It's tiring how people want to just bandwagon games just to feel vindicated when the other morons pipe in with the same stupid opinions. The steam forums are like a prime example of this with people calling it a piece of shit because it's not exactly like CoH2 despite CoH2 having years and years of support to make it actually decent. There was some poster saying it was horrible because they couldn't figure out how to pan the camera and I just don't understand how these people even play on PC. It's like a 7/10 right now and will get better as time goes on, but people just wanting to call it a dead game on release and complain just seems super pathetic.
I played coh2 from beta till last October, have 4k hours and played loads of multiplayer. You make a valid point especially when people compare content or saying its missing content. I think the problem here is that its clear Relic spent most of their budget on the SP content, which business wise makes sense however given the reviews and what I played (and returned) of it shows it clearly didn't pay off.
The thing comes down to quality and lack there of being that relic has had this IP for 20 years, knows what fans want and like, and charge top tier pricing for what consumers would assume would be a AAA product. With that comes the prestige and expectations of polish, top tier UI, better graphics, great audio, and most of all a fun to play game. None of that is here and given Relics quick to bail format on DOW3 and starting to show on AOE4 as they hand it off to Forgotten Empires (who have a new name) its hard to take them seriously if they state it'll get better.
At best the game is an alpha build with proof of concept, locked in models, locked in scope but missing all the polish and grandeur you'd expect. Things work but not to the level you'd expect and it will take a year to reach what should have been here day 1.
>How could they spend so much time on singleplayer and have it so bland?
you think the money was spent on development lol no. diversity and inclusivity consultants cost money, especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>you think the money was spent on development lol no. diversity and inclusivity consultants cost money, especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
I think a lot of people know it's gonna get crammed with propaganda and don't even bother, even though not many people say it
Like you just know exactly what's the story gonna be and makes it go from bland to repulsive
1 year ago
Anonymous
>especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
Is this really in the game? lol
leave
1 year ago
Anonymous
>/pol/
How is it related? Why are you derailing the thread?
1 year ago
Anonymous
what's even more hilarious about this is how aloof relic is about their fanbase, which contains a significant amount of wehraboos. of fricking course those autists are going to find anything wrong about a fake narrative of nazis persecuting israelites in africa. their fanbase is most likely to be turned off from woke SJW shit, and nort africa was the theater with the least nazi war crimes due to the fact that it was just germany try to help out italy unfrick itself. so for some reason they had an opportunity to just focus on the war, and then they intentionally drove through the one figurative land mine in a literal desert by manufacturing some character that historically came from a community that was not persecuted by nazis.
i'm just going to end this here because i don't want to invite /misc/tards in to shit up the thread about muh culture war. this has nothing to do with culture war, relic is a terrible vidya studio that straddles the fence on incompetence and fradulent. they can't even get woke right.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>that pic >"I don't want to invite /misc/tards"
Don't talk like one of them. You're not. Even if you'd like to be.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
Is this really in the game? lol
>you think the money was spent on development lol no. diversity and inclusivity consultants cost money, especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
I think a lot of people know it's gonna get crammed with propaganda and don't even bother, even though not many people say it
Like you just know exactly what's the story gonna be and makes it go from bland to repulsive
You all ignored the heavy anti-soviet propaganda in CoH2 and there you go, now they make up fake stories about germans and italians going after the israelites in the northern africa even though they actually went there for Suez and oil and to frick the british and french.
Relic was pozzed for quite a while you just chose to ignore it.
Just to give you some perspective.
This is the ending cutscene of the original Call of Duty.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>SOVIETS DIN DUN NUFFIN
lol
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Soviets did commit warcrimes but this one vastly exaggerated them >they dindu shit
sad to see Ganker is made out of the same moronic stock as reddit now. Back to my wizard tower I guess.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>You all ignored the heavy anti-soviet propaganda in CoH2
at the time i thought the COH2 campaign was a bit silly and heavy handed. due to certain recent events i think it actually didn't go far enough.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Man I IGNORED CoH2 ENTIRELY
This ain't new don't give me that shit.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Coh1 was just a rehash of Saving Private Ryan+BoB
Coh2 was just Enemy at the Gates rehash
Coh3 is just lame story writing
1 year ago
Anonymous
>especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
Is this really in the game? lol
1 year ago
Anonymous
it's literally how the german campaign starts. There is a text telling the player how this si actually their story.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I love how they even heavily imply that british was also the bad guys and basically both british and germans were there to just muh oppress israeli.
You dumb fricking homosexual, they should have LEARNED from CoH 2 and not delivered a broken product on launch. >B-But it'll get better!
Says fricking who? It should have released in this "better" state instead of broken. Stupid fricking homosexual opinions like that is why they keep giving you shitty, half finished games.
>first properly good RTS to come out in a decade >missing 90% of content in its two previous titles >graphically worse than its 2006 debut
no excuse.
and to get paid to shill this game... what a hellish existence. How do you live with yourself? Fricking prostitute
can someone explain why loads of people review bombed this game with like .5 hours of playtime screeching insane babble about menu music and shit like that, have they made the nazis into trannies which has triggered all the wehraboos or something?
game seems dope to me but i'm an ultimate casual who just wants things to look pretty as i click boom them.
I don't know, Its fricking bizzare. I get that the graphics and sound arn't amazing or whatever but they are really just fine, the sounds especially vary from underwhelming to really good and realistic, everytime my greyhound fires I cum a little
There were women in the Italian partisan resistance though. It's actually a pop culture thing at this point. Carla Capponi for example was pretty famous despite being a fricking communist she still ended up assassinating an officer and being the 2IC during one of the biggest partisan battles.
>muh partisans
Its not a torture helpless civilians simulator its a RTS, women cant fight which is why all these "partisans" and "insurgencies" which have armed foids fail miserably.
What the frick are you talking about, the partisans were trying to liberate their country. The Germans pulled Achse and occupied most of the country which resulted in this massive wave of young people fighting against them in organized attacks. Apennine was seized by the partisans. The revenge killings were brutal, because communists do that evil shit, but to think the resistance failed miserably is dumb dude
>Its not a torture helpless civilians simulator its a RTS
Leveling civilian homes and killing unarmed innocents was the best part of RA1&2 when you played as Soviets
>he cares more about what the units look like and what shitty accent they use than how the faction actually plays
I've come to realize that the average RTS player is a massive casual.
>no Italians even as a MP-only faction >you can tell that an X-pac/DLC is already in the works for the IJA vs. MEF(USMC)/ANZAC campaign that will make both playable in MP
shills on suciide watch, just look at it , if this game was not called company of heros 3 not even 10% of the sales would have happen, i fully expect to lose 90% of the playerbase like AoE 4 and be full of sunken cost fallacy copers that still pretend they did not waste their money on a terrible game justifying it by saying that they got 60 hours and that is enough to justify the overpriced purchase even though they will not ever touch the game again
For what it's worth they said they'd add that functionality to the editor, custom meshes and the like, but they said the same thing about CoH 2. And they're probably only going to add them after they've pumped out a couple DLC's for 19.99+Tax+Tip so in all honesty? A couple months to a year, minimum.
Currently it's not even that. Spearhead and Wikinger devs on the discord say they can edit unit stats but not mix models, create units and updates or even change tech trees etc like they could in CoH2. All they can do is e.g. change damage values and ressource costs...
Allegedly lelic already promises to improve on that but if they lull a full dow3 i doubt it.
Means they lied pre release btw cuz devs in the official forum said we would have support like coh2 ON RELEASE iirc.
Having done post-mortem on disaster releases before I can tell you that the issue is that a lot of the assets are still set up using the proprietary file system the company uses for development, and as a consequence also encrypted. When a game is rushed and barely scrapes its way out of the finish line, they don't have time to recompile assets in a way that's safe for the end user to view and edit so they just have to leave most shit encrypted and work on fixing it after the fact.
It's a sign of just how down to the wire development got.
I can see where you'd get that idea but I don't think it's the case. I remember several threads about CoH 2 model changes and they can easily extract and even change the models, it just can't be loaded into another persons game. It may be because of encryption, I don't know.
A lot of people, especially mod makes, are under the impression they're being intentionally blocked from these types of things.
Lelic needs to shape up soon or modders are eventually just gonna frick off to some other game.
So I actually bought this game i now have 12 hours into it. I played the multiplayer demo as well for maybe 5 hours. I feel bamboozled multiplayer demo everyone played the game as intended small unit tactics people microing squads around cover chucking nades. I had a blast in the beta. Right now 80% of my opponents blob 6 units together in a pack run them around annhilating everythin in cover or out of cover. If they do run into an mg retreat the whole blob instantly and repeat holy frick its getting tiresome do i just fall into the trap and blob as well. Cause microing and cover sure as hell doesnt fricking matter against it. Im hoping things maybe improve when all the kiddies move onto the next game release.
In every RTS ever, blobbing is the default beginner tactic because it keeps all the units you need to manage on one screen and within a drag-select box of each other. These people aren't doing it because it's effective, it's just the easiest way to keep control of their units.
Real warfare typically requires a concentration of forces for offensives to be successful, and the same principle applies here. If your opponent blobs multiple times as much unit-value as you in a single place, they're going to win the battle there. Emplacements, positional advantages etc. can be a force multiplier and help you win when outnumbered, but not infinitely so--otherwise nobody could ever win an attack. Whenever you split your forces, you have to be prepared for each group to face opposition they can't beat. When they do, they should be prepared to stall the enemy while groups elsewhere accomplish things uncontested, or withdraw if they can't stall profitably. You don't need to win every firefight, you just need to control the majority of the map. If your opponent is blobbing then the majority of your forces should always be able to access whatever control points the enemy isn't currently occupying.
This was true of previous CoH games, as well. Retreats are extremely forgiving to encourage you to split your forces, move around and take risks, knowing that you can always get away if you encounter a bigger group. Yes, it requires more micro out of you than the guy blobbing--which is why inexperienced players default to blobbing instead.
in regards to modding you may; >Make game modes >Maps and scenarios >Tuning packs
What about campaign mods you may ask? They haven't said a word about it but I genuinely doubt you'll be able to even so much as rename a unit. On top of that, it doesn't even seem like it's modding tools per se, but more of an editor. As far as meshes and textures go, they're untouchable for now. Sound design also seems to be off the table.
I don't know why Relic has developed this intense hatred of modders, considering several older Relic titles are kept alive by the efforts of modders, namely DoW 1 and 2 and even the original CoH. Could be a Sega decision, who knows.
Modders always get the shaft of modern games. Every single one. Cause why have competition to your 5 dollar microtransactions when modders are making free shit?
This is one of the major reasons modern games are so shitty.
No profiles page to see stats or match history present.
Fallschirmjagers missing 3D models.
Missing surrender option.
No inventory system - you cannot change the badge, banner, title, basically anything related to your ingame profile personalization.
Only 3 Battlegroups per faction (same amount as in beta). As a result, there are units currently in the game that are unable to be accessed in multiplayer due to there not being a battlegroup for them.
Only 2 4v4 MP maps (same amount as in beta).
Only 3 3v3 MP maps (same amount as in beta).
No earning of credits after games, meaning no way for us to earn said free credits to later buy things in the in-game store like in COH2.
Unable to queue capture orders on the tactical map.
No way to view the map at the end of the game.
No chat room server support.
After the game ends, there is no way to chat with your opponents or teammates.
No ability to name your multiplayer game.
No background sounds of birds chirping, faded gunfire in the distance, etc that was present in previous entries to give off that 'COH vibe'.
No player names showing over units when hovered over them.
No player list in-game in multiplayer (can't tell if human teammate got replaced by AI)
No leaderboards for pre-made teams.
No crushing infantry with heavy vehicles.
Unit statistics not viewable in game.
Cannot multi-select control groups with Shift + Numbers, instead it assigns multiple control groups to individual units
'Temporary' main menu UI from beta still remaining in full release.
Tiny soundtrack compared to previous COH games.
No ability to have the camera follow a unit you double clicked on (either the unit or it portrait). This was present in COH1/2.
No Bulletin system.
No Observer mode.
>Only 3 Battlegroups per faction >No earning of credits after games, meaning no way for us to earn said free credits to later buy things in the in-game store like in COH2.
Really homie? That belongs at the top of your list?
Unable to see crew weapons built in post-match stats screen.
No replays (although a workaround is available).
Unable to invite friends from Steam, directly from the steam UI and steam overlay.
Disappointing state of modding tools. Many possibilities were promised by Relic pre-launch in terms of modding, but it seems that turned out to be false and in reality the options are very limited.
Only English language voice tracks.
Bugs:
AI failing to attack you in campaign unless scripted.
Can't pause game in skirmish.
Custom game server browser broken. For example, you can only see 9 games, no sorting, no searching, no paging of the list. The top 9 games are usually never launched with an AFK host.
Instances where crew served weapons (for example, a US MG Squad and a mortar squad) both got "stuck" in a green covered position (which they were not really stuck or surrounded since it was open behind them) after pressing retreat.
254 Recon Tractor has the ability to call in free offmap mortars, at vet 1 it gains the ability to lock and have an improved barrage overwriting the default one.
US Airborne troops infinite spawn glitch.
Infantry units having their 'engines be broken'.
No tactical pause feature in skirmish.
Not being able to click on top of the big notifications.
Unable to save skirmish settings.
Unit icons inside buildings being off screen unless you can see the whole building, causing you to get suppressed without knowing from where its coming.
No autosave in campaign.
After match stats are hilariously broken and inaccurate.
Minimap has no indicator of which specific unit is selected if you are tabbing through several.
When using "walking stuka" is a circle, which doesn't fit the barrage itself which is instead an oval like shape.
Ultra texture option is locked out for no reason (although a workaround is available).
Pathfinding for vehicles is terrible.
Friends who are online and in-game don’t show up as online or inviteable many times.
Reticle/marker: when you send/direct multiple units to a spot shows only arrow, not the dots+arrow representing each group in the selection.
Things currently in COH3 needing improvement:
In-game visuals look too washed out/bland, require better lightning/contrast. As such, soldiers also tend to blend with the ground, sometimes not being able to instantly see where the model is standing.
Wonky, at times brain dead in-game AI.
Pings are still barely noticeable. COH2 it was too loud and spammy, now it makes barely any sound and hard / impossible to find.
Poor sound mixing. Extremely muffled and needs revamp.
Zoom level adjustments needed.
Twitchy camera. Camera movement with the WASD keys seems a little 'jumpy'.
Poor response of units when clicking on team weapons and weapons on the ground.
Small unit icons. Need to be bigger, they are even smaller than COH2.
Some of the unit icons need work. For example, the US M3 75mm halftrack still has the CoH2 Soviet SU-76 silhouette.
Clicking on a unit should tell you how many kills it has without having to hover over a certain spot on the UI.
Unique team colours needs fixing. For example, sometimes you can be playing as orange, and a red axis tank will be in the middle of your troops without knowing.
Unable to see crew weapons built in post-match stats screen.
No replays (although a workaround is available).
Unable to invite friends from Steam, directly from the steam UI and steam overlay.
Disappointing state of modding tools. Many possibilities were promised by Relic pre-launch in terms of modding, but it seems that turned out to be false and in reality the options are very limited.
Only English language voice tracks.
Bugs:
AI failing to attack you in campaign unless scripted.
Can't pause game in skirmish.
Custom game server browser broken. For example, you can only see 9 games, no sorting, no searching, no paging of the list. The top 9 games are usually never launched with an AFK host.
Instances where crew served weapons (for example, a US MG Squad and a mortar squad) both got "stuck" in a green covered position (which they were not really stuck or surrounded since it was open behind them) after pressing retreat.
254 Recon Tractor has the ability to call in free offmap mortars, at vet 1 it gains the ability to lock and have an improved barrage overwriting the default one.
US Airborne troops infinite spawn glitch.
Infantry units having their 'engines be broken'.
No tactical pause feature in skirmish.
Not being able to click on top of the big notifications.
Unable to save skirmish settings.
Unit icons inside buildings being off screen unless you can see the whole building, causing you to get suppressed without knowing from where its coming.
No autosave in campaign.
After match stats are hilariously broken and inaccurate.
Minimap has no indicator of which specific unit is selected if you are tabbing through several.
When using "walking stuka" is a circle, which doesn't fit the barrage itself which is instead an oval like shape.
Ultra texture option is locked out for no reason (although a workaround is available).
Pathfinding for vehicles is terrible.
Friends who are online and in-game don’t show up as online or inviteable many times.
Reticle/marker: when you send/direct multiple units to a spot shows only arrow, not the dots+arrow representing each group in the selection.
Things currently in COH3 needing improvement:
In-game visuals look too washed out/bland, require better lightning/contrast. As such, soldiers also tend to blend with the ground, sometimes not being able to instantly see where the model is standing.
Wonky, at times brain dead in-game AI.
Pings are still barely noticeable. COH2 it was too loud and spammy, now it makes barely any sound and hard / impossible to find.
Poor sound mixing. Extremely muffled and needs revamp.
Zoom level adjustments needed.
Twitchy camera. Camera movement with the WASD keys seems a little 'jumpy'.
Poor response of units when clicking on team weapons and weapons on the ground.
Small unit icons. Need to be bigger, they are even smaller than COH2.
Some of the unit icons need work. For example, the US M3 75mm halftrack still has the CoH2 Soviet SU-76 silhouette.
Clicking on a unit should tell you how many kills it has without having to hover over a certain spot on the UI.
Unique team colours needs fixing. For example, sometimes you can be playing as orange, and a red axis tank will be in the middle of your troops without knowing.
Should I bother picking this up? I played CoH 1 and 2 (as well as DoW2) but super casually. I don't think I would bother much with multiplayer but I need a new singleplayer RTS to sandbox with and this seems like the newest and shiniest.
I don't really care if it's not perfect, as long as it's not going to run at 6fps and buttons actually work when I click on them.
>I don't really care if it's not perfect, as long as it's not going to run at 6fps and buttons actually work when I click on them.
I would wait a month of two to see what they actually fix. The campaign map is pretty fun but its really buggy.
if you actually don't care if it's not perfect, then yes, it will definitely entertain you. at its core its a good, fun game. for all it's flaws its also well optimized so it should run great.
>Should I bother picking this up?
the gameplay is good and it runs well. 1v1 is tight, 2v2 is a lot of fun as well. faction design is way more interesting than last time. it's overpriced-- the game and the UI especially has like no polish at all
i'm around 3 hours in and it seems a lot like CoH2 except the faction design has been shaken up a little and the game performs a little better than CoH2. i don't think there's anything really wrong with the game so far, though i'm a little disappointed by how little they've changed things from CoH2. the game feels less cheesy than CoH1 at least, and at least the 2v2 maps seem pretty good. i wish there were more weirder units too, though if the game doesn't immediately die then we could see them as DLC
i feel a little bad about giving nu-relic 60 bucks to play CoH2.5 but at least i never have to deal with the broken drag scroll and slew of other shit in CoH2 that they never fixed. not like there's anything else to play in this genre right now
Only DLC I'll get is if they add a Pacific War expansion or actually add Italy. I think the next faction will be Allied Italy and the Italian Social Republic
>Should I bother picking this up?
the gameplay is good and it runs well. 1v1 is tight, 2v2 is a lot of fun as well. faction design is way more interesting than last time. it's overpriced-- the game and the UI especially has like no polish at all
What absolutely galls me about the price is all these "sponsored" youtube shills with promo codes that don't actually have promotions attached. Why the frick would I use your
"""promo code""" if there's no discount attached?
Is anyone else surprised at how relatively balanced mp feels? Apart from a few obvious things like the DAK tiger call in which they've already changed iirc, it feels pretty good. That said DAK does feel a bit too strong in 1v1s but otherwise I've been pleasantly surprised
>You pointed me to it, troony, thanks for that 🙂 Even Reddit hates your employers shit game. How are the reviews on steam going?
the seethe from this post convinced me to buy myself and a friend a copy of the game. if it wasn't good, you wouldn't care this much 🙂 thanks gay!
Am I the only one who absolute fricking hates the look of tank shells, explosions, shots and fire? It's like they wanted to imitate CoH where you see the shell bounce but it looks like fricking shit, like some mobile game. Turns out CoH2 got a bunch of artistic decisions just right
This weird thing happens with modern games where increasing graphical fidelity destroys readability, so to enhance readability they have to make some things more 'cartoonish', which makes them stand out painfully because they're cartoonish in something that's trying to render high fidelity realism everywhere else.
Businessmen decide the art direction of the game, because art and graphics are marketable and push product. Then game designers are left trying to make the gameplay readable to its players with that artstyle well after the fact and the result looks like this. It's a ubiquitous problem
How in the frick does one play as the US? Seems like the other three factions have obvious early strategies available. Using airdropped pioneers with grenade launchers, infantry sections with AT rifles, and halftracks are all good ways to start the other factions but the US just seems to have trouble in the early game with no powerful lategame units to make up for it. What is the secret of el goblino atrocidad?
US are literally spess from DoW2 and have the same openers. You go heavy on scouts and abuse free flares/smoke for an early tempo lead, then snowball. They're strong earlygame not necessarily in a direct all-in firefight but in map presence, which honestly matters way more. Their lategame is weaker, relatively speaking because it's balanced around them snowballing an early resource lead. Scouts are seriously nuts.
US are literally spess from DoW2 and have the same openers. You go heavy on scouts and abuse free flares/smoke for an early tempo lead, then snowball. They're strong earlygame not necessarily in a direct all-in firefight but in map presence, which honestly matters way more. Their lategame is weaker, relatively speaking because it's balanced around them snowballing an early resource lead. Scouts are seriously nuts.
A good US strat to try, especially in 1v1, is open like follows
-immediately queue 2 pathfinders
-select airborne BG and pathfinders upgrade
-send your first PF squad out to cap (it should reinforce to 4 models by the time it leaves spawn)
-use the other 2 squads to cap the map quicker than your opponent, avoid lengthy engagements and stay at a range. if you see an enemy MG use your free smoke abillity paired with your insane rifle grenade
-get an airborne squad and slap some zooks on them to deal with light vehicles
-springboard off map control into shermans
it can be tricky to pull of but ive had good success with it. I will note however, that this particular strategy starts to peter out if you can't get good map control early, and can also backfire if the game goes late, because pathfinders don't scale well.
There are other US strats that are better later, like heavy rifles into bars into the infantry company building with all the discounts as the armoured BG, but the pathfinders one is nice, succinct, easy to execute, and fun to play.
Has anyone figured out some funny meme strats?
Closest thing I could find was rushing bersaglieri to the enemy fuel/cutoff
They will be pushed off fast but you can probably decap and stall enemy fuel income for like a minute, especially if the dude undercommits
DAK infantry BG, get into early aggression as quickly as you can to generate CP, rush the two tanklets with flamethrowers on them for total allied death if you avoid boys AT rifles and keep your range. you'll have the whole map controlled for like 3 minutes before they can react but you have to get them out early
Funny because with DAK a lot of people overcommit on AT since they're anticipating vehicles rushes like that so another strategy is just to focus on ammo points, upgrade your Pgrens early and push useless bazooka paras or bazooka squads off the field.
DAK is so fun but it might be because a lot of USF players really don't know how to deal with you, idk why the British aren't more popular they're so straight forward and strong, my favorite allies for sure.
Levels of USF play is going to be terrible for a long while until meta build orders circulate widely. I think a tonnes of folks just picking up the game are expecting US to be the straightforward beginner faction that wants to ball up and brawl in the middle, but if anything that's Britain. The US are the dodgy faction that relies on abilities and mobility and they benefit a lot from game knowledge, so it's going to be a while before you start seeing them played competently as the norm.
This. I understand why people initially think that the USF in 3 is similar to the USF in 1 due to their unit roster but in terms of play style they’re the same micro intensive special ability heavy faction they are in 2.
I'm not really into MP whatsoever, so maybe I'm wrong, but hasn't the US faction always been the straight up brawlers? Biggest squads, higher rates of fire?
I have just emerged from under a rock to learn about CoH 3. I am a massive fan of the series. I remember playing Relic's Age of Empires 4 beta and how absolutely shit that game was visually. This is EXACTLY the same. Holy shit is this game the most UGLY bland piece of shit I've seen in any modern RTS. How do they make such an absolutely ugly dog shit game and get away with it? I check youtube reviews and nearly NOBODY but one review is actually shitting on this game's visuals. Frick strategy, I don't care. This is a big title that has milked their games for 20 years, where the frick is the production of a 2023 game? RTS games out there with half the studio and budget from independent companies look way fricking better than this ... YEARS AGO! Holy frick, I'm so fricking mad. I'm going to link this ONE HONEST FRICKING REVIEW on youtube from just a normal fricking stand up guy being honest about this dog shit release in a world of relic copium inhalers and shills. There is absolute NO reason to play this game over CoH2. NO REASON. People will just ignore this game just like Age of Empires 4 and play previous titles in the series. I will NEVER buy a relic game again in my life and I most certainly won't be buying this one. All it takes is 30 seconds of gameplay footage to draw that decision. If I want strategy I'll play a different game. If I'm playing retail price for a AAA game in 2023, it better not look like absolute dogshit.
So you think the game is visually acceptable? You like eating outdated everything that feels like a 20 year old game? CoH 1 looked better visually dude.
>So you think the game is visually acceptable? You like eating outdated everything that feels like a 20 year old game? CoH 1 looked better visually dude.
I think you're being a bit hyperbolic anon it really doesn't look bad at all
i'll be honest, i only played the open beta, im not going to buy it this early because its overpriced, but frick if it isnt fun slapping some engineers with flamers on the DAK half-track and toasting some homies. of course it could look better. of course it could be fixed up some more, but i at least feel someone there did something right about the fun aspect
sure ttk is higher, sure you cant wipe unattended squads with a grenade anymore, sure it looks funny that squads are shooting each other point blank and taking ages to kill anyone but if you really wanted something more hardcore you'd just be playing men of war or call to arms
Pay to win how? You buy the stupid cash grab commanders okay fine... yeah I fricking hate relic's DLC and I'm sure it hasn't gotten much cheaper. But the map is equal for the most part if you play meta commanders. Either case, CoH2 looks fricking decent. This game looks worse than any RTS i've seen in the past 20 years.
I understand why that would make you lose interest but who cares about a 4 hours campaign that you'll only play once, the multiplayer is where the game shines and it's really good.
1 year ago
Anonymous
But CoH2 multiplayer was really good and it looked better. Why should I play a game that looks worse when outdated games exist?
1 year ago
Anonymous
Because looks aren't everything
>when outdated games exist?
what do you mean?
1 year ago
Anonymous
then play coh2, who cares. we'll be playing coh3 because its fun and looks better than coh2
1 year ago
Anonymous
The virtue signaling in this post is fricking crazy
1 year ago
Anonymous
don't care 🙂 i'm literally laughing, smiling, and having fun while you sit, cope, seethe, and dilate
1 year ago
Anonymous
Are you just using random words?
1 year ago
Anonymous
No, it's people defending this game. They are like twitter SJWs defending their favorite marvel comic book. They think it's virtuous to silence all criticism. It's a fricking game, not a fricking election. Game developers do not deserve an ounce of understanding when a product doesn't deliver. That's business. In other trades and professions in life do we accept half baked products? Do you accept partially spoiled food at the grocery store? Do you like to go to a restaurant and accept a plate of nothing but ground beef when you ordered a full burger? I honestly believe that Relic, like many other gaming companies, are so low in intelligence and understanding of coding and game design due to hiring practice and israeli investors that we now not only have regression. We are moving back in time on even our fricking understanding of how to use a game's hardware potential. I believe that leftists in media, game development, ect.. are midwit tier IQ and can never produce an acceptable product.
>There is absolute NO reason to play this game over CoH2
what about the fact that everything about it is better?
CoH2 was shite. even the first expansion to the first CoH was shite. this is the first game they've made in about 20 years that is mechanically decent and it takes a massive dump on the failure that was CoH 2.
While I enjoy Mack's content, he is a total boomer shitter when it comes to RTS.
And this is the multiplayer test "review"
I was there when CoH1 and CoH2 launched so all this shit doesn't bother me that much.
Mechanicly CoH3 is already better than predecessors.
Just had a asiatic constantly using the same u.s rifleman unit and blobbing. nothing else. I killed his blob everytime, and he repeated the cycle until the match ended with my stunning victory. what is the mentality here behind asiatics? what do they hope to accomplish? Am I being trolled? This was the only boring part of the game that I've been played. asiatic 'troll' strats that don't work.
i kinda like how there's more unit variation and you get some free auxiliary units. every faction sets up these impromptu FOBs now. makes it feel more like you're running an actual military operation instead of CoH2 where if you play as soviets your army is like a roaming band of penals and a t70 for most of the game
the factions do feel a bit more symmetric than before but it's not because of that. and to be fair i don't really miss the way CoH2 did faction asymmetry because it was often like >lmao your opponent did a cheese strat and your faction literally cant deal with it with the units it has so you lose xd
would be cool if there was more asymmetry but i'll take symmetry over "cheese vs cheese" that coh2 often was
The only asymmetry in original CoH2 was "soviets get barebones equipment from 41 and have to choose COs to have anything good, while Germans can just forget about picking anything until they start losing".
Why do devs hate wehraboos so much as of late?
They are the audience that consistently flood every single WW2 game, they play a lot they buy all dlcs and are the most active members of the community. Even Russian boomers who only play soviets (WoT audience) are not as active and everyone else is a casual.
Why shit on the most loyal fanbase that brings in the money?
imagine a kino alt-hist game where Germany wins and descends into civil war between Wehr, Waffen-SS, Wilhelm loyalists and Weimar restoration partisans
after rebuilding their reputation after the war, online gaming has proven that germans are the worst kind of autistic raging subhumans and the treaty of versailles didn't go hard enough.
im not trying to be inflammatory but i legitimately cannot get into company of heroes
i dont know what it is about it but i fricking hate those games dude
i hate having so few squads
i hate how when squads are shooting at each other the time to kill is like ... 10 minutes, you just watch bullets whizz by each other as they miss each other
i hate how the camera is so zoomed in
i hate how 'loose' the game feels like units not reacting snappily to your commands or wiggling about
i hate all the stupid active abilities and "give your squad the B.A.R. upgrade!" nonsense
i really just dont like these games
I legitimately don't get why they don't just increase the scale of everything and zoom out a little bit and have the game feel a little more 'macro' instead of telling one of my two penis squads to hide behind the penis wall and shoot rubber bullets against one of the enemy's 3 dildo squads like a fricking chump, is this world war 2 or paintball? why the frick are there so few units on the map, why is the lethality so low
Regardless it frickin sucks because I love RTS games and would like to be able to enjoy a new game in a franchise with what appears to be actual polish and budget
i've always felt coh is basically a game about making a cool ww2 "diorama" come to life. It's definitely not for everyone, especially those interested in historical accuracy. I got into it when I was a little kid, so the idea of having a big firefight over a town square in normandy was really exciting. I think your complaints make sense anon.
yes I know, I guess I meant in terms of war strategy games, you might have something like Graviteam Tactics: Mius-Front, which seeks to replicate the scale and conditions of combat in a sim like formation, and then something like coh, which seeks to make a cool war movie happen. i like both games equally, but I see what the anon means when he says he can't get into it because of unit ranges, few squads, and high ttk
There is no game about historical accuracy, anon. War isn't fun.
People tend to romanticize WW2 without realizing that it was nowhere as clean as shown in any media. Take ukrainian conflict remove conteprorary body armor, medicine, comms and multiply it by x1000.
War crimes not simply were "common" it was THE normal and literally the way the war was fought. POWs were mass executed, civillians were purposefully targeted and murdered, cities were burned and people were dying left and right from sickness and hunger. In a way you could say that the war was not the biggest concern of people trying to survive this shit. It's the fallout from the war that killed more people than the actual artillery shelling, bombing runs, bullets and tanks.
coh is heavily designed gameplay-first. squads and units are few in number so they feel more individually meaningful and you aren't just spamming them out of a barracks like starcraft. units die slowly so you have time to save them. etc.
honestly, in terms of melding the gameplay and design intent into the aesthetics, the wh40k universe is way better for the CoH formula. the big ass unit models, the point blank gunfights that go on for several minutes, the silly unit upgrades make way more sense in the wh40k universe where you have a power-armored supersoldiers shooting at a giant green orcs with skin made out of kevlar. it's too bad they crashed their dawn of war franchise with no survivors. well to be honest they could probably still release CoH: dawn of war as a spinoff and it'd sell ok
anyway i agree the camera is too zoomed in, though i know why they did it (so you can see the cool explosions and shit and not spend the whole game zoomed out)
nvm i talked too soon the game seems pretty cheesy after all but on the bright side the germs seem to have the majority of the cheese units so if you wait the 5 minute queue time you dont have to play against them
>no way to chat with allies/enemies post-game
I tried us airborne some more and I like it a lot. Especially with a few pathfinders out on the field. They actually have so much utility its insane, rifle grenade/smoke, fast cap, big vision range and flares for peeking over terrain.
maybe im just new and moronic but this feels a lot more micro intensive than coh2 and there's also a bit more macro stuff to keep track of. feels less comfy than im used to
I mean sort of. Positioning didn't matter much in CoH 2, you could just A-move your shit around and destroy squads like you were playing C&C. Then by the time t4 rolled around infantry barely mattered anyway.
CoH 3 feels very similar in micro and tactical demands in the late game as in the early-mid game, which was always the most fun part of CoH anyway.
People who can't appreciate just how right fricking on they've got the gameplay in 3 should go back to plants vs. zombies.
>More micro intensive
Definitely, spamming mgs doesn't necessarily seem so toxic in mp anymore since
And this is a huge one >You don't have to spend the first 10 minutes of the game saving muni just to kit out your squads
Smoke lasts a very useful amount of time now
there are a lot of autistic germans who review bombed the game after playing for 5 minutes who now have 20 hours exclusively queuing as krauts so they can experience sending their great grandfather to die to delay hitler's failure by a year or two.
Yeah lots of people are playing DAK
Can't blame them they're fun as frick and they're the most flavorful.
Plus US is a little more complex and I'm sure people are screwing their builds up.
One thing I don't understand about the US factions is why only the infantry battalion gives you a unit, mechanized or airborne should also give you a captain imo, maybe with different weapon than an LMG
You're committing to infantry dominance when teaching up to buff up your tanks makes them do all kinds of stuff
I kinda don't get it myself since the hellcat is pretty good out of the box, although I feel like reduced reinforcement costs, +10hp and the combat engi synergy is pretty strong
British are the boring milquetoast faction and the US are the complicated and weird micro faction that nobody likes playing and always bounces between 'worst' and 'best' in the game depending on the patch. It's no surprise they aren't topping popularity charts.
What the frick is the early AT for the germans? I just took them into skirmish and I'm getting rolled by a halftrack because I have nothing that kills vehicles
Panzerfausts?? Your mainline infantry can just practically instakill light vehicles with them. Alternatively the flak gun shreds everything that isn't a tank.
The problem with panzerfausts is that you hit a light vehicle for much of its hp and then just do absolutely nothing to until they come off cooldown, and in that time it's going to push all your infantry off the point and come back next fight fully repaired.
>you don't need line of sight to backdoor with paratroopers
That seems kind of nuts. You can even drop and man AT guns behind enemy lines to cut off their movement routes
Had a guy do this to me in a 1v1, holy shit it was annoying but it ended up being a fun close win for me. He was just dropping them on cut-offs the whole game, even dropped an mg team on my munis right at the beginning
DAK is essentially the italy expy and a big part of their roster revolves around italian auxiliary units. Which is honestly sensible. The italian army on its own was not a credible fighting force, so instead they're repped by their babysitter.
