|
Well then go on and put out some arguments instead of being edgy. |
Remove the restriction on demo charges in territory points. Thats the only thing i would do. If any squad can reveal them just by LoS then there's no reason for the territory point rule
All it does it make it so you can't demo bunkers if your opponent places them close enough to the territory
Demos were the only thing unique about engineers, while they deserved nerfing it went too far imo
+1 on that point.
They were a bit cheesy when only sweepers could see them, but now they are almost useless. You have to use sight blockers (not the actual LOS in-game system, but that block the view from the camera to the ground) to use them. So only bushes, trees, some buildings. That's even cheesier.
Also someone brought up a comparison to the Teller mine in a discussion months ago to argue demos should only be seen by sweepers as well. Hard to argue against that to be honest with the only exception that OST is not able to spam Tellers, while SOV often have munis floating for demos. |
2 CE opening is very common, so its not like CEs are unpopular.
2 CE opening is common only in Soviet T1 builds and not due to CEs being good infantry, but because going Penals only delays your map capping heavily. Many compensate by getting a second engineer early on.
Appart from that I also think CEs are fine. Cheap and shitty, but with a flame thrower they become quite capable for fighting. |
HIS TOURNAMENT HAS BEEN POSTPONED BY TWO WEEKS!
This tournament has genuinely been postponed by two weeks to the 18th/19th of April.
This will allow time for the patch to hit after a small and understandable delay.
Due to your generous donations, the 1st place prize has increased to $300. Thank you!
Lul.
You can just admit it's due to the virus. We all know anyway kappa |
You provided a stat in isolation, as you always do, and then claim that that stat alone proves that the ISU is not a poor AT vehicle. Because you know, speed, cost, no turret, the fact that is has to swap ammo mid-fight, that it will face Tigers/Elephants/Jagdtigers/Panthers don't at all factor into the equation. It's all about single stats, by themselves, and pretending that you are proving claims are false.
You posted the TTK against mediums (which, you know, a P4 is by the way) to demonstrate that the TDs are really all the same. Which is the most stretching of stats you have done so far. Because not only are you now no longer looking at speed/cost/turret/potential targets, you are now also conveniently leaving penetration out of the picture to claim that, and I quote "the differences in TDs is not that great".
Doomlord has provided evidence that the Elefant and ISU perform somewhat similar against anything lighter than the real heavies. Your only response was that the King Tiger has been neglected.
I also do not fully agree with the four units that Vipper has chosen (the Panther is a quite different unit to the others and even the SU85 is a bit off), but you are wrong on the part that this is a "single stat". It's three stats combined: Penetration, ROF and damage.
Looking at the ISUs penetration, the only units against which it struggles are the heavies. JT, Ele, Tiger, KT. But still then it does deflection damage, which kind of offsets this a bit (Range 70 shot against Tiger penetrates with 2/3 chance for full damage and 1/3 for deflection damage. Alternatively, if we correct for the deflection damage it would perform as a 83% natural penetration at range 70. This is not super reliable, but quite decent). The Ele does not struggle against heavies, it just penetrates everything. But then again that's the trade off for not having HE rounds. |
We had this ISU for years now. Why is this a problem now? The 2 v 2 players are complaining because Grand offensive strategy of infantry spam only to wait for Tiger isn't working against it?
In 4 v 4 ISU is always a given and also with Elephant so that cancels it each other out. No to mention you have 3 other players to worry about Panther flanks in large game modes.
We had YEARS of fighting the ISU and now someone loses to a skill ISU player to complain about it?
Yep, pretty much. |
And here we go again...
TDs are compared with literally 1 stat, with absolutely no regard to what targets they will most likely encounter in matches, or their mobility or anything else. and the conclusion is drawn that there really isn't that much difference between the TDs at all.
ISU and Elefant are both 70 range, casemate, poor mobility (ISU has a little better speed). And if ISU has AT rounds they are basically heavy TDs. It's as close as you can get in a vehicle class that is highly diverse.
These two units in their role as TDs are then compared doing their job vs some common targets and also in one of the most meaningful stats - the time to kill. If this is not enough to compare these two units then you can't compare any unit in CoH at all. Sherman and P4? Nope, impossible, Sherman functions a bit different. Ost P4 and OKW P4? Nope, OKW P4 comes with higher stock armor, also the gun is slightly different...
Instead of dismissing any comparison as useless, elaborate why you think that comparing the performance of these TDs versus mediums and semi-heavy tanks is not alright and explain which comparison you think fits best or why a comparison can not be made at all. |
|
The game has been specifically changed to avoid this kind of spawn-in cheese. Especially Stormtroopers were forced to upgrade MP40s to avoid this sudden spawning of a high DPS squad on your retreat path.
I don't know about Paratroopers, could be the same, but they are 6 men as well and can take a surprise tank or mortar shot. If you pop the ability with Stormtroopers and two of your models get wiped quickly (and this is not a once in a million games scenario), that's basically your whole squad gone.
The ability grants high DPS boost for medium amount of mun. I thought the decreased speed was there to avoid this squad basically chasing everything down. But as it is right now it can be a huge risk for a very expensive squad. |
|
I think this has been brought up sometime ago.
Stormtroopers, once upgraded with MP40s, have a tactical advance ability that basically increases DPS in exchange for slower walking speed. The ability itself is fine, BUT:
It still "works" on retreat. Meaning, if you hit retreat while it is still active, your unit retreats slower than usual, which is basically the pace if normally walking units.
Stormtroopers are 4 model squads. There's a decent chance that something unforeseeable happens during the 10 seconds duration of the ability and you need to retreat. It should be canceled just like every other ability when hitting retreat.
Any chance this could make it still into the patch? |
The fact that ISU is meta in team games should say something. While it counters AT guns, it counters infantry as well. Same with ele+scope. Just stand near VP watch your flanks and win games. I've seen enough games where units like this single-handedly carried games, not meantioning the diversity of good abilities that doctrines with such assault guns have.
Just take a look at KV-2. The docs which have it are pretty one sided and lack diverse measures. But for some reasons docs with Ele and ISU are op af.
I think either docs, or unit themselves need to be nerfed, or reworked. ISU doctrines needs to let go of bombing strike, maybe AOE tweaked a bit to decrease wiping potential and remove a possibility of scope upgrade on elephant.
It says that the meta in team games is very different from 1v1 and 2v2, nothing else. A LOT of things suddenly become viable in large games modes while others are basically useless. OST T4 is regularly teched, you sometimes see Soviet M5s with the quad upgrade as anti air, heavy arty positions, PGren Schreck blobs, Ele and Jagdtiger. Otherwise it says nothing, because the game modes are very different in terms of strategy.
To the general discussion
At the moment I'm not sure if these units need a rework. As a tendency I'd say they are mostly fine. Their design fits very well for 2v2 where there are still unprotected areas to flank and still okay-ish for 3v3. 4v4 I don't know, but balancing to 4v4 has already been discussed plenty of times. They obviously become more efficient the less room there is for flanking, but that is a general issue of the game. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
