That's why it's range is 200. Whereas Stuka zu Fuss has a 1000 max range and 160 HP. In other words to use Calliope you need to get it to the front line.
Stuka -> Low hp/armor, devestating precise long range strike
Calliop -> Low range AOE rocket arty that may or may not kill. Also it's in salvoes so you have time to react whereas Stuka drops them in a sec or two making you pray that it misses.
If Stuka had 5 times the range of Calliope we'd all be complaining about the Stuka. Those numbers are super wrong, since even 60 or 70 range is more than one screen away. 1000 range would be like base-to-base for a 4 v 4 map.
FSJ are pretty ridiculous. You can charge them into melee against shock troops and win more than half the time- due likely to their insane damage on the move. Not only that but the volume of fire from the FG42s rip any vehicle short of a light tank to shreds simply through raw dps. Honestly, losing the faust wasnt even a huge nerf because without it FSJ still hardcounter most light vehicles.
Let's be real, if paratroopers only had 5 men like rangers they would be woefully underpowered. You yourself mentioned that rangers get stomped by FSJ and per model paratroopers are actually WEAKER than rangers. Paras are powerful sure, but not as cost effective as rangers amd certainly not as cost effective as FSJ.
Yup, charging Falls into melee range vs Shock Troops is genius-IQ play. Never mind the fact that Shocks have the highest close range DPS AND the highest durability of all units in the game. Also, FG42s are a hard counter to AAHT and AEC, it really is that simple.
Okay that is fine, then we don't have to try at all?
A simple but obvious example: In the vanilla version of the game there was an Ostheer commander with a LKW that you could drive on a ressource point to get more income out of it for the whole team. So if you took this commander you and your mates could build the normal caches and in addition you drove the LKW on ressource points. This lead to a huge ressource advantage in the lategame of the Ostheer vs Soviet matchup at 3vs3 and 4vs4 while it was only a small advantage in 2vs2. Obviously it was no problem at all in 1vs1.
The simple patch solution that came shortly before OKW/USF hit the field was only letting the player gain the ressources who build the LKW. Pretty simple but ingenious, no influence at 1vs1 matchup but a huge impact on balance of other modes in the right direction.
This example shows clearly that the sentence "3v3 and 4v4 is just impossible to balance" is just a lazy excuse for not beeing willing to invest anything to make this game better for all players in all game modes. I don't claim this game will be balanced at 4vs4 ever, but yes it could be way better than it is today. There are solutions, some are simple, some need thinking out of the box.
The problem is that the different game modes are fundamentally different games with different parameters altogether.
Perfect balance for 4v4 will be unplayable chaos for 1v1.
As Sander has said, the balance team is happy to pander to team gamers by sacrificing 1v1 gameplay. There's little we can do but co-exist uncomfortably and miserably.
Wow, thats a kind one. I love this forums too, because there are people who seem to think that people outside top50 don't know how the game works. Thx in the name of all of them.
To be in the top50 is a lot more than knowing how the game works, it is about constantly playing and developing micro skills. It is about exploiting map design, about knowing the best spot for building your truck for example. I guess there are a lot of people above top50 that played strategy games as some of the top50 weren't even born. Because of kids and work they don't have the time for constant training. They play just a couple of games with friends once or twice a week. But they may know strategic/tactical basics a lot better becasue of their experience. Imagine, just for a moment, they might be able to understand how the game works. And then imagine they do have a right to play a fair and balanced game too. A good game isn't balanced in the Top50 only. Just consider this from time to time, it will help a lot. With best Regards
Balancing games across different skill levels has always been impossible.
The problem is that there's no clear "target audience" for COH2. Does Relic/balance team care about the fanatical fanbase, semi-regular players, or the casuals? Because it's impossible to balance the game for all of them.
For a substantial length of time (several patches in a row after major KT nerfs), the KT was unusable in 1v1, and was used as a BM token. People like Price (rank 30) used it on stream to show off vs rank 200+ players he was stomping.
Yet at the lower levels of skill, where players simply charged headfirst into the KT, the KT was considered "OP". And to players who didn't play the game, it was considered "decent".
Another example would be MG42 spam. For low elo players, flanking is difficult to execute. Especially in team games, it can often be hard to counter because of narrow maps. For a casual 4v4 player who runs his 3 squads of rifles face-first into an MG42, the game can be a frustrating experience.
But can you seriously expect to balance the game around these players' opinions, just because they "deserve" a fair and balanced game? Well, they're playing it - it's their skills that are not properly balanced.
I don't understand wyh people complain about "IL2 anti tank rocket Strafe" because Ostheer has that ability for years. Same damge same munition cost , im talking about Close Air Support Doctorine, it has JU-87 Anti Tank strafe. Don't tell me that JU-87 deals less damge i tested it. JU-87 Anti Tank strafe has been there for years without any complaint. Now tell me whats wrong with IL2 ? Maybe ramming and sacrifice a 34 is OP for you ? And another thing "IL2 anti tank rocket Strafe" is nerfed once its not like it was first release.
IL2 anti tank rocket Strafe is just copy paste of axis commander ability which is fine for years.
