|
Eh ... nothing really changed since alpha in terms of how tiers work. Imo, luftwaffe companie looks super weak in comparison to panzergrenadier companie. Same problem with USF in CoH2 happening again, where one tier is just superior to the other.
Luft gives you AI squad, AI+soft AT team weapon, glass cannon soft AI/AT scout car, dedicated AI tank without alpha-strike damage, dedicated AT tank.
While PG companie gives you proper AI squad, proper AT gun, indirect unit, forward reinforcement unit (which in alpha could have been upgraded into indirect unit), proper indirect unit weapon + AT tank.
I mean its cool, that you basically can go either double or full 1 tier, but it seems like one will be picked almost exclusively over the other, unless they are equally useful.
I remember during Alpha there was almost no reason to go for luft. |
What are you talking about? To my knowledge they use Grenadier Kar, so they have a normal damage profile. Only the single G43 performs as you say and that is only once upgraded. So even without the upgrade they get excellent starting target size at .8, Gren guns, camo, ambush bonus, vision and two free weapon slots which are not used even when upgraded.
Its not like you want to use stock grenadiers, by the time other elites hit the field. Not to mention that its pointless to use them without G43.
On top of that, grenadiers kars don't have exceptionally good close range damage, and the whole DPS of jaegers comes from sniping models.
Point being, if you want to counter jaegers just close the distance which wont allow them to get easy snipes. |
For that kind of power, 60muni is an easy pay. There should always be a payoff - maybe reduce the rate of fire, lose sprint, may not plant bombs anymore are a few ideas.
There is already a pay-off. Jaegers, unlike other squads, do less damage to the unit the closer they are to them. |
I think you completely forgot how absolutely broken beyond repair many of the DLC commanders still were at that time.
Idk, from what I remember, things like Elite Tiger, tank hunters, windostry and so on were already fixed.
Still there was over-all BS, but in comparison to other patches where factions could have easily become just unplayble after latest changes or new DLC, it was the most balanced patch for vanilla game.
Ofcouse balanced, in a spectrum of old relic balance approach. |
|
Balance on the release was special, but I mean, a lot of the stuff was patched out pretty quickly by relic.
I guess, if you want to play truly "old fashion" game, you could try looking for a patch right before WFA release.
Game was pretty balanced, with some rough edges (like double soviet sniper) and required just a little bit more fixes, but WFA messed it up. |
|
Overwatch is literally just frustrating because it has LeFH, but you already with current meta aren't suppose to play neither side without anti-arty call-in in teamgames.
Jaegers litteraly do no damage the closer you get to them, which is sometimes the problem for UKF, unless they spam bren mandos, which is also a meta, which hard counters jaegers pretty badly. Not to mention that they are by far the weakest OKW elite inf, since they start kicking ass only around vet 3 and they take shit ton of time to vet up.
Loiter is the strongest one unitility wise, but allies AA is still on top of the Axis one, so you can pretty much make it 200muni waste.
Still, I'd pick playing against Overwatch in teamgames, over Breakthrought, which is by far the worst, because besides having arty, it has everything overwatch has but better. |
You want to argue that riflemen are crap and dragging the faction down?
There is no need to argue, for teamgames its a fact. Power of rifles comes exclusively from picking favourable engagements, flanking and 1v1ing. And even in 2v2 you more often then not fight your opponent face to face with very little room to actually win by out positioning and rifles are only good at that, in fair combat they are garbage for 280MP squad.
Pathfinder being used as mainline infatry is an issue that should simply should be fix even if riflemen are crap and USF are doing bad.
Who cares, no patches are comming anyway  |
Yet priest is the most popoluar commander in 4vs4 (so I doubt that 99% play Airborne in 4vs4) so one can play 4vs4 without Pathfinders and win
Yet, in every other gamemode airborne is top picked commander, even in top 200 4v4. As for global 4v4, its a difference, based on map and match up. There is no reason to go for x2 paths of you are double USF on one side, or you are on forest side on map like red ball. |
I just provided the winrates of USF in 4vs4 games and they are doing as good or better than other factions. What makes you think that USF are worse than soviet or UKF in teamgames?
Because 99% of USF players (me included) abuse paths into snowballing scotts? Literally its either airborne or inf company (if you are double USF).
Having high winrates because of a broken strategy doesn't mean that the stock faction is working fine. |
That is inaccurate. The original designed had USF with limited access to support weapons so they either got light vehicles support or support weapons (because of that those those units where OP).
Question still remains, why rifles, being 280MP unit have problems fighting much cheaper mainlines. Considering in early game, you have access to nothing but mortar and your starting unit is actually the weakest one in the game.
USF get a T0 mortar which is a support weapon.
Thats nice. Still it doesn't help, that 280MP squad have troubles fighting 240MP grenadiers, unless they are able to close the distance like conscripts.
IS do not have a mortar as support weapon or snares or the mainline infatry and they have to carry the faction. Actually UKF are worse designed than USF so I am not sure why you want to bring them up.
Again, purely 1v1 thing. In teamgames, where you can stale or rely on your teammate a bit, UKF is doing just fine. Not to mention, that 2 commanders comes with 0CP mortar call-in, and 2 have access to it. I'm bringing exactly to point out that unlike USF, UKF at least got commanders to cover different playstyles based on a gamemode.
T1 and Penal are also badly designed and one has to build time and MP on building T1 before having access to them.
In 1v1 yes. In teamgames they work just fine.
As shown from stat USF are doing fine in 1vs1 and have higher win ratios than OKW/Ostheer so do not see any indication that faction is doing bad.
And I am not speaking about 1v1 what so ever, because in 1v1 USF can actually make use of rifles.
None of that changes the fact that Pathfinder should not have the role of mainline infatry.
And I never said they should. |
Relic Entertainment
shadics ARG. 
The101stAirBorne 