Dlc is probably going to be the USSR and/or Japan since they're the only major part if each side not represented. It would be redundant to release an italian faction after already releasing a north africa campaign without an Italian faction, and an italy campaign without an Italy faction.
>DAK is essentially the italy expy and a big part of their roster revolves around italian auxiliary units. Which is honestly sensible. The italian army on its own was not a credible fighting force, so instead they're repped by their babysitter.
Doesn't matter when the game barely implements units of the main fighting factions anyway or splits them up.
Are people sleeping on US assault engineers or am I being moronic? >200 manpower engineer squad that can beat basic grens (with 5 grease guns they are basically a mini assault squad) >get a flamethrower + engineer utility to be good late game >no need to buy grenade or BARs so go straight for 76mm shermans quick
Yet I have literally never seen someone pick them in my matches.
Where the frick do I go to talk about this game? I haven't played CoH2 in almost a decade and I'm looking to get back into things but there are just no resources around anywhere. Youtube is just drowned in fallow shill shit, the wiki is fricking empty. I just want to read up on faction build orders, meta info, specific breakdowns of niche units I might grab to answer certain builds and so on.
After playing a few games I feel like Werh and Britain are the best factions for team modes, especially 3v3 and 4v4v >Wehr
Can go Lufftwaffe as a side player, land falls pioneers on the midpoint and have it capped and fortified with a pillbox before anybody can even be close to contest it while a ketten caps your home points. With some coordination you can tell your allies to leave their home points uncapped and cap it with the ketten for the resource bonus. You'll almost always win mid-battles this way since your side gets in position way ahead of the other side.
They just seem to have the best tools to deploy quickly to a forward position, especially on a very large or open map like the north side of Mignano Gap. You get air support up and you can hunker on your lane while supporting the rest of your map while your own AA keeps the skies clear. Then lategame you roll out with Panzer 4's
As a mid player you grab trucks from the Breakthrough group and just snowball a massive resource advantage, farm munitions from missile artillery and rush out a Tiger. Tigers are so fricking good in team games.
>Brits
You get a gas-free medical truck from your mortar call-in and British line infantry are so ridiculously good that you can just grab 3-4 companies and have absolutely ridiculous map presence. The mortar itself has an insanely short cooldown so you're just positioning it on a friendly point and shelling the nearest enemy's position every 30 seconds for the entire game. And since your infantry AT rifles and field reinforcing are so fricking good you can just grab an AT gun or 2 to support them and rush Matildas. It's ridiculously how quickly Panzers and Shermans melt when they try to break through a pair of british infantry squads with a 6lber in back.
DAK seem weak in 4v4s outside of the cheesy italian light tank rush and I have honestly yet to see the US played well so I'm not really sure the extend of what they can do.
I just had a game with US where I tried going armored battlegroup with the mechanized support center.
The Idea was trying to go assault engineers + sniper into a greyhound and then spam shermans
The guy was kicking my ass early on though so I had to go for an m16 halftrack, then he rushed my base with a wirberlwind and I had to get the 75mm halftrack to punish it.
Instead of going for P4s the guy got 2 marders and a wespe, I eventually got 2 easy eight call-ins and went for a base rush, since he had no AT guns or snares (all his infantry was jeagers to counter my ass engis and sniper) I got all his vehicles and even some infantry squad.
Sure, he would have probably won if he had gone for P4s and managed to destroy my AT guns but the back and forth of this game is really damn fun.
I don't think I ever had a CoH2 game where both players went for a base inspection.
They just seem really bad at their job. >shelling infantry
They take forever to kill anything >shelling vehicles
They can't hit shit and do tickle damage if they hit
Every time I've seen any kind of expensive artillery I've just dived it for the free kill, because being expensive means they're almost certainly lacking AT, and being slow means it basically can't escape anything that can kill it despite being 'self propelled'. There are basically 0 advantages over less expensive artillery weapon teams, especially because you can just restaff a lost weapon team whereas a lost vehicle is just resources lost.
by that point I had 2 AT guns and 2 MGs so the idea wasn't bad but he kept it in his base and max-range barrages seldom do any real damage.
If you want to wipe a team weapon you should get as close to the minimum range as possible.
I'm not sure how I feel about base rushing right now to be honest. It feels a little too easy and a little too hard to punish. Any kind of armoured breakthrough can instantly transition into a base snipe, especially if your AT isn't already in position and usually that's going to basically end the game from the value you get on it. Even light armour often can just run into the base to kill things and walk out with impunity
[...]
There are in fact quite a few italian units and weapons. They're just repped by DAK rather than being their own faction.
I guess there's some skill involved in knowing when you can get away with it.
He did it because he saw I went for assault engineers only and since he had more map control he figured I wouldn't have a chaffee or anything on the way
He probably thought I would surrender though so he overstayed his welcome or didn't notice the production animation on the building so he ended up trading his wirberlwind
When I did it, it was because I knew he had no snares on his jeagers and no AT gun because he went luftwaffe company, but also marders are actually not great against medium tanks because they've got like half of the HPs and no armor.
My only problem with base inspections is that, if you're behind already, getting AT prepared will only put you further behind if the guy decides to techup and keep playing with infantry.
imo the only artillery unit i think has ever been good in CoH history is rocket artillery like stuka's creeping barrage wiping the frick out of soviet field gun walls. sometimes the rocket sherman was ok because the US sucked at clearing big blobs otherwise
all the "hey stand still while i shell you once every 5 minutes" units just suck dick though
>My only problem with base inspections is that, if you're behind already, getting AT prepared will only put you further behind if the guy decides to techup and keep playing with infantry.
Yeah this is the main issue. Usually it's the player who's ahead doing the base rush, and unless they seriously frick up, it's generally ending the game. The idea that you can walk into opponent's base with impunity and wipe a squad or two because you hit 60 fuel a minute ahead of your opponent is kind of ridiculous and completely against the spirit of the game. And the fact that the necessary AT to prevent it is a bad choice until the moment you actually see it happening (which is usually too late) means that there's no really good answer if your opponent pulls ahead on gas early.
>The idea that you can walk into opponent's base with impunity and wipe a squad or two because you hit 60 fuel a minute ahead of your opponent is kind of ridiculous and completely against the spirit of the game.
I'm not sure how I feel about base rushing right now to be honest. It feels a little too easy and a little too hard to punish. Any kind of armoured breakthrough can instantly transition into a base snipe, especially if your AT isn't already in position and usually that's going to basically end the game from the value you get on it. Even light armour often can just run into the base to kill things and walk out with impunity
>Italian setting >no partisans >no social republic >no italian units and weapon
Souless
There are in fact quite a few italian units and weapons. They're just repped by DAK rather than being their own faction.
Don't forget towing weapons, breaching and auto-reinforce toggle. Those are pretty nice tbqh.
Also, what would you have expected/wanted? I think CoH's core gameplay has always been very good from the beginning hence its status as a popular classic. Personally I find it hard to imagine how much more they could change it without compromising the formula.
i could come up with some ideas on how to switch up the coh formula but i can see why they played it safe. dow3 must still be cutting to the very marrow
>towing
We had team weapons board halftracks in CoH2. Also, i'm pretty sure there's a mod for CoH1 thad had it. >auto reinforce
DoW2 had it >breaching
A normal ability, not different from a grenade throw. Call me when two squads from different players can enter the same building
Okay cool, but still not really anythign wrong with those things being included here. Yes, the game is lacking content but honestly the gameplay is fine. I don't think most people were really expecting a revolutionary change to CoH and if you were then sorry, I guess.
Breaching is a little different imo, it's a guaranteed capture of a building whereas good players could always leave and re-enter a building if a grenade was thrown from further away. Its another risk which forces you to protect things like MGs in choke point buildings with secondary units to make breaching too dangerous.
You couldn't tow AT guns or other large pieces in CoH2
Also how the frick would you balance indoor combat? That would require some serious changes to the scale or style of the game in order to effectively control, unless you want something like Empire TW with a tug of war bar over a house until one side loses. It's a nice wish and I wouldn't mind it either but realistically speaking it just wouldn't be a fun mechanic unless they made some serious changes.
HOW THE FRICK do you explain game developers making horrible games? The game is 10 years out of date visually. How do you explain that from a company like Relic? The new students in the gaming industry must be fricking stupid sub 100 IQ level idiots.
>play 4v4 >paradrop on a victory point at the start of the game and fortify it with sandbags/wire and a medic bunker >hold it 2v1 all game, and against a 3v1 push near the end >next game, map decides that I cannot place bunkers >get shat on horribly because I keep needing to return to base after every fight
Frontline reinforcements seem seriously nuts
i feel sorry for all the poverty brazillians and eastern europeans who can't afford this game when it's shitloads better than 2. can't go back to that swill after tasting the nectar of 3.
maybe it too will go F2P in a decade and you can play it then.
Wasn't uncompressed properly so things were coming through the wrong channels and sometimes with very low levels. Not something you'd probably care about without headphones but there's much more clarity to the ambience now.
I've noticed the same thing, but I also think that the ttk can just be crazy low sometimes. Those british rifle grenades give no warning or indicator and fire from their max firing range but deal as much damage as normal grenades (ie. they instantly kill any model caught in the blast). You can genuinely just wipe an entire engineer squad with a single shot and the other player gets no warning until their engineers are gone.
>Being so deaf you don't know which unit is shouting GRENADE
The cast time is huge and the model doing it takes like 4 seconds to plant his rifle in the ground
1 year ago
Anonymous
There's no audio queue 99% of the time.
There's 0 reason for this one grenade to deal the exact same damage as the rest but have no indicator and explode on impact instead of leaving an indicator with a 1.5 second timer like the rest
1 year ago
Anonymous
>There's no audio cue 99% of the time
That's a straight up bug then, because it sure as hell works for me, but I have the "rifles cutting each other off" issue which not necessarily everyone else has
Also is it or >Luftpioneers accurate as hell
They have really consistent damage when reading in cover
Unlike fricking glaucogrenadiers
>wehraboos complaining about conscripts(forma Grenadier) and rifle grenades
HOW DOES IT FEEL HANS
I HAD TO ENDURE THIS FOR 10 YEARS
BUT WITHOUT ELITE INFANTRY REPLACEMENTS OR OP TANKS
HOW DOES IT FEEL
1 year ago
Anonymous
>HOW DOES IT FEEL
1 year ago
Anonymous
>OP TANKS
Honestly all the german armor feels really shit this time around. Panzer 4's get floored by fricking british infantry with AT rifles. I think the Tiger is literally the only good Axis tank right now.
1 year ago
Anonymous
brit at rifles are currently annihilating everything from infantry to tanks, they will probably get a nerf
1 year ago
Anonymous
Axis needs to stop thinking this is CoH2 and there is no instant Backkrieg and Fart Tactician to bail their poor positioning
Once they realize how good upgrades are things will change
DAK upgrades are Panzer Elite tier
1 year ago
Anonymous
It's more like allies just have better armor. Panzer 4's lose to Shermans 1v1 (despite Shermans being less expensive) and Matildas are the strongest non call-in armor in general. The only notable armor option available to Wehr are Tigers. Everything else is playing underdog to cheaper ally armour.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>not pastamaxxing by shitting out Bersaglieri and Semoventes 7 minutes into the game
can't roll out armor if you have no map control
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Semovente >more expensive than a marder >less penetration >No pintle upgrade
it's bad bro just get 8rads and if you need AT call-in the cheapo AT gun
1 year ago
Anonymous
>and Matildas are the strongest non call-in armor in general
Matlidas literally can't pen a Pz4 from the front.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Frontal penetration is a diceroll, anon. Armour matchups can swing based on random chance for a deflection shot, but generally speaking the hierarchy in a 1v1 frontal armor duel goes:
Tiger > Sherman with upgrades > Churchill > Matilda > Panther > Sherman > Panzer 3 with upgrades > Panzer 4 > Panzer 3.
All Panzer 4s are really good for is chewing up infantry blobs. They can't duel any tank favorably. Shermans with the gun upgrade are seriously too good and basically make it impractical to field any vehicles against the US once they have them, since they can build almost 3 for the price of a Tiger. Lategame against the US you're just better off massing AT guns and infantry with AT upgrades. It's wild that the Sherman, famous for being the worst allied tank of the war, is so dominant here.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>It's wild that the Sherman, famous for being the worst allied tank of the war, is so dominant here.
a+ bait
1 year ago
Anonymous
America's military readiness was terrible across the board going into ww2. Their torpedos didn't work, their tank guns couldn't penetrate modern armour. The world is very fortunate that the british were winning the war on their own so the US didn't actually need to do anything until they had figured their shit out.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>America's military readiness was terrible across the board going into ww2.
True >Their torpedos didn't work
Painfully true >their tank guns couldn't penetrate modern armour
False. The Sherman's 75mm gun could easily penetrate everything that was a Panzer 4 or below from the front while also having vastly superior HE to...basically anything else. By late 1942/early 1943 standards it was probably the best tank in the world. That didn't last but even in the late war the Sherman was an effective AFV, and certainly better than basically anything the British produced except the Churchill and arguably superior to most Soviet designs. >The world is very fortunate that the british were winning the war on their own so the US didn't actually need to do anything until they had figured their shit out.
It would be more accurate to say that they "weren't losing" rather than winning.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>By late 1942/early 1943 standards it was probably the best tank in the world
imo it was probably the best tank in the world to the end of the war. what would you say was better? i guess you could make the case that the panther was better for the defensive war that germany was fighting at that point, and the fact that it broke down if you pressed the gas pedal too hard wasn't a real big deal when they were more or less used as stationary turrets at that point
1 year ago
Anonymous
I'm not sure if there is such a thing as "best tank". I think the tanks that Germany, the Soviets, and the US built all suited their needs pretty well for the most part. I know people like to criticize Germany for rushing Panther development and wasting time on things like the King Tiger but given their dwindling resources and manpower trying to maximize what they had wasn't a bad idea, even if the execution was questionable.
Still, as much as I like the Sherman and respect it for its insane reliability and versatility in every theater it was in, there's no denying that it struggled a bit against late war Panthers during the Battle of the Bulge.
1 year ago
Anonymous
The best tank was the jadgpanzer, everything else germany made aside from panzer 4s sucked ass and is basically a meme
1 year ago
Anonymous
The Panzer 4 is also a meme.
Germany made the same mistake most countries mad during the inter-war period. They underestimated how big tank guns would have to be to kill tanks, and designed their 'main' tank around a gun too light to kill tanks.
The Panzer 3 was the designated german tank for tank-on-tank warfare, and the Panzer 4 was designed as a close infantry support vehicle with a short-barreled howitzer--essentially copying the british interwar doctrine for infantry tanks.
When the germans faced competent armour they realized the P3 couldn't kill things, but its design couldn't accommodate a bigger gun. Hence the P4, which was already built for heavier guns, got redesigned to mount a modified AA flak cannon. By the time the P4 was properly set up to face russian tanks it was down to like 17mph from all the added weight. It was only ubiquitous because it was the right size of chassis going into the war to mount both a big enough gun and a big enough engine to move it. Germans mass produced P4s basically because it was just what they had to work with, but as a medium tank it was too slow and was consistently outgunned and out-armoured by faster allied tanks all through the war.
1 year ago
Anonymous
If you want to kill tanks that is what you have infantry for and stugs, panzer 4 is made to kill infantry, its a infantry support vehicle, "tank warfare" is literally made up bullshit cope by morons sitting in a office, tanks suck, infantry is king
1 year ago
Anonymous
The Panther's technical issues were a meme because its first combat deployment happened before its known mechanical defects had been rectified, but the majority of its late-war presence it was functional and reliable. As a late war tank it was basically peerless; the calibre and armour of a Tiger with the mobility of a medium tank and considerably cheaper/faster to produce.
Comparatively by the late war period the sherman struggled with multiple issues; it struggled with muddy terrain, it was underarmoured for tank-on-tank warfare and essentially a deathtrap for its crew, it was undergunned and struggled so much to pierce enemy armour that they had to later upgrade its gun.
The Sherman is held up in the US army because its chassis was versatile and had dozens of specialized variations. Modified Sherman chasses were still seeing use all the way up to the vietnam war, but not as tanks. As a tank, the sherman sucked--because it was designed for a pre-war doctrine that still genuinely believed there would never be another war on the scale of WW1. Its late war upgrades effectively turned it into a tank-killer, a self-propelled AT gun that had to rely on hitting its target before it was seen. The utter mediocrity of the sherman as a tank contributed to the difficulty in the allies advance through france and germany, because the allies relied heavily on air power to actually deal with axis armour.
The sherman was never really built to be a tank specifically. Its chassis was designed to be a general-purpose platform they could mount varying amounts of weaponry and armour on to--which it was great at. It just wasn't great at being a tank.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>and essentially a deathtrap for its crew
Sherman crew survival rates are the highest of any tank in the war. A lot of Shermans got knocked out but you'd probably live because >there were lots of hatches to escape from >Shermans were large and roomy meaning that spalling damage wouldn't kill the whole crew >crews had leather helmets and not berets/hats which significantly reduced head trauma
The only initial issue was dry stowage (not a unique problem to the Sherman either) which was quickly rectified.
1 year ago
Anonymous
nah
1 year ago
Anonymous
>As a tank, the sherman sucked--because it was designed for a pre-war doctrine that still genuinely believed there would never be another war on the scale of WW1
Stop with this meme. The Sherman was absolutely designed to fight other tanks. If it wasn't then why the frick would it carry AP for it's main gun? When it was introduced it could destroy any piece of German armor on the field with relative ease and the ones it couldn't it didn't face all that often. >Its late war upgrades effectively turned it into a tank-killer, a self-propelled AT gun that had to rely on hitting its target before it was seen
Yeah those same late war upgrades that allied commanders themselves didn't want when they went into Normandy because they thought it was unnecessary. Given that the major US/German tank engagement ended in a total US victory at Arracourt and was done almost entirely with 75mm Shermans + some M5's, M10's, and M18's I'd say they were mostly right. >The utter mediocrity of the sherman as a tank contributed to the difficulty in the allies advance through france and germany, because the allies relied heavily on air power to actually deal with axis armour.
No, the difficulty was in hedgerow country not being well suited to tank warfare and Bradley having the most moronic plan to invade Germany, respectively.
4v4s are a lot of fun I just really wish I knew what I was doing. So far every match is me just sitting on the Victory Point in my lane and steadily digging in more and more. I've feel like I keep winning against people who know even less than I do, and getting beat the frick down by anyone that actually knows how to play the game.
I don't know if it's just coincidental, but I've seen very, very little vehicle play even from good players. I'm usually the only person my team with a Panzer by the end of the game and the folks who have steamrolled me all just used a variety of infantry and mortars with AT guns backing them up. I've heard a lot about light vehicles being way more important than in CoH2 but is that just for 1v1s or something?
teching for light armor and clown cars was faster and more aggressive in coh2, and they were more important to make up for the faction's weaknesses. they also felt more powerful over all, like the t70 was like the only reason the soviets could even play the game iirc
>like the t70 was like the only reason the soviets could even play the game iirc
That was my biggest issue with CoH2. Too much of the game felt like it hinged on the play of certain linchpin units.
>So far every match is me just sitting on the Victory Point in my lane and steadily digging in more and more
that's team games alright > very little vehicle play even from good players
Everyone will have a pair of AT guns ready and team maps are tighter (per player) than normal maps, there's very little you can do with a vehicle, even medium tanks don't really have any use, if you need to deal with an HMG you either arty it or smoke it off and rush it with infantry
Yeah I'm getting the impression that team modes, especially uncoordinated team modes, are just artillery wars.
I don't know what it was, but some kind of US artillery ability oneshotted a Tiger and at that point I realized that unless I was massing tanks with my teammates in voice chat, they probably weren't going to accomplish much.
Well if you're actually coordinating with your team then you can totally mass armour and make a push somewhere away from the main contact point, overwhelm an single player or an undermanned area and sweep through that way to break the stalemate. The issue is that it requires coordination to actually find and exploit an opening with multiple players controlling the units, so instead folks would rather just tunnel on their own lane and pretend the victory point is the only objective.
It's why I refuse to play team games without friends.
One player with good game sense can competently address a dogpile
It's trashlords who b***h at their team for not helping to relieve pressure that are bad
That doubly said it's an epic fail when people are so up their own ass they don't take the time to counter push and take territory in their own fronts
1 year ago
Anonymous
Yeah it's so easy to beat 2-3x your own resources in assets you just like... have gamesense bro it's so easy.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Who said anything about beating them dumbass? I'm talking about minimizing damage
A lot of people lose units because they charge them in in normal play and just not recognizing a bad fight
It's no different from recognizing "oh shit I'm being bumrushed" and falling back sustainably, as opposed to completely abandoning a position and mass retreating, leaving your teammates to dry
Literally any match is instantly that much harder when you have at least one teammate who mass retreats, and has been an issue since coh1
I think of them more like trench warfare
Maybe if bunkers weren't so tanky team games would have more mobility, but right now the best you can do is harass each other with long range artillery and occasionally smoke the cap to steal it
bazooka squad seems kinda lame but i DO like their clear obstacle ability a lot. It does decent damage too, basically a 4sec cd no cost rifle grenade, though it can be blocked/missed if shooting uphill or through objects.
yea but british are boring because they have no active abilities
like the american sherman has 2 active abilities AND you need to level up another skill out of 2 skills when they get promoted. meanwhile matilda etc. have no actives whatsoever
Fritz have access to both the Tiger and Panther tanks as Heavy Tank call-ins. What are the actual differences between the two? Is one clearly better than the other?
I know in history the Panther was a heavier late-war tank, but in game it's 8CP to the Tiger's 9. Are there substantive differences between them or is it just for the sake of giving two competing battlegroups endgame mega tank call-ins?
Why the hell would I want that
They have no good abilities and they're only good against vehicles
At least the kagpanther was good in coh1 because the offense spec could overcome the vehicle exclusive counter performance , and good in 2 because they're tanky and fast as shit
Panthers are more mobile while still being quite strong, they're a middle ground between the slower, all-round solid tiger and a regular panzer. At least thats usually how it is. I know in 2 they were a de facto TD as they were pretty shi against infantry.
How do they hold up to AT Guns?
With a Tiger I know I can pop in and out of the fog of war picking things off and even a pair of AT guns just kind of tickle the front armour before I'm back to safety. With a Panzer 4 it feels like they lose half their health the instant they're revealed and are limping away a flaming wreck by the time they get out of AT range.
I didn't have much success with the mechanized battlegroup when I messed around with it on day 1 and it just doesn't seem to offer much compared to the luftwaffe's great paratroopers and call-ins and the breakthrough group's huge resource boosting. But if Panthers are worth it then it might be fun to try a tank rush build in 4s.
I havent got a good feel for them yet but they seem a little weak to AT guns right now, I think they're in a niche of being micro heavy to do their best, but when they do they are very good. Will win 1:1 against most allied armor and can probably do a frontal peek with enemy AT and still survive, but better to use them to flank as much as possible. I agree they feel the least useful out of all options though
It's pretty trivial for there to just be AT coverage everywhere you could possibly move a tank, and then the question is just 'how many AT shots can I take to break their line of sight"
Tigers can eat a dozen hits frontally and still be healthy enough to duel other tanks and its main gun has fantastic range. It's an excellent tech option for highly static battles where you're going to have to peak AT fire to ever shoot with anything that isn't artillery.
I havent got a good feel for them yet but they seem a little weak to AT guns right now, I think they're in a niche of being micro heavy to do their best, but when they do they are very good. Will win 1:1 against most allied armor and can probably do a frontal peek with enemy AT and still survive, but better to use them to flank as much as possible. I agree they feel the least useful out of all options though
I just went ahead and did a game with them. verdict is quite comfortably 'shit'
They move like Tigers, which is to say terribly. Not being able to reposition well mid-combat is a big disadvantage but it's a weakness that makes sense for the Tiger. In actual combat they behave like Churchills. They're middling, and not worth their hilarious 550 manpower cost. I ended up pitting 3 of them against roughly equal cost in Shermans and the Shermans won the straight firefight by just being more cost effective. I think I would have honestly just been better off with Panzer 4's (though I know those still lose to Shermans).
Actually reaching that point was also miserable because their battlegroup is awful (aside from the Assault Stug call-in, that rocked) but Panthers themselves are emphatically not good. If you want to focus on tank warfare, just stick to Breakthrough and take a Tiger with mixed stuff to support it.
Flamethrowers are nuts. They are sincerely probably too strong right now, but I can see how it slipped through the cracks because most factions can only put flamers on their fragile engineers while. DAK are the only faction in a good position to abuse them.
God luft feels so good to play >paradrop 2 combat engineers on my lane's victory point and fortify it with sandbags and a bunker right at the start of the game >lock the lane down entirely with emplacements, weapon teams, anti-air, paratroops and AT jaegers while calling down airstrikes to support allies >lategame I can drop engineers all over the map to build self-manning flak cannons that absolutely wall armor
The other 2 battlegroups feel like you lose so much by not having paratroopers to supplement your terrible starting infantry but gain so little in exchange.
Yeah they're genuinely better frontline infantry than grenadiers, especially with their grenade launcher upgrade. It's kind of funny how fricking bad grenadiers are, but it's also a bit of a problem since you're shoehorned into one of the replacement infantry, but none of the replacements have snares.
got hit with the most Black persontastic bug in a game.
was flanking a position with 2 assault grenadier squads in troop transports, the troop transports got engine damage status, I exited my squads and they ALSO had engine damage status and were moving like they were running through jello. basically lost me the game because I couldn't move my squads or remove the status from them.
Does it have grid?
Are there camera hotkeys?
How’s custom keymapping?
Can you adjust sensitivity of drag scroll?
How does the game behaves when alt-tabing (is it snappy or freezes shit for a while when switching)?
Early capper to get ahead on map control and can shoot. You send it to cap your side points and then have it join an engagement on the map by wheeling around and flanking. It can't fight a squad on its own but if it pincers a squad already engaged, especially before they have any grenades teched, then it can force an early retreat. It also excels at flanking mgs earlygame.
I would consider it in 1v1s as an early pickup just to get out on the map faster. In team modes you can safely skip it
Anyway I dingopilled myself
Especially good if you want to use doctrinal infantry since you don't really need to keep it alive past some point.
It's dogshit against infantry in cover but has decent damage when flanking squads.
Saves some fuel by having the heal ability so you can rush the humber or a stuart without having to worry about low health squads
The medkit ability also heals the dingo itself so that's extra utility >In team modes you can safely skip it
The 45 ammo barrage at vet 1 might get some use in team games, two of them should take down a concrete bunker
But I don't play team games so idk
Oh and also in one game I used the dingo to snipe the enemy upgraded kettenkrad
I think if you're fighting wehr you should always go for a jeep/dingo just for that
the weasel might be better because it comes out immediately and can contest the capture without vet
Team modes just tend to have very limited angles of approach so typically players keep their army grouped watching the only path you can approach them and dig in with layers of infantry and weapons teams. Units like the dingo are just too fragile to get much done even if you get around behind.
Typically team games boil down to some combination of heavy artillery wars using call-ins to force the enemy out of position, massed infantry pushes to force oblique angles, or massed armour to break through a point with low AT and flank. The kind of map presence that matters in 1v1s is basically nonexistent in team matches outside of a couple maps with really well-designed flanks so largely you're just doing ww1 style static warfare.
>Early capper to get ahead on map control
what? the british dingo cant cap at all and exists to harass capping units because they have to leave the cap circle to get it to frick off
america can get vet 1 jeeps or the m29 weasel to cap but the british cant
Is it just me or is infantry balance fricking terrible?
The overpowered DAK flamers are one example, but just in general it feels like every faction has a handful of overpriced elites that just suck or don't really do anything special to justify their cost or tier position.
Why would I ever breach when I can just throw a single grenade into a building and instantkill the entire squad even if they evacuate? Why would I ever recruit 'assault' units with smgs when I can just upgrade mainline infantry with lmgs that do more damage at longer range?
It feels like every faction has maybe 1 or 2 infantry options that are just so much better than everything else that they're the only ones worth recruiting.
>Why would I ever recruit 'assault' units with smgs when I can just upgrade mainline infantry with lmgs that do more damage at longer range?
If the assault boys close the gap with the mainline squad, the lmg doesn't really matter anymore, especially if you flank and negate their cover.
Honestly feels really feast or famine right now. Like if you lose a squad early to missmicro or input lag you might as well just quit out because there's no coming back from a unit deficit.
It honestly feels like the game's currently defined by just gradually accumulating a big mass of good infantry with a few specialist units (like AT) to counter specific things and if you at any point fall behind in massing your big ball you're just never going to be able to win a fight.
Every game I've lost has been decided by a single fight early or midgame where afterwards the lead just became insurmountable and there was no point in fighting back anymore.
>feels like the game's currently defined by just gradually accumulating a big mass of good infantry with a few specialist units (like AT) to counter specific things
thought this too but I've come to learn that mines are great at countering this. people blob up so much with special weapons that they'll never have a sapper / demolition engineer squad mixed in and get fricking clapped because of it.
Completely disagree, had a few chaotic 1v1s that were constantly shifting between myself and the other player losing units in engagements. At various points I had barely anything left but stopped his infantry blob with simple shit like MGs or a wirblewind until I could recover
After playing with it for about a day I can safely say there's no redeeming the "Mechanized" battlegroup for Wehrmacht. They seem bad on paper, and are bad in practice
Why they suck:
Their battlegroup offers nothing earlygame, and Wehr has a weak earlygame without battlegroup help. Both Luftwaffe and Breakthrough have good earlygame stuff to bolster them, but Mechanized literally has nothing. >midgame
This is Mechanized's only redeeming factor. They have two competing call-in options that cost a total of 4 or 5 CP. Both are good but come out too slowly. >lategame
Panthers are just terrible, and that's literally all they offer. You pick mechanized for Panthers. Panthers suck. Don't play Mechanized.
cover and high ground seem incredibly important now, like it doesn't really seem worth it to try to push with a numbers advantage and take any kind of ground against an enemy with green cover. manpower is such a scarce resource that you really have to conserve your men. i've had best success putting my units into green cover and high ground and trying to bait my opponent into engaging them like it's xcom or some shit. and if i can't do that, then i usually lose the game. sometimes i can back cap and force my opponent to move, but then he's typically going to amass more and more units while mine get torn up by the musical chairs shit.
with this in mind, wermacht seems outrageously good since they can deploy their shithead pioneers at the victory points at the start and start the clock on you, and now you have to push into their defensive bulwark of choosing with starting units that usually can't deal with it at all, so you lose a shit ton of manpower just to stabilize the game, which usually puts you in a death spiral. plus there's the moped back capping everything for free and further fricking your economy
Paratrooper openers on Werhmacht are indeed really strong, but the US has access to basically the same abilities with its own paratrooper tree. But cover on its own isn't the be all and end all; mortars just shit on infantry hanging out in cover, and several weapon upgrades like lmgs and AT rifles will actively destroy cover as they fire. Plus you can always lay down smoke to advance. Smoke is really fricking strong, a unit in smoke is basically unable to fight at all so you can either smoke the path forward and jump out at close range to nade something, or smoke a piece of cover to completely remove it as a position. Smoke + assault units makes it very difficult to hold ground.
I do agree that manpower seems excessively scarce. It often feels like falling behind in bodies is just a death sentence because you can't field enough to match your opponent anywhere on the map unless they frick up.
US airborne doesnt quite compare since they don't paradrop their units onto victory points at the start of the game like luftwaffe does.
also many of the options for dealing with units in green cover just flat-out aren't available at the start of the game, or they're so expensive that they instantly put you even more behind. US at least gets smokes at the start which make the engagement less one-sided but it's not like it puts you ahead or anything. if luftwaffe drops their units on a victory point, i usually just let them have it and go somewhere else and accept that he's just going to hold it for the next 3-5 minutes and put me 50-100 points down in score
I honesty think Allies are favoured right now in quick queue. DAK are great at being mobile and arriving in force wherever they go and they have that OP flamer unit early, but in mid-late game pitched battle they just don't bring that much weight or firepower.
Allies have the best infantry barring the one OP DAK unit. Allies have the best armour. Allies have the best artillery. All the axis really have in team modes are the Werh stealing VPs with paratroopers early. Their main strengths, like resource boosting with trucks to rush early armour, relies on team coordination you won't have in random matches. Whereas all the allies have to do to win is build their superior units and keep calling in air/artillery barrages until the other side is forced off the point.
I really think the big changes that need to be made are >Buff grens slightly. I know they want them to be Conscripts but even Conscripts could beat other faction's engineers. >Reduce fuel costs for US BARs. They're so overcosted right now that no one uses rifle squads. >Nerf spaghetti marines, though this can be done by reducing the power of flamethrowers overall >nerf British AT rifles. They shut down light vehicle play too hard
I thought no one used bars because it's better to go special weapons because that gives access to an mg/half-track
And because out of the box riflemen suck shit
Yeah grenadiers definitely need SOME buff. They legitimately lose to unupgraded engineers despite being a larger squad and that's absolutely fricking silly. They're just fine once you get Assault kits but any other doctrine just has to replace them entirely.
Nobody uses rifles because you can just rush pathfinders into paratroopers. It's not a rifleman problem, it's a problem with Pathfinders making US earlygame too stable without any investment, and 1CP paratroopers being arguably the best infantry in the game so there's no reason to waste any resources on the intermediary. US Airborne needs some targeted changes to make the rest of their doctrines appealing--then maybe apply some buffs.
You're right that Goose probably need nerfs less than flamers just generally need nerfs. 2 shots of a flamer is nearly as much damage as a grenade but with the range of a rifle. I'd honestly just murder the flamer range because it shoots from way too far right now. Goose are allowed to be good when you have to cycle multiple munitions abilities and micro to get them close enough to burn things.
British AT rifles suffer from the same issue as Paratrooper bazookas and Jaeger Panzershrek in that they're an AT upgrade on an anti-infantry squad that doesn't impact its anti-infantry power at all. They all need a big hit to their accuracy vs infantry so they function as actual tradeoffs. The fact that britain gets a ranged AT upgrade on its basic infantry means it's always going to be good at shutting down light vehicle play and that's fine, there should just be a tradeoff to teching AT on infantry squads that have 2-3 different mutually exclusive upgrades.
I'd also push for the Indian battlegroup t1 mortar to get nerfed. Right now that thing can wipe an entire fricking squad with a lucky barrage hit and considering it comes with a free truck (despite not requiring towing) gives you way too much value as it is.
