by soviet molotovs. If you dont rush your fuel defensively as a german, you WILL be cutoff 2 mins in and vulnerable to t70 rushes. GG.




This is one of the best posts I have seen on the forums. I mostly play ost but I dabble with the soviets, its not because im a fanboy but because I do not find the soviets rewarding to play. Even if you are losing as sov it never feels like it, the MP drain is never bad and its very difficult to really suffer from any unit losses, you can do it all game long and still float major mp and munitions.

Even massive early game losses dont mean anything, in vcoh it could mean gg straight off the bat. Ost is always on the knife egde, losses mean something, mp drain and muni drain is real but soviets this is never the case even when run off the map for substantial times. They can just spam their way back onto the map. THere are fundemental flaws with the game and need to be addressed like you said.

THe way the sov side is designed is basically a spam army, and ost has to really be clever in the approach to anything. You mention the distance discrepancy which is crazy, the soviets gain great benefits from keeping their indirect fire and long range units passively, and its almost impossible to counter them effectively. They just build 2 120 mortars and sit back with su 85 and theres nothing u can do. Even great maneuvers fail as su85 it still too powerful ( combination of great Armour, health, range and rate of fire) one of those factors needs to be addressed.

Its like the soviet army has all the abilities that the ost need to counter sovs ( better mg that pins, better los for su85, precision strike for mortars, anti inf ability for at guns, mines that work, super tough and adaptable inf that are multi roles with no trade off)

All their support weapons have 6 men and nothing can easily wipe them out, you can flank with a vet 3 gren with mg on a at gun and still struggle to polish them off as they start retreating. It should never be like this, a weapon crew like at gun, mortar and mg should be toast if they get flanked, end of story.

The fact that ost only has 4 unit squads makes such a huge difference on the field, any death mean a significant loss and easier chance to wipe the squad off the map, the soviets never have to fear this at all.

There are other underling issues with the game that make it no where near the level of the original coh. It lies in the game mechanics, and unit response times as well as the lethality and consistency of damage from weapons.

Molatovs are the biggest joke in my opinion, as they have potential to wipe out any squad, and the muni cost is negligible. Never does soviet army run out of munis, you can spam the almost free mines, molatove and nades at will, there is no skill involved, no risk and no reason not to.

There is never a draw back to teching molatov or at nades, its always possible and always a no brainer while it costs 120 muni to get shrecks.. which are good but they are on a super expensive and super easy to kill squad. Combat engies are tougher to wipe out then pgrens.

I just watched a vcoh game where an offmap arty strike wiped out 3 suads in one shot, why are these sort of abilities so pathetic in coh2? Its a spam filled arcade game compared to the original.

The devs never respond to threads like this, and they are doing themselves a disservice. THey are so lucky to have such a involved community that it taking the time out directly to tell them excatly what needs to be changed, we have spent countless hours on both games and we know what is good and bad, when threads like this get made with incredible insight and care taken to explain issues they are no where to be found.

I run a business myself and the most valuable thing, that companies pay millions for is to get insight into their customers mind, and here it is and its all being wasted.

Seriously it doesnt take that much to determine what post is trolling, or some whineing idiot and what posts are done by great players or people with real insight into problems with the game but it seems to be anyone that puts up real points gets ignored and the dumbed down masses get attention.

I also have to say the actual feel of coh2 is really second rate, from the super ugly cartoon hud, to the slow inaccurate unit controls to the weak and indecisive physics ( men fly out out armoured car but when hit with arty they do nothing, when shot with rifle they fall then bounce really hard off the ground.. wtf is this? Have they never even seen vcoh? The physics and effects are on another world compared to this and really truly effects the way the game is played, maps get damaged and the way action plays our changes through the match, nothing of the sort happens in coh2 - the ground gets darker but the cover system is a joke and this has 0 effect on the game. Lets not forget the completely random and stupid grenade/molatov/rifle nade damage and to the childs version of damage tables and weapons balance.

They went from knife edge lethality and chess like strategy to a spam army clickfest with the falvour of the month army ( soviets) getting every advantage at the expense of balance, fun and strategy.

The truth is coh2 can be great, can be better then vcoh but as it stands right now its not even close. It requires a bit more effort and some changes and then we would have ourselves a fantastic game but it seems that the real voices of real fans are being ignored for whatever reason and everyone pays for it.

