|
Thanks for taking the time to review. A lot of the squad wipes came from sticking around too long trying to decap or thinking that I'd get my grenade off first, then retreating without getting the grenade off and still losing the squad.
It's interesting how you could see the indecisiveness. There were multiple times where I was thinking WTF do I do now?
I will try Obers in long matches next time. I took a long break from playing and when I started again, it seemed like Volks were so efficient that there wasn't much of a reason to use anything else. I've tried Obers in 3's and 4's where they didn't seem to be worthwhile due to the stupid amount of indirect (particularly mortar pits) and the long reinforce time.
Thanks again |
Imo IS-2 much better, than ISU-152. It is one of the best tanks for allies.
On the other hand i find weird that fact, that 122-mm D-25T(IS-2 main gun) deals 160 damage, and 8.8-cm L/71 (Tiger II main gun) deals 240 damage. In the same way 152-mm guns (ML-20 on ISU-152 and M-10T on KV-2) deals only 240 damage, and 12.8-cm gun/8.8-cm guns (Jagdtiger and Elefant) deals 320 (in WBP 300) damage.
In some regards, you're talking apples and oranges. The KWK 43 had a lot higher muzzle velocity than the D-25T and could penetrate thicker armor. In real life, either of these would have one-shot any medium tank that they hit, but that wouldn't make for a fun video game. A good compromise might have been to give the D-25T a passive stun ability, so that anything hit but not penetrated couldn't respond for 1-2 seconds, including an increased reload time for the tank that was hit. At the end of the day, it is a video game, not a simulation.
|
If any higher level OKW random players have time to look at this, please review it.
I lost an hour long 2v2 on Crossing against a USF/UKF team where I made a lot of mistakes early yet it still felt winnable until about 40-50 minutes in. Here are the questions that I have:
1) Unit composition - on that map and matchup, was Scavenge the right doctrine to pick? JLI's didn't seem to be any better than volks on that map and that type of fighting
2) After losing my schwerer, should I have rebuilt it or just stuck with calling in a KT?
3) Was getting a KT the right choice? It seemed to not be effective with the Jacksons and Firefly's on the other side.
4) A lot of times, the game felt like two 1v1's, except when the other team hammered one of us. Did it look that bad, and do you have any suggestions on how to avoid the situation. I mostly tried to stay center but remember being far away a couple of times while my teammate was getting rekt.
5) Any other strategic mistakes?
|
|
If any higher level OKW random players have time to look at this, please review it.
I lost an hour long 2v2 on Crossing against a USF/UKF team where I made a lot of mistakes early yet it still felt winnable until about 40-50 minutes in. Here are the questions that I have:
1) Unit composition - on that map and matchup, was Scavenge the right doctrine to pick? JLI's didn't seem to be any better than volks on that map and that type of fighting
2) After losing my schwerer, should I have rebuilt it or just stuck with calling in a KT?
3) Was getting a KT the right choice? It seemed to not be effective with the Jacksons and Firefly's on the other side.
4) A lot of times, the game felt like two 1v1's, except when the other team hammered one of us. Did it look that bad, and do you have any suggestions on how to avoid the situation. I mostly tried to stay center but remember being far away a couple of times while my teammate was getting rekt.
5) Any other strategic mistakes? |
snip
I use the Jackson well and effectively but it makes me wonder if only I and a few other top USF players can use it then is it under powered? The reason I'm so opposed to the Jackson changes as if they go through then the Jackson will be incredible overpowered in my hands which I disdain the idea of. Take away that vulnerability of being three shotted then one of it's two weaknesses is patched. Yes, it'll have no armor but to take another AT shot is huge when said tank has a turret, 60 range, and great AT statistics.
snip
I don't think any amount of skill will help Jacksons on maps like Red Ball with a couple of the super TD's being used by roughly equally skilled players. Three Jacksons have roughly the same pop cop as two Ele's or JT's. They outrange you so one of the three Jacksons goes up in smoke immediately. The other two Jacksons might scratch the paint on one of the other two but will have to retreat as soon as they are hit. Those matchups end up being a shitfest of bazooka blobs, Calliopes, Fireflys versus JT, Ele's, KT's, walking stuka's etc. However, USF has nearly disappeared from 4v4's so it's usually just Brits and the occasional Soviet against mostly OKW.
USF would be in a lot better position in those games if all commanders could build a Pershing after getting all of the officers, the same way that OKW can build a KT with any commander. Non-doctrinal mines would help a lot also.
I do get your point about the 640 HP Jackson being too much in a 1v1.
|
I'd argue to just keep the Jackson as is then for these changes to go through. Do note I'm advocating for one v ones not team games as that's not my interest (aside from twos every once in awhile). The Jackson should only be slightly increased in price and hp to prevent one shots and two shots but still be three shotted by enemy AT guns.