Range on flamer is fine
I would just bias more damage to the lingering fire, increase interval between attacks, and reduce direct damage
That way you don't punish people who actively move to not stand in the fire
I should also say, and so you don't punish the flamethrower for actually being good for once
The only reason it probably seems so strong is because everything feels so weak out of the box
That said (someone correct me on this) I feel like the strongest core infantry right now are >Brits because in cover they do REALLY consistent damage vs other units in cover >DAK Engis because even though they're Engis they don't have potato aim and they get the nade gun >DAK because they have balanced performance and are the closest to a COH2 a-move squad >Fallschirm pioneers because same high performance accuracy as DAK pioneers >Pathfinders because many reasons >Assault Engis because big, tanky, cp0 replacement that opens up tech options, and synergizes with scout smoke and and tech specs to make them cheaper and even beefier xd4rp
1 year ago
Anonymous
Engis because big, tanky, cp0 replacement that opens up tech options, and synergizes with scout smoke and and tech specs to make them cheaper and even beefier xd4rp
yeah i use assault engies a lot, a 5-man squad for 200 mp is a steal, and you can put a flamethrower on them too. probably one of the few units that comes out manpower-positive when assaulting enemies in green cover. they can also build shit and repair armor so they're always useful to have around
1 year ago
Anonymous
>And then there's a munitions cost and hp upgrade you can access, if you don't mind sacrificing 76's for ez8s
Pretty nutty if you ask me
1 year ago
Anonymous
I had a 1v1 game where a DAK guy went 2 pios and a 250 into ass grens it was pretty damn effective at pushing my riflemen around
it backfired when I got 2 greyhounds though and an M16 would have also punished him earlier
1 year ago
Anonymous
Falls pioneers are great but they need their grenade launcher upgrade to actually stand up to mainline infantry on equal footing and it's like 85 fricking munitions. Plus they don't get regular nades or vehicle snares (in fact, the terrible grens are the only unit in their roster with snares)
I feel like vehicles are a step back from coh2 and even 1 >Cast times are fricking forever for artillery units, splash too fricking small
Look at the whizbang, what the frick >Precision splash of almost all HR barrages in the game is slow as shit, both for traverse time and projectile travel
And don't get me started on how slow and awkward attaching a gun to a truck is >Needs a specific anchor point, but most terrain is absolutely cancerous for vehicle pathing
These little things make mid-late so potentially antifun for jank alone, not even balance issues
Cast times are partially an input lag issue (there's like 200ms of input delay even offline) and partly an issue of jank. I don't think a lot of abilities are supposed to have an awkwardly long time after issuing the order where your squad/unit just kinda stands there.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I dojt feel an input delay
But watching a vehicle go through the motions to initiate a cast animation disgusts me everytime
Units have never been more responsive otherwise, at least in the franchise
>Range on flamer is fine
Flamers will literally fire at the max range of rue squad's longest-range weapon. If you have a rifle squad with flamers, it will fire at the max range of the rifle.
The range of flamers is absolutely not fine.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Bug if true and imo a moronic oversight, but that sounds more like a bug since I've seen plenty of stationary Engis not shoot their flamer in smg openfire range
>flamer is fine
the weapon is complete bullshit firing through hedgerows and over cliffs
just imagine how unfair it would be if a faction didnt have access to one
1 year ago
Anonymous
Which faction doesn't have access to flamethrowers?
[...]
Takeaways:
Just judging from this, the Panzer IV kind of sucks and has an abnormally high pricetag for what it's bringing.
The Tiger and Churchill are very close to equivalent, but the Tiger is around 50% more expensive. I assume that's to price around its main gun being bigger.
Panthers are essentially big AT guns and should be kept back, out of tank brawls.
The Marder offers basically no additional survivability or mobility over an AT gun despite costing tech and fuel. Terrible.
The StuG is surprisingly good for a t2.5 tank and is probably preferable to the P4 for your mainline vehicle work.
Sturmpanzer can't really fight other vehicles but it's as durable as a panther and wipes infantry squads in a single shot. This is the payoff for having vehicle supremacy as Axis and you should absolutely be building it if you have an advantage in armour or your opponent went for infantry-focused builds.
The Sherman is bugged but even without the bug it's kind of nuts. It moves like a medium tank but upgrades put it on equal footing with the Matilda while carrying a tank-killer gun. I don't think anyone can beat the US in a lategame tank war so you should probably just not bother against them. The bug makes them cheaper than hellcats, which is nuts.
Hellcat is great. Pre-upgrade its expensive for its durability but post-upgrade it's so cheap it might as well be expendable.
Chaffee's are surprisingly well-armed for their mobility and tier position
Matildas are undergunned and shouldn't really fight other tanks. It's probably a waste buying them unless you rushed t3 early and your opponent won't be able to field equivalent armour
Crusaders are unique in that they upgrade into high-mobility AT guns. They're being slept on but should definitely see more play. A rear shot from its 6lber is like a 3rd of a sherman's health and then it can ride off into the fow before the turret turns to face it.
Players are finding tech skips make the piv come out the quickest though
Unless you're the UK a lot of American players are getting caught off guard by pivs
That said wehr tech skips shouldn't be a thing
1 year ago
Anonymous
>tech skips
How exactly?
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Build first building that gives mg42s >Rely on bunkers or teammates and just save fuel until you can drop the panzer building because unlike other factions wehr doesn't need to buy tier ii for some reason
1 year ago
Anonymous
I should say, rely bunkers and teammates for medical utility shit
It's how Luftwaffe has been playing, relying on pioneers and stuff
1 year ago
Anonymous
They do need t2, though. The panzer building requires either the luft building or the pgren building, which require the t1 building with all your bad units.
You just have a choice between 2 different t2 buildings.
I can understand rushing panzers because the luft build is really lean on gas, but you absolutely do still need to pay for the tech buildings and you're ultimately not getting your tank out any faster than other players are getting their main AT going. You can pull off a tank rush as any faction, werh just have the benefit of medical bunkers for gas-free healing and jaegers being godly AT
1 year ago
Anonymous
Helping hans was scratching his head in 2v2 because he had a panzeriv by the time his enemy had access to their first AT gun
And this was in multiple games just to see how far he could take it
He didn't lose once and multiple times they were asking him how he had 3 panzer ivs by the time they were rolling out greyhounds
His argument was that "pivs are way too affordable"
1 year ago
Anonymous
I mean, as you can plainly see, pivs literally cost as much gas as any equivalent t3 tank, and werh spend just as much gas on tech to get them as anyone else. Actually it might be a little less technically, because allies need to buy their upgrade structure before t3. But we're talking a difference of 50 gas, not "he had panzers before I had t2"
I can see how having good gasless units can let you save gas to tech rush, but that's not exclusively to anyone.
[...]
Maybe it was one of those kettenkrad/supply truck builds, I don't remember the details but pivs had a weird issue of being spammable, and definitely not the DAK onesxrst4
Trucks make sense, but are mutually exclusive with Luft so it would have to be an ally that's trucking for him.
Tank rush meme builds have always been a thing but unless it's abusing a bug I'm just going to chalk it up to dunking on randos for content.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I just know timing wise the US specialization center shouldn't have a build time
It's so stupid
1 year ago
Anonymous
Helping hans was scratching his head in 2v2 because he had a panzeriv by the time his enemy had access to their first AT gun
And this was in multiple games just to see how far he could take it
He didn't lose once and multiple times they were asking him how he had 3 panzer ivs by the time they were rolling out greyhounds
His argument was that "pivs are way too affordable"
Maybe it was one of those kettenkrad/supply truck builds, I don't remember the details but pivs had a weird issue of being spammable, and definitely not the DAK onesxrst4
Yeah, Luftwaffe probably needs some nerfs to reduce their early game shenanigans potential, but on the other hand Wehr base units need a pretty throughout re-assessment. I get that Grenadiers aren’t supposed to be that good here, but now it’s silly how hard they suck.
>british tanks are just lame. theyre not even bad, just kinda lame. i really wish the churchill wasnt doctrinal, its such a kino tank
The Grant is pretty unique and I love the Matilda VA.
Im still in shock this game doesn't have a fricking surrender option for multi. The fact you have to quit to main menu is a joke. This really is a beta.
Yeah it's egregious. No game ever reaches endgame without dropping players, and I know I've quit several times when it would just be pointless to continue
>US and German tank-killers have almost the same cost >the US tank killer has almost twice the hp with no tradeoffs
Why is this thing so fricking tanky? It has the health of a panzer with a tank-killer gun.
>75mm upgrade will cause the War Machine manpower discount to be applied twice
You know what to do boys!
Time to drown Axis in tears before they fix it
tbh i always thought it was stupid as frick that anti-tank guns couldn't fire HE at infantry in CoH2, even though historically that was what they were used for like 80% of the time
They want there to be a meaningful decision between anti-vehicle or anti-infantry specialization when it comes to upgrades. Otherwise you'd just spam AT troops and they'd be good against everything--which is kind of an issue right now but it's obviously a balance problem and not intended.
to be fair the 76 upgrade is supposed to be an upgrade and not a conversion to an AT role.
tbh i always thought it was stupid as frick that anti-tank guns couldn't fire HE at infantry in CoH2, even though historically that was what they were used for like 80% of the time
It's just gamey balance, you know like how the stugs have no AoE and the short barreled tanks have no AT shell
I think it's fine balance-wise but it's nice when AT weapons have anti-infantry abilities like HE barrages
They have an HE shell ability already
It just shortens their range to less than that of a grenade and for some reason you need to target a squad with it and I'm pretty sure it's interrupted if you give a move command lol
I wouldn't say stugs are shit btw, the pintle upgrade makes them okay at range and they do have enough armor where they'll sometimes bounce medium tank shots
Meanwhile marders lose to medium tanks and sometimes even greyhounds because they have no armor or health so if they can't maintain max range they're always at a disadvantage.
And the semovente has no armor, no pintle, struggles to pen shermans and the HE barrage will barely.
It's not worth it at all unless you know the enemy got vehicles worth worrying about but it's one of the most well rounded TD you can buy before you unlock medium tanks for both wehrs
Would still go for a wirberlwind or an 8rad unless there's already a chaffee or a stuart on the ground
1 year ago
Anonymous
I feel like vehicles are a step back from coh2 and even 1 >Cast times are fricking forever for artillery units, splash too fricking small
Look at the whizbang, what the frick >Precision splash of almost all HR barrages in the game is slow as shit, both for traverse time and projectile travel
And don't get me started on how slow and awkward attaching a gun to a truck is >Needs a specific anchor point, but most terrain is absolutely cancerous for vehicle pathing
These little things make mid-late so potentially antifun for jank alone, not even balance issues
In case you're wondering, there are actually mixed race squads in the game, unless this is a replay bug
I don't give half a shit but some people were saying that there weren't any
Yeah, British and American blacks were not allowed to serve to in mixed racial units. There were however special units made up of various minorities you will find throughout WW2. Military theory was that race mixing of a military unit would reduce cohesion. They questioned African American's ability to fight sophisticatedly. If you think about it, whites have a history of warfare. African Americans are descendants of a conquered and uncivilized people. Also blacks would serve non-combat rules. General Patton's orderly was black.
I'd be okay with riflemen/vehicle crews randomly spawning as all blacks
But honestly what they should do is use the skin system to get brownie points for representation without needing to add and balance new units.
Kinda like Day of Infamy skins
This is unfortunately very untrue. Flamers will still hit multiple squad members even in the open because they don't naturally spread out the way they should and their dps against a single target is still better than the majority of normal weapons. Plus when you're in the open, the rest of the squad now now deals full damage while benefiting from cover. With the Guastatori it's 4 smgs +2 flamers and 4 smgs will melt a squad out of cover at close-mid range even without the flamers.
Flamers have no weakness, they're just really fricking good. The sole downside to them is that most factions only get them on fragile engineer squads, but DAK get them on tanky elite infantry that are immune to suppression and get cover bonuses while charging out of smoke.
>Let's nerf a strong unit that costs like 400 mp
Or they could address the problem of American rifle squads sucking shit, and give English something in return for the imminent "boys rifles being super accurate with splash damage" nerf
They'll win 2/1 against virtually everything but similarly-costed elites. tech/progression wise they're equivalent to US paratroopers or falls jaeger but they're absolutely ascendant in infantry vs infantry combat. They only begin to fall off in the very lategame because they lack the AT that competing elites have so you can't mass them the way that every US player is currently massing paratroopers.
You are not getting it, morono. Your units are cheap as frick compared to them. Any "win" they might have in that 2v1 situation is actually a manpower loss for them.
I'm getting it, anon. It's basic math. Goose do not cost twice as much, to recruit or per model, as basic infantry. They are never trading down in manpower in an infantry fight unless you frick up.
Their "weakness' if they can be said to have one, is that they are a lot of early manpower invested in a unit that can't do anything to light vehicles, but that requires that you're able to actually get a light vehicle out without getting rolled everywhere you fight by them.
I was curious to see how the numbers on armor stacked up this time around so I went digging around for some data. I'm only comparing the large vehicles because I just want to get a feel for how they shape up and which sides are able to win a 'tank war' lategame, ie who you should build tanks against and who you shouldn't. Comparing cost (man/fuel), population, hp, armour and main armament but I have no way of knowing if every 75mm gun is equivalent or if there are hidden stats for damage/rof on a case-by-case basis.
Axis will be all together since they have a lot of overlap:
Panzer III: 340m/80f 12p 620hp (720w/ upg) f130-s90-r60 50mm gun
Panzer IV: 430m/90f 12p 720hp (880w/ upg) f170-s105(136.6 w/ skirt)-r70 75mm gun
Panther: 550m/100f 16p 900hp f330-s140-r80 75mm long gun (extra range)
Tiger: 800m/180f 16p? 1200hp (1360w/ upg) f300-s210-r80 88mm gun
Marder: 280m/25f 7p 360hp f50-s25-r10 75mm long gun (extra range)
StuG: 360m/50f 10p 600hp f210-s110(143 w/ skirt)-r90 75mm fixed gun
Sturmpanzer: 420m/120f 14p 960hp f300-s150(195 w/ skirt)-75 150mm artillery
Takeaways:
Just judging from this, the Panzer IV kind of sucks and has an abnormally high pricetag for what it's bringing.
The Tiger and Churchill are very close to equivalent, but the Tiger is around 50% more expensive. I assume that's to price around its main gun being bigger.
Panthers are essentially big AT guns and should be kept back, out of tank brawls.
The Marder offers basically no additional survivability or mobility over an AT gun despite costing tech and fuel. Terrible.
The StuG is surprisingly good for a t2.5 tank and is probably preferable to the P4 for your mainline vehicle work.
Sturmpanzer can't really fight other vehicles but it's as durable as a panther and wipes infantry squads in a single shot. This is the payoff for having vehicle supremacy as Axis and you should absolutely be building it if you have an advantage in armour or your opponent went for infantry-focused builds.
The Sherman is bugged but even without the bug it's kind of nuts. It moves like a medium tank but upgrades put it on equal footing with the Matilda while carrying a tank-killer gun. I don't think anyone can beat the US in a lategame tank war so you should probably just not bother against them. The bug makes them cheaper than hellcats, which is nuts.
Hellcat is great. Pre-upgrade its expensive for its durability but post-upgrade it's so cheap it might as well be expendable.
Chaffee's are surprisingly well-armed for their mobility and tier position
Matildas are undergunned and shouldn't really fight other tanks. It's probably a waste buying them unless you rushed t3 early and your opponent won't be able to field equivalent armour
Crusaders are unique in that they upgrade into high-mobility AT guns. They're being slept on but should definitely see more play. A rear shot from its 6lber is like a 3rd of a sherman's health and then it can ride off into the fow before the turret turns to face it.
There is more to a tank in a coh game than the armor stats.
Panzer 4 is amazing, the gun has incredible AI (thats anti-infantry) and of course very good anti-armor performance, they can easily duel and win against 76 shermans. It's expensive but werh get way more fuel from kettenkrad and can get them out at the 8 frickin minute mark
Tiger can 1 v 2 churchills easily, I've done it, the churchills bounce almost every shot
StuG has dogshit pen on its gun, I did tests in cheatmod and it gets absolutely trashed by allied mainlines
We can't know concrete specifics on guns until they're datamined. I would believe that not all 75mm guns are created equal but I would actually need proof of their differences.
What we do know is that penetration is a random effect based on the attacker's armament and the target's armour. Just because most things bounce off a Tiger's frontal armour doesn't imply that a specific gun has below-average penetration. The results of any specific matchup test can just come down to dicerolls, which is why we'd either need dozens (or hundreds) of identical tests to normalize it, or need to actually have datamined stats on mainguns so we can determine how the interaction is playing out. I've definitely had fights where a Tiger bounces 3 consecutive shots against a Sherman and needs to be bailed out of a 1v1 against a tank 1/3 its cost, but that's just bad rng.
>losing earlygame >pick up a group of StuGs into Panthers and rotate with my team to take territory >come back and win >two Panthers end up with a dozen vehicle kills between them by the end of the game
These things are fricking cool. Also this stuff was really helpful. I stayed in the fog of war and let my ally's infantry screen for me and picked off the hellcats first. Since the Shermans had less range I could just back away and they'd be stuck firing into my stronger frontal armour while overextending or be forced to just give ground.
Why do you want to learn it? Technically the infantry is the least janky it's ever been
Vehicle movement have never been jankier, but at least their accuracy isn't unreliable RNG
>worth
bro all videogames are worthless
If you're asking if it's fun then who known
I'm enjoying playing 1v1s a lot
you might not like it but it really depends on you dude
I'd say if you're not sure just wait for a sale, the game is fun but a little rough around the edges anyway
I just want to say that as Luft I've started dropping further nack, away from the victory point. I've been pushed off the vp by early aggression before stabilising several times.
I feel like as people play faster they'll realize they can be there to challenge wehr before they're actually dug in, and they can't win that early fight because their patatroopers are weaker than line infantry and more expensive. Instead you just have to avoid commited early fights and just raid until you can afford grenade launchers.
I mean, it applies in 1v1s as well. I find them on the weaker end just because no single earlygame unit can one-for-one fight and win against anything else. Falls pioneers can beat regular engineers but struggle against Pathfinders and lose outright to any sort of mainline infantry until they get their 85 munitions weapon upgrade, at which point they can fight even only with micro. There's no point in trying to para drop aggressively and no real benefit to getting somewhere first, because if your opponent wants to fight you for it you have to give it to them.
When you play Wehr 1v1 you're basically fighting a retreating battle everywhere earlygame because you just don't have the weight or unit strength to commit to early fights fights. You're stalling losing battles and back-capping until you have 2CP for Falls Jaegers, then you're desperately stabilizing with the one unit that can now win infantry fights.
I just see so many folks complaining that "omg wehr beat me to the victory point with a group of engineers how do I win???" and it just seems so silly to me.
I grew up on wehrmacht representation in gaming. Ive seen 2 decades of developers and players argues over the balance of axis and allied equipment in multiplayer games. These days many history buffs will point to all these modern historians talking about tanks. The more you learn about German equipment the more you learn there are many problems. I think that I've come to the belief that German technological superiority is is in part myth, but the truth in German superiority isn't in their equipment. You learn that basically everything lacked a real technological advantage. They truthfully fought at a disadvantage half the time. They made fricking great tanks that could hold off columns of enemy armor, but the Allies developed ways to counter this. Soviet armor had far better aerodynamics to deflect shots. From inferior industry and economy to numerical inferiority, the Germans were underdogs every step of the way. When I first played CoH2 I was honestly shocked at how good the panzers 4 was against some of the allied tanks. I mean, the whole idea of the game is so gamey that you can never replicate an accurate scenario of the war in my opinion. I do know that all developers of WW2 games always hold anti-german sentiment and always have to find ways to change history for balance and get people to actually play the boring allies.
>dak player walks a huge fricking blob down a street into my 3 assault engineers with flamers and 2 MGs that are covering each other, plus a scout giving vision with flare >utterly shitstomps me 100-0 and runs me back to my base
ok
>big blob of probably mixed units supporting each other with abilities >vs 5 units, 3 of which are just support units
MGs feel a little undertuned right now but you can't seriously be surprised that 5 cheap earlygame units sitting afk lost to what was presumably a high-investment push. You're supposed to like, actually recruit units and do things with them.
it was like 3-4 bersaglieri and 1 flamer godmode unit so not very diverse
>high investment push
not really, and even if it were, i should have been able to at least draw a stalemate since i did the exact counter to his lineup. remember that the US has to actually invest in dogshit like bazooka squads so that it doesn't just instantly lose to 1 clown car
Anon the italian units are an explicit counter to mg nests. They have an ability that gives them suppression immunity and damage reduction as they advance.
unupgraded bersaglieri are roughly equal to unupgraded riflemen and they are more expensive, so you don't really need to counter them.
but if you really want to counter them use greyhounds or m16 halftracks because they have no snares
1 year ago
Anonymous
>unupgraded bersaglieri
thanks for the advice
anyway how should i counter wermacht players that drop their pioneers in front of my base MGs repeatedly
1 year ago
Anonymous
A: >You build a jeep and hunt down the capping kettenkrad >You group up your infantry and attack a single parapio squad at the time
or if they're massing up >threaten their own cutoffs and draw them out into engagements where you have cover and they don't >Decap the fuel points that that the kettenkrad captured so they lose the bonuses
B: >Rush a sniper and force them off the field >supplement with doctrinal infantry or engineers with flamers >Get the second sniper or an m16 halftrack >Have an AT gun or 2 bazooka squads ready for the inevitable wirbelwind
Chaffee is also an option but it sucks against infantry and everyone goes jagers with shrecks so it's not gonna last long
Greyhounds can't reliably pen the wirbelwind so unless he went for an 8rad I wouldn't bother.
after this hold onto the fuel for deal life and rush a sherman or twelve, if possible give them the 76mm upgrade which also makes them cheaper
All of the italian units are expensive and have no anti-vehicle utility whatsoever, so the answer is you just don't play infantry grabass with the best anti-infantry units in the game and instead just punish them with a light vehicle, which can come out not long after they'd be able to get their first flamer squad anyways.
How the frick do I counter a British player that has has engineers with flamethrowers and a frickton infantry sections with boys AT rifles, it melts everything I have
An MG to suppress them, AoE like the nibel rocket launcher to punish them for blobbing or displace them, or your own more specialized anti-infantry units like Jaegers and so on.
Lots of vehicles also outrange the AT rifles so you can just kite and potshot them while dishing out casualties. If you refer to the list further up in the thread, any vehicle with over 100 armour will basically take tickle damage from Boys, so things like Wirblewinds or DAK StuGs will slaughter them from a safe distance and take basically no damage doing it. Just watch that they don't have AT guns hiding in the FoW behind their infantry because those definitely will threaten your vehicles.
All engineers can get flamers but they're fragile support units and the flamers are close-range weapons so they'll have to approach through open ground to use it. Focus them and they melt. Infantry sections are GOOD right now, but they're still just generalist infantry. They lose outright to most dedicated anti-infantry squads, so things like Fallschirmjaeger, Jaegers, Stormtruppen etc. What sections are really good at is shutting down light vehicles like 8rads, and they do that with basically no tradeoff for their effectiveness against generic infantry. But that said, massing them is putting a lot of resources into something that at best can just kind of stalemate evenly-tiered infantry battles and that's only really useful if they've got something backline line a mortar to actually do the killing while their sections stall.
imo there's no real counter to a well-executed infantry section spam. the "counter" to them is to not to be losing to them in the first place and build up your own force of riflemen, and using them to capture the map and placing them in nice little green cover high ground spots where they can get hopefully put your opponent on a manpower deficit and slowly bring the game around. if you do get an MG, don't expect it to do much unless you've already stabilized the game, because MGs suck at killing shit in this game and are even worse at playing musical chairs, and they tend to be manpower drains on you due to how easily they are decrewed.
here's another hot take: all of the above is just to stop you from losing, not making you actually win. instead of playing fair and countering your opponent's lineup, imo the real name of the game is abusing your faction's overpowered thing better than your opponent is abusing his. if you are getting shit on by infantry section spam, the answer isn't necessarily to switch up your strategy to try to counter them, but rather just abuse your own thing harder. that's why i win most of my games spamming assault engineers and rushing for t4, because my flamer engineers are just cheap and good enough to prevent me from losing, and sherman upgrade is bugged so i can get them for 202 manpower. sure i'll buy an MG and a bazooka squad every now and then, but not because i want to, but rather because my faction's economy is so fricked that i have manpower coming out of my ass and it's not worth spending 60 fricking fuel just to have basic infantry that still loses toe-to-toe with random call-in infantry that the germs pull out of their asses. so instead i'll just place 3 MGs in 3 different houses and watch them just barely stalemate against some pasta shitter. occasionally my opponent's overpowered thing happens to be the best counter to my strategy, in which case i quit out of the match and queue up another
dude people give up way too early, gonna enjoy ranked so people don't feel like they coinflip against skill levels.
Also got a pretty buttmad boy after he sent me a 4.2 mortar right AS i was getting my shit pushed in by 3x jagershreck teams+ a panther
As if its my fault for him sending them to the very north of the map in deeply contested territory.
I really dig airborne though, feel munition starved sometimes and not sure if I should be sending it on paratroopers going with infantry upgrades, or just using PF's and paras to reach lategame with upgraded shermans.
Lategame definitely feels like it's where the US shines. I don't think Axis really has anything that can match them. The few times I've won team games late as the Axis side it's just by having 3 people spam off-map AoEs on the allies tankball.
I've noticed that reinforcing elite squads like paratroopers is a huge resource drain and while para spamming seems popular I think it's a noob trap to have more than 1 or 2 squads of them because of the reinforcing cost.
It's good to have cheap, durable chaff infantry like Riflemen or pathfinders to soak damage so you aren't spending all of your manpower replacing expensive elites. I think the gameplan is to stay lean and make things happen with a small number of squads while you rush upgraded Shermans.
I don't think their earlygame is honestly all that bad.
Pathfinders are fantastic. Like individually they aren't as strong as a mainline squad but they're cheap and mobile and strong enough that two of them will absolutely displace any 1 equivalent. Then past the earlygame they access a tonne of useful abilities and become support units.
At 1CP you get paratroopers, which are arguably just behind Guastatori as far as godlike earlygame infantry go. I honestly don't think the US are really lacking in anything except maybe midgame vehicle options. They're just slower to tech up than most factions because they have to buy an extra building.
Even though the British are pretty basic I've really enjoyed playing them so far. After you get your sections out it feels like you can kinda do whatever you want.
What's nice about the british is that they have a strong non-doctrinal core and a lot of worthwhile options spread through their doctrines so your choices are really open and your fundamental build order doesn't change much between them. Most other factions have to hard-commit to a specific doctrine from the start of the game and tailor their entire build around it, and in some cases have a 'must pick' doctrine.
Sounds cool, I'll definitely try to play for late in my next couple of matches, and I agree pathfinders are so damn good.
I've also want to check out armor battlegroup and see how ass engis fare, since flamethrowers seem to be the hot topic around here
I don't fricking know how they did it but 1v1s consistently feel blisteringly close. Just had one as DAK against Brits and we were just absolutely fricking gutting each other's forces the whole game, I lost two medical trucks, multiple at and field guns and had squads wiped and barely won, somehow took out a matilda and two of the lights (not crusaders?) Using Gusto satchels and an at gun. I think the game came down to me having more mobility with 250s, so I could back cap wherever he had the least units
I've had opponents who are way too passive even if hey drive me off the field tactically, he just doesn't push forward and lets me retain my map control. This is common brehz. And they love to Duke it out in 1 spot but I just go around the sides and attack in different places.
Even though the British are pretty basic I've really enjoyed playing them so far. After you get your sections out it feels like you can kinda do whatever you want.
>opponent tries to use "OP Sherman spam" >use Guastatori because it means he will mostly use infantry before that >make Marders and place Tellers >bait him with a single Marder into mines >recover his Sherman >ragequits after I have more Shermans than him
The Panzer Elite memories are coming back
How easy/ reliable is it to recover vehicles this time? I remember it being really hard to find a wreck that could be salvaged and having time to do it in CoH1.
Recovery vehicles are dogshit overpriced so nobody salvages, ever.
Any dead vehicle leaves a recoverable wreck, but vehicles destroy wrecks by touching them. Generally you'll never salvage anything 1v1 and in team games, the whole process is too slow and expensive to be worthwhile.
I kinda hate that ANY vehicle even tapping them, completely destroys the wreckage. Like my quarter-ton or even a half-track isn't gonna instantly disintegrate a Panther's carcass.
And honestly nothing really should be able to remove the debris of heavier tanks without having a bulldozer but I don't wanna "muh realism" post.
I want to see what the game would be like if recovering vehicles was fast AND cheap. Like I'm sure it would cause problems, but I just want to see what the game looks like with that possibility. If they were good, good enough to be a genuine problem, we could start talking about the meta gameplay of destroying wrecks. But right now the whole mechanic is just nonexistent outside of that one singleplayer mission.
Maybe they should let recovery vehicles build fortifications like engineers so they have some value outside of just reviving dead tanks or something.
Here's a great replay demonstrating how the Panzer rush is a meme
Basically: PoV, playing america, applies relatively little pressure early because they don't really know what wehr units do but still punishes them for trying to tech rush and controls 2/3 of the map's resources throughout the game
Panzer rolls out into an already prepared AT gun and basically can't accomplish anything
By the time he has a second panzer, the US has a sherman. A single sherman keeps both Panzers at bay because they can't favourably 2v1 the blatantly overtuned tank. When the 3rd panzer comes out, he tries a split push and the Sherman trivially crushes one Panzer while taking almost no damage then joins the AT gun against the other 2 and forces them back.
He even blunders a battle later, accidentally diving a sherman 1v3 and losing it and still manages to force a 1:1 trade.
The only thing that keeps the german player in the game to the end is the luftwaffe overwatch. Game is well played by both sides, obviously competent players still feeling out CoH3 changes and making some understandable mistakes along the way.
So yeah. I don't think the panzer rush is a good strategy against competent players. You're undermanned earlygame, have no real answers to light vehicles (the main mistake the US made was not applying enough pressure with their Greyhound because they didn't know what Wehr units provide AT) and the rush itself doesn't really have that much impact when it just means you're going to be putting a tank onto a field with readied AT the tank can't push through and then lose lategame anyways. Maybe it's more effective against the british since they don't have a sherman-tier tank hunter to tech into.
>Panzer rolls out into an already prepared AT gun
at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew >blatantly overtuned tank
a 76mm sherman is better than the panzer 4
if the wehrmacht player went luftwaffe and wasnt able to keep up pressure they deserve to lose
panthers shut out shermans but this is the first CoH game to not include them in the default army >undermanned earlygame, have no real answers to light vehicles
theres a wirblewind call in that comes with AT infantry that can buy plenty of time for tank spam to come out onto the field >more effective against the british
british AT rifle spam and upgunned crusaders are better than american AT infantry and their superior tanks
the sherman is very vulnerable to AT infantry and the british infantry is good against everything
>at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew
Please come back to our universe, anon. You're in the wrong timeline. A well-positioned AT gun will beat a panzer 1v1 and an AT gun supported by infantry with snares is essentially unassailable without multiple tanks to flank it.
The sherman is the overtuned tank I was referring to. The point is that the sherman is so overpowered that trying to go for vehicles against it is just pointless. You don't get your panzer out early enough to garner any kind of decisive advantage before they have the better tank and you just can't win >wasn't able to keep up pressure
It's hard to apply pressure when you're spending all your resources rushing tech, anon. That's the point. You sacrifice your earlygame pressure to rush panzers, which gets you punished because you have no earlygame pressure.
I agree Panthers being exclusive to a commander choice is terrible, especially because that commander is by far the worst at literally everything else. You sacrifice all of your good callins, offmaps and passives for one of the only good german vehicles, which also essentially forces you to pick between Panthers and a Tiger despite them both coming out at the same timing due to their CP cost. >Wirblewind callin
Why would you spend 60 gas on a callin when you're saving gas to rush tech for panzers? Doing that callin would delay your tanks so long that you'd end up just getting them out at the same timing as the other player gets theirs.
>which also essentially forces you to pick between Panthers and a Tiger despite
that battlegroup doesn't have the tiger? and the wehr can't get it non-doctrinally
>Why would you spend 60 gas on a callin when you're saving gas to rush tech for panzers?
true and also the manpower discount that's an exclusive choice alongside it is way better
The only core armor for Wehr are StuGs (75mm), Wirbels, Panzers, Brummbars and halftracks.
Panthers, 8rads and howitzer StuGs are exclusive to the Mechanized Battlegroup (which is also the worst one by far. At minimum, unlocking Panthers takes 12 CP but since that path takes 4CP to unlock an 8rad way too late for it to be a good choice, you're better off taking the 13 CP path for the StuG callin.
Breakthrough Battlegroup gets a Tiger as well as resource Trucks and the Grenadier upgrade that actually makes them usable infantry. They also get Blitzkrieg ability along the way. The path to Tiger's takes 13 points total
This means the Luftwaffe Battlegroup gets none of the lategame axis armour and are stuck with PIVs as their only real tank.
It's all a weird divide, both because Panthers take basically as much CP as Tigers to unlock but have considerably worse unlocks along the way, and because DAK have a non-doctrinal Tiger callin (which even after being nerfed from the beta still comes out way earlier than 13cp) but all of Wehr's lategame armour is doctrinal.
right - that makes sense. I've had success with the lufftwaffe p4 rush, but only in teamgames,where i can open with the resource boosted ketten into a panzer by 8 minutes, then alongside your teammates you can absolutely dominate from 8-12 minutes, usually irreparably swinging the game in your favor. I agree that its definitely not good in 1v1 though, way too much risk, way too easy a read, and p4s aren't even good against most tanks.
I wonder if they'll make it with next weeks balance patch that the wehr must have at least the t1 and either the t2 or t3 before the p4 comes out. (or must research a tank unlock at the t4 building), because it does seem very oppressive in team games, even in 2v2
Obviously their base tech structure is meant to parallel the US where they both end with medium tanks and an anti-infantry one
The difference is the US has a better and more expensive TD (compared to the marder) to deal with axis callins
Against brits and DAK the medium tanks essentially counter enemy medium tanks (crusaders, p3) because of better armor and penetration so they still end up being a good choice until callins hit the field
You're saying that as if being "stuck" with a p4 is a bad thing, they're great tanks that I've had a lot of success with in my 1v1s
>at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew
nta and I'm not following the conversation but having paired AT guns has always been the go-to counter to tanks (outside of better tanks) in every coh and in every game mode
They're cheap and deal a lot of damage, as long as you don't leave them unsupported they can zone out or kill any single tank
Just be mindful of their positioning so that they either cover each other or there's infantry nearby to spot and snare any flanking tank
I'll say they struggle against brummbars or tigers frontally in coh3 but that's to be expected
Yeah AT guns struggle to pen ~300 armour, so Tigers, Panthers, Churchills and Brummbars all deflect them fairly frequently, while upgraded Shermans are also pretty resistant to them (moreso than the ought to be tbh)
Unfortunately Panthers currently are bugged and will consistently suffer rear hits from projectiles striking their fronts.
>Why would you spend 60 gas on a callin when you're saving gas to rush tech for panzers? >You don't get your panzer out early enough to garner any kind of decisive advantage before they have the better tank
why would you want to dominate the map with your homosexual fallschirmpioneers and homosexual wirblewind when america can barely get out bazooka squads and an AT halftrack? gee i wonder
>at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew
nta and I'm not following the conversation but having paired AT guns has always been the go-to counter to tanks (outside of better tanks) in every coh and in every game mode
They're cheap and deal a lot of damage, as long as you don't leave them unsupported they can zone out or kill any single tank
Just be mindful of their positioning so that they either cover each other or there's infantry nearby to spot and snare any flanking tank
I'll say they struggle against brummbars or tigers frontally in coh3 but that's to be expected
>paired AT guns has always been the go-to counter to tanks
at guns are slow and if you push them too far out they are liable to be stolen and used against you
a base pin wont be possible but you've wasted manpower on essentially dead weight
USSR was pulled from the release due to current events. They'll be released as a DLC faction later but made unavailable in eastern europe
its pointless to release the soviets since they're mostly played by russians and those people arent going to pay a months salary for the game at this time
i really, really, really hope they release the japanese first instead, there's so much unexplored design space there
I don't understand these morons. The series is clearly always set in a specific theatre, and so will only include forces that fought in that theatre. From the very beginning this has been the case. In an ideal world where coh was as popular as CoD or some other shit maybe they'd have enough money or manpower to build content for all theatres but it's just wishful thinking.
