|
I actually agree with the wehraboo. All the excuses for why the Black Prince should be added are retarded. There isn't any balance reason to add an out-of-frame unit. There rarely ever is - it's an admission that you don't know how to balance a game.
And we shouldn't pretend that's the real reason for it either. It wasn't even to try and appeal to tank nerds who might recognize it. It's just part of the piss-poor research and care for historical authenticity that Company of Heroes gets worse at every single iteration.
M24 Chaffee light tanks and M18 Hellcat tank destroyers in 1943 Italy are also an abomination, so is the Captain being issued a LMG that wouldn't have seen use by most of the US Army in Italy (the 1919A6s are a mainstay of armored/mech formations and not infantry, as COH2 makes them out to be, and were rare even then at this point in time). The Germans also get their fantasy StG44s (in 1943 Italy... don't give me the MkB42 crap) and a Wirbelwind.
It's all a bad joke and it's high time to stop giving them money for it. They're just going to abandon the game without any sort of modding support after a few years of cash grab DLCs and poor design decisions anyway, and then it'll be managed by a small few 'community' developers with a laser focus on their own specific idea of what the 1v1 'competitive' meta should be and not a care in the world for anything else balance-wise. |
It seem you have little to no idea what a "benchmark" (not "baseline").
Claiming that "benchmark" has an advantage is like saying that a stick of 1 meter is now op because one switched to imperial and it now 39.37 inches...
Hey look, it's the guy I was talking about. Still derailing threads with petty, pointless arguments and semantics when you don't have any substance to offer, I see. This time over two almost synonymous terms.
Of course, I can humor you this once, for old time's sake. The real comparison would be you saying that a stick of 1 metric meter should in fact be longer than 40 imperial inches, because FDR and the New York bankers with the funny little hats ruined Greece - or whatever it was you used to rant about in the shout.
That would be closer to the concept of the Ostheer 'benchmark' argument over the past few years than any idea of it being used to keep other factions in measurement. Indeed - as I detailed in my post, which you likely ignored as you always do - the result of this thinking has only been the removal of Ostheer weaknesses - areas where the meaningful deviation between factions was not in Ostheer's favor. I will not repeat myself in detail as my post is right above yours and you are perfectly capable of reading it, and I will likely not respond to you again unless you decide to contribute meaningfully to the thread topic instead of behaving like this again. |
I asked why the Ost MG42 is so OP, while they also have the best mortar, and an amazing AT gun. The response was "Because they have weak infantry, so they need better support weapons". This is a flat out lie. Last time I played as USF, LMG Grens were cutting my riflemen to pieces before they could force the God tier MG42 to retreat. They also have the best snare, best none doctrine LMG, and the best magic grenade that wipes retreating squads. The faction as a whole is overperforming.
Somewhere along the people who demanded Ostheer be considered the 'baseline' faction which all other factions are compared and contrasted with decided it needed to also lose all the factional weaknesses that developed from this arrangement, like squishy mainline infantry and vulnerability to premium indirect fire weapons due to the faction's static gameplay. Now, with the Pack Howitzer and ZiS-3 barrages nerfed and Grens essentially 5-man squads in the lategame, people wonder how we got here. Frankly I'm surprised the StuG hasn't been given 60 range main gun attacks by now. |
|
Wow, a unit that was considered totally useless outside 4v4 only a few patches ago is now OP. Thanks COH2 Balance Forum. |
So? Make the OKW AAH go down with 3. Problem solved for everybody.
There is no problem. OKW AAHT is a good unit (and has never been a bad unit, just a unit that was in a bad place because of OKW teching.) If an ATG threatens the vehicle, smoke and get out. If a light tank threatens the vehicle, you should survive enough of the 80hp damage hits until you can get it to the safety of your raketenwerfer or mines. The only real non-armored threat to the OKW 251 AAHT is the USF M15 AAHT, and it can't fire its cannon on the move either.
