This has happened a few times now, always in 2v2, where I'm on a double-OKW team vs. at least one UKF. The game will go really well early on, and I'll go med truck (my usual pick) for Leigs, FlakHT and the forward reinforcement point, which helps out a ton especially against a defensive UKF player. Then UKF will bring out a sniper, defend it with their IS' (making closing on it with Volks/Kubel impossible), and it will effectively win the game single-handedly due to MP bleed.
I know that the typical counter would be a Luchs, but this always happens after I've teched and invested into med. If my teammate is OST a counter-snipe or 222 can usually solve this, but if it's 2x OKW there doesn't seem to be anything that can be done.
If it were against Sov this also wouldn't be a problem, as it would be supported by Cons, which don't have a lot of long-range DPS (allowing for Volks/Kubels to close). The issue is specifically that it's supported by very strong, long-range infantry.
This is for ~200 rank auto-match with random teammates.
Profile of Doomlord52
Post History of Doomlord52
Thread: 2v2 - Double OKW vs. UKF Sniper?28 Aug 2021, 04:34 AM
In: OKW Strategies
Thread: CoH2 Summer 2021 Balance Patch - BETA18 Aug 2021, 04:28 AM
17 Aug 2021, 08:00 AMSander93
That list is grasping.
From what I can tell, the list is factually accurate. It may not be optimal in terms of gameplay, but it does contain all of the non-doc upgrades and abilities available to a single IS squad, as well as one entry for "doc abilities" - at least all that I'm aware of. If this list is factually incorrect, I'd be happy to update it.
Nobody in their right mind would equip them with PIATs.
While true, it is still an option. If IS' were incapable of equipping it, I wouldn't have listed it. However, the intent was to list every ability, utility and upgrade.
Any infantry can benefit from commander buffs, for all factions, there is nothing (anymore) that specifically or permanently buffs IS.
The UKF ability "Defensive Operations" (Adv. Emplacement) grants abilities only to IS and Assault IS (and interestingly not RE's, even though the tooltip says it does), and "Advanced Cover Bonus" (Mobile Assault) buffs only IS - not even Assault IS.
Yes they can build caches, but nobody wants to sacrifice the valuable time of their mainline infantry for that.
Again, much like the Piats, while not optimal it is an option available to them.
They're also lacking one of the most important abilities of a mainline infantry, which is a snare.I agree, but I don't think missing a snare makes up for their incredible utility in every other area. I would much prefer that their utility was brought inline with other units in exchange for a standard snare.
I'm not a fan of buffing the side tech costs either, but to state that IS have a "comically" long list of utility is simply false. Compared to other mainlines such as Volks, and with the fact in mind that they are more integral to the faction than most other mainlines, it is not that special.
Compared to Volks, I would consider their list of abilities comical.
That's 6 'abilities', compare to IS' 11, and doesn't mention that some of the IS' abilities are arguably better. While yes, IS' are core to the faction, I would argue they are no more core than USF's Rifles, which have far less utility. Furthermore, many of the IS' abilities could easily be moved to other units, or could be removed due to redundancy.
Construction could be completely removed with no consequence (short of sandbags), the mills bomb could be made a squad upgrade that replaces the gammon creating a trade-off between the two, the pyro upgrade could be moved to REs and/or snipers (snipers already have coordinated fire), medical supplies could take a weapon slot (trade-off with weapon upgrades), and as I mention later, the stealth detection pyro buff could also be move elsewhere. Doing all of that cuts IS' abilities in half, without a drastic loss in IS' power, while also encouraging build diversity rather than 5x IS every match. Additionally, it would free up space to add a snare - something UKF could use.
The UC already has stealth detection, but against 18 range faust Grens it is simply not viable to use it in that role against snipers or camo Grens.
Compared to OKW's main detection unit, the Kubel, the UC is quite good (more HP, more armor). However, if the UC isn't viable in all situations, perhaps move the detection to the AEC (similar to the Luchs and 222), or possibly another infantry unit (REs?).
As-is, this massively nerfs Axis camo units such as Storms or Falls, while also allowing IS' to effectively "face check" for camo'd units, due to their high DPS.
Additionally, Axis is currently having massive issues with detecting cloaked Commandos, yet I don't think Ost T4 granting Grens/Pgrens +15 detection would be the right answer.
Construction of caches has already been added to REs.
Yes, and it's still available to IS.
And as much as we'd like to we can not overhaul Bolster, as Relic will not allow any such major changes anymore.
It doesn't need an overhaul, just a trade-off. Perhaps unlocking bolster gives a 'free' (0 resource) upgrade to IS, but it takes one weapon slot when equipped similar to OST's VSL. As-is, there is no reason to not take it every single game, preferably as soon as possible - which will be easier, now that it's less expensive.
Thread: CoH2 Summer 2021 Balance Patch - BETA17 Aug 2021, 06:13 AM
13 Aug 2021, 01:14 AMShadowLinkX37
In the current state of the game, UKF is blatantly unfun to play against, while also (somehow) being unfun for many to play as, especially in team games. The core issue, at least in my view, is that UKF has about 3 good units each with 50 different roles, and this patch is just taking that further.
The list of things one infantry section can do is completely comical at this point.
Make the UC the 'detection' unit, similar to OKW's Kubel, move construction to REs, remove some of those grenades or make them exclusive, make bolster an interesting choice, not an upgrade with zero downside, etc.
Thread: Black Prince Poll20 Jul 2021, 01:55 AM
19 Jul 2021, 22:54 PMSeductiveCardbordBox
I think the point people are trying to make is that there's a difference between historical realism in terms of aesthetics and in terms gameplay, and that you can have the former without the later.
CoH isn't a "realistic" game in terms of gameplay; it's based on reality, sure - but it's in no way a simulation. Units are "stylized" to fit the mechanics (ranges are reduced, HP and armor is increased, etc.), but they do remain true to their source material; the Tiger has a lot of HP/Armor, a big cannon, and is slow and expensive. The T-34 is pretty cheap, but not that great, etc. When you look at those units, though, you can say "yea, that's pretty much a [Tiger/T-34/etc.]", and more importantly, the interaction between the units makes sense. The JT doesn't tend to bounce off mediums, air-attacks do a ton of damage to slow/immobilized heavies, and so on.
When you look at CoH1 and CoH2, every single unit and ability is at least plausible. Railway artillery existed and was used - probably not on the battlefield - but if the situation arose there's no reason it couldn't have. The same can be said of the "tactical V1"; it doesn't make a lot of sense historically, but V1s were real, and could be aimed to some degree. There's nothing (at least that I can think of) that immediately jumps out as 'impossible' in either games; there's no Maus or E100, Panther 2, T28/T95 (US), IS3, Tortoise, or any other "slightly too late" late-war or 'never produced paper prototype' in the game.
The BP however, is exactly that; there's simply no reality in which it could've appeared in Italy. The design started in 1943 and the first 6 prototypes were delivered in May 1945 - after the war ended. No commander, no matter how persuasive or powerful, could have summoned these vehicles to Italy, and no incredible chain of events or coincidences could resulted in them appearing, because they simply didn't exist - there was nothing to send.
It opens up the door to other units of this type, which some people (myself included) just don't want.
What's stranger is that most of this could be avoided by simply switching the model to CoH2's "Comet". While it didn't historically serve in Italy, it did first see action in December 1944 in Belgium, during which the Italian campaign was still ongoing. The "ahistorical, but available to the army" idea would actually work with it.
In: COH3 Central
Thread: Is the Black Prince supposed to be some kind of easter egg?15 Jul 2021, 02:42 AM
I kind of have to agree with this sentiment; the "black prince" tank really doesn't fit in the game, and opens up a lot of really strange things to be added.
Wikipedia claims that there were 6 prototypes built, with the earliest completed in May 1945; definitely after the Italian campaign, and also just after the end of the war. The problem is, historically, the project was cancelled because of the success of the Centurion tank, which again according to wiki:
Six prototypes arrived in Belgium less than a month after the war in Europe ended in May 1945
That's quite a coincidence; the same number of prototypes built, completion within the same month, and even being shipped to Belgium (which is further than the BP got). So does that mean the Centurion is a valid tank to add? I wouldn't say so - it was far better than any other WW2-era tank (that served, anyway), and continued to serve until 1972, at which point every vehicle in the game was severely outdated.
Then there's other tanks as well, that existed to some degree or another:
My preference would be to stick with vehicles that existed and saw combat, even if they were incredibly rare.
In: COH3 Central
Thread: Relic Announcement in 24 hours! GTF IN HERE!13 Jul 2021, 04:27 AM
Well, this is certainly exciting. Time for some speculation based on very little:
1. It's CoH3. IGN said it's a "highly anticipated new game", and it's far too late to be releasing DLC for CoH2 (UKF was nearly 6 years ago).
2. "July 13th". On that day in 1943, the German Kursk Offensive was ended (which would make an interesting transition from CoH2). In 1944 the allied raid on Symi began (from Wiki), but that was in eastern Greece, which isn't visible on the map. It's also right in the middle of the Allied invasion of Sicily (July 9th - 17th, 1943), which was right at the start of the Italian Campaign.
3. The video footage we've seen so far (or at least, that I've seen) has mentioned North Africa, Montgomery (UK) , Rommel (Ger), Italian, US and Canadian forces. It has also mentioned Dakar (Senegal), which while it was involved in WW2, isn't on the map we're looking at. As a result, I don't think the footage is covering events that will be in the game, but is instead a 'prelude' to the invasion of Italy, which will end up being the focus of the game.
4. The focus of the map (in the video) seem to be on southern Italy. The location of the timer is actually interesting, as it's covering both Tunisia and Algeria, which were both large theaters in the Africa Campaign. To me that indicates we won't actually be playing there. Additionally, the edges of northern Italy are far too close to the top of the screen, which also takes focus away from it. Based on Wiki's Atlas of the world battle fronts map (scroll down slightly), only the areas up until July or September 1944 are really part of the focal point, so I'm guessing the game "ends" in July-Sept 1944. This would match the Allies advance towards the "Gothic Line", and their halt in August 1944 when 'Operation Olive' (late Aug 1944) didn't succeed.
TL;DR - CoH3, Italian Campaign, July 1943 to Sept 1944.
Thread: The devs did it again... Buffed B4 into the heaven5 Jul 2021, 03:29 AM
I gave this one some time as artillery can take a fair number of games to figure out; however, after a few games I can say for certain the current B4 is far too strong. It's not so much the damage or suppression (which is annoying), it's that the cooldown on barrages is so short. A pair of them in a team game can essentially be firing constantly.
Here are the numbers; a barrage lasts 24 seconds followed by an 80 second cooldown. Since we have two B4s, that means 80s cooldown minus the 24s barrage time leaves us with 56s of waiting. However, since we want to stagger the barrages, we only need to wait for half of that: 28 seconds. That means if you have two B4s, you can have a shell hitting at most 28 seconds apart constantly. For the amount of damage it's doing, that's way too frequent.
With the current stats, I would increase the cooldown to around 110-120s.
In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Something should be done about the dual atgun meta1 Jul 2021, 07:40 AM
It's a pretty boring meta, but I really don't see an easy fix that doesn't also seriously impact the game. The price probably can't change, as it will make getting the first ATG harder/slower, which can ruin certain factions (OST), and adding a fuel cost is also a huge problem as it would impact tech timings quite heavily as it's effectively a mandatory unit for most factions.
Mobility is also pretty key, as making them slower makes them even easier to flank than they are now, and is a pretty big nerf to "single ATG builds" and would only encourage getting two. Even changing the reinforce time or cost wouldn't change much, as most of the time you just end up recrewing them with your cheapest infantry since they're behind your infantry line (you do lose vet).
The only change I've seen so far that's viable would be a pop increase to 9 or 10 as that wouldn't change the early or mid-game phase very much, but would impact the later stages. However, by that point arty is pretty common, so double ATGs aren't really a threat.
This is a pretty strange issue; it's a boring meta that isn't really "overpowered" - it's just dull playing against it over and over again. How do you approach "fixing" that, and does it even need to be fixed?
In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: NO BAN system for DROPPERS1 Jul 2021, 03:31 AM
16 Jun 2021, 15:35 PMPorygon
So let's say, I started a random game, someone rang the doorbell, so I quit the game dealing with real life things first, you want me getting ban on this?
I don't think (or at least hope) that anyone is advocating for "drop = perma ban"; however, most modern games do have a "cooldown" period for leaving that increases the more games you leave.
For example, this is CSGO's system:
First cooldown (level 1) - lasts 30 minutes
In your example (if you were playing CSGO) you'd receive a 30 minute ban from competitive play. However, if you DC'd again within a 1 week period, you'd receive a 2 hour ban the 2nd time and so on. A week of not DC'ing (or just not playing) would then lower your "ban level" by 1.
Personally, I think the above system would work with CoH2 if it were approximately 1/4th as severe. So the first ban is around 10 minutes, the next 30 minutes, the 3rd 6hrs, and the 4th being 2 days, with it decreasing by 1 level for 2 days of "clean" play.
In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another infantry spam post25 Jun 2021, 03:41 AM
15 May 2021, 16:21 PMNigelBallsworth
has anyone else noticed this in team games ? Are longer strategies dead ? Are combined arms strategies now the province of elite players, ie: those that can make them work properly ?
Yes, I made a thread about it a few months ago; Link. My suggestions weren't too popular, judging by the polls at least, but the discussion was good. The one thing that did (barely) win out was making upgrades more "exclusive", so you couldn't stack so many abilities/weapons on a single squad.
Over-all, I find it pretty disappointing. CoH2's gameplay is really good when it's focusing on the tactical use of units; cover, flanking, grenades, smoke, that sort of thing. Blobbing isn't that, but it's incredibly effective. Yes, there are ways of punishing it, but my preference would be that it's just not viable in the first place.
Realistically blobbed infantry should be taking more damage and more suppression, but I don't think shoving some sort of "negative zeal aura" thing (from CoH1) that increases damage and suppression taken when near other units is going to happen.
In: COH2 Gameplay
Latest replays uploaded by Doomlord52
Ladders Top 10