If you are from relic and you are reading this listen to when the real fans speak, ones that love the original game, know what they are talking about and take time and real effort to try to make this game better for everyone.

We as fans have a fantastic opportunity to get to liase with you guys from relic and you guys have the opportunity to get incredible insight and feedback from real fans so lets both not squander what we have and take advantage of this amazing situation to actually make coh2 a true successor to vcoh.
27 Oct 2013, 03:48 AM
#14
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2013, 19:06 PMwongtp

You forgot he had 2 snipers..... making PG's farily redundant



his 2 snipers were up until fairly later? which by then early pgrens would have had already done their job/killed more than enough to pay for themselves.
27 Oct 2013, 07:21 AM
#15
avatar of Array
Donator 11

Posts: 609



corrected


I'm making no balance claim but the post expands and analyses the concept that the balance could shift significantly for different skill levels of the players (where they are both equally good or bad)

Personally I get kicked around has both factions but am less experienced with ostheer and can clearly see how I mess my games up, as soviet I can often play what seems to me to be a great early game but then still lose - normally to FHt and p4's but with pg's nullifying my counters. The detail here gives me lots of food for thought on how I might change aspects of my strategy and tactics to counter the problems in turn.

I hope in the short term that someone posts a similarly detailed response on how ostheer can be played to their full advantage for your benefit.

This topic is really important for balance though, the beta grapevine suggests that soviet is getting a significant rework and I assume perhaps wrongly that this will increase flexibility and thus ease of play for the faction, which at my level of skill feels (to me) broadly necessary. This gives another view that easing my (noob) pain might severely hurt high level ostheer players and that other areas (such as muni float and unit range) will need careful review.

Of course I don't actually know what's in the next patch unlike some but it sounds like the debs are going to have to think really hard about it and the next balancing steps particularly as any significant rework is going to throw up a whole load of new 'unforeseen consequences'
27 Oct 2013, 08:47 AM
#16
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Excellent meta analysis.

One particular universal element that shines through the cracks this post wedges, is flame dmg.

I think all flame dmg needs its crit chance reduced, and possibly its base damage increased.

One grossly understated use of Molotovs, is for preventing infantry assaults by placing an impassable wall of fire in the path of, for example, a Pgren/Assgren attempting to overrun Cons in cover.

Likewise, reducing the flame crit chance will make Cons more reliable and durable vs FHTs, improving its potential to score atleast an engine crit.
27 Oct 2013, 13:30 PM
#17
avatar of Ginnungagap

Posts: 324 | Subs: 2

Interesting read.

I'm genuinely looking for quality feedback on both my play and the state of the coh2 meta.


As i see it, CoH2 is more and more a game of hard counters. Recognizing what your enemy goes for and getting the counter is most important.
Basically as Ostheer i try to prepare for 3 common and strong tactics in 1v1 nowadays:

1. VonIvans Stalingrad Blitz Tactics, the most dangerous (i call it "the early kill"). Effective on urban maps like Semois (with molotows).
T70 Rush with PPSH. A P4 or even Stug almost always comes to late, PAKs mean total loss of map control, Tellermines rely entirely on the enemy to drive on one specific spot and Panzerschrecks are avoidable.
I will be honest, i played VonIvan multiple times and have not beaten him once, it is super effective.

But there is one unit that i would consider a hard counter to multiple T70 rush, at 1CP the Sd.Kfz 250 with Panzerschreck equpipped Pgrens in it. Is is expensive, but it works against T70s. After that you only have to worry about T34s, so you either tech up and go directly to P4s/Stugs or stall out for the Tiger. Since there are no Zis guns on the field, your armor will beat T3. It is only a matter of IF you can get Tanks out for yourself.


2. The aforementioned HTD scripts/at nades + guards + snipers + su85 + mines, or "late kill"

Explain to me how to beat the synergy of soviet HTD scripts/at nades + guards + snipers + su85 + 30mun mines + munition float for whatever you want (cough strafe cough) in a 1v1.

On of the oldest strategies with the best synergies. Perfect against the standart (P-)Grenspam into P4. Fairly weak in the middle game in terms of offensive, but will bleed you dry in the end. Effective on open maps like Langres.
Since a single Elefenant will kill an infinte amount of su85s, your whole goal should be to save up 5CP and 260Fuel. The rest of the resouces goes all to Infantry.
Once the Elefant is out, one Ostwind or P4 command tank can reign supreme over everything that is not a tank.

