DAK's T4 tech is prohibitively expensive
you need to pay 350MP (not the usual 300MP for the other factions) and 130F just to get to a decent panzer 3 (not even a panzer 4), a 40F (too much?) AT gun and a stuka (which is pretty good).
why go for T4 then if you can just stick with T3 and spam light tanks to cover all of your needs? i suspect that the high price of t4 and it's underwhelming selection of units contributes to (but not exclusively accounts for) the rather stale light tank spam meta...
and then you need to pay 200MP and 150F (!!!) to get to armored call-ins, most of which cost a lot of MP to get, as they contain infantry squads most people probably do not want anyway (same applies to the USF EZ8 call-in)
the only solid call-in in terms of price is the one with two stug Gs.
the tiger costs another whopping 700MP and 180F, and even if you somehow manage to get to that stage, the game is probably almost over because of the overly fast VP tick rate.
these super high tech costs are made worse by the fact that DAK is a heavily MP starved faction... compared to the other factions, i find myself struggling with MP bleed all the time - losing an infantry squad like a pgren or an assgren is really crippling, and the armory upgrades (the half of which you actually need) are all MP based.
thoughts?
Have you tried consoling yourself by building a half dozen of the Carro Armato M13's instead? |
Thread: Jaegers14 Mar 2023, 01:33 AM
The Jaeger Light Winfantry are back and better than ever now with shrecks!
Anyone worked a reasonable counter? My mad-minute US Sniper hit a mine, so that sucked, but maybe that OP unit is workable, any other ideas?
I usually open with a couple pathfinders into paras with 1919's, backed by one MG and a quad (in 4v4's). If they shreck-up, they're vulnerable to AI and you can push them around with your infantry. If they do AI upgrades, then your 76 Shermans have fun.
Having played a bunch of Wher, I don't really like the Grens a lot late game, so Jaegers end up being a bit of a crutch. I like the Grens so little that I often try to get by with just one until I get Jaegers. My guess is that most people do the same so every game you lose, it feels like you're getting ran over by Jaegers, when the problem is that Grens aren't scaling particularly well. When you win, you don't notice the Jaegers. |
This.
I also think people are insane if they can fully understand the games factional cometitive balance in a few days.
With large patches, it took COH2 2-3 MONTHS, not days for the meta to evolve.
One of my few regrets about COH 3 is that there won't be another balance patch. I don't think the last couple community patches were good for Allies in 4v4. Last month, the win rate for top 200 Allies in 4v4 was 37-40% depending on faction. 1v1 through 3v3 are well balanced which, to me, means that they did a good job of balancing infantry through medium tanks. Rocket arty, howitzers, and heavies are the problem. IMO, the game would be a lot better off without any of those things anyway. |
Oh I found the video. Lol. I really haven't been keeping up.
I like that they said they accidentally defaulted most people to low settings. It's proletarian and populist.
It might be proletarian and populist but it led to great frame rates....... |
Hello, I have a simple question. Is the Greyhound useless? Because it does feel like that. I can't see any situation where it is something that will give me a big advantage in said situation. Asking for both 1v1 matches and 3v3 or 4v4. I need some advice on it, or for someone to tell me to drop it because it actually is bad and its not just me
Once in awhile when I feel like doing something non-meta, I'll get them in a 4v4. If you play somewhat conservatively with them, they end up with really great vision and good AA at vet 2 or 3. I combine one with two Jacksons which makes it really difficult for armor, then once the armor is chased off, the main gun acts almost like a sniper. It's really situational and much more difficult to use against good players. |
Sometimes it worked, sometimes not. I think it was either the resource points or manpower points you couldnt cap on the minimap. Either way, I know there were issues.
It worked okay for me on the minimap but sometimes resulted in immediate retreats when I used the regular screen. I'd agree with the people who said it is buggy.
FWIW - I don't think it will be a massive flop. It has a lot of customizeability which will make it a hit for the single-players.
The biggest thing that I saw that was wrong with it was the UI. It looks like it was optimized for a tablet. It's way too spread out, and the hot keys can't be easily used by just one hand. That won't work for competitive gaming, unless you're 14 years old and playing on your phone. |
Thread: I'm sad19 Jan 2023, 07:25 AM
Yeah the Guastatori have a sticky satchel charge for whatever reason.... imagine soviet shock troops with that.
Anyways I share the sentiment of this thread... going back to CoH2 after the tech test is really rough and launch can't come soon enough
Shock troops with satchel and flamethrower, what's not to hate......
20 hours of COH3 spoiled COH2 for me, will just play other stuff until release. |
This is an important point to people doing preorders. How confident are you that Relic/Sega will not put this kind of trash into the game? I would be extremely mad if I bought the game just to find, when I downloaded it, there was some garbage like this in it.
But that is not my problem.
I'd be surprised if there wasn't some garbage in it, or if the first DLC didn't have over-the-top commanders. I'll buy it and like it anyway. |
I went for the same strat and made it to 500-0 in under 11 minutes in a 2v2 (will add screenshot later).
All I had to do was to drop pios on the vps and backcap with the kettenkrad, then build two flak 38's and camp for 10 minutes. This deletes any fun or strategy from the game, since there is not much the enemy can do, if one goes hard on this kind of playstyle. There is no comeback from a mistake or early fuk and You get punished even further You decide to tech against this.
In the predecessors you could have games anywhere from 15 to 60 minutes, where You can fuck up and manage to comeback with all kinds of strategy. Deciding a game that early has no appeal and is just boring af, this needs a change imo.
I'm not sure I'd read that much into one game (commenting about the winning strat). There were a lot of trash players this weekend. Sometimes I'd try things that made me one of them. The fact that your opponents didn't have a counter doesn't mean that it will be unstoppable in multiplayer.
I do agree that there isn't a comeback from a mistake. It's going to lead to a lot of early drops and will be terrible for 2v2+ multiplayer. |
For fuck's sake, a game isn't gonna flop because graphics or audio is not fully nailed down. It's the GAMEPLAY that really matters in the end.
CoH2 multiplayer at launch was:
- trash meta
- boring units without weapon profiles and dull veterancy
- laggy af games because no battle servers
- terrible performance esp. snow maps and blizzards
- no ladders
--> 75% of the launch-day playerbase gone in just 3 months
Seriously all the people here who praise and worship CoH2 so much, I just cannot imagine you were here from the beginning since June 2013
COH2 was trash at launch. It froze often on my computer and I'd lose units in multiplayer before getting control back. It was so un-fun that I stopped playing after a month or two and played other things until WFA came out. COH3 feels a lot better.
I looked on Steam and saw that I actually played more like 20 hours of the beta. I'm sure it's going to be addictive to a lot of people.
|
![Orange Zombie [ROK] flag](/images/replay/ostheer_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
