That won't work without a veterancy overhaul for all tanks, because the MGs scale very badly as the game goes on and enemy infantry gets lower target sizes with vet and medium cover becomes more abundant. They're also way worse at chasing retreating squads.
I would be happy with knowing that if I park a tank behind an unsupported AT gun I don't need an RNG roll to actually kill it. Chip damage would be great.
The mg treatment the t34 got is great. Even buffing the hull mg on all tanks would make a difference I think.
Beyond that, in regards to cover, perhaps the coaxial and pintles, partiallyignoring cover could help remedy that variable (the mgs are shooting from above)
But if all that happened was a hull mg buff I think the consistency and fear of tanks would be a great improvement. Vetted infantry not being as scared seems OK to me but team weapons would still suffer and that would be great |
What exactly do Soviets lack?
A grenade.
An infantry upgrade that comes before medium tanks (and thus generating value in that time)
Multiple weapon slots.
An mp only suppression platform that can reliably stop infantry from walking straight up the center of its arc while it shots.
An AT option that isn't "shot it in the face" of different flavors
Not to say that some of these are not OK, as soviet have alternatives-like the zis barrage instead of a nade... |
|
I actually think all tanks should get the t34 treatment where standing in front of it ias a bad idea... Remove some of the RNG of requiring the cannon to deter infantry from walking at it. |
That would be similar, but has some significant differences: It would require sight, and would definitely require the fire to be Direct, and it would be unit targeted, of course, which makes it a very different ability to that which has been suggested. Certainly an option, but it being closer to the Bofors ability would be nice, if that's possible.
Does an ability like "Volley fire" allow an unit to fire past it's usual range, in any case?
I agree it's quite different, I was just trying to make it work because of the limitation of a projectile thing.
Not sure about volley fire range tbh. I was just using it as an example of a target suppression ability.
Perhaps an alternative way to get around the animation would be having the vickers shoot blanks but call in an off map of suppression in the area. Then you kinda get the desired effect if a bit janky |
|
In regards to the vickers barrage thing. Could something like volley fire be used? A target ability but with more range than the normal range? It would be direct fire but it would have the desired effect |
Which constant mandatory expenditures do Soviet units have? Oorah? I really don't think that's "Mandatory" any more than Rifle Grenade is. It's a valuable tool for Conscripts, but it isnt "Mandatory" for it to be used "constantly"
Ostheer do have 60 munition LMG upgrades needed for their Grenadiers to be effective, which they start to require fairly early, Mobilise reserves is a cheaper upgrade (In terms of Muni) and comes much later.
Their Pintles might be the cheapest, but Soviet simply don't HAVE pintles to upgrade, other than through the IS-2 docs (I dont think there are any others). Pintles are great, but it clearly isnt a good think to point to when you're trying to argue how OSTheer has less Muni expenditure than Soviet.
OSTheer mines are also significantly more expensive than their Soviet counterparts (Individual patches of S-mines I would argue to be comparable to Tripwire flares).
OST also require Munitions for their healing solution, as opposed to Soviet who instead use fuel.
The maxim I'll agree, though it isnt commonly built, and the 57mm doesn't perform "on the level" of opposing AT guns when muni is pumped into it, it performs above and beyond them.
Soviets are considered one of the less munitions-heavy factions, to my knowledge, not one of the most, and Ostheer are absolutely not the "lowest". OKW are absolutely not the lowest, either, with mandatory STGs and (arguably) mandatory throwing of Flame Grenades to help swing fights in their favour. Up until the coming patch they also have a constant (practically) mandatory expenditure of Munitions for healing, as Mechanised builds are both popular, and don't have access to "free" healing. The latter can be such a sink that it often delays some of the STGs for Mechanised-build volksgrenadiers.
ISU also has pintles.
But soviet is drastically more soviet thirsty than it used to be. T2 units all have muni abilities that are frequently used, cons have had their dependancy on muni cranked up over the patches, penals will need PTRS if T1 is taken, 7 man is a thing now...
Quad is still the only AA and requires muni...
