About Rifle/Penal bleed: even with mobile reserves Penals tend to bleed a lot more than soviet faction is designed around. The 2MP is barely noticeable which is why I was thinking make it 4MP. Since Rifleman have similar playstyle and reinforce I would give them similar discount at Major tech.
Penals are already viable. I dont know why Penals have to be as good as Cons, the best stock mainline infantry atm.
Volks and Rifleman have some issues thats for sure though. But reducing the reinforce cost for every unit makes not much sense.
Grens/PG: I don't really know how to address this since most players like to quickly pump out as many Grens as possible early. Nicko showed that an MG-less opening is a viable strat with the main weakness being bleed so to promote PG I was thinking of making LMG upgrade more expensive since the units playstyle works really well for late game fighting. I don't really want to increase MP cost since their reinforce cost is so high so muni cost might make PG more attractive.
PG: If muni cost isn't enough I was thinking of making G43 upgrade all 4 models, since PG aren't as blobby as PF it shouldn't be as big a problem. For team games it could be a problem but MP cost/Timing/Reinforce/muni cost should put a cap on potential.
Conscripts: The comeback potential despite bad play is a bit much especially with 7-man upgrade. I think also bumping their muni price would be wise. Right now the unit is too cheap for what it gives, say 80 muni also.
Ostheer is already muni starved compared to soviets. If the lmg cost is increased, cons will have an even easier match up. I rather decrease the dmg of the lmg a bit and maybe give them better acc on vet 3 to compensate. So their midgame shock value is not as oppressive.
Sandbags: I think there should be a max of 5 sandbags per player. Sandbags become more tactical and requires micro when max has been reached.
Sandbags should cost munition. Maybe 25 like a grenade. |
|
Depends on the game mode. In 4vs4 OKW is pretty good and easy to execute. In other modes i wouldnt recommend them. SOV and OST are better for beginners, cause they have a solution for almost everything. Stock arty, strong medium tank, potent infantry, good at gun, sniper, good mg and good lategame scaling. So you either dont rely on your teammate or you dont get cucked by some cheese like sniper, teamweapon spam or better lategame. |
|
Imo this barrage ability shouldnt be on a heavy tank destroyer like the JT. An ability which boosts accuracy makes more sense. |
Never agreed more with a post on this site. Why was stadtschutt removed? Because people don't like maps that don't allow them to stay in their "double pak, LMG blob, a-move" comfort zone. So many good maps have been removed because of this and they are replaced by overrated lane maps because it is obvious how to play those.
I still cant belive how maps like Road to Kharkov, Rails and Metal and Minsk didnt get voted out in the 2vs2 map voting. Stadtschutt was completely fine, maybe a little bit too much heavy and red cover, but overall much better than other maps.
I hope coh3 has more emphasis on medium tanks, medium range weapons and open maps. |
USF is almost unplayable in top 200 2v2 without pathfinders, but that is because of the current state of maps in that mode. Nearly all the good riflemen maps like Stadtschutt or Lierneux got patched out and replaced with super open lane maps such as Belgorod, Baku or Wolfheze where riflemen get bullied back to base by A-move LMG grens, volks blobs and Obers.
This trend of replacing urban and/or big sightblocker maps with open lane-camp stalefest maps is going on since years and now you all get the ingame results for it......
Riflemen rely purely on many sightblockers since their smoke nade got removed, and if the map doesn't offer it then they are shit tier garbage.
Both Pershing and Calliope are good enough to make USF viable in 2vs2 imo. But yeah USF stock roster has some major problems with winning stale engagements.
I dont think vanilla Rifles are the problem. But it takes ages to get to 2 bar Rifles, while Axis just get their upgrade out of thin air after 4 mins. And i dont think Rifles are viable without fast weapon uprades. On top of that i hate the idea of dropping weapons on Rifles. You pay 150 manpower, 20 fuel and 60 mun per bar to just lose your weapon randomly, cause your squad is full upgraded and can lose weapons even with 1 man left. Just retarded.
|
What your saying is a bit strange, every allied elite comes CP2-3 while PG can come earlier especially if your talking team games. Falls are CP2 but are doctrinal like most allied elites. In your last statement you say tanks which means your talking mainly team games if POP is that big of an issue. If your not then fitting in 2 Obers is feasible along with 2 MG and 2 raks which is fairly meta. Only when your talking Panthers is POP that big of a problem.
