how can it be worse than lefh when it makes 200dmg per shell and only one shell less? This is clearly better ...only one shell less is good compensated by 40 extra dmg per shell
i think the fact that allies have mobile arty and better sov commander is the reason that ml20 is not seen often...not that they are worse or something
Depends on whether you're lucky or not. It's 2 less shells until vet1. 1 less shell on vet1.
LeFH is superior. More shells = more chance to hit and the damage itself is negligible. If you're targeting tanks (superior mobility) with arty, you'll have a bad time unless it's super clumped up and colliding. Then arty can work but most of the time, arty targeting tanks is useless as they just leave AOE. Hence the extra dmg for "tanks" is pointless. Also, LeFH straight up wins from vet0 to vet3 vs ML20, mainly because of counterbarrage and better scatter. ML20 is only good vs OKW forward positions and encampments. LeFH can even take out Scotts easily enough with counter barrage. Click and forget ability which works wonders in teamgames, forcing the enemy arty/mortars to reposition away from any supporting infantry. I remember having one scott barraging on Port of Hamburg the middle VP, 2 LeFH counterbarrage took out scott and retreating infantry with random scatter. It is also super oppressive on smaller maps like Winnekendonk where it can easily reach your base. LeFH is probably the best arty in game ATM. Oppressive and versatile.
The DO have downsides, problem is they dont have clear downsides against OKW and its not persistant downsides.
They suffers badly against Ost sniper, they suffers against Ost mortar and so on. Pretty much they suffers from anything but mainline inf early on, at the same time OKW has ONLY mainline inf early on.
But on the other hand, they have the strongest late game and mid game, especially in team games. At least OKW that I play against. Also, the guy that built 2x sturms and 2x kubel. It's a pretty good build vs USF. A couple of days ago I went vs that build on Across the Rheine. On the beach side, sturms went to heavy cover fuel, kubel was behind them and other sturms charged my heavy cover (VP sandbag) rifleman and won the engagement (5v4,5v3,4v3,3v3,3v2,2v2 - I retreat). Then my 2nd rifles coming to help were pushed back by 2 model sturms and kubel. Basically I had no chance with echelons -> rifle -> rifle -> rifle vs sturms->sturms->kubel->kubel on that map which is green cover rich around fuel and VP, especially with sturms being starting unit vs my echelons.
While I agree that volks before the upgrade are lackluster, they are also cheaper. Until the vet and upgrade, you really need to keep them long range, cover only. But that's why you need to play smart. I've seen 2 good OKW players win vs 2 of my brit allies (3OKW vs 2xbrit + my USF on whiteball). Basically in each VP "lane" they used volks as bait for IS and flanked with sturms. Both fell for that.
Point is, while they are weaker, you have to adapt playing vs different factions. Don't force all the fights. IN 1v1 it is most prominent. The ability to gauge which fights and when to take them are probably the most important thing in 1v1. You play as OKW vs UKF on a map which favors UKF?
Be smart. I think there is even a loading screen tip that says the best commanders know which fights to take. Something like that. It's true that in early game, chances are OKW will lose to UKF, but you have to play around those chances.
Don't complain about the hand you've been dealt, learn to play with it.
OKW vs USF is definitely not Instant Exit. Dense maps greatly favor Sturms in the opening and in 1v1 you can deny a lot of area to USF. USF will win engagements in medium and close range <same cover>, however, long range engagements behind same cover are won by volks.
1v1 is the most distinct game mode and as such should never be the basis for balance. I'm pretty sure it's downright impossible to achieve any sort of balance considering all modes.
Eg. while OKW is on the weaker side in most scenarios vs USF, it's really strong in teamgames with walking stukas and good commanders (like specOps flares).
If you considered 1v1 only, then some units become useless. You'd never see Pershing cause you need Sherman to push back. Rangers would also be rare due to the 10 pop cost along with 350 manpower cost. Pak howits might be a micro-hell and constant bleed. 1v1 games tend to last shorter and therefore you don't see late game units unless somebody rushes them by skipping stuff.
I think instead of Puma(234-2) ac it should be replaced by 234-1 ac (the one with auto-cannon).
The 234-1 can the can then be upgraded to 234-2(Puma), similar to Coh1.
The reasons being :
1) Even with changes to the doctrine 5cp to unlock it imo too much and by that time it will be facing medium tank which it cannot fully match.
2) Puma itself with OST currently costs 270mp & 70fuel. By going for 234-1
and then upgrading to 234-2 would be a gradual investment, but more importantly
the unit will be having better impact as to 222 ac.
1) Replace 234-2(Puma) with 234-1 ac, available at 2cp(I guess), buildable after T2 built or above.
2) C.PIV with Puma upgrade package , available at 4or5cp(I guess).
As for cost of 234-1 be 250mp & 50fuel and Puma upgrade be 70mp & 20fuel.(I guess?)
Total cost= 320mp & 70fuel similar to OKW Puma.