Su76 barrage now has a cost
Not to say they are more expensive than any other faction, but they are probably on par now. Certainly not able to simply lay mines like they used to. |
Yes we know, according to you all soviet units/abilities are UP (and yet for some miraculous reason the preview soviet faction is one strongest faction in game).
Let me explain something to you, not every post you make has to contain a rant about how bad Soviets are...
Now pls stop derailing a thread for UKF feedback with your rant about maxims.
The maxim is undeniably ass. Admitting that doesn't undermine the vickers argument.
On the topic, some sort of ability that increases suppression is what the vickers needs not range and not pen. Even if THAT'S tied to garrison or some shit. It needs to be able to stop infantry attacking it head on... |
I mean, this is taken into consideration, isnt it? Conscripts are an utility squad that trades favourably with axis infantry, particularly once it gets the 7-man upgrade, and vets up. They're not intended as a burst damage/focus fire squad, they're there to take points and make the enemy bleed hard trying to get them back.
which falls off dramatically when the enemy gets weapon upgrades, like 3 min into the game from their first techs while the soviet counterpart comes with their final tier. even then, you cant simply utility youre enemy to death- this idea that you can has been the bane of conscripts from days old. their utility has to be coupled with killing power elsewhere, in this case, the zis.
Centralised DPS is less an issue for SOV due to merge, and they even already have units (Guards, who are admittedly doctrinal) to fulfil that function. In any case, Conscripts are an exceedingly good infantry squad, with a lot going for it.
centralized dps is king in this gameis huge and bursting down models is what makes and breaks engagements, for example, if tommies do not kill 2 models of a sturm squad before they close, tommies lose to sturms with no cover attacking into tommies with green. when you start adding vet durability to both sides and then concentrated dps to one, the side without loses out.
and killing isnt the thing they have going for them, they have other units to do that. take away the ability for other units to do that and there is nothing to do that. cons are there to be a present enough threat to tar pit enemies while other units deal actual damage. eneough of a threat they cant be ignored but forced off easy enough if focused.
The zis is marginally worse at AT, sure, but it is also more survivable and has the incredibly valuable Barrage. Making the Barrage less effective than it is now is unlikely to make the unit useless or overpriced, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill.
the barrage is getting) nerfed. the follow up shells come much slower than they did before. im not overstating the ability at all, i simply understand why its necessary and dont think making the zis into a shittier pak is a good idea for the faction that doesn't even have a grenade in their core lineup. the barrage serves a purpose within the faction and removing it requires adjustments elsewhere
I'm pretty sure the ISU-152 is an anti-tank vehicle, and the HE shells are the thing that people complain about... not the AP shells. Reminds me of another unit, actually.
the isu is not and never ever in its entire existence in game or real life been an AT unit. it has ALWAYS been an AI unit first and foremost. the fact that it could engage tanks IRL was a reult of the huge caliber of gun and in game it serves to keep its performance and price in line because there is no way to have a ~250 fuel only AI unit remotely balanced. by having AT it eats up some of the "points" that go into cost effeciency and keeps its price high enough and its AI low enough that its palpable
I'm pretty sure it hasn't been suggested that the Barrage is being "gotten rid of", at least not meaningfully by anyone with the ability to make that so.
locking it behind vet is as good as and would throw off the balance in place and certainly require buffs to the zis and elsewhere in the faction.
What's being suggested (and being implemented in the Balance Patch) is a nerf to the Barrage to make it less oppressive. It doesn't need to be oppressive to be an useful unit or ability.
exactly, there is already a nerf in place, ive been operating under the assumption that people feel that that is not enough (thus a new thread complaining about something that is already being addressed)
|
The issue is that, although the other three Grenadier models don't contribute as much damage as the LMG gunner, you will be losing those models at a much faster rate. A four-man squad with poor survivability due to being reinforced with Ostruppen models is not survivable enough to make best use of its LMG's damage, even with the Grenadier RA and Damage reduction bonuses. You will be forced to retreat your Grenadiers much sooner, due to more rapid model losses, which will translate into inferior DPS overall... which is compounded by having to retreat even SOONER than that, as you will have less effective HP on retreat than is usual, meaning you cannot safely retreat at the same approximate HP as you usually would.
im aware of these drawbacks, which is why is specified it would have use on the defensive in conjunction with forward reinforcement. these would offset the major drawbacks in this scenario. its better to have a squishier squad shooting at the enemy than a more durable one running to base. part of the reason i like the idea is that it isnt perfect for every scenario which means it wont dominate the meta by being a flat upgrade. it would have its uses, especially in team game, but not be dominating.
Command bunkers aren't often used by Ostheer, incidentally (Though this might change a little with the coming patch that makes Command and Healing bunker upgrades non-exclusive), and Halftracks usually have a very short window in which they reinforce, as most Ostheer players will be upgrading them immediately to FHTs due to Ostheer's strong desire for a shock-light-vehicle.
perhaps a reason to leverage the utility of forward reinforcement may change that. just because people dont use things a certain way in the current meta doesn't mean they wont if the ideal scenario presents itself. the flexibility and ability to keep higher dps units on the field, even at a cost, could be
quite valuable. i recall ostroppen being backed by half track in the past to be very much a thing, and now that they can heal as well it would lend itself even more to helping larger models sized infantry
As mentioned before, the main benefit of Merge is not necessarily the lower reinforcement cost gained by replacing models with Conscripts, but instead the opportunity cost of being able to "instantly" reinforce in the field, effectively sacrificing a weaker squad's presence on the battlefield (The Conscripts) for allowing either a more immediately utilitarian unit (Team weapon), or a more deadly one (Guards, Penals) to stay on the field for much longer... or for consolidating models from multiple injured conscript squads into a smaller number of intact squads, reducing the number of squads that need to leave the field at once. The suggestion you're making really doesn't do any of these things.
im aware of the benifits of merge, and that this isnt that. this would act as something similar though. ost models are not cheap, ostroppen models are. you would be saving more in manpower but losing out in staying power. im aware of this, the benifits would not be the same as merge but the outcome somehat similar and true to the theme of the ability- get bodies out as fast as you can to help hold the line. thats what would happen. its relief infantry. nobody would be under the assumption that they are getting the same models for half the price. you are paying less and getting less, but you are getting something. shitty men holding the line are better than nobody holding the line and the interior stats of the ostroppen models would ensure that this isnt simply "all your infantry reinforces at half or less their origional cost for no drawbacks whatsoever"
as long as the drawbacks are clearly stated (or as clearly as coh2 tooltips are allowed to be) it could work. if nobody used it it would be no worse off that the current iteration of the ability, if some people find value in having cheap reinforcements on some of the most expensive reinforcement costs around then we have something.
again, the beauty of it is that its not a universally good choice to reinforce your infantry with, its situational with advantages and disadvantages and that means it gives the player a choice.
|
I understood it the same way. But as I said, you are just gimping your own squad. Merge on elite units is very unpopular, but if you do so it provides the huge advantage of getting a better weapon or keeping a better squad on the field. The suggestion of OP does neither of this. Your choice is to gimp your squad by reinforcement, most of the benefits of merge are lost.
The benifit in this case would be rapid reinforcement and manpower saved. It wouldn't always be applicable but there would be scenarios where having squads on the field with full models would be better than not. Grens are 30mp a head and most of their dps comes from the lmg42 so what models are standing around firing their rifles don't matter so much, especially behind cover. Combined with a halftrack or command bunker you could have a cost effective line holder for a Time
I like it because it has clear drawbacks-outside the defensive scenario mentioned, your squad is weakened. Assuming you can chose between the models you want to reinforce from it could have some use for sure.
While you are missing the imidiate reinforcement of merge you are saving like half the mp and time in reinforcement for grens alone. If allowed on something like pgrens you could end up with a nasty halftrack pshrek combo. Weaker but with its boons as well.
I like the idea because it's a choice based ability with a dynamic |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