Ofc you could argue that Pgrens come too early, but my point is that Obers deserve their performance regardless whether Volks are shit or not, just because their timing is much slower than other elite inf.
If you go 2 Obers, 2Raks, 2 Mgs you have either a smaller number of tanks or no indirect at all. GL breaking defenses.
Going to your original post, aside from combat performance, players go for Fussies for their Utility such added sight and Flare which ends up being fairly useful in all modes. I think that is where VG should get a buff, maybe the ability to throw down a cheap AI mine that drops only 1 model similar to the soviet doctrinal one(7 muni I think). This way VG would be able to dictates fight better with out messing with overall balance.
The utility is nice, but nothing crazy. A little bit of vision (42 instead of 35 i think) wont give you that much of an advantage. And the flares are pretty costly with 50 muni. There are more important things like mines and call-in arty. The combatboost is way more important than these gimmick utilities.
I agree in theory about USF, but in practice since they are designed to assault they need to get in close with double bars which causes a unstainable amount of bleed which is fairly well known. The whole Pathfinder/scott meta allows the USF player to bypass this massive weakness while still paying similar to the same in weapon upgrade cost(1 or 2 Bars) along with same tech cost.
Paths scott are just cheese, which require heavy outplaying from your opponent to beat. I dont think it has much to do with how good Rifles are. Just look at Ele+scopes. This tactic gets played all the time in teamgames. And not cause Panther or Stug are shit compared to Ele. No its because this combo is way more difficult to beat than the classic Panther spam. |
What you described is pretty much every elite AI unit so it is not a unique problem. Now I am not sure if you meant Two Ober squads to Vet2. Which is a lot of initial cost/bleed but it is supposed to be. OKW seems to be the only army that can easily fit in several Elite squads with out wipes.
Soviet: most elite players go 3 conscripts 2 guards or 4 conscripts 1 guard. Other elites seem to be out of favor due to MP bleed or lack of utility.
USF: Before Pathfinder spam going for 2 or more Para's was a resource drain due to their target size and late arrival. Rangers were even worse since they due the exact same things rifle due but without snare. So at that point why even make it.
Ost: How often do you see high end players go for 2 PG let alone 1 outside of non-meta strats.
The point is you can't buff one without thinking of the other due to how blobby all WFA are.
Ofc its unique. Every (semi-)elite unit arrives around CP2-3. Only OKW needs its most expensive tech structure to get them (their elite) out. If you dont rush T4 its gonna take some time until you get them out. Therefore the shock value between Lmg Obers and Lmg Paras is vastly different.
Ostheer and Soviets dont even need elites, cause they have the best mainline inf in the mid and lategame. In theory USF doesnt really needs elites too, cause their mainline scales good enough to be useful lategame. But their weapon tech/upgrade is a little bit too costly.
Compared to Ost/Sov Okw has way bigger popcap problems. I dont understand how you can think that OKW has an easy time getting 2 Obers on top of 3/4 mainline squads and support weapons with their heavy popcap tanks. |
OKW players get Obers which beats everything so any buffs to Volks would ruin the balance. I can imagine Volks performing better against barred Rifles or 7 man cons. Volks fight and then there is less left to stop or hold the Obers.
OKW had 46% winrate top 200 1vs1 last month and 44% this month.(Imo in teamgames infantry power is less important) Do you really think giving volks better vet5 veterancy will bring them to 60%? In 4vs4 many players already go Fussies cause Volks are nothing more than mp bleed later on.
There are units who can hold off Obers (Paras long range, Shocks, etc), but its a 4men T4 unit. It takes ages until you get atleast 2 Obers vet 2. Just use your tanks or arty. Have you ever played with Scotts against Obers? Thats just free manpower bleed. |
|
Alright. After 75 years we can finally stop debating on this matter. This 31 minute long youtube video is all we need to know. Thanks for sharing. He fucking owned these Wheraboos.
/s
Can someone close this thread, please? This has neither something to do with the game, nor is it good researched. |
The sherman doesn't satisfy a role against axis meta, right now. Not in teams at least. Most axis players are leaning on their infantry superiority and back it up with dual at guns. An effective scott is just a way better option based on the way people are playing right now.
The sherman is just shit. I see every other stock medium tank expect the sherman. The unit has nothing to offer. Low armor, low dmg (either vs inf or vs tanks), no utility, no fast timing. Nothing at all. The bulldozer upgrade has to be stock to make this unit useful. |
Relic Entertainment
