|
Shock troopers, particularly in pairs, can be very effective vs infantry blobs. Smoke, charge in, and watch the carnage. Don't expect a single shock squad to beast the entire blob though, as the number of opposing infantry always has to be accounted for.
If you are OK with less mobility then multiple maxim teams can shut down blobs. Just watch out for a stuka if you go this rout.
Also, as Mr. Someguy stated the ISU-152 is quite effective vs blobs as is the IS2.
Lastly, demo charges are invaluable against blobs. Build them on retreat paths, cover, or attack routs you expect the blob to take and enjoy.
|
|
I too would like to see RE given at least some degree of combat effectiveness.
One thing that should be kept in mind though is that the American starting manpower takes into account the cheap cost of the initial RE squad. This means that if RE received a cost and combat effectiveness increase American starting manpower might need to be correspondingly reduced. |
please make capture points invisible so tanks can drive through them
Now that is an interesting idea. When you think about the way capture points were designed it seems as though they are bit of a hold over from vCoH when squads had to physically touch the CP to cap it. The expanded capture radius of CPs in CoH2 means there is no need for the CP flag to physically exist in game. The CP flag could be made visible but intangible to improve vehicle pathing while producing no real detrimental effect on gameplay. |
Which are not answering my points. That is not going to affect the performance of the units, both call ins and stock units.
I think it´s an obvious answer of what unit would you field between a 76 or an 85. There is still no place for the SU76 and the overlapping T70.
OH is still going to suffer from a mp draining teching system, Panthers are not going to see the light in 1v1.
I´m gonna say this again, it´s not a matter of JUST attaching Call-ins into Building/Tiers, you need to change the performance of stock units to put in line with both new factoins.
While some units are definitely under performing (SU-76 why you fail so bad) and need to be looked at they at least will be on the same price level as call-in units. Right now teching and buying a single T34/76 costs only 30 fuel less than not teching and calling in two T34/85s. If 85s were tied to T3/T4 a player could have two 76s earlier and for 40 fuel less than two 85s.
I agree that attaching call-ins to tiers isn't going to solve all of the balance issues with the game but I hope you would agree it is at least a step in the right direction. |
|
Back on topic, someone needs to email this to relic. I would totally play this patch. |
Better yet, bring back the whole "Doctirne units have to be produced at a structure".
This would mean Shocktroops/guard rifles being produced in t1, Heavy mortar/ DHSK being produced in t2 etc. You could of course tie some units to only require t0 (Like partisans) but honestly I'm real fucking tired of doctrines providing a well rounded arsenal and letting people ignore tech. Soviets are the worse for this because some of their best units are doctrinal. You can go heavy on t2 weapons crews and then shit out shock troops giving you a stupid strong force.
And then by doing this, you could tweak the INSANE costs of those super heavy units because they would require tech investment to field. You could actually make them affordable.
Limiting infantry call-ins to specific buildings would be unnecessarily harmful to the soviets. They aren't designed to build both T1 and T2 so any doctrine with guards rifle or shocks is meant to provide call-ins that can substitute for the tech tier that wasn't built instead of supplement it. |
If I go Rifle Company in a 1vs1, it's just pure Easy Eight spam when I hit 9 CPs. Why would you invest 90 fuel for T4 when all you really need are Easy Eights?
They're much more versatile than Jacksons and even have almost the same anti-tank effectiveness if you factor in their better survivability.
Anyway, to the point.
Light vehicles and infantry absolutely should not be tied to Tiers because there is no real reason for it. If the US Dodge was tied to Lieutenant, for example, it would never be built because AA Halftrack and M20 are much better options at that point. The Dodge is an early game vehicle like M3 and Kubel, it won't survive for more than 6-8 minutes.
However, the heavy hitting vehicles with big fuel prices should absolutely require teching to unlock, because at the moment it is far more efficient to just not go T3 as Wehr even and just save the resources for late game Tiger-spam. Same deal with other similar call-ins (ISU, IS-2, T-34/85, Easy Eight).
That said, they should be tied to tech in a way that does not reduce your options. As Soviets, for example, heavies should only require EITHER T3 or T4, and as Wehr I think the requirement should be just T3. That way you need at least some technology to get access to the more heavy-hitting call-ins, but the system does not restrict your options too much.
+1
Spot on. |
|
Thanks! |
|
Thanks, awesome work! |
|
What exactly qualifies as a "super" vehicle here? Do medium tanks such as the T34/85 qualify or is it limited to the big beasts like the ISU-152?
Instead of a specific building requirement I think a general tier requirement would be the most effective way at gating vehicle call-ins while still maintaining a lot of teching flexibility. For example, to access heavy tank call-ins a soviet or ost player would need T3 OR T4 built. This way strats such as going T4 as soviets and using the KV-1 call-in for a front line tank would still be viable.
The largest issue with call-ins right now is that by not teching a player can stockpile a large amount of fuel before they hit 10 or 11 CP then spend it all on call-in tanks. If you watch the recent Barton vs Cruzz replay Barton is able to call in 3 ISU-152 in a relatively short time span because he only builds T1 the entire game. Forcing construction of later tier buildings would put an end to these strategies and make the units these tiers produce more competitive with call ins from a total fuel expenditure point of view. |
0
~TAB~ Cabreza
~TAB~ Napalm (Paid Relic Shill)
~TAB~ Napalm (Paid Relic Shill)
~TAB~ Cabreza
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