Maybe they'll do it as an expansion.
tbqh i dont see why wermacht would need heavy armor outside doctrinals. i figured wermacht is 1939-1943 france/barbarossa germany which is why they use garbage tanks panzer 3s and shit.
imo it's not the end of the world that there's a german faction in the game that doesn't get to spam heavy armor with giant cannons as their reward for not losing in the first 10 minutes. all the allied factions have been like that for like 3 games. let afrika korps be the big armor faction
DAK are the ones who use P3s, anon. Wehr uses late-war P4s with the upgraded gun.
Obviously their base tech structure is meant to parallel the US where they both end with medium tanks and an anti-infantry one
The difference is the US has a better and more expensive TD (compared to the marder) to deal with axis callins
Against brits and DAK the medium tanks essentially counter enemy medium tanks (crusaders, p3) because of better armor and penetration so they still end up being a good choice until callins hit the field
You're saying that as if being "stuck" with a p4 is a bad thing, they're great tanks that I've had a lot of success with in my 1v1s
The Panzer IV, Sherman and Grant are all roughly equivalent t3 medium tanks, so lets compare them.
They all tie for gas cost. Grant requires extra tech, so you can say its gas cost is technically the highest
P4 has the highest manpower cost by a wide margin
P4 and Grant have identical armour stats and identical main guns. Grant has a secondary gun that's heavy enough to penentrate tanks, giving it an edge in firepower.
Sherman has better armour across the board pre-upgrade, and an armour upgrade that makes it even better. Sherman starts with the same main armament as the P4, but upgrades it to an anti-tank armament which is the single best tank gun short of the Tiger's.
Sherman also gets an upgrade that drops its manpower cost to less than a riflemen squad. This is to say nothing of abilities, of which shermans get several.
The P4 is a distant last place as far as t3 medium tanks, with its only advantage being that Luft builds can rush it out a bit ahead of the other factions by literally never building any tech or recruiting any units that cost gas.
It just seems weird for the Panther to be stuck behind 13cp in a bad battlegroup instead of a core unit.
>Grant has a secondary gun that's heavy enough to penentrate tanks, giving it an edge in firepower.
I just tested it with the cheat command mod p4 won 7 out of 8 1v1 fights with a grant, realistically it would always win if it can get a shot on target before the grant rotates its hull to use the 75mm, I tested them in a full frontal fight at medium range for fairness.
But also P4 has a pintle upgrade and a turret with the good gun so it's better against infantry and at flanking team weapons.
Against unupgraded shermans it's the same story, 7/8 fights won, although RNG can swing the fight and the 76mm with extra armor has an edge, but you should know in advance if the enemy player has picked mechanized, if he hasn't you have a pretty decent chance to come out on top in a direct fight.
The takeaway is that it's by no mean a "distant last place" and besides that, the role of medium tanks isn't to shit on other medium tanks in unsupported 1v1 fights
With wehr you also have non-doctrinal jagers which when upgraded with schrecks do a good job at both AT and AI, them and the p4s cover each other nicely as both can take care of all threats besides maybe grouped up MGs and AT guns
If the enemy has gone with paratrooper bazookas or SF commandos then you can use your own paratroopers to outgun them.
idk I just don't see your point my dude. Not every tank needs to be a tiger to be good.
>cheat mod lets you spawn in unreleased units for future DLCs
Britain is getting an infantry-focused colonial battlegroup with Aussie Jaeger-equivalents and Canadian shock troopers. Wehr is getting a defensive battlegroup with mortar bunkers and a heavy Tank Killer. The rest don't have enough finished assets to really know much.
I think some of those might be campaign units or cut campaign units
The single logistic officer unit for example would be the perfect target for a "sniper the officer" mission
And the australian squad is in the DAK campaign already
you havent taken the wehraboo variable into account. see: war thunder, where wermacht versions of allied tanks, even with the exact same or even better stats and battle rating, have much worse winrates simply due to being piloted by wehraboos. afaik they've had to buff those german versions of allied tanks because of this
>And the australian squad is in the DAK campaign already
This is true, but they have full voice lines for player control and also a veterancy ability, neither of which are present in the campaign.
>cheat mod lets you spawn in unreleased units for future DLCs
Britain is getting an infantry-focused colonial battlegroup with Aussie Jaeger-equivalents and Canadian shock troopers. Wehr is getting a defensive battlegroup with mortar bunkers and a heavy Tank Killer. The rest don't have enough finished assets to really know much.
I was wondering about ANZAC troops. They're in the campaign and I was hoping to use them in MP as an ausgay myself, so I'll probably be a big sucker and buy that dlc on release
I sincerely hope we're not getting dripfed microtransaction battlegroup DLCs because that would be cancerous. I hope they just include new battlegroups with faction DLCs so there's a reason to buy it even if you don't play the new guys.
I'll start with 3v3s and 4v4s to figure them out first. I can probably figure out a 1v1 build once I've got a feel for them, I just need a place to start so I'm not dragging teams down.
yeah because the schizoids are mostly angry coh2 players and i think people realize that while the game has a ton of problems, its really fun at its core. it helps that relic is patching shit at a quick clip
Biggest point of complaints is that they charge 60$ for game that is early access state and people like you just normalize this behaviour that publisher can release what ever shit they want without consequences, if they just stated that this is early access that would been fine, but the fact that they consider this to be "full release" for 60$ is just insult to consumers but i guess this starting to be standard these days.
heeeeeeeeee's back everyone! after reading this post, i decided to buy another copy for a friend who was waiting to buy it after it got patched - he's installing right now and we're about to play 🙂
keep seething, i'll buy a third copy for my other friend 🙂
1 year ago
Anonymous
i dont really give shit, just gave my two cents that clearly wont matter when i have to fight some bot army.
1 year ago
Anonymous
the "bot army" in question is me and my friends enjoying the game 🙂 we just won another cool one
1 year ago
Anonymous
NPCs happily eating shitty pre alpha tier games are just either paid shills or delusional fan boys like you.
1 year ago
Anonymous
the game is clearly not pre-alpha, i think someone is a little cranky and is over exaggerating. take a minute away from the computer and have a few deep breaths, and we'll talk about it when you've calmed down
1 year ago
Anonymous
Or it is just that your standards have been turned to this shit that we have now days, 10 years ago we used to get complete game instead of this shit but clearly you are either zoomer or you have just accepted to eat shit instead of having actually standards or actual complete games in release.
1 year ago
Anonymous
actually im not a zoomer and have not accepted eating shit, which is why im really enjoying coh3 instead of stomping my feet and stinking up the thread with my BO
1 year ago
Anonymous
Its really astounding that people now days enjoy eating shit and actually paying for it.
1 year ago
Anonymous
it is definitely crazy. not coh3 players though, that game is pretty good 🙂
>lull in the action around early midgame >all 3 players show up on my position with 2 panzers each and overwhelm me >chase my routing army all the way back to base >enter base and kill my entire army when I have nowhere else to run >allies don't lift a finger >somehow they don't even manage to capture the other VPs while this is going on
You shouldn't be allowed to queue premade teams in quickmatch.
Game doesn't seem dead at all, queue times are quite low for me. Leaderboards aren't really indicative either. I get the feeling the current player base is mostly new since coh2gays are busy reeing and won't buy just yet (I say this as someone with >1000hrs in Coh2 and seeing people play like dogshit most coh3 games), which might explain why you're ranking highly when you don't expect to be.
Holy frick the howitzer emplacement at the end of the Indian artillery tree is fricking terrible >only fires like 4 shots per volley, deals the same damage as a mortar but with a longer cooldown
We were stuck in a dug-in showdown so I figured a couple of them might help displace the enemy, but I was hilariously wrong. They do frick all. Their veteran ability is a precision "armor-piercing" shell that tickles a truck if it hits and shares a cooldown with the barrage despite only firing 1 shot.
These things genuinely lost me the game because they eat up more cap than a tank but contribute absolutely nothing to the game. I couldn't even delete them to free up population so I just became dead weight in lategame tank battles.
Yeah, it is insanely garbage when you consider how late you get it and how much it costs. Seems like they’re too careful with artillery as of now, most of them suck hard besides mortars.
Yeah it's just a weird combination of >low damage, especially against emplacements >long cooldown, especially compared with mortars which can barrage almost constantly >no autoattack so they ONLY fire on cooldown >reveal themselves when they fire, so your opponent can just spam offmaps on them, which actually do decent damage to emplacements
I had an axis player sitting on a flak gun I was shelling with a pair of pioneers, repairing it as it was shelled. The batteries couldn't outdamage the repairs, and their AoE was so small they weren't actually killing the engineers so they were effectively doing nothing.
>play axis >constantly feel disadvantaged and persecuted by how much better ally units and abilities are to mine and wonder why I bother playing the bad guy faction in a game that obviously biases against them >play allies >loathe the fricking jerries and every gay ass little cheap shit jerry thing they do
Why is it like this?
This may be a stupid question but like, how do you win as the british?
Infantry sections are solid early but they get one-sidedly stomped by any more advanced infantry ie. jaegers, paratroopers etc. Every time I play as the british it feels like I'm getting swarmed by infantry stronger than mine and I'm just running from fights constantly, or someone digs in on a victory point and I can't dislodge them because artillery is so fricking bad. I feel like I need some kind of assault unit with smoke grenades but they just don't have one.
I really like their lategame, especially flanking around with speedy crusaders, but I just don't know how to make the rest of their roster work. I'm look at the battlegroups for supplement but they just offer shitty artillery that does nothing and units like Commandos that don't really do what I feel like I need.
snares are so fricking shit in this game >45 munitions >doesnt destroy engine >short range >you have to REMAIN in range or it cancels so it's impossible to land on a fleeting target
i like that snares are worse, in coh2 it was incredibly stupid to leave your vehicle within even 1 mile of an infantry squad because they would snare it and let it get hunt down. I'm not sure that the range matters? as long as youre in range when you give the command they will do the animation no matter how far the vehicle drives
Snares DO follow the target if you cast in range as long as the game registers it through the ~200ms input lag before the target leaves range.
The satchel will even do this weird thing where it follows the vehicle into the FoW like a ghost.
But it doesn't work for panzerfausts. Pfs will cancel when the target leaves range, which causes them to do this weird little cancel animation and is extremely fricking clunky.
I'm glad they don't instantly destroy intact engines any more but I do think the cost is a bit too high. As it is using one delays a weapon upgrade by almost a minute
>Guastatori
Why are they so fricking DURABLE?
I had 3 infantry sections with LMGs shooting them and they were just standing out of cover soaking the damage and forced a squad to retreat before they had to pull back.
What the frick is wrong with these things?
>early game as US 2v2 >wermacht builds 2 MGs >scout them with flare, flank them >rout his entire force, losing 1 model in the process >he tries to counterattack and runs straight into my MGs >gets routed again >tries again, gets a bunch of his units killed by flamers and MGs >spend all of my manpower to further demolish his strat >he keeps doing the same thing >eventually gets through 3 of my MGs, a mortar and a sherman by just spamming assault grenadiers and MGs into them head-on >lose
i even checked his resources and he was FLOATING while building useless shit like AT cannons against my entirely infantry/emplaced force
i have no idea how i can lose that shit except if his units are just better than mine
You should never have more than 1 MG in your overall composition. They deal terrible damage in this game and are only good for the crowd control via suppression. But even then, often they will just randomly fail to suppress a charging squad until it's in grenade range and just fricks you over. Don't waste too much pop on mgs, just 1 for the status effect is enough.
Units have upkeep, which is hidden right now just because the UI is unfinished. The bigger your army, the higher your upkeep and the lower your income as a result. Building up too much earlygame can slow down your tech progression and frick you over late game. You'll be stuck with a big army of weak t1 units and be unable to afford new, better units that have more impact or help to counter your opponent. This also serves as a bit of a comeback mechanic: if you get blown out early and lose a lot of units you'll free up resources to replace them.
If you invest heavily into t1 for an aggressive start, you need to basically push your opponent all the way back to their base turrets and uncap all their shit while you have that numbers advantage, otherwise you'll just fall behind lategame.
And conversely, it's usually better to keep your earlygame army lean even if it means losing some early fights. You'll always be able to retake ground later as long as you can afford to tech faster than your opponent and fill your pop cap with strong units.
my opponent spammed me to death with t1 units so i don't see how amassing my own t1 units that *should* counter them would be such a bad idea. in a perfect world i would have built riflemen to counter the assault infantry spam, but sadly it takes 100 fuel to tech riflemen as the US so that's not really an option. i guess i could have built an AA half track, though in my experience it does frick all and he did buy that random AT cannon.
if your opponent has any brain function whatsoever, it doesn't seem like you can actually *win* as the US unless you go airborne. the faction has no cost-effective anti-infantry until shermans otherwise
Nobody really has "cost-effective anti-infantry" for most of the game, anon. Infantry defines the earlygame. You have to actually move your units around and do things with them to get an edge.
>You should never have more than 1 MG in your overall composition
i think it's honestly mostly the US MG that sucks. MG42 seems to suppress squads on the first burst. the M1919 fires a much, much longer burst, and it takes its sweet time suppressing shit. maybe the M1919 is like the US MG in CoH2 where it sets up faster but so far it doesn't feel like that
i think the american lineup is heavily balanced around the idea of their riflemen (and bazookamen) being the god-infantry they were in CoH2 when kitted out, but kitting them out in CoH3 eats directly into your teching speed. they aren't even that great even when kitted out. and their infantry AT kinda sucks too. so it's like a perfect storm to make their whole lineup into a wonky mess that only the paratrooper doctrine can sort of patch up
Nobody really has "cost-effective anti-infantry" for most of the game, anon. Infantry defines the earlygame. You have to actually move your units around and do things with them to get an edge.
>Nobody really has "cost-effective anti-infantry" for most of the game
lmao shut up dude
All the MGs are identical except for the british one, which is slightly worse. They all suppress at the same rate. Suppression is just weird and inconsistent because we're still in the 'patch everyday disaster launch' phase of the game
i could swear that certain units seem to get suppressed faster but it might just be unit differences in general. assault grens dont give a frick about suppression because they usain bolt into proned grenade range within 1 second. and then there's the pasta flamer guys
It's possible. I know this was a stat in DoW2 but every unit had the same suppression value except for 1 or 2 weird exceptions. Pasta men have a special active ability that gives them suppression immunity which helps make them so cancerous to fight.
Suppression is supposed to be a universal "do not assault this position frontally" mechanic so giving units arbitrary resistance to it doesn't really make sense. You flank weapon teams. You don't just dive them with your 'immune to machine guns' men.
1 year ago
Anonymous
id be okay with it if MGs were less oppressive (CoH2 is pretty horrible to play on certain maps due to it) but the fact that MGs deal such shit damage and are so easy to decrew really fricks them up.
maybe MGs should just deal 2-3x extra damage to unsuppressed targets so that they'd consistently drop a model or two before the suppression kicks in. imo it'd make sense and having your units be suppressed would feel more like something you'd want to happen.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I'm fine with them doing piss damage because it encourages shitters to not stack them on poorly designed maps. I just wish suppression behaviour was consistent.
thats the beauty of it. he didnt even smoke them. he just sprinted units into them, tanked the first burst (possibly in incidental yellow cover), got closer, got suppressed, threw grenade to force a retreat. and then he used 2 different squads to do the same thing to the other 2 MGs that were covering the first MG. i think in total he used 5 squads with no smokes to assault 3 MGs and forced a total retreat that way. he attack moved his own MGs to suppress my defending infantry. and then i couldnt retake because i chose the doctrine without mainline infantry
its ok i will probably just switch factions. i actually gained 3 ranks the instant i switched off US in CoH2
I don't think I ever used an MG as US so I'm not saying they're great but it's normal for MGs to occasionally be forced off the field I don't see how that lost you the game
Also that sounds like a terrible build but I really only play 1v1s so idk about team games meta
>Also that sounds like a terrible build but I really only play 1v1s so idk about team games meta
tbh if the game had CoH2 balance in regards to the MGs, and i could actually layer MGs on top of each other to gas out blobbers, it would probably work very well. the build doesn't really lack anything except that anti-blob potential. i can throw so much smoke with my mortars and scout that my opponents can't really use any emplaced weapons or green cover, so they're just forced to retreat, run into my MGs or sit in smoke with my 3 engineers that keep hosing them with ground-targeted flame.
Yeah that one. The LMG upgrade seems mediocre by comparison because it's basically just the same as what the standard infantry get, but the smgs are tommy guns instead of the stens. It makes the Ghurkas basically better commandos.
The recon package upgrade for british infantry is also being slept on just because the AT rifles are so good. But you rarely need more than 1 AT rifle squad since they just immediately check light vehicles and you'll have dedicated AT guns for everything else.
Dunno I've had a game where my SMG ghurkas underperformed against shrecks jagers of all things >because it's basically just the same as what the standard infantry get
The same weapon might have different damage in different squads.
I haven't tested it but it might actually be better than rifle lmgs
Tomorrow I'll test them out
>It makes the Ghurkas basically better commandos
The Commando's do have stealth which can be really useful sometimes, but other than that I agree. Assault Gurkhas are the shit.
Commandos are weird because they don't have stealth on their unit card like other stealth units do (probably because the 3 different grenades take up all the slots), and it doesn't seem to work very well. Jaegers and Falls will stealth the instant they step into cover and stay stealthed after stepping out for a second or so, so they can move in stealth across ground with a lot of scattered light cover.
Commandos will sometimes sit in full cover for several seconds before stealthing, or never stealth at all and need to be moved until it clicks, and they lose it the instant they move again.
the best part about the AT rifles seems to be that the instantly shoot them. meanwhile rocket launcher units tend to aim for like 2 minutes before they take a shot (which very often misses as well)
Why are DAK suddenly showing up to the first fight in a halftrack at sub-2 minutes? I thought they needed to wait longer than that for their first callin.
They can literally start with one but it's really not that strong just stay in cover and you'll force it away with mainline infantry
It will shit on jeeps though
>build infantry support center and research demolitions package >designate captain retinue as retreat point >place captain retinue in m29 weasel and drive into enemy base >mass retreat all riflemen and engineers then call in special operations smoke barrage >spam timed demo charges in enemy's base
how do you counter this?
>Timed demo charge = 35 munitions, heavy explosive that can destroy buildings and bridges. 9 second fuse that counts down after the 13 second construction. >The final few seconds of construction is not animated, yet if you give the squad an order they will stop building the bomb and you will have to right click on it to continue the process. >I tested the damage of the charge; >I placed a charge directly in front of an M4A1 Sherman. It only did 13 damage (out of 720 durability). >I placed the charge directly behind the same tank, and didn't move the squad away, and the detonation only did 183pts of damage to the Sherman, killed two of the riflemen, wounded two down to 88hp, and two more down to 18hp. >So it's damage against units is pitiful and simply not worth it, however against base buildings it is ENORMOUS. >Even though you cannot place the charge directly next to a base structure, it still one-hit destroyed an enemy HQ building I placed it near. >Depending on enemy layout its not unrealistic to think you could destroy two base structures with one charge, which could be an incredibly potent backdoor attack, IF you could pull it off.
theres no cooldowns
it only takes one pass and you have all of your rifles and engineers to do it with
i think everyone knows smoke lasts way longer than it aught to
>I placed a charge directly in front of an M4A1 Sherman. It only did 13 damage (out of 720 durability
Sometimes I think they go way overboard with damage types. If you score a hit on a tank with a demo charge, why wouldn't it kill the tank?
>Timed demo charge = 35 munitions, heavy explosive that can destroy buildings and bridges. 9 second fuse that counts down after the 13 second construction. >The final few seconds of construction is not animated, yet if you give the squad an order they will stop building the bomb and you will have to right click on it to continue the process. >I tested the damage of the charge; >I placed a charge directly in front of an M4A1 Sherman. It only did 13 damage (out of 720 durability). >I placed the charge directly behind the same tank, and didn't move the squad away, and the detonation only did 183pts of damage to the Sherman, killed two of the riflemen, wounded two down to 88hp, and two more down to 18hp. >So it's damage against units is pitiful and simply not worth it, however against base buildings it is ENORMOUS. >Even though you cannot place the charge directly next to a base structure, it still one-hit destroyed an enemy HQ building I placed it near. >Depending on enemy layout its not unrealistic to think you could destroy two base structures with one charge, which could be an incredibly potent backdoor attack, IF you could pull it off.
theres no cooldowns
it only takes one pass and you have all of your rifles and engineers to do it with
i think everyone knows smoke lasts way longer than it aught to
if it only takes 1-2 demo charges, couldn't you just do this with a half track and a rifleman? i don't see why you'd need to go all-in and retreat your squads there
a halftrack requires motor pool investment and you can skip it by using the m29 weasel
if you go all in you can wipe out the enemy's entire base
once you have used this tactic once you wont be able to easily do it again
its not uncommon for unreinforced units to be sitting in an enemies spawn and they would be more than enough to deal with a single rifleman squad that needs to take 13 seconds to plant the charge
this strategy is vulnerable to fallschirmpioneers and their sweepers defusing the charges during the countdown so with multiple charges they will simply be overwhelmed
does anyone know how the US medical station works? it says it "recovers wounded" and i occasionally see some medics run to the battlefield, so i assume it recovers a certain percentage of your lost units and gives them back as manpower? i wish it was explained in any way lol
They heal nearby damaged units and reinforce squads that have lost men. The latter is toggled off by default, because reinforcing costs manpower to replace the dead squad members. Click the building and toggle it on.
Stations like that which heal and reinforce are very useful. The medics are purely cosmetic.
10hp is the difference between basic t1 infantry and endgame elites. Turning all of your riflemen, paratroopers and even pathfinders into juggernauts is a fricking huge stat swing. The cost is entirely justifiable.
What I think people don't realize with things that seem egregiously overcosted is that Relic absolutely playtested these things internally on an early build (in addition to the closed beta a month ago) and quickly realized when something simply couldn't work without a frickhuge fuel cost or other downsides to balance it.
There were a lot of changes between the closed beta and release that were clearly attempts to address prerelease balance issues. For example, Britain had a Tank Killer available from their t2 structure that was cut from release, because having access to highly mobile long range anti-vehicle that early in the game meant they could basically invest all-in on anti-infantry earlygame and just rely on the Archer to answer both light and heavy vehicles. They cut the Archer (it's still in the game files and will likely be added back as a battlegroup callin with DLC) and buffed the Infantry Section's AT rifle upgrade to compensate (since otherwise britain would have absolutely no mobile anti-vehicle until t3).
the difference between basic t1 infantry and endgame elites is that the endgame elites usually have broken abilities, not that they can take 9% more damage
>default scout squad has 240 health >pathfinders with survival training have 400 health (66% more health) >default engineers have 320 health >assault engineers have 500 health (56% more health)
doesnt apply to weapon teams though
>base Wehr Grenadiers have 80hp per model, even less than Royal Engineers
Holy frick no wonder they suck so much shit.
Also it's wild actually taking a closer look at some units and what they specialize in. Why do Stormtroopers carry long range sharpshooting rifles and a light machinegun that can't fire while moving? Isn't standing still and picking things off from long range the exact opposite of 'storming'? Why would I ever bother with these things when Jaegers use the same rifle but have stealth and anti-vehicle upgrades?
Are the Canadian Stormtroopers in the Italian campaign or are they genuinely cut/unfinished assets? I spawned them in the cheat mod and they seemed pretty nuts, beat every infantry except Guastatori at close range.
I'm holding off on playing the Italy campaign until they've finished patching it so I don't know if they're a campaign unit or future DLC or something.
It's easier than you think. The thing has fricking enormous range, so you can build it well back from the victory point and have it finished by the time they've capped it and realize something's amiss. Then the flak gun covers you building your medical bunker, and now you have both the OP gun in range of the VP and a staging area to support it and keep your army fresh.
Alternative is to fight for the vp like normal and build the flak cannon with your second falls squad, which should be coming down around the point the vp fight is decided.
On that italian city map, a 20mm built on the northern gas point will be in range to cover the vp. They're seriously fricking nuts.
>team game >playing plants & zombies against the enemy team running waves of infantry into me >my teammate just chilling >finally lose my front and get all my shit taken from me >ask him if he needs help defending >"lol does it look like i need help :D"
It's come to my attention that there's a British Forces build floating around where you don't bother with Infantry Sections and instead spam engineers (with some vickers)
The idea is that the Royal Engineers are actually quite strong, because they're a 4-man smg squad. You rush them in close and they absolutely melt their target, and in the right circumstances can punch upwards to higher tier infantry. Since most axis basic infantry are long range rifles, royal engineer spam can just run them over. It's especially effective against the meta Luft builds since they rely too much on stalling with falls pioneers that are vulnerable up close. The British Armoured Battlegroup has a 1cp passive that discounts recruitment/reinforcement of Royal Engineers by 25% and allows you to basically just push tempo aggressively and trade manpower. Then you rush Humbers for more early aggression. The idea is to punish Luft for trying to afk to a panzer. The humbers can force them to slow down to tech anti-vehicle (likely the wirbelwind callin), at which point you can refund them to tech to your own tanks and just wienerblock their wirbel with cheap AT guns.
Since you don't have a tonne of Infantry sections with expensive weapon upgrades, you can spend most of your munitions on mines, then lategame you have a bunch of vetted engineers to support your proper tanks. It seems like a really effective way to run the battlegroup with Churchills.
>by the time I've recruited my 3rd t1 squad, axis is sitting on the victory point with 7 squads
It's a shame team colour is fricked so you can't tell when you're getting 2v1'd while your allies afk vs when the game balance and econ is just fricked.
>gayass luft trying the gayass luft cheese >rush him and force him off before he finishes his gayass broken flak gun >less than a minute later, 6 luftwaffe squads flank me from my teammate's side and force me back >check my teammates side >the other guy also went for the gayass luft cheese and has a flak gun sitting on the victory point mowing down my ally, so now he's free to just roam with his luftball >push back to my victory point after recovering >now there's 2 flak cannons and a medic bunker on it
Fricking christ they cannot fix this broken shit soon enough.
tbh im finding that the 20mm rush isnt that great if youre pubbing because your other teammate will run headfirst into 2 opponents instead of playing around your flak, or said opponents 2v1 you with flamers and smokes and steal your flak while your teammate sits on his fat ass doing nothing
honestly i think it might be better to just setup good ambush positions with the fall pioneers and just for small tactics plays until you get out of shit ranks
Fortunately falls pioneers ALSO have smokes so you can just retake your flak if they steal it.
But that said, even the most overpowered strategy will lose Xv1 against a premade group coordinating. You would have gotten rushed and fricked over even if you didn't have a broken emplacement. Though it should be noted that at 25 gas a pop, you can easily afford to spam multiple flak guns under the cover of the first and suddenly your opponent can't smoke enough of them to make a push work.
It's definitely strongest in the large team modes, 3v3 or 4v4, since typically you have a smaller amount of space to cover per player, and the larger maps mean you have more time to get your emplacement established before anyone can approach you. 1v1 the emplacement is basically irrelevant and 2v2 there's just too many ways your opponents can apply pressure without running headlong into it, plus 90% of 2v2s are against a premade duo who will work together to punish it anyways.
But make no mistake, it's broken as frick. For less manpower than a grenadier squad and 25 gas you have an emplacement with as much range as an AT gun that kills infantry faster than any dedicated end-tier anti-infantry tool and is effectively immortal. It's totally fricked, and putting 2 or more on a victory point essentially makes it unassailable until your opponent has t3, at which point you can have the heavy flak callin that 2-shots tanks
DAK Panzerpioneers get a smoke ability with their grenade launcher upgrade but Fallschirmpioneers don't. Instead they come with a free minesweeper. I think the only offensive smoke abilities available to WM are jaegers, mortars and the artillery upgrade to their halftrack. And, I guess the phosphorous grenades for stormtroopers, technically. Mortar smoke lasts about 50 seconds and falls can throw a satchel charge for 45 muni to instantly decrew it (or ground attack with the grenade launcher upgrade) so a single mortar pickup is enough to let them retake stolen flak guns. I've seen this silly flak roulette on a few streams already where every player steals the flak gun on their push and then loses it on the counterpush, back and forth.
i like getting the mobile 20mm flak on wermacht because every allied player is massing infantry sections and the 20mm flak absolutely demolishes them. also they have an active ability that insta suppresses infantry. they cost the same as an MG too.
marder is in the same tech so you're set for AT as well
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1imoe52Qe0yt0eqJjMxdD8-lv1qo_6F5fCXmC4U9Byo0/edit#gid=0
Handy resource somebody compiled. Faction winrates in each mode made by aggregating statistics available from the official leaderboard site. Custom matches are not tracked, and no distinction is made between premade vs solo queue.
We see the most variance in 1v1s, where Wehrmacht stand clearly above the rest. Since these stats have been tracked since launch and the luftwaffe cheese strategies have been discovered relatively recently, we can expect this gap to steadily widen. DAK and US are basically even in 2nd place and UK is a close 3rd but the gap between 1st and 2nd is concerning
Once we move into team modes, we start to see stats normalize across ally/axis boundaries. Axis have a clear and substantial advantage in team mode winrates owing to Wehrmacht (including an appalling 77% wr in 4v4s). US winrates fall a little behind britain here but that might just be because team modes are a more casual environment and the US have more abilities to manage than the british. The huge gap in winrates suggests that axis were winning the majority of large team games well before the recent meta builds were discovered.
>Since these stats have been tracked since launch and the luftwaffe cheese strategies have been discovered relatively recently, we can expect this gap to steadily widen
I believe the 1v1 wehr winrate is solely because of the jager into wirbelwind strat catching people unaware
The wirbelwind also counters AT rifle sections so that would explain the UK winrate tanking as the go-to build is directly countered.
imo the winrate will stabilize at all but the lowest of ranks as people learn to play around it
Or if it gets nerfed
The cheat mod got updated today. One of the results of the update is that the number of unrecruitable units you can spawn in with it has increased. Presumably these are units that have been added into the files via the hotfixes since release.
Pic related are the british: >reskinned M3 Stuart
Identical to the existing one, but green >Valentine II
Same green camo as the above. Same armament and vet ability as the Crusader (might be a placeholder) but better armour >CMP 15cwt AA Truck
Name is identical to the recruitable version, which is the AA upgrade to the standard utility truck, but reskinned green. It's currently unfinished and has no gun or vet ability. >CMP 15cwt Repair and Resupply Truck
Same green. Placeholder unit icon. It passively repairs nearby vehicles and has 3 active abilities that cost 75 munitions: Deploys uncrewed Vickers, 3inch Mortar or medical crates >Command Churchill
Same green. Passively boosts the speed and RoF of nearby infantry. Vet abilities are autorepair and a vehicle accuracy aura. Otherwise identical to a normal Churchill. >Australian Light Infantry
From the North Africa campaign. They have a full set of voice lines for player control including idle lines. 6 man squad with 80hp apiece and rifles. Abilities are "Sharpshooter" (15muni, instantly kills an infantry model) and snares. Vet ability is Camouflage >Canadian Shock Troopers
Not from singleplayer as far as I can tell. Close range elite 6m squad with 110 hp/model. Abilities are Breach, White Phosphorous grenades and Satchel Charge. Veteran ability is "Charge" (increase speed and rof for a time). Uniforms are green instead of tan. Also fully voiced. >2lb AT gun
Weapon squad with aussie voice lines. Has Rapid Fire and a vet ability that disables target's weapons >25lb Artillery emplacement
Aussie voices. No autoattack. Barrage and Airburst abilities >Bofors
No abilities currently >Churchill Crocodile
Standard tan Churchill with front-mounted mg replaced by flamethrower.
Possibly. Right now all of them have generic voice lines instead of aussie ones, but that may change, several of them are obviously unfinished. My guess is that all of the green camo units will either be callins for a yet unreleased battlegroup, or sp units in a future campaign expansion. Hopefully it's ANZAC focused because that's a pretty cool concept.
Just to be clear, the only unit that's explicitly a reskin is the Stuart. Everything else green is actually a new unit variation. Existing reskins, like the US ones you get for buying the game on launch, don't appear as separate entries in the cheat menu.
That said, some of these may just be campaign units that I didn't notice when I played the campaign. The green might be a stock texture used as a placeholder (all the green camo units still have emblems of british north africa) or the green units themselves might be placeholders for skins or other cosmetics. We're looking at in-development assets without context so it's hard to say for sure.
I'll add: the canadians have a LOT of idle lines.
They mention the Crocodile Churchill by name if it drives by them. They make references to arriving on the battlefield by a beach landing and describe fighting on a stone beach, mention Sicily by name, etc. It sounds like they're supposed to be an Italian Campaign unit but as far as I can tell you never have access to them? Maybe I missed something.
just played a 2v2 with a friend and i correctly guessed that they would attempt to do flak 20mm on the 2x muni on the desert map, and so we routed them off the point and destroyed a flak in the process. but then the 70% wermacht winrate kicked in and they won and one of the dudes accused us of stream sniping. turns out he was rank 1 europe. sadly i cant find his stream so i cant call him a little b***h
>german midgame tanks remain useful to the very end >marders literally 25 fuel and can push shermans off >allied midgame tanks cost like 50 fuel and get two-shot by marders and can't do anything except harass back capping infantry squads once enemy has AT
im glad there isn't shit like t70 in the game anymore but light tanks seem really shit. i guess the chauffee can help against wirbelwind rush but idk
marders lose to medium tanks because of their shit HPs and low RoF
I've even had a game where I kept picking off DAK marders by just using 2 greyhounds, which by the way die in 3 marder hits, not 2, so I'm pretty sure the stuart and chaffee also die in 3 hits.
Marders are unable to hold their own in a tank fight and need supporting units to keep enemy tanks out of range, meaning that on their own they don't actually counter tanks.
They also take damage from small arms and flamers so if you snare a low health one with infantry you can stay on its ass and finish it with just BARs, the captain mark vehicle also works great for this
>i guess the chauffee can help against wirbelwind rush but idk
The greyhound is great against DAK, chaffee is also decent if you're behind or if the guy is using m13/40 tanks, against wehr it can punish the wirbelwind but very shitty anti infantry damage means shreck jagers will force it away without trouble so it's better to go AT gun and use the fuel to get BARs so your riflemen can actually beat AT jagers
Humbler can hunt down halftracks and be annoying but it loses relevance fast.
Stuart has a huge fuel tech cost up front (probably because you're meant to withdraw it later and get all your resources back) but it loses to the wirbelwind and it's not great against infantry, but supported with AT rifle blobs it can be a soft counter as the wirbelwind can't deal with both at the same time.
Never tried stuart against DAK but that's because AT rifles can take care of most vehicles and the humbler is just better at bleeding infantry because it's cheaper
Marders are probably a contender for the single worst vehicle in the game. Its accuracy is so bad that it genuinely cannot hit moving vehicles. It lands like 1/4 shots. That's on top of being so fragile that it dies to a stiff breeze. You're unironically better off with AT crews as either Axis faction. I know for DAK, your vehicle upgrades apply to Marders and make them deceptively durable lategame, but their accuracy is seriously so bad that it doesn't matter. Marders are a trap.
oh yea i forgot about withdrawing, i guess that makes the stuart much better
i should probably try to build the greyhound more often, i just remember it being total ass in coh2 back when i played so i haven't tried
Stuart tech has a 40 fuel cost, so getting out a single Stuart is 85 fuel. The refund will only give you back the 45 fuel for the Stuart itself, not for the tech. Just grabbing two Humbers would be 70 fuel instead and you can refund all of it as soon as you hit t3 because the refund ability has a low cooldown, which will instantly buy you a Crusader.
The Stuart is in an awkward place. It's worse at killing infantry than a single Humber in exchange for being better vs light vehicles, but emphasis on LIGHT. It can't pen a Wirbel's frontal armour and isn't durable enough to dive it to hit the back. Plus Sections already provide a lot of AT, so spending 85 fuel to strengthen your anti-vehicle midgame is a huge waste. You could just grab a gas-free 6lber to help your sections against a beefier vehicle like a Wirbel or an 8 Rad. I'd just stick with grabbing a Humber or 2 midgame for extra map pressure and refunding them later and wait to see if Relic buffs the Stuart.
I'm not sure what game you're playing if you think "keep it further back" protects a unit that can't hit anything. You can keep AT guns back, because they will kill a tank if it dives them.
A Marder will lose to a fricking Chaffee rushing it (and miss 4 times in the process). It just does fricking nothing. You may think "oh great it's only 25 fuel" but an AT gun is 0 fuel and will actually kill armour
>finally get my tankfu hellcat in a coh game >there's no real reason to get it because germany barely has heavy tanks this time around and sherman kicks too much infantry ass to skip
feels bad man
hopefully infantry + hellcats becomes a viable setup next patch
>US: all buffs except greyhound nerf >UK: all buffs except AT rifles nerfed massively against infantry >Wehr: all nerfs >DAK: all nerfs
I don't like sledgehammer balance
Like the 250 halftrack was strong-ish but it traded somewhat evenly with squads, scaled way worse in the mid game and can't capture points until the late game.
You are obviously meant to use it though, DAK infantry is so expensive and cost-ineffective that spamming it means having no manpower for your vehicles.
Now it has less damage at all ranges and costs more, but pgrens are also worse at attack-move range, which when paired with riflemen buffs and bren buffs it's gonna make them pretty bad.
They also made fire support elements more expensive despite the fact that in 1v1 there's no reason to go for any of those units.
But making the M13/40 come out at 4 CPs total is going to be so strong I'm going to say it's a mistake, they're gonna frick everything up and they'll be so easy to mass before the enemy has proper mediums of their own.
I don't think the dev realize how strong they really are when you rush them.
props for massively buffing the bazooka squad and the stuart though, that was a good call.
Even that 30 seconds barrage bishop is looking somewhat juicy against team weapon spammers.
And yet: >not a single change to unavoidable skill planes one tapping tanks
REEEEEEEEEEEEELIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIC
The irony is that Werh is still overtuned despite all the nerfs.
DAK got hit a bit too hard but it's clear that some of these were part of a larger shift in the focus of their playstyle that will make sense with more patching. The direction they're taking them is essentially IG from DoW 2, where they had expensive and mediocre infantry and poor capping power in exchange for a big light vehicle emphasis. The buff to the M13/40 telegraphs that to me because it mirrors how they had to balance IG over the course of that game.
Some more testing:
The stuart now counters the wirbelwind, it wins in a 1v1
At short range it actually trades perfectly even with a panzer 3 (but will lose because of the lower health especially after the buffs)
At longer ranges they actually bounce each other's shots quite frequently but the tungsten core upgrade should give the panzer 3 a definitive advantage
Also not new but: >Tungsten core ammunition also applies to the m13/40 for 16 extra damage and presumably extra penetration. >Emergency repair kit gives the M13/40 80 health >Vehicle survival package gives the m13/40 80 health
And I thought these guys were a little underwhelming, of course, I wasn't buffing them fully.
I predict that an 8RAD/StuG D rush into m13/40 spam will be the meta for a while, too bad because I was having fun spamming this silly unit and now it might become FOTM cheese.
>where they had expensive and mediocre infantry and poor capping power in exchange for a big light vehicle emphasis
They're already like this, but now the motorcycle and the 250 are worse choice for opening
Tomorrow I'll get some automatch games in and see how it goes.
>I was having fun spamming this silly unit and now it might become FOTM cheese.
My thoughts exactly
I will be called a meta slave even if I did it before it was cool
As the british forces, when you build the 17lber, it comes with a free CMP truck to tow it.
If you refund the CMP truck after detaching the gun, you get the full refund for the value of the 17lber (360mp/40f) rather than just for the cost of the truck (240mp/20f), essentially making the 17lber free once you've placed it.
If you refund the CMP truck that comes towing the Heavy Mortar callin from the Indian battlegroup, it refunds at its proper value of 240mp/20f (which is still pretty good since the callin doesn't cost fuel), so the bug is exclusive to the 17lber.
american riflemen seem pretty fricking shit still, like even with 2x bar they just flat out don't do enough damage. like i get it that they're not supposed to be blobbable because muh micro faction but why the frick do they cost so much fuel to get up to speed then? you can't even use them as cannon fodder because of how expensive they are to reinforce. imo if you want to make use of the lower reinforcement costs of the captain tree, then you might as well go paras or commandos and actually have a unit that wins fights
Bro Riflemen are now the single best t1 infantry unequivocally. The job of mainline infantry is to soak damage, screen for more valuable/vulnerable units and push off utility units like pioneers. They aren't supposed to upgrade into your endtier lategame elite infantry. None of them do that. Riflemen shit on everything in tier 1 and then lategame they just draw fire for your paratroopers, who in turn provide AT support for your shermans or push and threaten enemy weapon team positions so your shermans can push.
US upgrades are fuel expensive because they want to encourage you to pick between them rather than just grabbing all of them as you progress. You're supposed to pick your specialization. With the bar, US rifles have comparable damage output to elite lmg units like Stormtroopers or Ghurka. There isn't really much reason to go for an all-in long range infantry specialization right now because Shermans are overtuned and lategame devolves into medium tank spam, but that's not an issue with Riflemen.
they aren't, they don't, and they cost way too much fricking fuel to do stuff that other faction's infantry does with minor munitions upgrades. stop replying to my posts with this garbage
Won a game where I got the m13/40 spam going and a buffed mass of those things is insane.
People aren't even going AT rifle anymore so I just get a stug to deal with AT guns, it's working like a charm.
Unless you can pick one off before they start buffing each other with vet 1 and before DAK gets the self repair upgrade you're in deep shit.
I think a rushed humbler will deal with them nicely but people seem intent on rushing stuarts against DAK and the problem is that panzerjagers still force them away so unless the other guy is going 8rad you're paying more for a vehicle that's not gonna fare any better against enemy infantry.
Well yeah AGrens and Commandos are similarly priced and tiered close range specialists that both got the exact same buff. They were close to equal prepatch and they're close to equal now. They're definitely good and something DAK needed, but at their price point I don't know how much presence they're going to ultimately have. DAK already had a manpower bottleneck and in t2 they're probably prioritizing that insane 8 Rad instead.
>luftwaffe
You skip them for paratroopers, who are fantastic. >breakthrough
The assault kit upgrade makes them unironically good, just takes a bit to get out. >mechanised
You just use them alongside mgs to stall while you quicktech to t2 and then win late.
Werh are designed to be weaker early and stronger late, but the nuance varies by battlegroup. For the most part, the purpose of grens are just to slow your opponent down and buy you time to tech into better infantry, like Jagers, Pgrens, or the assault kit upgrade.
it feels like you go from dominating to being completely useless and then back to dominating every 2 minutes due to how their teching and call-ins work
I'm having a lot of success spamming m13/40s, you're vulnerable before you mass them but once you have 2 or 3 of them fully upgraded you can trade so well against allied tanks.
Frick it I had games where I literally lost all infantry and the guy's 3 LMG sections became completely useless since all my units were self healing tanks
But I'm having problems with the early game, if I get too many Pgrens I end up bottlenecking on manpower, if I go ass grens I'm forced to get a medical truck since they always take a lot of damage approaching infantry, and if I go panzerpioneers they always get wiped in the mid game since they're so fragile, also they get pushed around like crazy if the guy rushes anti infantry upgrades or calls in elite infantry.
I wonder if I should rush the combat halftrack upgrade and get autocannons on the 250
btw can we get a proper CoH3 thread instead of the 97 crybaby threads on the catalogue?
I swear half of the anons on /vst/ haven't played a strategy game in 10 or more years and are here just to autistically screech at anything new that comes out.
The current 'meta' for DAK seems to be going for the Italian battlegroup and using Bersalieri as your mainline infantry and stalling for an 8 Rad. You basically constantly lose through the first minutes of the game because your best infantry lose 1v1 to the allies equivalent, but you just slow their capping and back-cap with your speedy italians and as soon as the 8 Rad hits the field you dominate. US has no good answer to it until they have tanks and the British AT rifles are bugged so they literally have no effective answer to ANY light vehicle play right now except to bring their own. Humbers can't fight 8 Rads and Stuarts take longer to get out so you're guaranteed a few minutes of impunity.
Once you stabilize with the 8 Rad, you start spamming the Carro Armata callins. They're stupidly cost effective, being only 38 fuel, and not requiring t3 lets you just stack upgrades on them, turning them into essentially medium tanks. They key is that you get them out so early, and mass them so quickly, that allied anti-armour can't keep up. Upgrades make them too durable for bazookas to be effective, AT rifles are bugged and they're too fast for AT gun teams--you'll flank them before they get a second shot and then kill them before they can set up again or escape. Their Armour piercing active skill allows them to fight on equal grounds with lategame heavy tanks, and combined with the tungsten upgrade, they will consistently penetrate Churchills so they end up just being more cost-effective than any allied tank, you just dive any armour they build with impunity since they can't outrun you to escape.
Just note that as soon as they hotfix AT rifles to work properly again, it will probably kill Carro spam, but right now it's legitimately broken.
Unequivocally. Pgrens, despite being armed with 'long range rifles' actually have terrible long range damage. Their damage curve increase dramatically as you close in, so they basically work like an aggressive, close range squad. The issue is that DAK is almost never being aggressive in t1. Bersaglieri are long range specialists like Infantry Sections where their damage is the same regardless of distance, meaning you can keep them at max range, in heavy cover and stall fights. They'll beat Pathfinders comfortably and can trade well with Riflemen at long range, but their main advantage is that their out of combat movement speed gives them a lot of early map presence for capping and reinforcing. Plus then every CP you earn makes them more effective.
They're better against the US than the British, but they help a lot earlygame regardless.
It is utter shit as of now, you will always get better use for your munitions elsewhere, not to even mention the opportunity cost of losing upgrades. Just avoid it.
repeating digits don't lie.
What the frick were they thinking lol
1 year ago
Anonymous
There are a lot of really bad abilities around right now. A bunch of british units have this artillery strike skill that just fires like 3 shots in an extremely wide spread that do no damage, but it costs a frickload of muni.
The naval artillery bombardment fires 4 shells in a massive spread, like twice the size of a vp capture zone, has the extra long callin delay like the US carpet bomb and a special audio cue. It will never, ever hit anything. It can't even hit static emplacements because the spread is so huge.
It's 150 munitions. More than the fricking AT loiter.
anyone find a use for the US air support center yet? the abilities are already kind of ass, and if your opponent gets any AA then they just flat out stop working even with all the upgrades unlocked lol
the only way i could imagine for it to be good is if they rework the upgrades and add a (small/nerfed) loiter ability and some kind of "damage/suppress AA defenses" as unlockable upgrades
I think the general assumption right now is that most loiters and offmaps are going to get reworked at some point down the line, and that it's just not as big of a priority as fixing big cheese strategies or campaign AI. Nobody likes the way skillplan loiters work, while the remainder of the offmaps hover somewhere between "instantly wins you a major battle" and "literally never does anything but costs 200 muni anyways." The British tank battlegroup has an artillery loiter that literally just fires 3 2-shell volleys in a massive spread, where each shell does less than a pack howitzer, and it costs 150 muni. Meanwhile the anti tank loiter can just wipe an entire army if they don't retreat from its circle in time (or do absolutely fricking nothing if they have AA). Anti-air itself is a mess, with like 2/3 of the AA units being totally incapable of shooting down any aircraft and won't even stop a loiter before it naturally expires, while the other 1/3 will just instantkill any aircraft the instant they enter the map.
Currently the US auto commits to the armoured support center every game no questions asked, so changes to it and the other 2 support centers are inevitable, but I would assume the version of air support we're currently playing with are glorified beta assets and they're going to get a major pass somewhere down the line.
It is utter shit as of now, you will always get better use for your munitions elsewhere, not to even mention the opportunity cost of losing upgrades. Just avoid it.
wrong. *slits your throat*
idiots who put 2000 hours into CoH2 and complaining about CoH3. Willfully forgetting how bad CoH2 launched was.
This is miles better than that launch.
Ok, I'll buy it when it's finished in a year.
Thanks for beta testing!
keep me posted
works for me, probably the smart move if youre not super obsessed with the game
>he doesn't normally wait 3 years and 5 majors DLC before buying a vidya
lmao
basado
I wait this long just to pirate everything and still get game ending bugs for some shit.
Fricking hell what a shit world we live in.
"This garbage is not so bad because there are other garbage games!"
Not a great argument.
God forbid they improve after 10 years
The game is nice.
>be autistic german who claims to like RTS
>hate spam the first properly good RTS to come out in a decade
the mind boggles. losing a bit too much are we hans?
Germans hate everything except Anno, Gothic, WoW, The Settlers, Minecraft wiener and of course CS, just ignore them.
The only spam I see is the same 2-3 shills telling you to "buy the game now, because it will be finished and bugfixed soon, trust me bro".
Check the catalog and take your anti-chimpout meds
everything has to be another tortanic for bored anhedonic Gankerlets
It's tiring how people want to just bandwagon games just to feel vindicated when the other morons pipe in with the same stupid opinions. The steam forums are like a prime example of this with people calling it a piece of shit because it's not exactly like CoH2 despite CoH2 having years and years of support to make it actually decent. There was some poster saying it was horrible because they couldn't figure out how to pan the camera and I just don't understand how these people even play on PC. It's like a 7/10 right now and will get better as time goes on, but people just wanting to call it a dead game on release and complain just seems super pathetic.
I played coh2 from beta till last October, have 4k hours and played loads of multiplayer. You make a valid point especially when people compare content or saying its missing content. I think the problem here is that its clear Relic spent most of their budget on the SP content, which business wise makes sense however given the reviews and what I played (and returned) of it shows it clearly didn't pay off.
The thing comes down to quality and lack there of being that relic has had this IP for 20 years, knows what fans want and like, and charge top tier pricing for what consumers would assume would be a AAA product. With that comes the prestige and expectations of polish, top tier UI, better graphics, great audio, and most of all a fun to play game. None of that is here and given Relics quick to bail format on DOW3 and starting to show on AOE4 as they hand it off to Forgotten Empires (who have a new name) its hard to take them seriously if they state it'll get better.
At best the game is an alpha build with proof of concept, locked in models, locked in scope but missing all the polish and grandeur you'd expect. Things work but not to the level you'd expect and it will take a year to reach what should have been here day 1.
I think Relic is still fully in control of AoE4. Forgotten Empires is mainly handling development on 2, 3, and AoM Retold
I'm pretty sure Forgotten Empires have been the one handling life support for AoE4. Cysion was the guy talking about Mali and Ottomans iirc.
>aoe4
>life support
moron
How could they spend so much time on singleplayer and have it so bland?
>How could they spend so much time on singleplayer and have it so bland?
you think the money was spent on development lol no. diversity and inclusivity consultants cost money, especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
>you think the money was spent on development lol no. diversity and inclusivity consultants cost money, especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
I think a lot of people know it's gonna get crammed with propaganda and don't even bother, even though not many people say it
Like you just know exactly what's the story gonna be and makes it go from bland to repulsive
leave
>/pol/
How is it related? Why are you derailing the thread?
what's even more hilarious about this is how aloof relic is about their fanbase, which contains a significant amount of wehraboos. of fricking course those autists are going to find anything wrong about a fake narrative of nazis persecuting israelites in africa. their fanbase is most likely to be turned off from woke SJW shit, and nort africa was the theater with the least nazi war crimes due to the fact that it was just germany try to help out italy unfrick itself. so for some reason they had an opportunity to just focus on the war, and then they intentionally drove through the one figurative land mine in a literal desert by manufacturing some character that historically came from a community that was not persecuted by nazis.
i'm just going to end this here because i don't want to invite /misc/tards in to shit up the thread about muh culture war. this has nothing to do with culture war, relic is a terrible vidya studio that straddles the fence on incompetence and fradulent. they can't even get woke right.
>that pic
>"I don't want to invite /misc/tards"
Don't talk like one of them. You're not. Even if you'd like to be.
You all ignored the heavy anti-soviet propaganda in CoH2 and there you go, now they make up fake stories about germans and italians going after the israelites in the northern africa even though they actually went there for Suez and oil and to frick the british and french.
Relic was pozzed for quite a while you just chose to ignore it.
Just to give you some perspective.
This is the ending cutscene of the original Call of Duty.
>SOVIETS DIN DUN NUFFIN
lol
>Soviets did commit warcrimes but this one vastly exaggerated them
>they dindu shit
sad to see Ganker is made out of the same moronic stock as reddit now. Back to my wizard tower I guess.
>You all ignored the heavy anti-soviet propaganda in CoH2
at the time i thought the COH2 campaign was a bit silly and heavy handed. due to certain recent events i think it actually didn't go far enough.
Man I IGNORED CoH2 ENTIRELY
This ain't new don't give me that shit.
Coh1 was just a rehash of Saving Private Ryan+BoB
Coh2 was just Enemy at the Gates rehash
Coh3 is just lame story writing
>especially to make up a story about persecuting berber israelites and remind the player that you are bad for playing germans in WW2.
Is this really in the game? lol
it's literally how the german campaign starts. There is a text telling the player how this si actually their story.
I love how they even heavily imply that british was also the bad guys and basically both british and germans were there to just muh oppress israeli.
You dumb fricking homosexual, they should have LEARNED from CoH 2 and not delivered a broken product on launch.
>B-But it'll get better!
Says fricking who? It should have released in this "better" state instead of broken. Stupid fricking homosexual opinions like that is why they keep giving you shitty, half finished games.
>Says fricking who
Says me. Now shut the frick up homosexual. *slits your throat*
aoe2 remaster came out years ago dude
>first properly good RTS to come out in a decade
>missing 90% of content in its two previous titles
>graphically worse than its 2006 debut
no excuse.
and to get paid to shill this game... what a hellish existence. How do you live with yourself? Fricking prostitute
>missing 90% of content in its two previous titles
moron
It has more factions and units than the two previous titles at launch
>good RTS
>can't de-crew tanks with AT rifles/Molotovs
>vechicles can't run-over infantry
>female on cover
can someone explain why loads of people review bombed this game with like .5 hours of playtime screeching insane babble about menu music and shit like that, have they made the nazis into trannies which has triggered all the wehraboos or something?
game seems dope to me but i'm an ultimate casual who just wants things to look pretty as i click boom them.
I don't know, Its fricking bizzare. I get that the graphics and sound arn't amazing or whatever but they are really just fine, the sounds especially vary from underwhelming to really good and realistic, everytime my greyhound fires I cum a little
I can tell if a game is shit within 30 minutes. You're only allowed 2 hours before you can't refund.
>Zoomercorps
I should buy aoe4 instead
I have not seen a single second of gameplay footage and I have no desire to.
>woman in the center of the cover
>in a ww2 game
DOA
There were women in the Italian partisan resistance though. It's actually a pop culture thing at this point. Carla Capponi for example was pretty famous despite being a fricking communist she still ended up assassinating an officer and being the 2IC during one of the biggest partisan battles.
>muh partisans
Its not a torture helpless civilians simulator its a RTS, women cant fight which is why all these "partisans" and "insurgencies" which have armed foids fail miserably.
>Its not a torture helpless civilians simulator its a RTS
yeah I also want germans removed but what can you do
>I also want germans removed
why?
What the frick are you talking about, the partisans were trying to liberate their country. The Germans pulled Achse and occupied most of the country which resulted in this massive wave of young people fighting against them in organized attacks. Apennine was seized by the partisans. The revenge killings were brutal, because communists do that evil shit, but to think the resistance failed miserably is dumb dude
>the partisans were trying to liberate their country
No, that was the SS volunteers.
>Its not a torture helpless civilians simulator its a RTS
Leveling civilian homes and killing unarmed innocents was the best part of RA1&2 when you played as Soviets
Where is Italy faction?
Do you not know what "diverse" means?
yeah it's the israelites' strength
So no then
please don't feed moronic eastern european ESLs
It means Americans, British and Germans? And no italians in a game set in Italy?
Brave
Powerful
dare I say
a bit of shit
>he cares more about what the units look like and what shitty accent they use than how the faction actually plays
I've come to realize that the average RTS player is a massive casual.
>no Italians even as a MP-only faction
>you can tell that an X-pac/DLC is already in the works for the IJA vs. MEF(USMC)/ANZAC campaign that will make both playable in MP
To be fair, Japan would be insanely based in CoH. I want to see Ha-Gos rolling out.
oh boy I can't wait to play as the
>Regular Germans
>Fast Germans
for the third game in a row.
shills on suciide watch, just look at it , if this game was not called company of heros 3 not even 10% of the sales would have happen, i fully expect to lose 90% of the playerbase like AoE 4 and be full of sunken cost fallacy copers that still pretend they did not waste their money on a terrible game justifying it by saying that they got 60 hours and that is enough to justify the overpriced purchase even though they will not ever touch the game again
didnt read
seething
don't pop a blood vessel
>f this game was not called company of heros 3 not even 10% of the sales would have happen
funny enough, if this game wasn't CoH3 or developed by relic, i would've been far more lenient in bugs/lack of content/etc.
These posts are so heckin based, but is there anything wrong except "Audio is unholesome -100" or "bugs (no I will not provide details)"
They still haven't fixed vehicle pathing what a fricking joke lmao
Do they really portray unsegregated units?
Shouldn't he have webbing for his Thompson instead of Garand pouches?
You cannot seriously expect these lazy devs to model that, can you?
Will this game have modding tools like COH1 to make custom models etc
No, it's the same deal as CoH 2, despite them promising otherwise.
god that's so fricking disappointing.
For what it's worth they said they'd add that functionality to the editor, custom meshes and the like, but they said the same thing about CoH 2. And they're probably only going to add them after they've pumped out a couple DLC's for 19.99+Tax+Tip so in all honesty? A couple months to a year, minimum.
Currently it's not even that. Spearhead and Wikinger devs on the discord say they can edit unit stats but not mix models, create units and updates or even change tech trees etc like they could in CoH2. All they can do is e.g. change damage values and ressource costs...
Allegedly lelic already promises to improve on that but if they lull a full dow3 i doubt it.
Means they lied pre release btw cuz devs in the official forum said we would have support like coh2 ON RELEASE iirc.
Relics newfound hatred of the modding community is interesting to say the least.
Having done post-mortem on disaster releases before I can tell you that the issue is that a lot of the assets are still set up using the proprietary file system the company uses for development, and as a consequence also encrypted. When a game is rushed and barely scrapes its way out of the finish line, they don't have time to recompile assets in a way that's safe for the end user to view and edit so they just have to leave most shit encrypted and work on fixing it after the fact.
It's a sign of just how down to the wire development got.
I can see where you'd get that idea but I don't think it's the case. I remember several threads about CoH 2 model changes and they can easily extract and even change the models, it just can't be loaded into another persons game. It may be because of encryption, I don't know.
A lot of people, especially mod makes, are under the impression they're being intentionally blocked from these types of things.
Lelic needs to shape up soon or modders are eventually just gonna frick off to some other game.
So I actually bought this game i now have 12 hours into it. I played the multiplayer demo as well for maybe 5 hours. I feel bamboozled multiplayer demo everyone played the game as intended small unit tactics people microing squads around cover chucking nades. I had a blast in the beta. Right now 80% of my opponents blob 6 units together in a pack run them around annhilating everythin in cover or out of cover. If they do run into an mg retreat the whole blob instantly and repeat holy frick its getting tiresome do i just fall into the trap and blob as well. Cause microing and cover sure as hell doesnt fricking matter against it. Im hoping things maybe improve when all the kiddies move onto the next game release.
blobbing has never been easier to deal with. everyone is doing it because you are playing noobs who think it is starcraft.
mgs and artillery will absolutely frick their shit while you rat cap the rest of the map from them then roll out t4 before they've even hit t3.
Yes, early game I had an mg with one guy in the squad left, and it suppressed a blob and I mopped IT up with a bike.
What factions are you playing and what faction is doing the blobbing?
In every RTS ever, blobbing is the default beginner tactic because it keeps all the units you need to manage on one screen and within a drag-select box of each other. These people aren't doing it because it's effective, it's just the easiest way to keep control of their units.
Real warfare typically requires a concentration of forces for offensives to be successful, and the same principle applies here. If your opponent blobs multiple times as much unit-value as you in a single place, they're going to win the battle there. Emplacements, positional advantages etc. can be a force multiplier and help you win when outnumbered, but not infinitely so--otherwise nobody could ever win an attack. Whenever you split your forces, you have to be prepared for each group to face opposition they can't beat. When they do, they should be prepared to stall the enemy while groups elsewhere accomplish things uncontested, or withdraw if they can't stall profitably. You don't need to win every firefight, you just need to control the majority of the map. If your opponent is blobbing then the majority of your forces should always be able to access whatever control points the enemy isn't currently occupying.
This was true of previous CoH games, as well. Retreats are extremely forgiving to encourage you to split your forces, move around and take risks, knowing that you can always get away if you encounter a bigger group. Yes, it requires more micro out of you than the guy blobbing--which is why inexperienced players default to blobbing instead.
in regards to modding you may;
>Make game modes
>Maps and scenarios
>Tuning packs
What about campaign mods you may ask? They haven't said a word about it but I genuinely doubt you'll be able to even so much as rename a unit. On top of that, it doesn't even seem like it's modding tools per se, but more of an editor. As far as meshes and textures go, they're untouchable for now. Sound design also seems to be off the table.
I don't know why Relic has developed this intense hatred of modders, considering several older Relic titles are kept alive by the efforts of modders, namely DoW 1 and 2 and even the original CoH. Could be a Sega decision, who knows.
Modders always get the shaft of modern games. Every single one. Cause why have competition to your 5 dollar microtransactions when modders are making free shit?
This is one of the major reasons modern games are so shitty.
Missing content/features/elements:
No profiles page to see stats or match history present.
Fallschirmjagers missing 3D models.
Missing surrender option.
No inventory system - you cannot change the badge, banner, title, basically anything related to your ingame profile personalization.
Only 3 Battlegroups per faction (same amount as in beta). As a result, there are units currently in the game that are unable to be accessed in multiplayer due to there not being a battlegroup for them.
Only 2 4v4 MP maps (same amount as in beta).
Only 3 3v3 MP maps (same amount as in beta).
No earning of credits after games, meaning no way for us to earn said free credits to later buy things in the in-game store like in COH2.
Unable to queue capture orders on the tactical map.
No way to view the map at the end of the game.
No chat room server support.
After the game ends, there is no way to chat with your opponents or teammates.
No ability to name your multiplayer game.
No background sounds of birds chirping, faded gunfire in the distance, etc that was present in previous entries to give off that 'COH vibe'.
No player names showing over units when hovered over them.
No player list in-game in multiplayer (can't tell if human teammate got replaced by AI)
No leaderboards for pre-made teams.
No crushing infantry with heavy vehicles.
Unit statistics not viewable in game.
Cannot multi-select control groups with Shift + Numbers, instead it assigns multiple control groups to individual units
'Temporary' main menu UI from beta still remaining in full release.
Tiny soundtrack compared to previous COH games.
No ability to have the camera follow a unit you double clicked on (either the unit or it portrait). This was present in COH1/2.
No Bulletin system.
No Observer mode.
>Only 3 Battlegroups per faction
>No earning of credits after games, meaning no way for us to earn said free credits to later buy things in the in-game store like in COH2.
Really homie? That belongs at the top of your list?
its not my list, its from the CoH 3 reddit community where they made a list
You pointed me to it, troony, thanks for that 🙂 Even Reddit hates your employers shit game. How are the reviews on steam going?
(posted from reddit)
>Fallschirmjagers missing 3D models.
what? no they aren't I just used them today, they kick ass
if this is the worst of it then it's the best new AAA release in years.
it is, the game is good and its becoming clear that its coh1 fans moving over to coh3 and coh2 fans getting upset that its a bit different
Unable to see crew weapons built in post-match stats screen.
No replays (although a workaround is available).
Unable to invite friends from Steam, directly from the steam UI and steam overlay.
Disappointing state of modding tools. Many possibilities were promised by Relic pre-launch in terms of modding, but it seems that turned out to be false and in reality the options are very limited.
Only English language voice tracks.
Bugs:
AI failing to attack you in campaign unless scripted.
Can't pause game in skirmish.
Custom game server browser broken. For example, you can only see 9 games, no sorting, no searching, no paging of the list. The top 9 games are usually never launched with an AFK host.
Instances where crew served weapons (for example, a US MG Squad and a mortar squad) both got "stuck" in a green covered position (which they were not really stuck or surrounded since it was open behind them) after pressing retreat.
254 Recon Tractor has the ability to call in free offmap mortars, at vet 1 it gains the ability to lock and have an improved barrage overwriting the default one.
US Airborne troops infinite spawn glitch.
Infantry units having their 'engines be broken'.
No tactical pause feature in skirmish.
Not being able to click on top of the big notifications.
Unable to save skirmish settings.
Unit icons inside buildings being off screen unless you can see the whole building, causing you to get suppressed without knowing from where its coming.
No autosave in campaign.
After match stats are hilariously broken and inaccurate.
Minimap has no indicator of which specific unit is selected if you are tabbing through several.
When using "walking stuka" is a circle, which doesn't fit the barrage itself which is instead an oval like shape.
Ultra texture option is locked out for no reason (although a workaround is available).
Pathfinding for vehicles is terrible.
Friends who are online and in-game don’t show up as online or inviteable many times.
Reticle/marker: when you send/direct multiple units to a spot shows only arrow, not the dots+arrow representing each group in the selection.
Things currently in COH3 needing improvement:
In-game visuals look too washed out/bland, require better lightning/contrast. As such, soldiers also tend to blend with the ground, sometimes not being able to instantly see where the model is standing.
Wonky, at times brain dead in-game AI.
Pings are still barely noticeable. COH2 it was too loud and spammy, now it makes barely any sound and hard / impossible to find.
Poor sound mixing. Extremely muffled and needs revamp.
Zoom level adjustments needed.
Twitchy camera. Camera movement with the WASD keys seems a little 'jumpy'.
Poor response of units when clicking on team weapons and weapons on the ground.
Small unit icons. Need to be bigger, they are even smaller than COH2.
Some of the unit icons need work. For example, the US M3 75mm halftrack still has the CoH2 Soviet SU-76 silhouette.
Clicking on a unit should tell you how many kills it has without having to hover over a certain spot on the UI.
Unique team colours needs fixing. For example, sometimes you can be playing as orange, and a red axis tank will be in the middle of your troops without knowing.
Should I bother picking this up? I played CoH 1 and 2 (as well as DoW2) but super casually. I don't think I would bother much with multiplayer but I need a new singleplayer RTS to sandbox with and this seems like the newest and shiniest.
I don't really care if it's not perfect, as long as it's not going to run at 6fps and buttons actually work when I click on them.
>I don't really care if it's not perfect, as long as it's not going to run at 6fps and buttons actually work when I click on them.
I would wait a month of two to see what they actually fix. The campaign map is pretty fun but its really buggy.
if you actually don't care if it's not perfect, then yes, it will definitely entertain you. at its core its a good, fun game. for all it's flaws its also well optimized so it should run great.
i'm around 3 hours in and it seems a lot like CoH2 except the faction design has been shaken up a little and the game performs a little better than CoH2. i don't think there's anything really wrong with the game so far, though i'm a little disappointed by how little they've changed things from CoH2. the game feels less cheesy than CoH1 at least, and at least the 2v2 maps seem pretty good. i wish there were more weirder units too, though if the game doesn't immediately die then we could see them as DLC
i feel a little bad about giving nu-relic 60 bucks to play CoH2.5 but at least i never have to deal with the broken drag scroll and slew of other shit in CoH2 that they never fixed. not like there's anything else to play in this genre right now
t. multiplayer only guy
>less cheesy than CoH1
meant CoH2 here
Only DLC I'll get is if they add a Pacific War expansion or actually add Italy. I think the next faction will be Allied Italy and the Italian Social Republic
Japs vs Soviets in late manchuria
IS2 vs. Type 95 Ha-Go. Let's go.
>Should I bother picking this up?
the gameplay is good and it runs well. 1v1 is tight, 2v2 is a lot of fun as well. faction design is way more interesting than last time. it's overpriced-- the game and the UI especially has like no polish at all
What absolutely galls me about the price is all these "sponsored" youtube shills with promo codes that don't actually have promotions attached. Why the frick would I use your
"""promo code""" if there's no discount attached?
Is anyone else surprised at how relatively balanced mp feels? Apart from a few obvious things like the DAK tiger call in which they've already changed iirc, it feels pretty good. That said DAK does feel a bit too strong in 1v1s but otherwise I've been pleasantly surprised
>You pointed me to it, troony, thanks for that 🙂 Even Reddit hates your employers shit game. How are the reviews on steam going?
the seethe from this post convinced me to buy myself and a friend a copy of the game. if it wasn't good, you wouldn't care this much 🙂 thanks gay!
Am I the only one who absolute fricking hates the look of tank shells, explosions, shots and fire? It's like they wanted to imitate CoH where you see the shell bounce but it looks like fricking shit, like some mobile game. Turns out CoH2 got a bunch of artistic decisions just right
This weird thing happens with modern games where increasing graphical fidelity destroys readability, so to enhance readability they have to make some things more 'cartoonish', which makes them stand out painfully because they're cartoonish in something that's trying to render high fidelity realism everywhere else.
Businessmen decide the art direction of the game, because art and graphics are marketable and push product. Then game designers are left trying to make the gameplay readable to its players with that artstyle well after the fact and the result looks like this. It's a ubiquitous problem
Stop posting this garbage image. CoH2 was a shitty game and would have flopped as hard as DoW3 had it not been for paypigs.
yeah, you are the only one. that shit looks great and I always thought it looked bad in coh2
CoH2 looked shittier on those departments than CoH1
I don't grasp how half the people called it, and the other half didn't
no italy no buy, its that simple
3 games and over a decade and still the only axis faction lelic can ever add is germany? no thanks.
How in the frick does one play as the US? Seems like the other three factions have obvious early strategies available. Using airdropped pioneers with grenade launchers, infantry sections with AT rifles, and halftracks are all good ways to start the other factions but the US just seems to have trouble in the early game with no powerful lategame units to make up for it. What is the secret of el goblino atrocidad?