P.S: I am not a very good Coh2 player(noob) having less than 600hr of playing experience.
So, if my idea seems bad or impossible please feel free to discard this.
You've got more than enough experience. I've got 700 hours and managed to reach top 25 3v3 USF, currently 64th in 3v3 USF. Your idea might be worth considering. I see no fault in it.
Point being, always speak your mind if you have something constructive to say.
It used to have a weaker barrage, but no cost for it.
It was well-balanced for 1v1, and sometimes people would go for it instead of the T-70.
However, in teamgames you could spam the things. The SU-76 blob could take on most enemy vehicles with sheer volume of fire, and the stacked barrage would annihilate any infantry AT sent in to deal with them.
So it's original design, which I have been advocating was abused. Thanks for informing. Don't know what would make it viable then. Increased ROF and accel/speed would give it more survivability... but I don't really know.
There is some truth in your words. I saw only one really viable tactic with SU-76 - you massing t-70 and su-76, not go to t-4. But become viable only with defensive doctrine. Not popular choice, because you need very high skill and good control to realize such piano tactic. Light vehicles dies too fast in late game. ANd i even don't say about AT stuka strafe, that can kill all your light vehicle army from one strike. And yea, when i play against low skill opponent i can use su-76 very effective, but in equal skill fights - no. Who need stock armor unit that becomes good only with some tricky doctrine?
Also there is problem in core SU design - when unit do 2 jobs simultaneously. SU-76 made in this concept. When unit is good, it will lead to spam. Old su-76 have insane ROF with lower pen and free barrage, but you can build 3 and kill tiger with them, while free barrages used to wipe paks. Cancer situation.
So it used to be cancerous. Yeah, I guess SU76 with a buffed barrage is OP. Well, I hope they manage to bring life to the unit.
How much did you see recently pro-games or tournament games where soviets go to T1 and SU-76? It sounds nice in theory, but facts says different - you almost never see SU-76 in-games. It arrive in timeframe where you don't need it. P4 comes 3-4 minutes later after T-70. Who in sane will build SU-76 as start unit, for what you will built it? For barrages? T-70 kills team weapons much easier and effective than SU-76 with barrage. Even M5 quad better as team weapon killer. Risky, but at least do its job.
It will be nice to see, if SU-76 will be locked behing special upgrade in T3 and T3 will get discount to fuel. How people do you think will built such upgrade to unlock SU-76? No one. Just more earlier T-70 give much more power and nothing else.
Su-76 lacks role in-game. You can find tons of explanations why it need for SU, but reality says different. It could be a choice, if axis have access to earlier mediums or sub-mediums (like short P4), but we don't have such strategies now.
I don't watch tournaments and "pro" players. I believe you that SU-76 lacks a role, that's why it should get a better barrage or sth. In my theory, it would be viable. It seems logical that the original relic team thought it out like that... maybe, don't know. Right now it's role lacking due to the fact that P4s are really early and T70 is pretty powerful in good hands, albeit needs to play it safe if raketen and paks are on the field.
I did have some luck fielding SU-76 with conscripts in custom games, although the opponents weren't really skilled.
I might be wrong and maybe SU76 is useless right now but maybe, just maybe, the role hasn't been found. In theory, skipping maxims and zis to go for SU-76 with conscripts should in theory be viable, especially with the fast snare on conscripts. That's all in theory. Maybe somebody goes YOLO and builds SU76 and wins a game and shows that the SU76 has a role.
A lot of "META" was found. It was not straightaway clear from the patch notes. "This unit is getting these buffs" and then people go "Oh this unit was buffed, let's play around it", and hence a meta arrives. I mean, I've played Dota2 and often enough my experiments ended up in clear wins (top ranks in dota2). I don't believe that in a game with so many dynamic variables, there exists only one build order and few METAs. Maybe there exists a SU76 build that can be really viable vs distinct OST or OKW build orders. Who knows. I admittedly, don't
The problem is on axis side..which have no nondoc 60range high penetration unit.
- all the have is a stug with only low penetration and only 50 range on a nonturret casemate.
- panther which is only 50 range and low accu on the move and high price
- jp4 which is low penetration on a nonturret casemate for the same pricetag like jackson, firefly, Su85.
axis lack even a lategame spamable AI/gerneralist unit like a comet.
u can have p4..which are not this great as lategame unit. you will be hardcountert by anythink with a AT option
You can have brummbar...which let u stay in no AT. yes...you can combine brummbar and panther...which need alot more of micro than for example 3 comets which running around the map and are great vs anything, super fast, smoke all8sec, grenades, high armor and good AI
SU85 is great vs all armor targets..su76 is great for support and even delete team weapons and blobbs.
Pretty much every Axis tank has enough penetration to penetrate every stock Allies tank. For heavies, Panther and stugs do the job perfectly. Panther wins 1v1 vs IS-2, Pershing, Comet, Churchill, KV-2, KV-1. It's stock.
