Luchs is heavier and has tracks. Therefore more stable firing platform. Therefore more accurate. In the abstraction of CoH 2, that means it's more effective overall, which means more damage, accuracy, ect, all porportioned to balance ofc.
So there. Luchs has same gun but is not the same tank.
Actually no. The 222 and Luchs were about equal both in protection values and performance historically speaking. The 222 in this game is firing AP-rounds instead of HE-rounds. More effective overall for infantry, also its armor is pathetically thin and weak compared to the Luchs.
Also there is virtually no reason that the 222 is firing slower than the Luchs save for "balance" One could argue that since they are firing AP-rounds, that they are shooting slower for the sake of accuracy against vehicles, but that's about it. |
Why not make it increase accuracy by 200%? That should make any AT Weapon have 100% accuracy against any target.
That would actually be very fair, Allied AT equipment often suffers from a lack of accuracy. If accuracy was improved by marking a target instead of increasing the raw damage the target takes, then it would be mostly balanced. |
|
No more powerful than the damn double BAR or BAR + M19191, or double M1919's.
Like seriously, Grenadiers can't even double equip anymore for G-43 + LMG42, why should American rifles be able to?
But like, whatever - I already know this thread is going to turn into an Axis hate train and say "LMG-Grens are OP and need nerfed!".
Why bother trying to speak reasonably right? |
That's not even in the same book as "ok". It couldn't be ok. Why a wire is better than other wire? Nurf the okw wire!! 
No seriously, this should not be.
Because it's not just friggen wire, it's a reinforced steel barricade with razor wire on it to discourage and completely shutdown traffic in an area. |
The fancy "efficiency" percentages at the end of a match are awful ways of evaluating how effective a unit is. I mean I never get more than 10% efficiency with vehicle crews, ambulances, and medics so they must be awful right? I doubt it even takes into consideration how much suppression a unit has done (an MG's entire reason to exist).
Actually that's just it, it seems efficiency is almost directly evaluated based on casualties and damage inflicted. |
I think it can be agreed that this ability works far more effectively than the P-47 strafe does, in this current patch. Therefore, I think the Cost of the JU-87 strafe should be increased to reflect this superior performance, to say 260 or 280. Yes that's expensive, but considering it can one-shot Jacksons and put allied mediums into a position in which a Panther can easily finish them off... I'd say it would be worth it.
How about no? It still arrives 3x slower than P-47's or IL-2's. It's fine as it is considering it can only kill Allied medium tanks that are neglected or ignored in placement. |
|
Honestly? No, I don't think they really do. They don't have all that great of range to begin with. To fire they have to be within range of enemy tanks and often will lose a few models on the first couple of shots fired from the tanks. |
Lol,
Yeah let's just completely disregard the fact that it doesn't only hit vehicles, easily avoided? Did you even see how the sherman was strafed? No smoke or anything, just the plane coming from outside the map at incredible speed, no visual feedback from the shells exploding just the sherman being shredded, the P47 can't even achieve that sort of damage even when standing still given how only a single rocked will hit at a time.
Have you considered that the camera simply didn't pan over where the flares were? Or the fact that the Sherman was within the same barrage area that assisted in killing the SU-85 and that the Stuka came around on one of it's 3x passes that allowed for the flares to no longer be on screen? |
I'm surprised no one mentioned that the stuka doctrine is overall better than the p47 one, costs less, is much more reliable AND ALSO TARGETS SUPPORT WEAPONS when there are no vehicles.
Also the axis apologists are gardening ridiculous man, the Su-85 was almost destroyed in a single pass with no chance of evading, an exclusively anti tank strafe like the p47 can't even come close to do that when you consider just reversing is enough to avoid it completely.
Uh, it's really not less expensive at all, it's very fuel heavy if you use conversion. (assuming you're using Close Air Support doctrine.)
The SU-85 would have been flanked by a goddamn tiger to begin with, not to mention that the thing made zero attempts to try and escape after the flares were cast, sticking close to the rear of the IS-2 up until it was hit by the JU-87.
It was bad play on the Allied player's part and the Stuka is just as easily avoided as a P47 Mustang Rocket Launch. If you use it and catch your opponent off guard, it'll work with deadly efficiency. Besides that the P47's can outright kill tanks on single passes. This Stuka left the tanks hit with enough HP to be hit by tigers, panthers, and ATG's at least two or more times before death. |
This must be the first thread ever in COH 2 history complaining about this strafe being too powerful, so i guess relic actually did something right this time,
PS. i have always wanted this ability to have an impact, even if i am a soviet player (huge fan of Hans Ulrich Rudel), since it has always sucked and it costs a lot in munitions and you never saw it being used
Hans-Ulrich Rudel, er trinkt nur sprudel.
@PwnageMachine, quit fuckin' crying man.
The guy dumped 200 munitions into a air-call in that lowered the HP of two single individual tanks to a manageable level that allowed for quick destruction. You nor your ally(allies?) Had any proper Anti-Aircaft on the field and made no attempts at all to try and escape, you set yourselves up for your own destruction, swallow it down like a damn man and face the fact you got outplayed. |
United States
![[Sigmnt] flag](/images/replay/usf_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