US are literally spess from DoW2 and have the same openers. You go heavy on scouts and abuse free flares/smoke for an early tempo lead, then snowball. They're strong earlygame not necessarily in a direct all-in firefight but in map presence, which honestly matters way more. Their lategame is weaker, relatively speaking because it's balanced around them snowballing an early resource lead. Scouts are seriously nuts.
like this anon said
A good US strat to try, especially in 1v1, is open like follows
-immediately queue 2 pathfinders
-select airborne BG and pathfinders upgrade
-send your first PF squad out to cap (it should reinforce to 4 models by the time it leaves spawn)
-use the other 2 squads to cap the map quicker than your opponent, avoid lengthy engagements and stay at a range. if you see an enemy MG use your free smoke abillity paired with your insane rifle grenade
-get an airborne squad and slap some zooks on them to deal with light vehicles
-springboard off map control into shermans
it can be tricky to pull of but ive had good success with it. I will note however, that this particular strategy starts to peter out if you can't get good map control early, and can also backfire if the game goes late, because pathfinders don't scale well.
There are other US strats that are better later, like heavy rifles into bars into the infantry company building with all the discounts as the armoured BG, but the pathfinders one is nice, succinct, easy to execute, and fun to play.
Has anyone figured out some funny meme strats?
Closest thing I could find was rushing bersaglieri to the enemy fuel/cutoff
They will be pushed off fast but you can probably decap and stall enemy fuel income for like a minute, especially if the dude undercommits
DAK infantry BG, get into early aggression as quickly as you can to generate CP, rush the two tanklets with flamethrowers on them for total allied death if you avoid boys AT rifles and keep your range. you'll have the whole map controlled for like 3 minutes before they can react but you have to get them out early
Funny because with DAK a lot of people overcommit on AT since they're anticipating vehicles rushes like that so another strategy is just to focus on ammo points, upgrade your Pgrens early and push useless bazooka paras or bazooka squads off the field.
DAK is so fun but it might be because a lot of USF players really don't know how to deal with you, idk why the British aren't more popular they're so straight forward and strong, my favorite allies for sure.
Levels of USF play is going to be terrible for a long while until meta build orders circulate widely. I think a tonnes of folks just picking up the game are expecting US to be the straightforward beginner faction that wants to ball up and brawl in the middle, but if anything that's Britain. The US are the dodgy faction that relies on abilities and mobility and they benefit a lot from game knowledge, so it's going to be a while before you start seeing them played competently as the norm.
This. I understand why people initially think that the USF in 3 is similar to the USF in 1 due to their unit roster but in terms of play style they’re the same micro intensive special ability heavy faction they are in 2.
I'm not really into MP whatsoever, so maybe I'm wrong, but hasn't the US faction always been the straight up brawlers? Biggest squads, higher rates of fire?
Not in CoH2 they weren't.
i increased the resolution from 1080p to 1440p and it no longer looks like shit
I have just emerged from under a rock to learn about CoH 3. I am a massive fan of the series. I remember playing Relic's Age of Empires 4 beta and how absolutely shit that game was visually. This is EXACTLY the same. Holy shit is this game the most UGLY bland piece of shit I've seen in any modern RTS. How do they make such an absolutely ugly dog shit game and get away with it? I check youtube reviews and nearly NOBODY but one review is actually shitting on this game's visuals. Frick strategy, I don't care. This is a big title that has milked their games for 20 years, where the frick is the production of a 2023 game? RTS games out there with half the studio and budget from independent companies look way fricking better than this ... YEARS AGO! Holy frick, I'm so fricking mad. I'm going to link this ONE HONEST FRICKING REVIEW on youtube from just a normal fricking stand up guy being honest about this dog shit release in a world of relic copium inhalers and shills. There is absolute NO reason to play this game over CoH2. NO REASON. People will just ignore this game just like Age of Empires 4 and play previous titles in the series. I will NEVER buy a relic game again in my life and I most certainly won't be buying this one. All it takes is 30 seconds of gameplay footage to draw that decision. If I want strategy I'll play a different game. If I'm playing retail price for a AAA game in 2023, it better not look like absolute dogshit.
didn’t ask
So you think the game is visually acceptable? You like eating outdated everything that feels like a 20 year old game? CoH 1 looked better visually dude.
>So you think the game is visually acceptable? You like eating outdated everything that feels like a 20 year old game? CoH 1 looked better visually dude.
I think you're being a bit hyperbolic anon it really doesn't look bad at all
i'll be honest, i only played the open beta, im not going to buy it this early because its overpriced, but frick if it isnt fun slapping some engineers with flamers on the DAK half-track and toasting some homies. of course it could look better. of course it could be fixed up some more, but i at least feel someone there did something right about the fun aspect
sure ttk is higher, sure you cant wipe unattended squads with a grenade anymore, sure it looks funny that squads are shooting each other point blank and taking ages to kill anyone but if you really wanted something more hardcore you'd just be playing men of war or call to arms
It's fun tho
>There is absolute NO reason to play this game over CoH2. NO REASON
coh2 is pay to win
Pay to win how? You buy the stupid cash grab commanders okay fine... yeah I fricking hate relic's DLC and I'm sure it hasn't gotten much cheaper. But the map is equal for the most part if you play meta commanders. Either case, CoH2 looks fricking decent. This game looks worse than any RTS i've seen in the past 20 years.
>muh toy soldiers don't look perfect!
the gameplay's fun, autist
dont forget to call me a chud you absolute limp wristed homosexual. Let me guess, you clap at the israeli family narrating the Afrika campaign too.
umm sweaty, its just a game ok? no need to get upset, just turn off the game, lol
I understand why that would make you lose interest but who cares about a 4 hours campaign that you'll only play once, the multiplayer is where the game shines and it's really good.
But CoH2 multiplayer was really good and it looked better. Why should I play a game that looks worse when outdated games exist?
Because looks aren't everything
>when outdated games exist?
what do you mean?
then play coh2, who cares. we'll be playing coh3 because its fun and looks better than coh2
The virtue signaling in this post is fricking crazy
don't care 🙂 i'm literally laughing, smiling, and having fun while you sit, cope, seethe, and dilate
Are you just using random words?
No, it's people defending this game. They are like twitter SJWs defending their favorite marvel comic book. They think it's virtuous to silence all criticism. It's a fricking game, not a fricking election. Game developers do not deserve an ounce of understanding when a product doesn't deliver. That's business. In other trades and professions in life do we accept half baked products? Do you accept partially spoiled food at the grocery store? Do you like to go to a restaurant and accept a plate of nothing but ground beef when you ordered a full burger? I honestly believe that Relic, like many other gaming companies, are so low in intelligence and understanding of coding and game design due to hiring practice and israeli investors that we now not only have regression. We are moving back in time on even our fricking understanding of how to use a game's hardware potential. I believe that leftists in media, game development, ect.. are midwit tier IQ and can never produce an acceptable product.
>There is absolute NO reason to play this game over CoH2
what about the fact that everything about it is better?
CoH2 was shite. even the first expansion to the first CoH was shite. this is the first game they've made in about 20 years that is mechanically decent and it takes a massive dump on the failure that was CoH 2.
t: day one coh buyer back in 2006
While I enjoy Mack's content, he is a total boomer shitter when it comes to RTS.
And this is the multiplayer test "review"
I was there when CoH1 and CoH2 launched so all this shit doesn't bother me that much.
Mechanicly CoH3 is already better than predecessors.
agreed
good luck convincing the copium huffers round these parts tho
The game is mechanically fun but yeah the visual and audio presentation is an absolute dumpsterfire
Just had a asiatic constantly using the same u.s rifleman unit and blobbing. nothing else. I killed his blob everytime, and he repeated the cycle until the match ended with my stunning victory. what is the mentality here behind asiatics? what do they hope to accomplish? Am I being trolled? This was the only boring part of the game that I've been played. asiatic 'troll' strats that don't work.
>play against noob
>win
>complain on Ganker
?
i kinda like how there's more unit variation and you get some free auxiliary units. every faction sets up these impromptu FOBs now. makes it feel more like you're running an actual military operation instead of CoH2 where if you play as soviets your army is like a roaming band of penals and a t70 for most of the game
Yeah making all the factions the same is always a great choice in an RTS
the factions do feel a bit more symmetric than before but it's not because of that. and to be fair i don't really miss the way CoH2 did faction asymmetry because it was often like
>lmao your opponent did a cheese strat and your faction literally cant deal with it with the units it has so you lose xd
would be cool if there was more asymmetry but i'll take symmetry over "cheese vs cheese" that coh2 often was
The only asymmetry in original CoH2 was "soviets get barebones equipment from 41 and have to choose COs to have anything good, while Germans can just forget about picking anything until they start losing".
Why do devs hate wehraboos so much as of late?
They are the audience that consistently flood every single WW2 game, they play a lot they buy all dlcs and are the most active members of the community. Even Russian boomers who only play soviets (WoT audience) are not as active and everyone else is a casual.
Why shit on the most loyal fanbase that brings in the money?
Half of the launch factions are nazis, why are you crying?
why not all?
imagine a kino alt-hist game where Germany wins and descends into civil war between Wehr, Waffen-SS, Wilhelm loyalists and Weimar restoration partisans
I for one hate them for swarming the CoH2 forums with complaints about balance, until Soviets needed 3 times the APM of germs to win.
Wtf are you talking about moron? Soviets are the best faction
after rebuilding their reputation after the war, online gaming has proven that germans are the worst kind of autistic raging subhumans and the treaty of versailles didn't go hard enough.
im not trying to be inflammatory but i legitimately cannot get into company of heroes
i dont know what it is about it but i fricking hate those games dude
i hate having so few squads
i hate how when squads are shooting at each other the time to kill is like ... 10 minutes, you just watch bullets whizz by each other as they miss each other
i hate how the camera is so zoomed in
i hate how 'loose' the game feels like units not reacting snappily to your commands or wiggling about
i hate all the stupid active abilities and "give your squad the B.A.R. upgrade!" nonsense
i really just dont like these games
I legitimately don't get why they don't just increase the scale of everything and zoom out a little bit and have the game feel a little more 'macro' instead of telling one of my two penis squads to hide behind the penis wall and shoot rubber bullets against one of the enemy's 3 dildo squads like a fricking chump, is this world war 2 or paintball? why the frick are there so few units on the map, why is the lethality so low
Regardless it frickin sucks because I love RTS games and would like to be able to enjoy a new game in a franchise with what appears to be actual polish and budget
i've always felt coh is basically a game about making a cool ww2 "diorama" come to life. It's definitely not for everyone, especially those interested in historical accuracy. I got into it when I was a little kid, so the idea of having a big firefight over a town square in normandy was really exciting. I think your complaints make sense anon.
There is no game about historical accuracy, anon. War isn't fun.
yes I know, I guess I meant in terms of war strategy games, you might have something like Graviteam Tactics: Mius-Front, which seeks to replicate the scale and conditions of combat in a sim like formation, and then something like coh, which seeks to make a cool war movie happen. i like both games equally, but I see what the anon means when he says he can't get into it because of unit ranges, few squads, and high ttk
actually this
People tend to romanticize WW2 without realizing that it was nowhere as clean as shown in any media. Take ukrainian conflict remove conteprorary body armor, medicine, comms and multiply it by x1000.
War crimes not simply were "common" it was THE normal and literally the way the war was fought. POWs were mass executed, civillians were purposefully targeted and murdered, cities were burned and people were dying left and right from sickness and hunger. In a way you could say that the war was not the biggest concern of people trying to survive this shit. It's the fallout from the war that killed more people than the actual artillery shelling, bombing runs, bullets and tanks.
Too many games are about large scale low TTK combat already, some of us like it slow like in WC3 or Rise of Legends.
You should try the Spearhead mod for CoH2 or Blitzkrieg for CoH1 if you want more "realism" in it with TTK and all that.
coh is heavily designed gameplay-first. squads and units are few in number so they feel more individually meaningful and you aren't just spamming them out of a barracks like starcraft. units die slowly so you have time to save them. etc.
honestly, in terms of melding the gameplay and design intent into the aesthetics, the wh40k universe is way better for the CoH formula. the big ass unit models, the point blank gunfights that go on for several minutes, the silly unit upgrades make way more sense in the wh40k universe where you have a power-armored supersoldiers shooting at a giant green orcs with skin made out of kevlar. it's too bad they crashed their dawn of war franchise with no survivors. well to be honest they could probably still release CoH: dawn of war as a spinoff and it'd sell ok
anyway i agree the camera is too zoomed in, though i know why they did it (so you can see the cool explosions and shit and not spend the whole game zoomed out)
coh1 with bkmod is for you then
>camera is zoomed further out
>more units
>lethality cranked up to 11
it is the best way to play coh
ITT: people who've never played COH seethe.
nvm i talked too soon the game seems pretty cheesy after all but on the bright side the germs seem to have the majority of the cheese units so if you wait the 5 minute queue time you dont have to play against them
its somewhat cheesy between the germans and the brit at rifle spam. supposedly a balance patch is coming this week
>no way to chat with allies/enemies post-game
I tried us airborne some more and I like it a lot. Especially with a few pathfinders out on the field. They actually have so much utility its insane, rifle grenade/smoke, fast cap, big vision range and flares for peeking over terrain.
maybe im just new and moronic but this feels a lot more micro intensive than coh2 and there's also a bit more macro stuff to keep track of. feels less comfy than im used to
I mean sort of. Positioning didn't matter much in CoH 2, you could just A-move your shit around and destroy squads like you were playing C&C. Then by the time t4 rolled around infantry barely mattered anyway.
CoH 3 feels very similar in micro and tactical demands in the late game as in the early-mid game, which was always the most fun part of CoH anyway.
People who can't appreciate just how right fricking on they've got the gameplay in 3 should go back to plants vs. zombies.
>More micro intensive
Definitely, spamming mgs doesn't necessarily seem so toxic in mp anymore since
And this is a huge one
>You don't have to spend the first 10 minutes of the game saving muni just to kit out your squads
Smoke lasts a very useful amount of time now
Using guastatori with flamethrowers and throwing smoke to move up on MGs is my favorite thing to do right now
the queue times for germans are insane in EU, like literally 10 second wait for allies and 5 minute wait for germoids
there are a lot of autistic germans who review bombed the game after playing for 5 minutes who now have 20 hours exclusively queuing as krauts so they can experience sending their great grandfather to die to delay hitler's failure by a year or two.
Yeah lots of people are playing DAK
Can't blame them they're fun as frick and they're the most flavorful.
Plus US is a little more complex and I'm sure people are screwing their builds up.
One thing I don't understand about the US factions is why only the infantry battalion gives you a unit, mechanized or airborne should also give you a captain imo, maybe with different weapon than an LMG
You're committing to infantry dominance when teaching up to buff up your tanks makes them do all kinds of stuff
I kinda don't get it myself since the hellcat is pretty good out of the box, although I feel like reduced reinforcement costs, +10hp and the combat engi synergy is pretty strong
DAK is easily the most fun faction, I love the Italian infantry/tanks. It makes me mad that they weren't their own faction because of that
British are the boring milquetoast faction and the US are the complicated and weird micro faction that nobody likes playing and always bounces between 'worst' and 'best' in the game depending on the patch. It's no surprise they aren't topping popularity charts.
What the frick is the early AT for the germans? I just took them into skirmish and I'm getting rolled by a halftrack because I have nothing that kills vehicles
Panzerfausts?? Your mainline infantry can just practically instakill light vehicles with them. Alternatively the flak gun shreds everything that isn't a tank.
The problem with panzerfausts is that you hit a light vehicle for much of its hp and then just do absolutely nothing to until they come off cooldown, and in that time it's going to push all your infantry off the point and come back next fight fully repaired.
>you don't need line of sight to backdoor with paratroopers
That seems kind of nuts. You can even drop and man AT guns behind enemy lines to cut off their movement routes
Had a guy do this to me in a 1v1, holy shit it was annoying but it ended up being a fun close win for me. He was just dropping them on cut-offs the whole game, even dropped an mg team on my munis right at the beginning
where is spaghetti army?
DAK is essentially the italy expy and a big part of their roster revolves around italian auxiliary units. Which is honestly sensible. The italian army on its own was not a credible fighting force, so instead they're repped by their babysitter.
watch as the Italian Royal Army becomes the first DLC faction. I can guarantee it.
Dlc is probably going to be the USSR and/or Japan since they're the only major part if each side not represented. It would be redundant to release an italian faction after already releasing a north africa campaign without an Italian faction, and an italy campaign without an Italy faction.
>Italian front themed game with no Italian faction
homie you can't be seriously talking about redundant when we've had two and a half CoH games with two German factions already.
>DAK is essentially the italy expy and a big part of their roster revolves around italian auxiliary units. Which is honestly sensible. The italian army on its own was not a credible fighting force, so instead they're repped by their babysitter.
Doesn't matter when the game barely implements units of the main fighting factions anyway or splits them up.
Are people sleeping on US assault engineers or am I being moronic?
>200 manpower engineer squad that can beat basic grens (with 5 grease guns they are basically a mini assault squad)
>get a flamethrower + engineer utility to be good late game
>no need to buy grenade or BARs so go straight for 76mm shermans quick
Yet I have literally never seen someone pick them in my matches.
Probably because DAK will just kite you until Wirling or Gurstati
>fast tanks
With skill planes they are not a problem
self replying autistic german who spends his whole day seetheposting the best new RTS in 20 years strikes again.
look jurgen, i'm sorry they didn't do a german language version, but you did lose the war. as losers you don't get a say in those things.
Are you the ‘asiaticclicker’ poster?
NTA but he can't be.
That gay only plays tactics games in SP.
Also responsible for current "invented acronym for bullshit genre" thread spam
Where the frick do I go to talk about this game? I haven't played CoH2 in almost a decade and I'm looking to get back into things but there are just no resources around anywhere. Youtube is just drowned in fallow shill shit, the wiki is fricking empty. I just want to read up on faction build orders, meta info, specific breakdowns of niche units I might grab to answer certain builds and so on.
Got to see how Relic/Sega will handle the modding tools, CoH2 was held back too much that we could not have custom model assets.
If CoH3 will allow custom models and whatnot, it will be way superior to CoH2 in replayability
After playing a few games I feel like Werh and Britain are the best factions for team modes, especially 3v3 and 4v4v
>Wehr
Can go Lufftwaffe as a side player, land falls pioneers on the midpoint and have it capped and fortified with a pillbox before anybody can even be close to contest it while a ketten caps your home points. With some coordination you can tell your allies to leave their home points uncapped and cap it with the ketten for the resource bonus. You'll almost always win mid-battles this way since your side gets in position way ahead of the other side.
They just seem to have the best tools to deploy quickly to a forward position, especially on a very large or open map like the north side of Mignano Gap. You get air support up and you can hunker on your lane while supporting the rest of your map while your own AA keeps the skies clear. Then lategame you roll out with Panzer 4's
As a mid player you grab trucks from the Breakthrough group and just snowball a massive resource advantage, farm munitions from missile artillery and rush out a Tiger. Tigers are so fricking good in team games.
>Brits
You get a gas-free medical truck from your mortar call-in and British line infantry are so ridiculously good that you can just grab 3-4 companies and have absolutely ridiculous map presence. The mortar itself has an insanely short cooldown so you're just positioning it on a friendly point and shelling the nearest enemy's position every 30 seconds for the entire game. And since your infantry AT rifles and field reinforcing are so fricking good you can just grab an AT gun or 2 to support them and rush Matildas. It's ridiculously how quickly Panzers and Shermans melt when they try to break through a pair of british infantry squads with a 6lber in back.
DAK seem weak in 4v4s outside of the cheesy italian light tank rush and I have honestly yet to see the US played well so I'm not really sure the extend of what they can do.
>Italian setting
>no partisans
>no social republic
>no italian units and weapon
Souless
I just had a game with US where I tried going armored battlegroup with the mechanized support center.
The Idea was trying to go assault engineers + sniper into a greyhound and then spam shermans
The guy was kicking my ass early on though so I had to go for an m16 halftrack, then he rushed my base with a wirberlwind and I had to get the 75mm halftrack to punish it.
Instead of going for P4s the guy got 2 marders and a wespe, I eventually got 2 easy eight call-ins and went for a base rush, since he had no AT guns or snares (all his infantry was jeagers to counter my ass engis and sniper) I got all his vehicles and even some infantry squad.
Sure, he would have probably won if he had gone for P4s and managed to destroy my AT guns but the back and forth of this game is really damn fun.
I don't think I ever had a CoH2 game where both players went for a base inspection.
>wespe
buying any kind of self-propelled artillery unit seems like a great way to instantly lose the game in my experience
there's nothing in this game worth artying with that many resources
They just seem really bad at their job.
>shelling infantry
They take forever to kill anything
>shelling vehicles
They can't hit shit and do tickle damage if they hit
Every time I've seen any kind of expensive artillery I've just dived it for the free kill, because being expensive means they're almost certainly lacking AT, and being slow means it basically can't escape anything that can kill it despite being 'self propelled'. There are basically 0 advantages over less expensive artillery weapon teams, especially because you can just restaff a lost weapon team whereas a lost vehicle is just resources lost.
by that point I had 2 AT guns and 2 MGs so the idea wasn't bad but he kept it in his base and max-range barrages seldom do any real damage.
If you want to wipe a team weapon you should get as close to the minimum range as possible.
I guess there's some skill involved in knowing when you can get away with it.
He did it because he saw I went for assault engineers only and since he had more map control he figured I wouldn't have a chaffee or anything on the way
He probably thought I would surrender though so he overstayed his welcome or didn't notice the production animation on the building so he ended up trading his wirberlwind
When I did it, it was because I knew he had no snares on his jeagers and no AT gun because he went luftwaffe company, but also marders are actually not great against medium tanks because they've got like half of the HPs and no armor.
My only problem with base inspections is that, if you're behind already, getting AT prepared will only put you further behind if the guy decides to techup and keep playing with infantry.
imo the only artillery unit i think has ever been good in CoH history is rocket artillery like stuka's creeping barrage wiping the frick out of soviet field gun walls. sometimes the rocket sherman was ok because the US sucked at clearing big blobs otherwise
all the "hey stand still while i shell you once every 5 minutes" units just suck dick though
>My only problem with base inspections is that, if you're behind already, getting AT prepared will only put you further behind if the guy decides to techup and keep playing with infantry.
Yeah this is the main issue. Usually it's the player who's ahead doing the base rush, and unless they seriously frick up, it's generally ending the game. The idea that you can walk into opponent's base with impunity and wipe a squad or two because you hit 60 fuel a minute ahead of your opponent is kind of ridiculous and completely against the spirit of the game. And the fact that the necessary AT to prevent it is a bad choice until the moment you actually see it happening (which is usually too late) means that there's no really good answer if your opponent pulls ahead on gas early.
>The idea that you can walk into opponent's base with impunity and wipe a squad or two because you hit 60 fuel a minute ahead of your opponent is kind of ridiculous and completely against the spirit of the game.
fricking lmao
I'm not sure how I feel about base rushing right now to be honest. It feels a little too easy and a little too hard to punish. Any kind of armoured breakthrough can instantly transition into a base snipe, especially if your AT isn't already in position and usually that's going to basically end the game from the value you get on it. Even light armour often can just run into the base to kill things and walk out with impunity
There are in fact quite a few italian units and weapons. They're just repped by DAK rather than being their own faction.
>try the m8 scott
they massacred my boy
>9 years of technological advancement amounts to armor being split to 3 sections instead of 2 and height advantage modifier
literally a coh2 mod
Don't forget towing weapons, breaching and auto-reinforce toggle. Those are pretty nice tbqh.
Also, what would you have expected/wanted? I think CoH's core gameplay has always been very good from the beginning hence its status as a popular classic. Personally I find it hard to imagine how much more they could change it without compromising the formula.
i could come up with some ideas on how to switch up the coh formula but i can see why they played it safe. dow3 must still be cutting to the very marrow
>towing
We had team weapons board halftracks in CoH2. Also, i'm pretty sure there's a mod for CoH1 thad had it.
>auto reinforce
DoW2 had it
>breaching
A normal ability, not different from a grenade throw. Call me when two squads from different players can enter the same building
Okay cool, but still not really anythign wrong with those things being included here. Yes, the game is lacking content but honestly the gameplay is fine. I don't think most people were really expecting a revolutionary change to CoH and if you were then sorry, I guess.
Breaching is a little different imo, it's a guaranteed capture of a building whereas good players could always leave and re-enter a building if a grenade was thrown from further away. Its another risk which forces you to protect things like MGs in choke point buildings with secondary units to make breaching too dangerous.
You couldn't tow AT guns or other large pieces in CoH2
Also how the frick would you balance indoor combat? That would require some serious changes to the scale or style of the game in order to effectively control, unless you want something like Empire TW with a tug of war bar over a house until one side loses. It's a nice wish and I wouldn't mind it either but realistically speaking it just wouldn't be a fun mechanic unless they made some serious changes.
>Dow2 had it
Dawn of war1 has it
Did they stop teaching new students at university how to design games? Is it because they are non-whites and women? I don't understand
shhh gramps we're talking about the game here
HOW THE FRICK do you explain game developers making horrible games? The game is 10 years out of date visually. How do you explain that from a company like Relic? The new students in the gaming industry must be fricking stupid sub 100 IQ level idiots.
>muh gwaphics
no one cares
shhh its okay, here, i brought you the big blanket you like and we can wheel you into the sitting room - the fires on and you can relax
>play 4v4
>paradrop on a victory point at the start of the game and fortify it with sandbags/wire and a medic bunker
>hold it 2v1 all game, and against a 3v1 push near the end
>next game, map decides that I cannot place bunkers
>get shat on horribly because I keep needing to return to base after every fight
Frontline reinforcements seem seriously nuts
i feel sorry for all the poverty brazillians and eastern europeans who can't afford this game when it's shitloads better than 2. can't go back to that swill after tasting the nectar of 3.
maybe it too will go F2P in a decade and you can play it then.
new patch just fixed the audio, it sounds great now
what was broken about it
Wasn't uncompressed properly so things were coming through the wrong channels and sometimes with very low levels. Not something you'd probably care about without headphones but there's much more clarity to the ambience now.
idk if it is related but i feel like a bunch of my units have been dying because i just dont hear them complaining about dying
i could swear they occasionally don't let off a peep and just die if i'm not constantly staring at the minimap
I've noticed the same thing, but I also think that the ttk can just be crazy low sometimes. Those british rifle grenades give no warning or indicator and fire from their max firing range but deal as much damage as normal grenades (ie. they instantly kill any model caught in the blast). You can genuinely just wipe an entire engineer squad with a single shot and the other player gets no warning until their engineers are gone.
>Being so deaf you don't know which unit is shouting GRENADE
The cast time is huge and the model doing it takes like 4 seconds to plant his rifle in the ground
There's no audio queue 99% of the time.
There's 0 reason for this one grenade to deal the exact same damage as the rest but have no indicator and explode on impact instead of leaving an indicator with a 1.5 second timer like the rest
>There's no audio cue 99% of the time
That's a straight up bug then, because it sure as hell works for me, but I have the "rifles cutting each other off" issue which not necessarily everyone else has
>wehraboos complaining about conscripts(forma Grenadier) and rifle grenades
HOW DOES IT FEEL HANS
I HAD TO ENDURE THIS FOR 10 YEARS
BUT WITHOUT ELITE INFANTRY REPLACEMENTS OR OP TANKS
HOW DOES IT FEEL
>HOW DOES IT FEEL
>OP TANKS
Honestly all the german armor feels really shit this time around. Panzer 4's get floored by fricking british infantry with AT rifles. I think the Tiger is literally the only good Axis tank right now.
brit at rifles are currently annihilating everything from infantry to tanks, they will probably get a nerf
Axis needs to stop thinking this is CoH2 and there is no instant Backkrieg and Fart Tactician to bail their poor positioning
Once they realize how good upgrades are things will change
DAK upgrades are Panzer Elite tier
It's more like allies just have better armor. Panzer 4's lose to Shermans 1v1 (despite Shermans being less expensive) and Matildas are the strongest non call-in armor in general. The only notable armor option available to Wehr are Tigers. Everything else is playing underdog to cheaper ally armour.
>not pastamaxxing by shitting out Bersaglieri and Semoventes 7 minutes into the game
can't roll out armor if you have no map control
>Semovente
>more expensive than a marder
>less penetration
>No pintle upgrade
it's bad bro just get 8rads and if you need AT call-in the cheapo AT gun
>and Matildas are the strongest non call-in armor in general
Matlidas literally can't pen a Pz4 from the front.
Frontal penetration is a diceroll, anon. Armour matchups can swing based on random chance for a deflection shot, but generally speaking the hierarchy in a 1v1 frontal armor duel goes:
Tiger > Sherman with upgrades > Churchill > Matilda > Panther > Sherman > Panzer 3 with upgrades > Panzer 4 > Panzer 3.
All Panzer 4s are really good for is chewing up infantry blobs. They can't duel any tank favorably. Shermans with the gun upgrade are seriously too good and basically make it impractical to field any vehicles against the US once they have them, since they can build almost 3 for the price of a Tiger. Lategame against the US you're just better off massing AT guns and infantry with AT upgrades. It's wild that the Sherman, famous for being the worst allied tank of the war, is so dominant here.
>It's wild that the Sherman, famous for being the worst allied tank of the war, is so dominant here.
a+ bait
America's military readiness was terrible across the board going into ww2. Their torpedos didn't work, their tank guns couldn't penetrate modern armour. The world is very fortunate that the british were winning the war on their own so the US didn't actually need to do anything until they had figured their shit out.
>America's military readiness was terrible across the board going into ww2.
True
>Their torpedos didn't work
Painfully true
>their tank guns couldn't penetrate modern armour
False. The Sherman's 75mm gun could easily penetrate everything that was a Panzer 4 or below from the front while also having vastly superior HE to...basically anything else. By late 1942/early 1943 standards it was probably the best tank in the world. That didn't last but even in the late war the Sherman was an effective AFV, and certainly better than basically anything the British produced except the Churchill and arguably superior to most Soviet designs.
>The world is very fortunate that the british were winning the war on their own so the US didn't actually need to do anything until they had figured their shit out.
It would be more accurate to say that they "weren't losing" rather than winning.
>By late 1942/early 1943 standards it was probably the best tank in the world
imo it was probably the best tank in the world to the end of the war. what would you say was better? i guess you could make the case that the panther was better for the defensive war that germany was fighting at that point, and the fact that it broke down if you pressed the gas pedal too hard wasn't a real big deal when they were more or less used as stationary turrets at that point
I'm not sure if there is such a thing as "best tank". I think the tanks that Germany, the Soviets, and the US built all suited their needs pretty well for the most part. I know people like to criticize Germany for rushing Panther development and wasting time on things like the King Tiger but given their dwindling resources and manpower trying to maximize what they had wasn't a bad idea, even if the execution was questionable.
Still, as much as I like the Sherman and respect it for its insane reliability and versatility in every theater it was in, there's no denying that it struggled a bit against late war Panthers during the Battle of the Bulge.
The best tank was the jadgpanzer, everything else germany made aside from panzer 4s sucked ass and is basically a meme
The Panzer 4 is also a meme.
Germany made the same mistake most countries mad during the inter-war period. They underestimated how big tank guns would have to be to kill tanks, and designed their 'main' tank around a gun too light to kill tanks.
The Panzer 3 was the designated german tank for tank-on-tank warfare, and the Panzer 4 was designed as a close infantry support vehicle with a short-barreled howitzer--essentially copying the british interwar doctrine for infantry tanks.
When the germans faced competent armour they realized the P3 couldn't kill things, but its design couldn't accommodate a bigger gun. Hence the P4, which was already built for heavier guns, got redesigned to mount a modified AA flak cannon. By the time the P4 was properly set up to face russian tanks it was down to like 17mph from all the added weight. It was only ubiquitous because it was the right size of chassis going into the war to mount both a big enough gun and a big enough engine to move it. Germans mass produced P4s basically because it was just what they had to work with, but as a medium tank it was too slow and was consistently outgunned and out-armoured by faster allied tanks all through the war.
If you want to kill tanks that is what you have infantry for and stugs, panzer 4 is made to kill infantry, its a infantry support vehicle, "tank warfare" is literally made up bullshit cope by morons sitting in a office, tanks suck, infantry is king
The Panther's technical issues were a meme because its first combat deployment happened before its known mechanical defects had been rectified, but the majority of its late-war presence it was functional and reliable. As a late war tank it was basically peerless; the calibre and armour of a Tiger with the mobility of a medium tank and considerably cheaper/faster to produce.
Comparatively by the late war period the sherman struggled with multiple issues; it struggled with muddy terrain, it was underarmoured for tank-on-tank warfare and essentially a deathtrap for its crew, it was undergunned and struggled so much to pierce enemy armour that they had to later upgrade its gun.
The Sherman is held up in the US army because its chassis was versatile and had dozens of specialized variations. Modified Sherman chasses were still seeing use all the way up to the vietnam war, but not as tanks. As a tank, the sherman sucked--because it was designed for a pre-war doctrine that still genuinely believed there would never be another war on the scale of WW1. Its late war upgrades effectively turned it into a tank-killer, a self-propelled AT gun that had to rely on hitting its target before it was seen. The utter mediocrity of the sherman as a tank contributed to the difficulty in the allies advance through france and germany, because the allies relied heavily on air power to actually deal with axis armour.
The sherman was never really built to be a tank specifically. Its chassis was designed to be a general-purpose platform they could mount varying amounts of weaponry and armour on to--which it was great at. It just wasn't great at being a tank.
>and essentially a deathtrap for its crew
Sherman crew survival rates are the highest of any tank in the war. A lot of Shermans got knocked out but you'd probably live because
>there were lots of hatches to escape from
>Shermans were large and roomy meaning that spalling damage wouldn't kill the whole crew
>crews had leather helmets and not berets/hats which significantly reduced head trauma
The only initial issue was dry stowage (not a unique problem to the Sherman either) which was quickly rectified.
nah
>As a tank, the sherman sucked--because it was designed for a pre-war doctrine that still genuinely believed there would never be another war on the scale of WW1
Stop with this meme. The Sherman was absolutely designed to fight other tanks. If it wasn't then why the frick would it carry AP for it's main gun? When it was introduced it could destroy any piece of German armor on the field with relative ease and the ones it couldn't it didn't face all that often.
>Its late war upgrades effectively turned it into a tank-killer, a self-propelled AT gun that had to rely on hitting its target before it was seen
Yeah those same late war upgrades that allied commanders themselves didn't want when they went into Normandy because they thought it was unnecessary. Given that the major US/German tank engagement ended in a total US victory at Arracourt and was done almost entirely with 75mm Shermans + some M5's, M10's, and M18's I'd say they were mostly right.
>The utter mediocrity of the sherman as a tank contributed to the difficulty in the allies advance through france and germany, because the allies relied heavily on air power to actually deal with axis armour.
No, the difficulty was in hedgerow country not being well suited to tank warfare and Bradley having the most moronic plan to invade Germany, respectively.
>what would you say was better?
the L6/40, duh
For me the biggest issue was multiple shots interrupting each other so the game sounds like a bunch of sound cuts
4v4s are a lot of fun I just really wish I knew what I was doing. So far every match is me just sitting on the Victory Point in my lane and steadily digging in more and more. I've feel like I keep winning against people who know even less than I do, and getting beat the frick down by anyone that actually knows how to play the game.
I don't know if it's just coincidental, but I've seen very, very little vehicle play even from good players. I'm usually the only person my team with a Panzer by the end of the game and the folks who have steamrolled me all just used a variety of infantry and mortars with AT guns backing them up. I've heard a lot about light vehicles being way more important than in CoH2 but is that just for 1v1s or something?
teching for light armor and clown cars was faster and more aggressive in coh2, and they were more important to make up for the faction's weaknesses. they also felt more powerful over all, like the t70 was like the only reason the soviets could even play the game iirc
>like the t70 was like the only reason the soviets could even play the game iirc
That was my biggest issue with CoH2. Too much of the game felt like it hinged on the play of certain linchpin units.
>So far every match is me just sitting on the Victory Point in my lane and steadily digging in more and more
that's team games alright
> very little vehicle play even from good players
Everyone will have a pair of AT guns ready and team maps are tighter (per player) than normal maps, there's very little you can do with a vehicle, even medium tanks don't really have any use, if you need to deal with an HMG you either arty it or smoke it off and rush it with infantry
Yeah I'm getting the impression that team modes, especially uncoordinated team modes, are just artillery wars.
I don't know what it was, but some kind of US artillery ability oneshotted a Tiger and at that point I realized that unless I was massing tanks with my teammates in voice chat, they probably weren't going to accomplish much.
The balance of team modes has always been a war between whichever is stronger that patch: Allied artillery or German armor.
Well if you're actually coordinating with your team then you can totally mass armour and make a push somewhere away from the main contact point, overwhelm an single player or an undermanned area and sweep through that way to break the stalemate. The issue is that it requires coordination to actually find and exploit an opening with multiple players controlling the units, so instead folks would rather just tunnel on their own lane and pretend the victory point is the only objective.
It's why I refuse to play team games without friends.
One player with good game sense can competently address a dogpile
It's trashlords who b***h at their team for not helping to relieve pressure that are bad
That doubly said it's an epic fail when people are so up their own ass they don't take the time to counter push and take territory in their own fronts
Yeah it's so easy to beat 2-3x your own resources in assets you just like... have gamesense bro it's so easy.
Who said anything about beating them dumbass? I'm talking about minimizing damage
A lot of people lose units because they charge them in in normal play and just not recognizing a bad fight
It's no different from recognizing "oh shit I'm being bumrushed" and falling back sustainably, as opposed to completely abandoning a position and mass retreating, leaving your teammates to dry
Literally any match is instantly that much harder when you have at least one teammate who mass retreats, and has been an issue since coh1
I think of them more like trench warfare
Maybe if bunkers weren't so tanky team games would have more mobility, but right now the best you can do is harass each other with long range artillery and occasionally smoke the cap to steal it
I much prefer the gameplay of 1v1s
bazooka squad seems kinda lame but i DO like their clear obstacle ability a lot. It does decent damage too, basically a 4sec cd no cost rifle grenade, though it can be blocked/missed if shooting uphill or through objects.
call me a shitter but the US units have way too many active abilities to use
That's their whole thing. If you're a shitter, just play the british instead. They're america, but for shitters.
yea but british are boring because they have no active abilities
like the american sherman has 2 active abilities AND you need to level up another skill out of 2 skills when they get promoted. meanwhile matilda etc. have no actives whatsoever
>meanwhile matilda etc. have no actives whatsoever
Matilda has smoke launchers
Imagine unironically building matildas when you could just call in the man himself
Fritz have access to both the Tiger and Panther tanks as Heavy Tank call-ins. What are the actual differences between the two? Is one clearly better than the other?
I know in history the Panther was a heavier late-war tank, but in game it's 8CP to the Tiger's 9. Are there substantive differences between them or is it just for the sake of giving two competing battlegroups endgame mega tank call-ins?
Tigers are better but you can have one tiger at a time but as many panthers as you want.
Why the hell would I want that
They have no good abilities and they're only good against vehicles
At least the kagpanther was good in coh1 because the offense spec could overcome the vehicle exclusive counter performance , and good in 2 because they're tanky and fast as shit
Yeah it's weird how bad they are here. They're as slow as Tigers (i'm like 90% certain they have the exact same speed) but with none of the upsides.
Panthers are more mobile while still being quite strong, they're a middle ground between the slower, all-round solid tiger and a regular panzer. At least thats usually how it is. I know in 2 they were a de facto TD as they were pretty shi against infantry.
How do they hold up to AT Guns?
With a Tiger I know I can pop in and out of the fog of war picking things off and even a pair of AT guns just kind of tickle the front armour before I'm back to safety. With a Panzer 4 it feels like they lose half their health the instant they're revealed and are limping away a flaming wreck by the time they get out of AT range.
I didn't have much success with the mechanized battlegroup when I messed around with it on day 1 and it just doesn't seem to offer much compared to the luftwaffe's great paratroopers and call-ins and the breakthrough group's huge resource boosting. But if Panthers are worth it then it might be fun to try a tank rush build in 4s.
I havent got a good feel for them yet but they seem a little weak to AT guns right now, I think they're in a niche of being micro heavy to do their best, but when they do they are very good. Will win 1:1 against most allied armor and can probably do a frontal peek with enemy AT and still survive, but better to use them to flank as much as possible. I agree they feel the least useful out of all options though
believe it or not you're not supposed to attack anti-tank guns frontally with tanks
It's pretty trivial for there to just be AT coverage everywhere you could possibly move a tank, and then the question is just 'how many AT shots can I take to break their line of sight"
Tigers can eat a dozen hits frontally and still be healthy enough to duel other tanks and its main gun has fantastic range. It's an excellent tech option for highly static battles where you're going to have to peak AT fire to ever shoot with anything that isn't artillery.
I just went ahead and did a game with them. verdict is quite comfortably 'shit'
They move like Tigers, which is to say terribly. Not being able to reposition well mid-combat is a big disadvantage but it's a weakness that makes sense for the Tiger. In actual combat they behave like Churchills. They're middling, and not worth their hilarious 550 manpower cost. I ended up pitting 3 of them against roughly equal cost in Shermans and the Shermans won the straight firefight by just being more cost effective. I think I would have honestly just been better off with Panzer 4's (though I know those still lose to Shermans).
Actually reaching that point was also miserable because their battlegroup is awful (aside from the Assault Stug call-in, that rocked) but Panthers themselves are emphatically not good. If you want to focus on tank warfare, just stick to Breakthrough and take a Tiger with mixed stuff to support it.
Is it just me or do flamethrowers seem really strong
Flamethrowers are nuts. They are sincerely probably too strong right now, but I can see how it slipped through the cracks because most factions can only put flamers on their fragile engineers while. DAK are the only faction in a good position to abuse them.
Killing blobs with the Italian flamethrowers is very satisfying.
test
test failed. Yer still a Black person.
Was pretty hyped but I've heard it was dissapointing. Is it true there's no ranked matchmaking?
God luft feels so good to play
>paradrop 2 combat engineers on my lane's victory point and fortify it with sandbags and a bunker right at the start of the game
>lock the lane down entirely with emplacements, weapon teams, anti-air, paratroops and AT jaegers while calling down airstrikes to support allies
>lategame I can drop engineers all over the map to build self-manning flak cannons that absolutely wall armor
The other 2 battlegroups feel like you lose so much by not having paratroopers to supplement your terrible starting infantry but gain so little in exchange.
Also is it or
>Luftpioneers accurate as hell
They have really consistent damage when reading in cover
Unlike fricking glaucogrenadiers
Yeah they're genuinely better frontline infantry than grenadiers, especially with their grenade launcher upgrade. It's kind of funny how fricking bad grenadiers are, but it's also a bit of a problem since you're shoehorned into one of the replacement infantry, but none of the replacements have snares.
>lane
lmao they really did pull in the moba casual crowd.
The UI/Main Menu is such an eyesore holy shit. It's worse than CoH1
got hit with the most Black persontastic bug in a game.
was flanking a position with 2 assault grenadier squads in troop transports, the troop transports got engine damage status, I exited my squads and they ALSO had engine damage status and were moving like they were running through jello. basically lost me the game because I couldn't move my squads or remove the status from them.
>Germans confirmed for bots
Always knew it
Why does he need two straps for his helmet?
He doesn't want to lose his helmet
Does it have grid?
Are there camera hotkeys?
How’s custom keymapping?
Can you adjust sensitivity of drag scroll?
How does the game behaves when alt-tabing (is it snappy or freezes shit for a while when switching)?
yes
dont know
pretty good
i think so?
very well
redpill me on the dingo
Early capper to get ahead on map control and can shoot. You send it to cap your side points and then have it join an engagement on the map by wheeling around and flanking. It can't fight a squad on its own but if it pincers a squad already engaged, especially before they have any grenades teched, then it can force an early retreat. It also excels at flanking mgs earlygame.
I would consider it in 1v1s as an early pickup just to get out on the map faster. In team modes you can safely skip it
>capper
anon the dingo can't cap
Anyway I dingopilled myself
Especially good if you want to use doctrinal infantry since you don't really need to keep it alive past some point.
It's dogshit against infantry in cover but has decent damage when flanking squads.
Saves some fuel by having the heal ability so you can rush the humber or a stuart without having to worry about low health squads
The medkit ability also heals the dingo itself so that's extra utility
>In team modes you can safely skip it
The 45 ammo barrage at vet 1 might get some use in team games, two of them should take down a concrete bunker
But I don't play team games so idk
Oh and also in one game I used the dingo to snipe the enemy upgraded kettenkrad
I think if you're fighting wehr you should always go for a jeep/dingo just for that
the weasel might be better because it comes out immediately and can contest the capture without vet
Team modes just tend to have very limited angles of approach so typically players keep their army grouped watching the only path you can approach them and dig in with layers of infantry and weapons teams. Units like the dingo are just too fragile to get much done even if you get around behind.
Typically team games boil down to some combination of heavy artillery wars using call-ins to force the enemy out of position, massed infantry pushes to force oblique angles, or massed armour to break through a point with low AT and flank. The kind of map presence that matters in 1v1s is basically nonexistent in team matches outside of a couple maps with really well-designed flanks so largely you're just doing ww1 style static warfare.
>Early capper to get ahead on map control and can shoot.
Dingo can’t cap.
>Early capper to get ahead on map control
what? the british dingo cant cap at all and exists to harass capping units because they have to leave the cap circle to get it to frick off
america can get vet 1 jeeps or the m29 weasel to cap but the british cant
My bad I must've had the dingo mixed up with one of the other early vehicles
Is it just me or is infantry balance fricking terrible?
The overpowered DAK flamers are one example, but just in general it feels like every faction has a handful of overpriced elites that just suck or don't really do anything special to justify their cost or tier position.
Why would I ever breach when I can just throw a single grenade into a building and instantkill the entire squad even if they evacuate? Why would I ever recruit 'assault' units with smgs when I can just upgrade mainline infantry with lmgs that do more damage at longer range?
It feels like every faction has maybe 1 or 2 infantry options that are just so much better than everything else that they're the only ones worth recruiting.
>Why would I ever recruit 'assault' units with smgs when I can just upgrade mainline infantry with lmgs that do more damage at longer range?
If the assault boys close the gap with the mainline squad, the lmg doesn't really matter anymore, especially if you flank and negate their cover.
Honestly feels really feast or famine right now. Like if you lose a squad early to missmicro or input lag you might as well just quit out because there's no coming back from a unit deficit.
It honestly feels like the game's currently defined by just gradually accumulating a big mass of good infantry with a few specialist units (like AT) to counter specific things and if you at any point fall behind in massing your big ball you're just never going to be able to win a fight.
Every game I've lost has been decided by a single fight early or midgame where afterwards the lead just became insurmountable and there was no point in fighting back anymore.
hard disagree I've had and suffered a bunch of comebacks
>feels like the game's currently defined by just gradually accumulating a big mass of good infantry with a few specialist units (like AT) to counter specific things
thought this too but I've come to learn that mines are great at countering this. people blob up so much with special weapons that they'll never have a sapper / demolition engineer squad mixed in and get fricking clapped because of it.
i love engineers with flamers but yeah i dont think ive ever had them get minesweepers or anything
Completely disagree, had a few chaotic 1v1s that were constantly shifting between myself and the other player losing units in engagements. At various points I had barely anything left but stopped his infantry blob with simple shit like MGs or a wirblewind until I could recover
After playing with it for about a day I can safely say there's no redeeming the "Mechanized" battlegroup for Wehrmacht. They seem bad on paper, and are bad in practice
Why they suck:
Their battlegroup offers nothing earlygame, and Wehr has a weak earlygame without battlegroup help. Both Luftwaffe and Breakthrough have good earlygame stuff to bolster them, but Mechanized literally has nothing.
>midgame
This is Mechanized's only redeeming factor. They have two competing call-in options that cost a total of 4 or 5 CP. Both are good but come out too slowly.
>lategame
Panthers are just terrible, and that's literally all they offer. You pick mechanized for Panthers. Panthers suck. Don't play Mechanized.
been playing for 20 hours or so, mostly allies
cover and high ground seem incredibly important now, like it doesn't really seem worth it to try to push with a numbers advantage and take any kind of ground against an enemy with green cover. manpower is such a scarce resource that you really have to conserve your men. i've had best success putting my units into green cover and high ground and trying to bait my opponent into engaging them like it's xcom or some shit. and if i can't do that, then i usually lose the game. sometimes i can back cap and force my opponent to move, but then he's typically going to amass more and more units while mine get torn up by the musical chairs shit.
with this in mind, wermacht seems outrageously good since they can deploy their shithead pioneers at the victory points at the start and start the clock on you, and now you have to push into their defensive bulwark of choosing with starting units that usually can't deal with it at all, so you lose a shit ton of manpower just to stabilize the game, which usually puts you in a death spiral. plus there's the moped back capping everything for free and further fricking your economy
Paratrooper openers on Werhmacht are indeed really strong, but the US has access to basically the same abilities with its own paratrooper tree. But cover on its own isn't the be all and end all; mortars just shit on infantry hanging out in cover, and several weapon upgrades like lmgs and AT rifles will actively destroy cover as they fire. Plus you can always lay down smoke to advance. Smoke is really fricking strong, a unit in smoke is basically unable to fight at all so you can either smoke the path forward and jump out at close range to nade something, or smoke a piece of cover to completely remove it as a position. Smoke + assault units makes it very difficult to hold ground.
I do agree that manpower seems excessively scarce. It often feels like falling behind in bodies is just a death sentence because you can't field enough to match your opponent anywhere on the map unless they frick up.
US airborne doesnt quite compare since they don't paradrop their units onto victory points at the start of the game like luftwaffe does.
also many of the options for dealing with units in green cover just flat-out aren't available at the start of the game, or they're so expensive that they instantly put you even more behind. US at least gets smokes at the start which make the engagement less one-sided but it's not like it puts you ahead or anything. if luftwaffe drops their units on a victory point, i usually just let them have it and go somewhere else and accept that he's just going to hold it for the next 3-5 minutes and put me 50-100 points down in score
is there ever going to be a coh game where axis doesnt win team games by rolling their faces on the keyboard
I honesty think Allies are favoured right now in quick queue. DAK are great at being mobile and arriving in force wherever they go and they have that OP flamer unit early, but in mid-late game pitched battle they just don't bring that much weight or firepower.
Allies have the best infantry barring the one OP DAK unit. Allies have the best armour. Allies have the best artillery. All the axis really have in team modes are the Werh stealing VPs with paratroopers early. Their main strengths, like resource boosting with trucks to rush early armour, relies on team coordination you won't have in random matches. Whereas all the allies have to do to win is build their superior units and keep calling in air/artillery barrages until the other side is forced off the point.
I dunno, Wehrmacht doesn’t feel like a faceroll faction now that grenadiers are pure ass. It’s actually pretty hard to win early game with them.
DAK seems much stronger, but it remains tomsee where they will end up after the surely-incoming flamer nerfs etc.
I really think the big changes that need to be made are
>Buff grens slightly. I know they want them to be Conscripts but even Conscripts could beat other faction's engineers.
>Reduce fuel costs for US BARs. They're so overcosted right now that no one uses rifle squads.
>Nerf spaghetti marines, though this can be done by reducing the power of flamethrowers overall
>nerf British AT rifles. They shut down light vehicle play too hard
I thought no one used bars because it's better to go special weapons because that gives access to an mg/half-track
And because out of the box riflemen suck shit
Yeah grenadiers definitely need SOME buff. They legitimately lose to unupgraded engineers despite being a larger squad and that's absolutely fricking silly. They're just fine once you get Assault kits but any other doctrine just has to replace them entirely.
Nobody uses rifles because you can just rush pathfinders into paratroopers. It's not a rifleman problem, it's a problem with Pathfinders making US earlygame too stable without any investment, and 1CP paratroopers being arguably the best infantry in the game so there's no reason to waste any resources on the intermediary. US Airborne needs some targeted changes to make the rest of their doctrines appealing--then maybe apply some buffs.
You're right that Goose probably need nerfs less than flamers just generally need nerfs. 2 shots of a flamer is nearly as much damage as a grenade but with the range of a rifle. I'd honestly just murder the flamer range because it shoots from way too far right now. Goose are allowed to be good when you have to cycle multiple munitions abilities and micro to get them close enough to burn things.
British AT rifles suffer from the same issue as Paratrooper bazookas and Jaeger Panzershrek in that they're an AT upgrade on an anti-infantry squad that doesn't impact its anti-infantry power at all. They all need a big hit to their accuracy vs infantry so they function as actual tradeoffs. The fact that britain gets a ranged AT upgrade on its basic infantry means it's always going to be good at shutting down light vehicle play and that's fine, there should just be a tradeoff to teching AT on infantry squads that have 2-3 different mutually exclusive upgrades.
I'd also push for the Indian battlegroup t1 mortar to get nerfed. Right now that thing can wipe an entire fricking squad with a lucky barrage hit and considering it comes with a free truck (despite not requiring towing) gives you way too much value as it is.
Range on flamer is fine
I would just bias more damage to the lingering fire, increase interval between attacks, and reduce direct damage
That way you don't punish people who actively move to not stand in the fire
I should also say, and so you don't punish the flamethrower for actually being good for once
The only reason it probably seems so strong is because everything feels so weak out of the box
That said (someone correct me on this) I feel like the strongest core infantry right now are
>Brits because in cover they do REALLY consistent damage vs other units in cover
>DAK Engis because even though they're Engis they don't have potato aim and they get the nade gun
>DAK because they have balanced performance and are the closest to a COH2 a-move squad
>Fallschirm pioneers because same high performance accuracy as DAK pioneers
>Pathfinders because many reasons
>Assault Engis because big, tanky, cp0 replacement that opens up tech options, and synergizes with scout smoke and and tech specs to make them cheaper and even beefier xd4rp
Engis because big, tanky, cp0 replacement that opens up tech options, and synergizes with scout smoke and and tech specs to make them cheaper and even beefier xd4rp
yeah i use assault engies a lot, a 5-man squad for 200 mp is a steal, and you can put a flamethrower on them too. probably one of the few units that comes out manpower-positive when assaulting enemies in green cover. they can also build shit and repair armor so they're always useful to have around
>And then there's a munitions cost and hp upgrade you can access, if you don't mind sacrificing 76's for ez8s
Pretty nutty if you ask me
I had a 1v1 game where a DAK guy went 2 pios and a 250 into ass grens it was pretty damn effective at pushing my riflemen around
it backfired when I got 2 greyhounds though and an M16 would have also punished him earlier
Falls pioneers are great but they need their grenade launcher upgrade to actually stand up to mainline infantry on equal footing and it's like 85 fricking munitions. Plus they don't get regular nades or vehicle snares (in fact, the terrible grens are the only unit in their roster with snares)
Cast times are partially an input lag issue (there's like 200ms of input delay even offline) and partly an issue of jank. I don't think a lot of abilities are supposed to have an awkwardly long time after issuing the order where your squad/unit just kinda stands there.
I dojt feel an input delay
But watching a vehicle go through the motions to initiate a cast animation disgusts me everytime
Units have never been more responsive otherwise, at least in the franchise
>Range on flamer is fine
Flamers will literally fire at the max range of rue squad's longest-range weapon. If you have a rifle squad with flamers, it will fire at the max range of the rifle.
The range of flamers is absolutely not fine.
Bug if true and imo a moronic oversight, but that sounds more like a bug since I've seen plenty of stationary Engis not shoot their flamer in smg openfire range
>flamer is fine
the weapon is complete bullshit firing through hedgerows and over cliffs
just imagine how unfair it would be if a faction didnt have access to one
Which faction doesn't have access to flamethrowers?
Players are finding tech skips make the piv come out the quickest though
Unless you're the UK a lot of American players are getting caught off guard by pivs
That said wehr tech skips shouldn't be a thing
>tech skips
How exactly?
>Build first building that gives mg42s
>Rely on bunkers or teammates and just save fuel until you can drop the panzer building because unlike other factions wehr doesn't need to buy tier ii for some reason
I should say, rely bunkers and teammates for medical utility shit
It's how Luftwaffe has been playing, relying on pioneers and stuff
They do need t2, though. The panzer building requires either the luft building or the pgren building, which require the t1 building with all your bad units.
You just have a choice between 2 different t2 buildings.
I can understand rushing panzers because the luft build is really lean on gas, but you absolutely do still need to pay for the tech buildings and you're ultimately not getting your tank out any faster than other players are getting their main AT going. You can pull off a tank rush as any faction, werh just have the benefit of medical bunkers for gas-free healing and jaegers being godly AT
Helping hans was scratching his head in 2v2 because he had a panzeriv by the time his enemy had access to their first AT gun
And this was in multiple games just to see how far he could take it
He didn't lose once and multiple times they were asking him how he had 3 panzer ivs by the time they were rolling out greyhounds
His argument was that "pivs are way too affordable"
I mean, as you can plainly see, pivs literally cost as much gas as any equivalent t3 tank, and werh spend just as much gas on tech to get them as anyone else. Actually it might be a little less technically, because allies need to buy their upgrade structure before t3. But we're talking a difference of 50 gas, not "he had panzers before I had t2"
I can see how having good gasless units can let you save gas to tech rush, but that's not exclusively to anyone.
Trucks make sense, but are mutually exclusive with Luft so it would have to be an ally that's trucking for him.
Tank rush meme builds have always been a thing but unless it's abusing a bug I'm just going to chalk it up to dunking on randos for content.
I just know timing wise the US specialization center shouldn't have a build time
It's so stupid
Maybe it was one of those kettenkrad/supply truck builds, I don't remember the details but pivs had a weird issue of being spammable, and definitely not the DAK onesxrst4
I don't know why they gave the at rifle/zooka splash damage
Because they sure as frick don't need it
if i see the enemy build grens i know ive already probably won
its the musical chairs shit with luftwaffe units that fricks me
Yeah, Luftwaffe probably needs some nerfs to reduce their early game shenanigans potential, but on the other hand Wehr base units need a pretty throughout re-assessment. I get that Grenadiers aren’t supposed to be that good here, but now it’s silly how hard they suck.
british tanks are just lame. theyre not even bad, just kinda lame. i really wish the churchill wasnt doctrinal, its such a kino tank
>british tanks are just lame. theyre not even bad, just kinda lame. i really wish the churchill wasnt doctrinal, its such a kino tank
The Grant is pretty unique and I love the Matilda VA.
i really hope they revert the manpower changes from coh2 and just make it flood you with manpower when your army wipes
>losing a close 3v3
>finally get a Tiger out
>carry the comeback push with perfect tank micro
Feels fricking good.
Im still in shock this game doesn't have a fricking surrender option for multi. The fact you have to quit to main menu is a joke. This really is a beta.
Yeah it's egregious. No game ever reaches endgame without dropping players, and I know I've quit several times when it would just be pointless to continue
You can't even tell who is who on your team. It's so fricking annoying along with the dogshit UI.
>US and German tank-killers have almost the same cost
>the US tank killer has almost twice the hp with no tradeoffs
Why is this thing so fricking tanky? It has the health of a panzer with a tank-killer gun.
Wait how do DAK recruit Tigers? I don't see it anywhere in their battlegroup lists but I've seen them with it
press this upgrade button then you can call it in from the left hand call in menu
>75mm upgrade will cause the War Machine manpower discount to be applied twice
You know what to do boys!
Time to drown Axis in tears before they fix it
>76mm sherman cheaper than an m13/40
lol und lmao, time to abuse
Plus the 76 is busted, who knew putting a better AT gun on would also annihilate infantry
It seems ubiquitously that anti-tank specialisations are too good vs infantry, whether its AT rifles, bazookas or cannon upgrades.
tbh i always thought it was stupid as frick that anti-tank guns couldn't fire HE at infantry in CoH2, even though historically that was what they were used for like 80% of the time
Let's just ignore how disastrous for gameplay in a strat game it is to have every unit be good against everything
They want there to be a meaningful decision between anti-vehicle or anti-infantry specialization when it comes to upgrades. Otherwise you'd just spam AT troops and they'd be good against everything--which is kind of an issue right now but it's obviously a balance problem and not intended.
to be fair the 76 upgrade is supposed to be an upgrade and not a conversion to an AT role.
It's just gamey balance, you know like how the stugs have no AoE and the short barreled tanks have no AT shell
I think it's fine balance-wise but it's nice when AT weapons have anti-infantry abilities like HE barrages
Stugs seem like complete shit right now so an HE shell ability like what the Tiger gets might be a good addition.
They have an HE shell ability already
It just shortens their range to less than that of a grenade and for some reason you need to target a squad with it and I'm pretty sure it's interrupted if you give a move command lol
I wouldn't say stugs are shit btw, the pintle upgrade makes them okay at range and they do have enough armor where they'll sometimes bounce medium tank shots
Meanwhile marders lose to medium tanks and sometimes even greyhounds because they have no armor or health so if they can't maintain max range they're always at a disadvantage.
And the semovente has no armor, no pintle, struggles to pen shermans and the HE barrage will barely.
It's not worth it at all unless you know the enemy got vehicles worth worrying about but it's one of the most well rounded TD you can buy before you unlock medium tanks for both wehrs
Would still go for a wirberlwind or an 8rad unless there's already a chaffee or a stuart on the ground
I feel like vehicles are a step back from coh2 and even 1
>Cast times are fricking forever for artillery units, splash too fricking small
Look at the whizbang, what the frick
>Precision splash of almost all HR barrages in the game is slow as shit, both for traverse time and projectile travel
And don't get me started on how slow and awkward attaching a gun to a truck is
>Needs a specific anchor point, but most terrain is absolutely cancerous for vehicle pathing
These little things make mid-late so potentially antifun for jank alone, not even balance issues
In case you're wondering, there are actually mixed race squads in the game, unless this is a replay bug
I don't give half a shit but some people were saying that there weren't any
Yeah, British and American blacks were not allowed to serve to in mixed racial units. There were however special units made up of various minorities you will find throughout WW2. Military theory was that race mixing of a military unit would reduce cohesion. They questioned African American's ability to fight sophisticatedly. If you think about it, whites have a history of warfare. African Americans are descendants of a conquered and uncivilized people. Also blacks would serve non-combat rules. General Patton's orderly was black.
I wouldn't even object to a future US battlegroup representing black soldiers, but this mixed race meme is shit.
I'd be okay with riflemen/vehicle crews randomly spawning as all blacks
But honestly what they should do is use the skin system to get brownie points for representation without needing to add and balance new units.
Kinda like Day of Infamy skins
Just don't use cover bro the flamer does nothing against squads in the open
This is unfortunately very untrue. Flamers will still hit multiple squad members even in the open because they don't naturally spread out the way they should and their dps against a single target is still better than the majority of normal weapons. Plus when you're in the open, the rest of the squad now now deals full damage while benefiting from cover. With the Guastatori it's 4 smgs +2 flamers and 4 smgs will melt a squad out of cover at close-mid range even without the flamers.
Flamers have no weakness, they're just really fricking good. The sole downside to them is that most factions only get them on fragile engineer squads, but DAK get them on tanky elite infantry that are immune to suppression and get cover bonuses while charging out of smoke.
>because they don't naturally spread out
drag clicking works for that
but the guastatori could probably use a nerf yeah
>Let's nerf a strong unit that costs like 400 mp
Or they could address the problem of American rifle squads sucking shit, and give English something in return for the imminent "boys rifles being super accurate with splash damage" nerf
Gustatori are insanely expensive at like 40 manpower per model. Just use two squads to fight them. Git fricking gud
They'll win 2/1 against virtually everything but similarly-costed elites. tech/progression wise they're equivalent to US paratroopers or falls jaeger but they're absolutely ascendant in infantry vs infantry combat. They only begin to fall off in the very lategame because they lack the AT that competing elites have so you can't mass them the way that every US player is currently massing paratroopers.
You are not getting it, morono. Your units are cheap as frick compared to them. Any "win" they might have in that 2v1 situation is actually a manpower loss for them.
I'm getting it, anon. It's basic math. Goose do not cost twice as much, to recruit or per model, as basic infantry. They are never trading down in manpower in an infantry fight unless you frick up.
Their "weakness' if they can be said to have one, is that they are a lot of early manpower invested in a unit that can't do anything to light vehicles, but that requires that you're able to actually get a light vehicle out without getting rolled everywhere you fight by them.
nta but it's fairly trivial to get an m16 halftrack before 2 CPs
I was curious to see how the numbers on armor stacked up this time around so I went digging around for some data. I'm only comparing the large vehicles because I just want to get a feel for how they shape up and which sides are able to win a 'tank war' lategame, ie who you should build tanks against and who you shouldn't. Comparing cost (man/fuel), population, hp, armour and main armament but I have no way of knowing if every 75mm gun is equivalent or if there are hidden stats for damage/rof on a case-by-case basis.
Axis will be all together since they have a lot of overlap:
Panzer III: 340m/80f 12p 620hp (720w/ upg) f130-s90-r60 50mm gun
Panzer IV: 430m/90f 12p 720hp (880w/ upg) f170-s105(136.6 w/ skirt)-r70 75mm gun
Panther: 550m/100f 16p 900hp f330-s140-r80 75mm long gun (extra range)
Tiger: 800m/180f 16p? 1200hp (1360w/ upg) f300-s210-r80 88mm gun
Marder: 280m/25f 7p 360hp f50-s25-r10 75mm long gun (extra range)
StuG: 360m/50f 10p 600hp f210-s110(143 w/ skirt)-r90 75mm fixed gun
Sturmpanzer: 420m/120f 14p 960hp f300-s150(195 w/ skirt)-75 150mm artillery
US:
Sherman: 360m/90f 12p 720hp f195-s110-r80 75mm gun
Upgraded Sherman: 202m/90f 9p(bugged) ""hp f234-s132-r96 76mm gun
Hellcat: 320m/70f 10p 600hp f`100-s75-r50 76mm
Upgraded Hellcat: 240m/70f 8p ""hp f120-s90-r60 "" gun
Chaffee: 320m/50f 7p 480hp, f50-s37.5-r25 75mm
Upgraded Chaffee: 240m/50f 5p ""hp f60-s45-r35 ""gun
British:
Matilda: 360m/90f 14p 700hp f160-s150-r100 2lb gun (50mm equiv?)
Crusader: 300m/60f 10p 600hp f100-s75-r50 2lb gun (6lb--75mm equiv--w/ upg)
Grant: 360m/90f 12p 720hp f170-s105-r60 75mm fixed gun + 37mm turret
Churchill: 460m/120f 18p 1200hp r300-s225-r150 6lb gun
Takeaways:
Just judging from this, the Panzer IV kind of sucks and has an abnormally high pricetag for what it's bringing.
The Tiger and Churchill are very close to equivalent, but the Tiger is around 50% more expensive. I assume that's to price around its main gun being bigger.
Panthers are essentially big AT guns and should be kept back, out of tank brawls.
The Marder offers basically no additional survivability or mobility over an AT gun despite costing tech and fuel. Terrible.
The StuG is surprisingly good for a t2.5 tank and is probably preferable to the P4 for your mainline vehicle work.
Sturmpanzer can't really fight other vehicles but it's as durable as a panther and wipes infantry squads in a single shot. This is the payoff for having vehicle supremacy as Axis and you should absolutely be building it if you have an advantage in armour or your opponent went for infantry-focused builds.
The Sherman is bugged but even without the bug it's kind of nuts. It moves like a medium tank but upgrades put it on equal footing with the Matilda while carrying a tank-killer gun. I don't think anyone can beat the US in a lategame tank war so you should probably just not bother against them. The bug makes them cheaper than hellcats, which is nuts.
Hellcat is great. Pre-upgrade its expensive for its durability but post-upgrade it's so cheap it might as well be expendable.
Chaffee's are surprisingly well-armed for their mobility and tier position
Matildas are undergunned and shouldn't really fight other tanks. It's probably a waste buying them unless you rushed t3 early and your opponent won't be able to field equivalent armour
Crusaders are unique in that they upgrade into high-mobility AT guns. They're being slept on but should definitely see more play. A rear shot from its 6lber is like a 3rd of a sherman's health and then it can ride off into the fow before the turret turns to face it.
There is more to a tank in a coh game than the armor stats.
Panzer 4 is amazing, the gun has incredible AI (thats anti-infantry) and of course very good anti-armor performance, they can easily duel and win against 76 shermans. It's expensive but werh get way more fuel from kettenkrad and can get them out at the 8 frickin minute mark
Tiger can 1 v 2 churchills easily, I've done it, the churchills bounce almost every shot
StuG has dogshit pen on its gun, I did tests in cheatmod and it gets absolutely trashed by allied mainlines
Yes I know you posted this 18 hours ago
We can't know concrete specifics on guns until they're datamined. I would believe that not all 75mm guns are created equal but I would actually need proof of their differences.
What we do know is that penetration is a random effect based on the attacker's armament and the target's armour. Just because most things bounce off a Tiger's frontal armour doesn't imply that a specific gun has below-average penetration. The results of any specific matchup test can just come down to dicerolls, which is why we'd either need dozens (or hundreds) of identical tests to normalize it, or need to actually have datamined stats on mainguns so we can determine how the interaction is playing out. I've definitely had fights where a Tiger bounces 3 consecutive shots against a Sherman and needs to be bailed out of a 1v1 against a tank 1/3 its cost, but that's just bad rng.
>losing earlygame
>pick up a group of StuGs into Panthers and rotate with my team to take territory
>come back and win
>two Panthers end up with a dozen vehicle kills between them by the end of the game
These things are fricking cool. Also this stuff was really helpful. I stayed in the fog of war and let my ally's infantry screen for me and picked off the hellcats first. Since the Shermans had less range I could just back away and they'd be stuck firing into my stronger frontal armour while overextending or be forced to just give ground.
So as someone who doesn't play COH multiplayer at all is it worth buying to try and learn? Or it's not good?
I just don't know
Why do you want to learn it? Technically the infantry is the least janky it's ever been
Vehicle movement have never been jankier, but at least their accuracy isn't unreliable RNG
I dunno just this game seems much easier than starcraft or anything else similar.
>worth
bro all videogames are worthless
If you're asking if it's fun then who known
I'm enjoying playing 1v1s a lot
you might not like it but it really depends on you dude
I'd say if you're not sure just wait for a sale, the game is fun but a little rough around the edges anyway
I just want to say that as Luft I've started dropping further nack, away from the victory point. I've been pushed off the vp by early aggression before stabilising several times.
I feel like as people play faster they'll realize they can be there to challenge wehr before they're actually dug in, and they can't win that early fight because their patatroopers are weaker than line infantry and more expensive. Instead you just have to avoid commited early fights and just raid until you can afford grenade launchers.