For all I care the balance team can buff the JP4 penetration from 200 to 50000. Won't change anything, Jacksons, shermans, T34s, Churchills, Cromwells, etc... will all go down the same way they do now. Comet is the only exception. JP4 with 50000 penetration would penetrate Comet 100% of time unlike the 60% it does now. Also, pak40. If you manage to keep one pak alive, the veterancy on it makes it the fastest tank killer with 3 sec reload.
Yes, while Axis don't have a Comet, they do have Panther. While Comet is better at AI, Panther is better at AT. Comet has 30 more armour, Panther has 160 more HP. And for OKW, they have more than enough to deal with AI. Stuka zu Fuss and Obers are more than enough to deal with infantry while OST has the, like Katitof said, close to OP Brummbar.
If in late game you have 3 comets running... well, that's your problem. If you don't get Stugs, JP4, any heavy tank destroyer, Pak40, raketen.... not really a balance problem. Same can be said about 3 Panthers with pintle MG running and killing infantry and tanks alike.
If having brumbar and panther is too micro intensive then I don't know what isn't. You can easily bind brumbar on one control group and panther on another. Or even bind them in the same control group and use TAB to shift and direct.
JP4 is a 230 armour tank with better accuracy than SU-85 but lower penetration.... Again, because it doesn't need more penetration because 95% of time it will go against tanks that it will penetrate with 100% chance. And Stug. If you consider Stug bad, well... tough luck. Use the 50 range against allies mediums and it's fast ROF combined with (high) 200 penetration and you will easily deal with any Ally generalist tank. It's a tank with 4 sec (3sec vetted) reload with more than enough penetration to deal with almost all ally tanks. If you expect a cheap stug to counter IS-2, well.... that's your problem.
su76 should be a mobile light/medium vehicle barrage tank. The reason Soviets have 2 TDs (although su76 is not a TD in it's regard) is the fact that soviets have piss poor infantry AT. Brits have piats which, USF has zooks, Axis have the best panzershrecks. Soviets have "Fast" firing high caliber rifles that can easily deal with light vehicles but rely on low range satchel to kill tanks. SU76 is there as a cheaper alternative to SU-85 to complement ZiS builds. On first glance, you'd think it's got no place but it does. It should be a tank you get to push off mediums for less fuel, giving you time to bring out katyusha or t34-76.
It's got 400hp, 120 dmg (40 less than regular tanks), 160-180 penetration -> enough for mediums like OST P4 (hardly for OKW P4).
I think what would make it viable more is any buff to it's barrage. Whether CD or cost. It's role would then be to fill in the gaps between SU-85 and ZiS. More mobile, easier to escape vs infantry and better repositioning to deal with blobs with barrage.
I've heard somebody say that SU76 used to be OP. I haven't played the game when it came out so I don't know but that's how I see the SU76.
SU-85 should remain the same.
SU-76 should be a response unit. Has AT capabilities up to mediums. Has AI capabilities in a sense of barrage to support infantry.
ZiS is ... well, ZiS. Less mobile SU-76 that costs no fuel and has better penetration.
I think SU-76 exists in order to fill in that gap. If you go for penals/snipers, you can go to T3, skipping maxims and ZiS and yet not losing the early AT capabilities.
I think the unit is fine. It reinforces that Soviet versatility notion.
You're missing my point completely. The bundle nade is more expensive and more potent. The player hit with it understands that a more expensive grenade will deal more damage and feels it is natural. If they dodge it, the opponent wastes more munitions. With shocks the grenade is a bit better than the standard one and probably should cost a bit more to make it logical. Maybe sth like 5 munitions more. It would also indicate to new players that it is a better nade than standard nades. Imo you're making too much fuss here.
Sidenote: It needs to be remembered that standard allies grenades will usually inflict similar manpower damage to bundle nades. If a bundle nade kills 3-4 infantry models on a squad, the result is often similar to 2 models on an axis squad killed by a standard nade (similar manpower cost to reinforce). Of course if players can use grenades well they can often have better results but that is another story.
First paragraph I can agree with. 5 muni more wouldn't make a difference, not substantial at least unless you're making love to granades and keep pumping them out. However, that's the only thing that should change on Shocks. Shocks need to represent the name they have been given. SHOCK troops.
2nd paragraph: 3-4 infantry models on Allied is definitely not anywhere close to any 2 model lost on Axis. That would mean that reinforce cost of allies is 2x lower than that of Axis. Looking at the patch notes of last year... the reinforce cost of OST has gone down. There is no way in hell that 3-4 downed models on IS/RE or Rifles/Echelons or Cons/penals equals 2 models down on Grens or PGrens or ASgrens or Sturmpios or Volks. Is there anywhere, where I could check the reinforce costs of vetted and non-vetted infantry squads? Also remember the old saying "Brick by brick and you have a palace". Most people usually think "Eh, having 5 manpower more to reinforce is nothing. Yeah, reinforcing once, it's not...reinforcing throughout a 50 minute game, it's a lot. (similar to people who smoke)