Ah, so an ability which requires two conditions (immobilised target + Commander ability) to be super powerful isn't impactful on a Commander-faction combo that can only fulfill one of those conditions? While the faction-commander combo which easily fulfills both conditions gets to benefit from the entire impact? Who would have thought?
Putting a potentially powerful late-game ability on one of the worst commanders in the Ost roster, vs putting a similar late-game ability on a Commander which gives Soviets early game dominance, a powerful hmg they can't access through tech, and an elite infantry call-in. Why aren't the two situations exactly identical?
And it's certainly not as if having an (almost 100%) undodgeable uber-snare which can be started from long distance, is virtually unstoppable unless you have 40ish pop worth of AT firing on the same target, which has guaranteed long-duration immobilisation, and is threatened anywhere on the battlefield through the platform of a high speed medium tank - what's wrong with it?
Ost and OKW have their own unstoppable undodgeable unsnareable low cost long range high mobility guaranteed-long-duration-immobilisation snares that double up as highly efficient medium tanks too, so why aren't they abusing it to guarantee trades for vehicles costing 250% the price in fuel?
Infiltration commandos from Mobile assault regiment should lose infiltration but spawn as 5 men for 340mp.
Yeah they effectively cost 400+ mp cos of 2 models having died sometime during infiltration.
I am a 3000+ hours coh2 player and play all 4 factions. My rank is top 80 on all factions, I normally don't post but there is sth I would like to point out to improve the gameplay experience, let me know what do you think of it, thanks.
Currently, Soviet had hard time when playing against ostheer strategy (Ostrupen + fast flame halftrack).
Especially, when you opponent go to your cut off and further delay your teching as flame halftrack is quite good at map control, Kiting and forcing off your infantry quite easily.
So I am proposing:
- Reduce soviet T3 fuel cost to 50, but only unlock halftrack. To unlock t70 and su76, you will need to research for additional 35 fuel similar to the one in USF.
As a Soviet player, I find IL2 anti tank rocket Strafing is quite powerful against Axis tanks, one Strafing to take out enemy tank can happen quite often if ramed by t34.
So I am proposing:
- Reduce the munition cost of rocket Strafing to 60, but reduce the number of rockets Strafing from 4 to 2.
As a Ostheer player, I feel teller mine is too punishing for opponent light armor rushing.
So I am proposing:
- Reduce the munition cost of teller mine by half, reduce its damage by half. If player still want to mine to one hit light armor, they can still put down 2 mines next to each other for same result with same munition cost.
As a Ostheer player, I find Grenadier is in a awkard spot due to its squad size.
So I am proposing:
- Medkit is no longer ver ability and heal injured squads within the range like the one in UKF. at least, give them a way to stay longer on the field.
As a UKF player, I find Valetine is a quite good, its AI and AT capability is outstanding and it is not snared by first faust if full health. from my perspective, I find Valetine just slightly weaker version of Cromwell, making opponent hard to counter especially team it with AEC.
So I am proposing:
- Make it snared by faust even in full health.
4. USF, OKW
Nothing in mind at the moemnt.
What the fuck are you doing here bro?
This is not the place for fair, reasonable suggestions targeted at legitimate balance problems/issues.
The fact that you play all 5 factions, have decent ranks in all of them, and are able to articulate issues multiple factions are facing is concrete, irrefutable proof of just how biased you are. You simply have no right to post any balance opinions - come back only when you're rank 1000 in 4v4 and play only one faction.
You don't belong here. (Axis OP!)
What's higher? 3 times 30 or 4 times 28?
Take all time you need to do the math. Don't confuse it with meth this time.
If anyone is trading 4 rifle models for 3 gren models he's getting outplayed hard.
The USF in my opinion... Bleed manpower like crazy, sure it's infantry is good close range but does it rly deserve the high cost that it currently has for its mainline infantry
I can't be the be the only one questioning this, why is it seriously so expensive
280mp for a rifle with 28mp reinforce
200mp for a RE with a 25 reinforce.
I propose a discussion, should USF maineline be cheaper, should it's performance go down to compensate or should we keep the same price yet increase some vet...I'd like some thoughts.
TLDR: USF bleeds more than it should for cost of its mainline, should it be reduced or should performance be increased.
I charged my Riflemen across red cover vs Volks in sandbags and only barely won the fight.
Worse still, I charged into an MG42 headfirst with my Riflemen and lost the engagement.
With the IS buff, USF no longer has the strongest, most cost-efficient mainline. This is made worse by getting free officer squads with teching, which results in less MP income. Something needs to be done about this.
Why do you people never save a replay, but always claim you've seen a unicorn?
It wouldn't be a unicorn if you actually played the game. If you played 100% Allies/Sovs without ever using T34-76s, you'd never have seen it either. You're basically someone who lives in the mountains ridiculing others describing what a shark looks like.
Also, last patches' replays don't work. I'll do it when I have some free time on my hands.
And most importantly, I/several others didn't know it was a bug. Thought it was one of those glorious COH2 features. Why save a replay for something that happens fairly often?