If the sniper part gives you more trouble than the su85, G43s are a hard counter to that. They can kill snipers at 40 range very quickly. Besides that, mortar halftracks are good against snipers and 120mm too.

There is also a variant of this strategy with KV8s (CcArtSO3 used it frequently if i remember correctly.), but since the nerf to the flame damage it is not as prevalent.


3. T2-T3, META flavour of the month, the most "balanced"
Since there is no rush for a single unit or crazy stong combo no specific counter or commander is needed. The usual P4 spam with support will do fine.
27 Oct 2013, 15:06 PM
#18
avatar of =][=mmortal

Posts: 215

Thanks for the continuing feedback guys. As I collect my thoughts and your responses I will eventually try to make an itemized list of actionable changes that can be made to the game to improve the fun and challenge for everyone. Theory is great but I want to also provide some recommendations on the off chance relic listens.

@Ginnungagap
Your are spot on with your post. I think you have highlighted exactly another flaw in the current meta for both sides:

Relying on doctrinal units to counter non-doctrinal units. Just like I don't enjoy being forced to save for a clunky elefant, many soviet players are tired of feeling required to use a Guards commander.
To me a doctrinal unit call-in should add support or perform a niche role in an army that you couldn't get otherwise.

Every counter you mentioned to strong soviet combos is from a specific doctrine. Not only that but to counter snipers/su85s you mentioned units from TWO separate doctrines. And each is essentially a soft counter--mortar halftracks with incendiaries is no more a hard counter to snipers than an 81mm or an off-map artilery call-in. It takes skill and luck to make work. On the other hand the soviet sniper team is a hard counter to ostheer snipers.

@Nullist
Molotovs are also something I've been thinking a lot about lately. The utility they give from start to finish is just unparalleled for their price point and early arrival.

You might be on to something with reducing the crit chance and upping the base damage for all flame weapons. That would punish you for standing and fighting for extended periods in flames while reducing the shock value. Relic did something similar with the kv-8, although its still quite strong. I am pretty tempted to advocate for a cost increase to molotovs as well, probably to a 20-25 mun price point as part of an overall overhaul of the faction.

@Array
I would love to see greater communication from Relic regarding both their next upcoming patch and vision for the game balance. I understand they err on the side of caution because they like to give themselves wiggle room to make changes without inspiring premature flame wars over a specific nerf... but at some point the greater community CAN and should help. The Forward HQ exploit on release was completely avoidable through testing. Similarly the issues with AGrens and Ostruppens could have used a gut check from the community

Does Relic have any kind of open beta build they allow the community to test before patches? Similar to how EVE has SISI and TQ?
27 Oct 2013, 15:34 PM
#19
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Their is an invitational Relic test server and a "secret" invitational board here on coh2.org from what I gather.
27 Oct 2013, 15:56 PM
#20
avatar of Blovski

Posts: 480

On the molotov discussion -

Riflenades have no upgrade cost (apart from Tier 1 but that's useful for a lot of other things), deal all their damage as frontloaded, have a reasonable area of effect, do an OK amount of damage to M3s(allowing you to finish one after a faust), can one-hit buildings, are much easier to fire from out of line of sight/behind obstacles, usually don't require you to leave cover (and therefore are telegraphed less) and also have a botched warning right now.

'Molotovs are also something I've been thinking a lot about lately. The utility they give from start to finish is just unparalleled for their price point and early arrival.' doesn't really cut it when riflenades are a free upgrade and have at least equal utility.

---

I'm not sure I'm a high-level enough player to comment with authority but it seems to me like you're expecting hard build order counters for strategies designed to have a synergy where each part of the strat compensates for another bit and the real counters are a matter of play (so, flank the snipers or use the scout car and FHT to force the Soviets to keep their forces bunched up, or alternatively get a mortar halftrack to put pressure on the snipers or whatever). If you're getting outplayed by a really good Soviet player I'm not sure that's evidence that the Soviet 'meta' is OP relative to the Ostheer...

Most of the good players I watch who play both sides regularly seem to feel that the Soviets are the weaker faction at the moment.
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

418 users are online: 418 guests
0 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
59 posts in the last month
Registered members: 46378
Welcome our newest member, DiazNickolas
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM