General Information
Register Time: 20 Jan 2014, 06:00 AM
Last Visit Time: Yesterday, 21:33 PM
Broadcast: https://www.twitch.tv/gbpirate
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCON2ubiyRfjP0HY9AGAuXIw
Steam: 76561198035726839
Residence: Canada
Nationality: United States
Timezone: America/Toronto
Game Name: GBPirate
How about if you have too many units in a certain area (whether of a certain type or just number of units idk yet) then they are penalised with a delay when retreating. So when you click 'retreat' rather than an instant reaction they take longer to start retreating, as it would irl with a larger force.
So if you are controlling your blob and you hear kat/stuka etc or you get surrounded the enemy has a few more moments to inflict higher losses on you.
Smaller groups of units obviously have no delay still.
Just an idea, what do you guys think? I see lots of people suggesting altering MP income or debuff auras for blobs etc and just thought this might be a good start.
Messing with the retreat function would just be bad for gameplay. Elite Troops stun grenade (and maybe Sturmpio stun grenade) already do this.
It would be a rather poor mechanic if, as soon as you hear the pwerfer fire, you retreat, but you still lose a squad or two because they took to long to move. That wouldn't reward early reaction time and it would confuse new players about the "save my squad from certain death" mechanic if it didn't function consistently/how it does now.
Vindicare, I'd have to agree with the general premise that aggressive factions tend to play better.
here's a replay of this being demonstrated. Compared to vindicare, I'm a scrub, but I'm better than at least 90% of people who have bought this game, if not more. It got a lot easier when my opponent ran his stuart over a teller (after commenting about my mine bulletins), a rifle squad got wiped, and I kept my sniper alive. In the following game, my MG was stolen, my sniper got wiped a few minutes later and it was all over for me. I lost to the guy who ended up going onto the semis, so it's whatever.
I've got a thread on soviet strategies about a triple Maxim opening with some replays that are still viewable. I'd recommend checking them out. One replay, I got outplayed by Strummingbird, but he's just better than me.
With three Maxims on Minsk Pocket, I was able to use some classic, late 19th century machine gun tactics; two Maxims firing at a few squads on a VP, then my third maxim would come down on the flank and put in some enfilading fire. Cons and a shock kept flanks away, then 3 SU76s kept OKW vehicles away and their barrages lowered truck health.
Soviets seem to be the most even-keeled faction in terms of power. They have units that make them aggressive at all stages of the game. Maxims, Shocks, T70, IS2. If KV tanks weren't so crappy (excluding KV8) then Soviets would have killer late game options as well.
USF having such ubiquitous smoke is poor design. Having only one core infantry unit isn't necessarily bad. The problem is that, even with weapon racks (which could, theoretically, allow a player to have rifles used for different purposes), there tend to be rifleblobs of doom.
Even with the current faction state, the game is playable for most even at a relatively high level.
I think there are several things that need to be fixed, like the reinforce cost between rifles, Rear echelons, grenadiers, volks, etc. REs should not be 25; grens at 30 seem too high when against rifles, but against cons it is ok.
Obersoldaten getting suppression without any sort of micro or ability is silly. That's why it was taken off rifles with M1919s. Those are just a few things off the top of my head, but there are more. Well, one example is Jagdtiger killing 17lbr because the Jagd can attack ground outside of the ATG's range...silly.
There are still bugs with many things, I find. As far as I know there are still problems with british tanks' smoke shells when moving. Target Weak Point shouldn't take munitions away if it fails to fire... Weapon teams can be slow to respond to orders and MGs don't always begin setting up when being put in houses. Slow unit response times can be incredibly frustrating.
I think it's important for people who regularly visit .org to play in the ESL 1v1 cup if they enjoy playing 1v1s. This will let Relic know that people want coh2 to be taken seriously as an ESL game, even if it's a little imbalanced.
I very much like these suggestions, Kyle. I like the idea with the handheld AT; it forces a reliance on mines, AT guns, and/or vehicle snares.
Map layout/design is definitely important in 4v4s. Contrary to popular belief, these team games are also very competitive at the high levels. Yes, there is a lesser focus on micro, build orders, etc., however, there is a focus on teamwork and on commander choices, build orders, capping orders that benefit on others. It definitely is important to balance 4v4, but, as Relic is doing - balancing 1v1s first - is the right step. Perhaps the easiest "hotfix" to balance 3v3/4v4 is to reduce the amount of resources given from each territory point?