No idea why Axis players feel like they need to have the best units stats-wise for every scenario. If the flak halftrack didn't have setup time people would still be making these stupid posts calling it underpowered and asking for unique durability buffs. |
|
Literally years later, I come back to this forum, and it is just the same cycle of dishonesty trying to nerf whatever the latest cheese strat is to come out and try to challenge the stale, static, long-range, open-lane combat meta.
No reasonable changes allowed, particularly because nobody maining Axis wants a quid-pro-quo balance change on their end. This time the subject of so much drama is apparently a fucking barrage ability of all things. Did people forget how to spread their units out at some point in the last few years? Is moving AT guns no longer possible?
I've never been on a site with so many babies, or so much dishonesty. Can anyone articulate, clearly, what the most pressing problem is with these units? It's been 16 fucking pages and whatever the singular issue is just gets lost in the back and forth of irrelevant "faction design" bullshit that gets brought up every other page. Were Scotts rofl-stomping Ober hordes with Pathfinder vision or something? With their barrage? How? You can just move out of the way - it's a barrage. With their auto-attack, then? Wouldn't that put the Scott in AT gun range?
How many of these Scotts are being bought? How much fuel and manpower is going into synergizing these two units with no counter-mobility potential and barely any AT ability (outside zooking up your Pathfinders, maybe.) What are Axis spending fuel and manpower on in the face of this build?
Sure, if it's really this tough for someone in a teamgame to dive one of these things, remove the skillsmoke, or gate it behind Vet 3 or something. The escape smoke canisters have been cancer in almost every form they take. I don't understand how this unit almost nobody used has suddenly somehow become a problem after so many nerfs, though. Like Soviets, USF has always crutched on HE firepower once their target_size infantry weapons stop being useful vs Axis elite infantry, but the Scott has never been particularly good at this. Is the state of the balance really so bad that people are using it instead of Sherman spam or Calliope docs?
Is this like, purely a 4v4 concern? Since when did this forum even pretend to care about 4v4 balance? Allies need practically any cheese they can get in that mode, and that's been the way of things for years. |
|
If anything must be changed, remove the crew; the WC51 is fine and if anything its the other ultra-lights in the game which are terrible and have 0 presence beyond the first 3-5minutes of the game. The Kubelwagen comes in second place since it has shared vet, but even that is basically still useless. The M3A1 is probably the worst.
Removing the crew would make sense on many levels. Replace the driver model with a rifleman model, 50 cal upgrade gunner model with a MG crew model.
I can't believe people still bitch about such minute things on this forum. Literally a drive to murder things in this game that are actually cool and good to make room for more mindless late-game heavy tank crutching (sooner and sooner). I'm going to go away for a few more months and hopefully forget about this horrible forum in the mean time. |
|
I do think Stormtroopers' tactical advance ability cost should be reduced to the same as USF paratroopers; I think it was only higher because Stormtroopers came with STG-44s before and were thusly hilariously powerful with tactical advance. |
|
Skirts are fine, and were fine, they weren't ever a problem and I don't think they are now.
But the build time double nerf I agree is doubly oppressive and the .50 cal mounted on the M20 could use a very slight base penetration buff (talking even just +1 at all ranges) or a better vet 3 penetration bonus. Unit would be fine with just that. |
|
Revert the build time nerf and either raise base penetration or change the vet 3 penetration bonus to something actually consequential. It adds a grand total of 1.5 penetration at minimum range and .5 at maximum for a total of 4.5 and 1.5 respectively. I have talked about the vet 3 penetration being basically worthless for a long time and have no idea why it hasn't been changed to an additive bonus at the very least (maybe make it a flat +2 penetration bonus for a total of 5/4/3 instead of 4.5/3/1.5)
Otherwise it's fine. It's really not a bad unit combat-wise, and its' USF's best tool against Ostheer snipers. |
1
Relic Entertainment
T.R. Sidewinder 