The Jackson is USF answer to Axis heavy armor and it does that job well. It has good penetration, long range, and it has a turret which people seem to underestimate the significance of. USF has other tools to deal with Axis medium tanks and below with the 57mm, bazooka's, Shermans, etc. Tell me what weaknesses of the Jackson would remain aside from having no armor? It has 60 range, is mobile, and hard to flank without taking return fire as other Tank destroyers are unable to which is huge. If I allow my Jackson to get chased and destroyed it's because I misplayed from either lack of supporting it, not scouting, or some other reason where I did something wrong.
Why I reached ranked 1 with USF is because I used the Jackson to it's strength as a mobile, long range but fragile turreted tank destroyer. I don't get why people are complaining about the Jackson when they play like a slugger when it's not! If the Jackson gets that HP buff even with the cost increase it will be overpowered in one v ones. I mean this is coming from a player who loves USF to death.
The problem with the Jackson isn't the Jackson itself - it's the Elefant and JT combo in larger games that make the Jackson worthless after a point. Lack of mines for USF makes it worse. Also, having the pop cap of the super TD's be only slightly larger than a Jackson further complicates matters.
Just out of curiosity, do you use the Stuart in the current patch and if so, when? It only seems to soft counter the flamer halftrack when I use it and is otherwise a waste of pop cap, but it could be user error. |
|
Recon Support
Replace Forward Observers with a scoped rifle upgrade, similar to what Panzerfusiliers get.
IR Pathfinders - please fix pop cap, 6 is absurd for a 3 model squishy squad. Give them the ability to plant the 30 muni mines and let them cloak like snipers
Greyhound - at minimum, include armor skirts free when called in, maybe fix main gun to make it somewhat useful, canister shot is currently a joke
Recon Sweep- replace with m1919 upgrade, why does a recon company only have short range weapon upgrades?
Airdropped Combat group - break it up into something less expensive and give more control over the weapons that the paratroopers get. If you can float 900 mp, you can probably win the game without any abilities.
Mechanized
WC51 - This unit goes between OP and garbage every time it is changed. It would be nice if you could buff it but not to the point that I see three of them every time I play OKW in a 1v1.
Withdraw & Refit - think it is currently okay
Halftrack assault group - either replace with plain Assault engineers or with a motar half track. The ability is too expensive and doesn't do much.
Recon Sweep - replace with Pershing
155 mm Artillery - currently okay
Feuerstorm
Commander isn't terrible, in fact decent on city maps. It doesn't get used a lot because it is situational so commanders like Spec Ops are always better to have in loadout.
Hetzer - worst ability in doctrine, needs to get close to be effective but then doesn't live long. Maybe decrease target size so that it has some chance of doing something.
LGF
Another situational commander that isn't too bad.
Flak emplacements are still a joke. Either fix or replace with something usable.
On a lot of maps, Falls are too much of a glass cannon, maybe buff reinforce cost and time.
OST
All commanders - could you make Grens survive better against indirect? The only starting infantry that I like less than Grens is the live version Cons.
Jaeger Inf - Light Artillery Barrage - maybe make it into a timed counter battery ability to cut down on Allied indirect fire abuse (clone the British one)
Ostruppen - replace Concentrated Fire with an offmap Counter Battery (like British one), replace coordinated fire with a clone of the USF major's offmap
|
There's plenty of evidence within this thread that at least one of the members on the mod team that is driving the direction of "balance" has very little knowledge of how things currently work in CoH2 in terms of actual gameplay. This patch pretty much pushes the game to an unrecoverable state if it is released as is. With this patch (and any future patches released by the same team) the game will never be competitive, and it's chances of actually being enjoyable to play for each faction are practically zero. It'd be great if the vocal minority could just for a second think of how fun it's going to be to sit in the lobby, searching for a game at 100% allies, and voice some concern on the direction of this game - at least if any of you want any more longevity from CoH2.
So how many 2v2+ games have you played as USF in the current patch? Ya, didn't think so. The vocal majority got their wish last patch with almost every USF nerf that they ever wanted. This from the same balance team that you're now accusing of being biased towards Allies.
As for all your other conclusions, they're all comically bad. The current patch had really low Allied search rates for awhile. Long term, it didn't change the average number of players or the "longevity" that you talk about. |
|
Neither are really worth it. Airburst shells from UKF usually kill the PAK 43 in 1-2 barrages. The pop cap of the 17 pounder means that it is rarely built, and LEIG's take it down easily. I'm okay with both of them not being built. |
|
I'd like to be able to exit and retreat right away. I'd rather the penalty just be on entering. There are a lot of times I exit a building with just a couple of models and see this leading to lots of wipes.
I won't miss the current state of garrison BS. The only thing I like less than having to use garrisons is playing against someone who does the hop-in, hop-out all the time. |
0
Relic Entertainment