I assume you're talking about team games?
I mean, it applies in 1v1s as well. I find them on the weaker end just because no single earlygame unit can one-for-one fight and win against anything else. Falls pioneers can beat regular engineers but struggle against Pathfinders and lose outright to any sort of mainline infantry until they get their 85 munitions weapon upgrade, at which point they can fight even only with micro. There's no point in trying to para drop aggressively and no real benefit to getting somewhere first, because if your opponent wants to fight you for it you have to give it to them.
When you play Wehr 1v1 you're basically fighting a retreating battle everywhere earlygame because you just don't have the weight or unit strength to commit to early fights fights. You're stalling losing battles and back-capping until you have 2CP for Falls Jaegers, then you're desperately stabilizing with the one unit that can now win infantry fights.
I just see so many folks complaining that "omg wehr beat me to the victory point with a group of engineers how do I win???" and it just seems so silly to me.
>but struggle against Pathfinders
No they don't, they beat pathfinders convincingly at close range
I grew up on wehrmacht representation in gaming. Ive seen 2 decades of developers and players argues over the balance of axis and allied equipment in multiplayer games. These days many history buffs will point to all these modern historians talking about tanks. The more you learn about German equipment the more you learn there are many problems. I think that I've come to the belief that German technological superiority is is in part myth, but the truth in German superiority isn't in their equipment. You learn that basically everything lacked a real technological advantage. They truthfully fought at a disadvantage half the time. They made fricking great tanks that could hold off columns of enemy armor, but the Allies developed ways to counter this. Soviet armor had far better aerodynamics to deflect shots. From inferior industry and economy to numerical inferiority, the Germans were underdogs every step of the way. When I first played CoH2 I was honestly shocked at how good the panzers 4 was against some of the allied tanks. I mean, the whole idea of the game is so gamey that you can never replicate an accurate scenario of the war in my opinion. I do know that all developers of WW2 games always hold anti-german sentiment and always have to find ways to change history for balance and get people to actually play the boring allies.
rambling, self-hating, schizo wehraboo post.
>dak player walks a huge fricking blob down a street into my 3 assault engineers with flamers and 2 MGs that are covering each other, plus a scout giving vision with flare
>utterly shitstomps me 100-0 and runs me back to my base
ok
>big blob of probably mixed units supporting each other with abilities
>vs 5 units, 3 of which are just support units
MGs feel a little undertuned right now but you can't seriously be surprised that 5 cheap earlygame units sitting afk lost to what was presumably a high-investment push. You're supposed to like, actually recruit units and do things with them.
it was like 3-4 bersaglieri and 1 flamer godmode unit so not very diverse
>high investment push
not really, and even if it were, i should have been able to at least draw a stalemate since i did the exact counter to his lineup. remember that the US has to actually invest in dogshit like bazooka squads so that it doesn't just instantly lose to 1 clown car
Anon the italian units are an explicit counter to mg nests. They have an ability that gives them suppression immunity and damage reduction as they advance.
ok great what do i build to counter them as US
unupgraded bersaglieri are roughly equal to unupgraded riflemen and they are more expensive, so you don't really need to counter them.
but if you really want to counter them use greyhounds or m16 halftracks because they have no snares
>unupgraded bersaglieri
thanks for the advice
anyway how should i counter wermacht players that drop their pioneers in front of my base MGs repeatedly
A:
>You build a jeep and hunt down the capping kettenkrad
>You group up your infantry and attack a single parapio squad at the time
or if they're massing up
>threaten their own cutoffs and draw them out into engagements where you have cover and they don't
>Decap the fuel points that that the kettenkrad captured so they lose the bonuses
B:
>Rush a sniper and force them off the field
>supplement with doctrinal infantry or engineers with flamers
>Get the second sniper or an m16 halftrack
>Have an AT gun or 2 bazooka squads ready for the inevitable wirbelwind
Chaffee is also an option but it sucks against infantry and everyone goes jagers with shrecks so it's not gonna last long
Greyhounds can't reliably pen the wirbelwind so unless he went for an 8rad I wouldn't bother.
after this hold onto the fuel for deal life and rush a sherman or twelve, if possible give them the 76mm upgrade which also makes them cheaper
All of the italian units are expensive and have no anti-vehicle utility whatsoever, so the answer is you just don't play infantry grabass with the best anti-infantry units in the game and instead just punish them with a light vehicle, which can come out not long after they'd be able to get their first flamer squad anyways.
>blobbing basic infantry is good chud! Using counter-units isn't supposed to work!
yikes
How the frick do I counter a British player that has has engineers with flamethrowers and a frickton infantry sections with boys AT rifles, it melts everything I have
An MG to suppress them, AoE like the nibel rocket launcher to punish them for blobbing or displace them, or your own more specialized anti-infantry units like Jaegers and so on.
Lots of vehicles also outrange the AT rifles so you can just kite and potshot them while dishing out casualties. If you refer to the list further up in the thread, any vehicle with over 100 armour will basically take tickle damage from Boys, so things like Wirblewinds or DAK StuGs will slaughter them from a safe distance and take basically no damage doing it. Just watch that they don't have AT guns hiding in the FoW behind their infantry because those definitely will threaten your vehicles.
All engineers can get flamers but they're fragile support units and the flamers are close-range weapons so they'll have to approach through open ground to use it. Focus them and they melt. Infantry sections are GOOD right now, but they're still just generalist infantry. They lose outright to most dedicated anti-infantry squads, so things like Fallschirmjaeger, Jaegers, Stormtruppen etc. What sections are really good at is shutting down light vehicles like 8rads, and they do that with basically no tradeoff for their effectiveness against generic infantry. But that said, massing them is putting a lot of resources into something that at best can just kind of stalemate evenly-tiered infantry battles and that's only really useful if they've got something backline line a mortar to actually do the killing while their sections stall.
heres an alternate view
imo there's no real counter to a well-executed infantry section spam. the "counter" to them is to not to be losing to them in the first place and build up your own force of riflemen, and using them to capture the map and placing them in nice little green cover high ground spots where they can get hopefully put your opponent on a manpower deficit and slowly bring the game around. if you do get an MG, don't expect it to do much unless you've already stabilized the game, because MGs suck at killing shit in this game and are even worse at playing musical chairs, and they tend to be manpower drains on you due to how easily they are decrewed.
here's another hot take: all of the above is just to stop you from losing, not making you actually win. instead of playing fair and countering your opponent's lineup, imo the real name of the game is abusing your faction's overpowered thing better than your opponent is abusing his. if you are getting shit on by infantry section spam, the answer isn't necessarily to switch up your strategy to try to counter them, but rather just abuse your own thing harder. that's why i win most of my games spamming assault engineers and rushing for t4, because my flamer engineers are just cheap and good enough to prevent me from losing, and sherman upgrade is bugged so i can get them for 202 manpower. sure i'll buy an MG and a bazooka squad every now and then, but not because i want to, but rather because my faction's economy is so fricked that i have manpower coming out of my ass and it's not worth spending 60 fricking fuel just to have basic infantry that still loses toe-to-toe with random call-in infantry that the germs pull out of their asses. so instead i'll just place 3 MGs in 3 different houses and watch them just barely stalemate against some pasta shitter. occasionally my opponent's overpowered thing happens to be the best counter to my strategy, in which case i quit out of the match and queue up another
wirbelwind
Elite infantry
dude people give up way too early, gonna enjoy ranked so people don't feel like they coinflip against skill levels.
Also got a pretty buttmad boy after he sent me a 4.2 mortar right AS i was getting my shit pushed in by 3x jagershreck teams+ a panther
As if its my fault for him sending them to the very north of the map in deeply contested territory.
I really dig airborne though, feel munition starved sometimes and not sure if I should be sending it on paratroopers going with infantry upgrades, or just using PF's and paras to reach lategame with upgraded shermans.
Lategame definitely feels like it's where the US shines. I don't think Axis really has anything that can match them. The few times I've won team games late as the Axis side it's just by having 3 people spam off-map AoEs on the allies tankball.
I've noticed that reinforcing elite squads like paratroopers is a huge resource drain and while para spamming seems popular I think it's a noob trap to have more than 1 or 2 squads of them because of the reinforcing cost.
It's good to have cheap, durable chaff infantry like Riflemen or pathfinders to soak damage so you aren't spending all of your manpower replacing expensive elites. I think the gameplan is to stay lean and make things happen with a small number of squads while you rush upgraded Shermans.
NTA but I agree. This is the strongest USF has ever been late game (and conversely probably the weakest they've ever been early game).
I don't think their earlygame is honestly all that bad.
Pathfinders are fantastic. Like individually they aren't as strong as a mainline squad but they're cheap and mobile and strong enough that two of them will absolutely displace any 1 equivalent. Then past the earlygame they access a tonne of useful abilities and become support units.
At 1CP you get paratroopers, which are arguably just behind Guastatori as far as godlike earlygame infantry go. I honestly don't think the US are really lacking in anything except maybe midgame vehicle options. They're just slower to tech up than most factions because they have to buy an extra building.
What's nice about the british is that they have a strong non-doctrinal core and a lot of worthwhile options spread through their doctrines so your choices are really open and your fundamental build order doesn't change much between them. Most other factions have to hard-commit to a specific doctrine from the start of the game and tailor their entire build around it, and in some cases have a 'must pick' doctrine.
Sounds cool, I'll definitely try to play for late in my next couple of matches, and I agree pathfinders are so damn good.
I've also want to check out armor battlegroup and see how ass engis fare, since flamethrowers seem to be the hot topic around here
>flamers
>hot topic
Heheh wp anon
I don't fricking know how they did it but 1v1s consistently feel blisteringly close. Just had one as DAK against Brits and we were just absolutely fricking gutting each other's forces the whole game, I lost two medical trucks, multiple at and field guns and had squads wiped and barely won, somehow took out a matilda and two of the lights (not crusaders?) Using Gusto satchels and an at gun. I think the game came down to me having more mobility with 250s, so I could back cap wherever he had the least units
I've had opponents who are way too passive even if hey drive me off the field tactically, he just doesn't push forward and lets me retain my map control. This is common brehz. And they love to Duke it out in 1 spot but I just go around the sides and attack in different places.
Even though the British are pretty basic I've really enjoyed playing them so far. After you get your sections out it feels like you can kinda do whatever you want.
>opponent tries to use "OP Sherman spam"
>use Guastatori because it means he will mostly use infantry before that
>make Marders and place Tellers
>bait him with a single Marder into mines
>recover his Sherman
>ragequits after I have more Shermans than him
The Panzer Elite memories are coming back
How easy/ reliable is it to recover vehicles this time? I remember it being really hard to find a wreck that could be salvaged and having time to do it in CoH1.
generally you insta lose the match if you buy a recovery vehicle because they made it cost like 45 fuel lol
Recovery vehicles are dogshit overpriced so nobody salvages, ever.
Any dead vehicle leaves a recoverable wreck, but vehicles destroy wrecks by touching them. Generally you'll never salvage anything 1v1 and in team games, the whole process is too slow and expensive to be worthwhile.
I kinda hate that ANY vehicle even tapping them, completely destroys the wreckage. Like my quarter-ton or even a half-track isn't gonna instantly disintegrate a Panther's carcass.
And honestly nothing really should be able to remove the debris of heavier tanks without having a bulldozer but I don't wanna "muh realism" post.
I want to see what the game would be like if recovering vehicles was fast AND cheap. Like I'm sure it would cause problems, but I just want to see what the game looks like with that possibility. If they were good, good enough to be a genuine problem, we could start talking about the meta gameplay of destroying wrecks. But right now the whole mechanic is just nonexistent outside of that one singleplayer mission.
Maybe they should let recovery vehicles build fortifications like engineers so they have some value outside of just reviving dead tanks or something.
Here's a great replay demonstrating how the Panzer rush is a meme
Basically: PoV, playing america, applies relatively little pressure early because they don't really know what wehr units do but still punishes them for trying to tech rush and controls 2/3 of the map's resources throughout the game
Panzer rolls out into an already prepared AT gun and basically can't accomplish anything
By the time he has a second panzer, the US has a sherman. A single sherman keeps both Panzers at bay because they can't favourably 2v1 the blatantly overtuned tank. When the 3rd panzer comes out, he tries a split push and the Sherman trivially crushes one Panzer while taking almost no damage then joins the AT gun against the other 2 and forces them back.
He even blunders a battle later, accidentally diving a sherman 1v3 and losing it and still manages to force a 1:1 trade.
The only thing that keeps the german player in the game to the end is the luftwaffe overwatch. Game is well played by both sides, obviously competent players still feeling out CoH3 changes and making some understandable mistakes along the way.
So yeah. I don't think the panzer rush is a good strategy against competent players. You're undermanned earlygame, have no real answers to light vehicles (the main mistake the US made was not applying enough pressure with their Greyhound because they didn't know what Wehr units provide AT) and the rush itself doesn't really have that much impact when it just means you're going to be putting a tank onto a field with readied AT the tank can't push through and then lose lategame anyways. Maybe it's more effective against the british since they don't have a sherman-tier tank hunter to tech into.
>Panzer rolls out into an already prepared AT gun
at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew
>blatantly overtuned tank
a 76mm sherman is better than the panzer 4
if the wehrmacht player went luftwaffe and wasnt able to keep up pressure they deserve to lose
panthers shut out shermans but this is the first CoH game to not include them in the default army
>undermanned earlygame, have no real answers to light vehicles
theres a wirblewind call in that comes with AT infantry that can buy plenty of time for tank spam to come out onto the field
>more effective against the british
british AT rifle spam and upgunned crusaders are better than american AT infantry and their superior tanks
the sherman is very vulnerable to AT infantry and the british infantry is good against everything
>at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew
Please come back to our universe, anon. You're in the wrong timeline. A well-positioned AT gun will beat a panzer 1v1 and an AT gun supported by infantry with snares is essentially unassailable without multiple tanks to flank it.
The sherman is the overtuned tank I was referring to. The point is that the sherman is so overpowered that trying to go for vehicles against it is just pointless. You don't get your panzer out early enough to garner any kind of decisive advantage before they have the better tank and you just can't win
>wasn't able to keep up pressure
It's hard to apply pressure when you're spending all your resources rushing tech, anon. That's the point. You sacrifice your earlygame pressure to rush panzers, which gets you punished because you have no earlygame pressure.
I agree Panthers being exclusive to a commander choice is terrible, especially because that commander is by far the worst at literally everything else. You sacrifice all of your good callins, offmaps and passives for one of the only good german vehicles, which also essentially forces you to pick between Panthers and a Tiger despite them both coming out at the same timing due to their CP cost.
>Wirblewind callin
Why would you spend 60 gas on a callin when you're saving gas to rush tech for panzers? Doing that callin would delay your tanks so long that you'd end up just getting them out at the same timing as the other player gets theirs.
>which also essentially forces you to pick between Panthers and a Tiger despite
that battlegroup doesn't have the tiger? and the wehr can't get it non-doctrinally
>Why would you spend 60 gas on a callin when you're saving gas to rush tech for panzers?
true and also the manpower discount that's an exclusive choice alongside it is way better
The only core armor for Wehr are StuGs (75mm), Wirbels, Panzers, Brummbars and halftracks.
Panthers, 8rads and howitzer StuGs are exclusive to the Mechanized Battlegroup (which is also the worst one by far. At minimum, unlocking Panthers takes 12 CP but since that path takes 4CP to unlock an 8rad way too late for it to be a good choice, you're better off taking the 13 CP path for the StuG callin.
Breakthrough Battlegroup gets a Tiger as well as resource Trucks and the Grenadier upgrade that actually makes them usable infantry. They also get Blitzkrieg ability along the way. The path to Tiger's takes 13 points total
This means the Luftwaffe Battlegroup gets none of the lategame axis armour and are stuck with PIVs as their only real tank.
It's all a weird divide, both because Panthers take basically as much CP as Tigers to unlock but have considerably worse unlocks along the way, and because DAK have a non-doctrinal Tiger callin (which even after being nerfed from the beta still comes out way earlier than 13cp) but all of Wehr's lategame armour is doctrinal.
right - that makes sense. I've had success with the lufftwaffe p4 rush, but only in teamgames,where i can open with the resource boosted ketten into a panzer by 8 minutes, then alongside your teammates you can absolutely dominate from 8-12 minutes, usually irreparably swinging the game in your favor. I agree that its definitely not good in 1v1 though, way too much risk, way too easy a read, and p4s aren't even good against most tanks.
I wonder if they'll make it with next weeks balance patch that the wehr must have at least the t1 and either the t2 or t3 before the p4 comes out. (or must research a tank unlock at the t4 building), because it does seem very oppressive in team games, even in 2v2
Obviously their base tech structure is meant to parallel the US where they both end with medium tanks and an anti-infantry one
The difference is the US has a better and more expensive TD (compared to the marder) to deal with axis callins
Against brits and DAK the medium tanks essentially counter enemy medium tanks (crusaders, p3) because of better armor and penetration so they still end up being a good choice until callins hit the field
You're saying that as if being "stuck" with a p4 is a bad thing, they're great tanks that I've had a lot of success with in my 1v1s
>at guns are essentially worthless with how easy they are to decrew
nta and I'm not following the conversation but having paired AT guns has always been the go-to counter to tanks (outside of better tanks) in every coh and in every game mode
They're cheap and deal a lot of damage, as long as you don't leave them unsupported they can zone out or kill any single tank
Just be mindful of their positioning so that they either cover each other or there's infantry nearby to spot and snare any flanking tank
I'll say they struggle against brummbars or tigers frontally in coh3 but that's to be expected
Yeah AT guns struggle to pen ~300 armour, so Tigers, Panthers, Churchills and Brummbars all deflect them fairly frequently, while upgraded Shermans are also pretty resistant to them (moreso than the ought to be tbh)
Unfortunately Panthers currently are bugged and will consistently suffer rear hits from projectiles striking their fronts.
>Why would you spend 60 gas on a callin when you're saving gas to rush tech for panzers?
>You don't get your panzer out early enough to garner any kind of decisive advantage before they have the better tank
why would you want to dominate the map with your homosexual fallschirmpioneers and homosexual wirblewind when america can barely get out bazooka squads and an AT halftrack? gee i wonder
>paired AT guns has always been the go-to counter to tanks
at guns are slow and if you push them too far out they are liable to be stolen and used against you
a base pin wont be possible but you've wasted manpower on essentially dead weight
Le Good Game
coh3 has no russian faction?
it's just the us, bongs and germany?
USSR was pulled from the release due to current events. They'll be released as a DLC faction later but made unavailable in eastern europe
excuse me, there's TWO germanies
its pointless to release the soviets since they're mostly played by russians and those people arent going to pay a months salary for the game at this time
i really, really, really hope they release the japanese first instead, there's so much unexplored design space there
Ivan cried too much.
it's set in italy and north africa, a theatre where russia did not participate
I don't understand these morons. The series is clearly always set in a specific theatre, and so will only include forces that fought in that theatre. From the very beginning this has been the case. In an ideal world where coh was as popular as CoD or some other shit maybe they'd have enough money or manpower to build content for all theatres but it's just wishful thinking.
Maybe they'll do it as an expansion.
tbqh i dont see why wermacht would need heavy armor outside doctrinals. i figured wermacht is 1939-1943 france/barbarossa germany which is why they use garbage tanks panzer 3s and shit.
imo it's not the end of the world that there's a german faction in the game that doesn't get to spam heavy armor with giant cannons as their reward for not losing in the first 10 minutes. all the allied factions have been like that for like 3 games. let afrika korps be the big armor faction
DAK are the ones who use P3s, anon. Wehr uses late-war P4s with the upgraded gun.
The Panzer IV, Sherman and Grant are all roughly equivalent t3 medium tanks, so lets compare them.
They all tie for gas cost. Grant requires extra tech, so you can say its gas cost is technically the highest
P4 has the highest manpower cost by a wide margin
P4 and Grant have identical armour stats and identical main guns. Grant has a secondary gun that's heavy enough to penentrate tanks, giving it an edge in firepower.
Sherman has better armour across the board pre-upgrade, and an armour upgrade that makes it even better. Sherman starts with the same main armament as the P4, but upgrades it to an anti-tank armament which is the single best tank gun short of the Tiger's.
Sherman also gets an upgrade that drops its manpower cost to less than a riflemen squad. This is to say nothing of abilities, of which shermans get several.
The P4 is a distant last place as far as t3 medium tanks, with its only advantage being that Luft builds can rush it out a bit ahead of the other factions by literally never building any tech or recruiting any units that cost gas.
It just seems weird for the Panther to be stuck behind 13cp in a bad battlegroup instead of a core unit.
The P4 is overpriced and undertuned.
>DAK are the ones who use P3s, anon. Wehr uses late-war P4s with the upgraded gun.
oops my b i havent played wehr/dak more than a couple of times because of the queue times
>Grant has a secondary gun that's heavy enough to penentrate tanks, giving it an edge in firepower.
I just tested it with the cheat command mod p4 won 7 out of 8 1v1 fights with a grant, realistically it would always win if it can get a shot on target before the grant rotates its hull to use the 75mm, I tested them in a full frontal fight at medium range for fairness.
But also P4 has a pintle upgrade and a turret with the good gun so it's better against infantry and at flanking team weapons.
Against unupgraded shermans it's the same story, 7/8 fights won, although RNG can swing the fight and the 76mm with extra armor has an edge, but you should know in advance if the enemy player has picked mechanized, if he hasn't you have a pretty decent chance to come out on top in a direct fight.
The takeaway is that it's by no mean a "distant last place" and besides that, the role of medium tanks isn't to shit on other medium tanks in unsupported 1v1 fights
With wehr you also have non-doctrinal jagers which when upgraded with schrecks do a good job at both AT and AI, them and the p4s cover each other nicely as both can take care of all threats besides maybe grouped up MGs and AT guns
If the enemy has gone with paratrooper bazookas or SF commandos then you can use your own paratroopers to outgun them.
idk I just don't see your point my dude. Not every tank needs to be a tiger to be good.
I think some of those might be campaign units or cut campaign units
The single logistic officer unit for example would be the perfect target for a "sniper the officer" mission
And the australian squad is in the DAK campaign already
>And the australian squad is in the DAK campaign already
But they also are already FULLY VOICED
Same with Leaf paratroopers
you havent taken the wehraboo variable into account. see: war thunder, where wermacht versions of allied tanks, even with the exact same or even better stats and battle rating, have much worse winrates simply due to being piloted by wehraboos. afaik they've had to buff those german versions of allied tanks because of this
>And the australian squad is in the DAK campaign already
This is true, but they have full voice lines for player control and also a veterancy ability, neither of which are present in the campaign.
>cheat mod lets you spawn in unreleased units for future DLCs
Britain is getting an infantry-focused colonial battlegroup with Aussie Jaeger-equivalents and Canadian shock troopers. Wehr is getting a defensive battlegroup with mortar bunkers and a heavy Tank Killer. The rest don't have enough finished assets to really know much.
>dlc for an unfinished game with game breaking exploits
cool
I was wondering about ANZAC troops. They're in the campaign and I was hoping to use them in MP as an ausgay myself, so I'll probably be a big sucker and buy that dlc on release
I sincerely hope we're not getting dripfed microtransaction battlegroup DLCs because that would be cancerous. I hope they just include new battlegroups with faction DLCs so there's a reason to buy it even if you don't play the new guys.
What's the build order for Britain? I feel like I should probably pick them up and learn them if they're getting Leafs soon.
what game mode
I'll start with 3v3s and 4v4s to figure them out first. I can probably figure out a 1v1 build once I've got a feel for them, I just need a place to start so I'm not dragging teams down.
>le garbage game
>thread filled with gameplay discussion after the schizoids left
i hate everyone
le good game (bugs aside) (balance aside) (single player aside)
yeah because the schizoids are mostly angry coh2 players and i think people realize that while the game has a ton of problems, its really fun at its core. it helps that relic is patching shit at a quick clip
I just wish they had detailed patchnotes
they do, check the discord, that's where they post it. the reddit also will post the latest patchnotes
they are two types of schizoids:
brazilians and chinese who got COH2 when it went F2P so basically don't want anyone playing the new one while they still have to pay for it.
germoids who are autistically outraged that the game doesn't have a full german localised VO.
Im not impressed by how you want people to perceive reality
Biggest point of complaints is that they charge 60$ for game that is early access state and people like you just normalize this behaviour that publisher can release what ever shit they want without consequences, if they just stated that this is early access that would been fine, but the fact that they consider this to be "full release" for 60$ is just insult to consumers but i guess this starting to be standard these days.
heeeeeeeeee's back everyone! after reading this post, i decided to buy another copy for a friend who was waiting to buy it after it got patched - he's installing right now and we're about to play 🙂
nice bot post, took literally under 10 seconds.
keep seething, i'll buy a third copy for my other friend 🙂
i dont really give shit, just gave my two cents that clearly wont matter when i have to fight some bot army.
the "bot army" in question is me and my friends enjoying the game 🙂 we just won another cool one
NPCs happily eating shitty pre alpha tier games are just either paid shills or delusional fan boys like you.
the game is clearly not pre-alpha, i think someone is a little cranky and is over exaggerating. take a minute away from the computer and have a few deep breaths, and we'll talk about it when you've calmed down
Or it is just that your standards have been turned to this shit that we have now days, 10 years ago we used to get complete game instead of this shit but clearly you are either zoomer or you have just accepted to eat shit instead of having actually standards or actual complete games in release.
actually im not a zoomer and have not accepted eating shit, which is why im really enjoying coh3 instead of stomping my feet and stinking up the thread with my BO
Its really astounding that people now days enjoy eating shit and actually paying for it.
it is definitely crazy. not coh3 players though, that game is pretty good 🙂
SEETHE
schizo on the brink after people have come around to the game
>lull in the action around early midgame
>all 3 players show up on my position with 2 panzers each and overwhelm me
>chase my routing army all the way back to base
>enter base and kill my entire army when I have nowhere else to run
>allies don't lift a finger
>somehow they don't even manage to capture the other VPs while this is going on
You shouldn't be allowed to queue premade teams in quickmatch.
Bro just play 1v1 if you're not playing with friends
It's so much better.
yea playing groups is a big waste of time as long as there's no ranked and/or leaver penalty
also i really hope they add some more maps soon
There is a leaderboard and ELO for unranked. 1v1 is the best mode.
leaderboards(.)companyofheroes
huh, there actually is...
I'm not even gonna bother asking why the frick this is not searchable ingame, or any other career stats for that matter.
apparently im in the top 200 in EU and i suck at this game quite a lot. surprised how dead the game seems despite the high player count on steam
Game doesn't seem dead at all, queue times are quite low for me. Leaderboards aren't really indicative either. I get the feeling the current player base is mostly new since coh2gays are busy reeing and won't buy just yet (I say this as someone with >1000hrs in Coh2 and seeing people play like dogshit most coh3 games), which might explain why you're ranking highly when you don't expect to be.
Holy frick the howitzer emplacement at the end of the Indian artillery tree is fricking terrible
>only fires like 4 shots per volley, deals the same damage as a mortar but with a longer cooldown
We were stuck in a dug-in showdown so I figured a couple of them might help displace the enemy, but I was hilariously wrong. They do frick all. Their veteran ability is a precision "armor-piercing" shell that tickles a truck if it hits and shares a cooldown with the barrage despite only firing 1 shot.
These things genuinely lost me the game because they eat up more cap than a tank but contribute absolutely nothing to the game. I couldn't even delete them to free up population so I just became dead weight in lategame tank battles.
Yeah, it is insanely garbage when you consider how late you get it and how much it costs. Seems like they’re too careful with artillery as of now, most of them suck hard besides mortars.
Yeah it's just a weird combination of
>low damage, especially against emplacements
>long cooldown, especially compared with mortars which can barrage almost constantly
>no autoattack so they ONLY fire on cooldown
>reveal themselves when they fire, so your opponent can just spam offmaps on them, which actually do decent damage to emplacements
I had an axis player sitting on a flak gun I was shelling with a pair of pioneers, repairing it as it was shelled. The batteries couldn't outdamage the repairs, and their AoE was so small they weren't actually killing the engineers so they were effectively doing nothing.
>play axis
>constantly feel disadvantaged and persecuted by how much better ally units and abilities are to mine and wonder why I bother playing the bad guy faction in a game that obviously biases against them
>play allies
>loathe the fricking jerries and every gay ass little cheap shit jerry thing they do
Why is it like this?
>pincer an mg nest from 2 directions
>the unit it isn't shooting at instantly gets suppressed and then pinned anyways
Cool
This may be a stupid question but like, how do you win as the british?
Infantry sections are solid early but they get one-sidedly stomped by any more advanced infantry ie. jaegers, paratroopers etc. Every time I play as the british it feels like I'm getting swarmed by infantry stronger than mine and I'm just running from fights constantly, or someone digs in on a victory point and I can't dislodge them because artillery is so fricking bad. I feel like I need some kind of assault unit with smoke grenades but they just don't have one.
I really like their lategame, especially flanking around with speedy crusaders, but I just don't know how to make the rest of their roster work. I'm look at the battlegroups for supplement but they just offer shitty artillery that does nothing and units like Commandos that don't really do what I feel like I need.
snares are so fricking shit in this game
>45 munitions
>doesnt destroy engine
>short range
>you have to REMAIN in range or it cancels so it's impossible to land on a fleeting target
i like that snares are worse, in coh2 it was incredibly stupid to leave your vehicle within even 1 mile of an infantry squad because they would snare it and let it get hunt down. I'm not sure that the range matters? as long as youre in range when you give the command they will do the animation no matter how far the vehicle drives
it does destroy the engine if it's missing health, otherwise it's a temporary slow. you shouldn't be able to immobilize a tank for 35 muni.
snares, like just about every single mechanical change they've made, are much better in 3.
Snares DO follow the target if you cast in range as long as the game registers it through the ~200ms input lag before the target leaves range.
The satchel will even do this weird thing where it follows the vehicle into the FoW like a ghost.
But it doesn't work for panzerfausts. Pfs will cancel when the target leaves range, which causes them to do this weird little cancel animation and is extremely fricking clunky.
I'm glad they don't instantly destroy intact engines any more but I do think the cost is a bit too high. As it is using one delays a weapon upgrade by almost a minute
>Guastatori
Why are they so fricking DURABLE?
I had 3 infantry sections with LMGs shooting them and they were just standing out of cover soaking the damage and forced a squad to retreat before they had to pull back.
What the frick is wrong with these things?
>early game as US 2v2
>wermacht builds 2 MGs
>scout them with flare, flank them
>rout his entire force, losing 1 model in the process
>he tries to counterattack and runs straight into my MGs
>gets routed again
>tries again, gets a bunch of his units killed by flamers and MGs
>spend all of my manpower to further demolish his strat
>he keeps doing the same thing
>eventually gets through 3 of my MGs, a mortar and a sherman by just spamming assault grenadiers and MGs into them head-on
>lose
i even checked his resources and he was FLOATING while building useless shit like AT cannons against my entirely infantry/emplaced force
i have no idea how i can lose that shit except if his units are just better than mine
You should never have more than 1 MG in your overall composition. They deal terrible damage in this game and are only good for the crowd control via suppression. But even then, often they will just randomly fail to suppress a charging squad until it's in grenade range and just fricks you over. Don't waste too much pop on mgs, just 1 for the status effect is enough.
Units have upkeep, which is hidden right now just because the UI is unfinished. The bigger your army, the higher your upkeep and the lower your income as a result. Building up too much earlygame can slow down your tech progression and frick you over late game. You'll be stuck with a big army of weak t1 units and be unable to afford new, better units that have more impact or help to counter your opponent. This also serves as a bit of a comeback mechanic: if you get blown out early and lose a lot of units you'll free up resources to replace them.
If you invest heavily into t1 for an aggressive start, you need to basically push your opponent all the way back to their base turrets and uncap all their shit while you have that numbers advantage, otherwise you'll just fall behind lategame.
And conversely, it's usually better to keep your earlygame army lean even if it means losing some early fights. You'll always be able to retake ground later as long as you can afford to tech faster than your opponent and fill your pop cap with strong units.
my opponent spammed me to death with t1 units so i don't see how amassing my own t1 units that *should* counter them would be such a bad idea. in a perfect world i would have built riflemen to counter the assault infantry spam, but sadly it takes 100 fuel to tech riflemen as the US so that's not really an option. i guess i could have built an AA half track, though in my experience it does frick all and he did buy that random AT cannon.
if your opponent has any brain function whatsoever, it doesn't seem like you can actually *win* as the US unless you go airborne. the faction has no cost-effective anti-infantry until shermans otherwise
Nobody really has "cost-effective anti-infantry" for most of the game, anon. Infantry defines the earlygame. You have to actually move your units around and do things with them to get an edge.
>You should never have more than 1 MG in your overall composition
i think it's honestly mostly the US MG that sucks. MG42 seems to suppress squads on the first burst. the M1919 fires a much, much longer burst, and it takes its sweet time suppressing shit. maybe the M1919 is like the US MG in CoH2 where it sets up faster but so far it doesn't feel like that
i think the american lineup is heavily balanced around the idea of their riflemen (and bazookamen) being the god-infantry they were in CoH2 when kitted out, but kitting them out in CoH3 eats directly into your teching speed. they aren't even that great even when kitted out. and their infantry AT kinda sucks too. so it's like a perfect storm to make their whole lineup into a wonky mess that only the paratrooper doctrine can sort of patch up
>Nobody really has "cost-effective anti-infantry" for most of the game
lmao shut up dude
All the MGs are identical except for the british one, which is slightly worse. They all suppress at the same rate. Suppression is just weird and inconsistent because we're still in the 'patch everyday disaster launch' phase of the game
i could swear that certain units seem to get suppressed faster but it might just be unit differences in general. assault grens dont give a frick about suppression because they usain bolt into proned grenade range within 1 second. and then there's the pasta flamer guys
It's possible. I know this was a stat in DoW2 but every unit had the same suppression value except for 1 or 2 weird exceptions. Pasta men have a special active ability that gives them suppression immunity which helps make them so cancerous to fight.
Suppression is supposed to be a universal "do not assault this position frontally" mechanic so giving units arbitrary resistance to it doesn't really make sense. You flank weapon teams. You don't just dive them with your 'immune to machine guns' men.
id be okay with it if MGs were less oppressive (CoH2 is pretty horrible to play on certain maps due to it) but the fact that MGs deal such shit damage and are so easy to decrew really fricks them up.
maybe MGs should just deal 2-3x extra damage to unsuppressed targets so that they'd consistently drop a model or two before the suppression kicks in. imo it'd make sense and having your units be suppressed would feel more like something you'd want to happen.
I'm fine with them doing piss damage because it encourages shitters to not stack them on poorly designed maps. I just wish suppression behaviour was consistent.
What do you mean he "got through" your MGs?
Why didn't you just move them back if they got smoked?
thats the beauty of it. he didnt even smoke them. he just sprinted units into them, tanked the first burst (possibly in incidental yellow cover), got closer, got suppressed, threw grenade to force a retreat. and then he used 2 different squads to do the same thing to the other 2 MGs that were covering the first MG. i think in total he used 5 squads with no smokes to assault 3 MGs and forced a total retreat that way. he attack moved his own MGs to suppress my defending infantry. and then i couldnt retake because i chose the doctrine without mainline infantry
its ok i will probably just switch factions. i actually gained 3 ranks the instant i switched off US in CoH2
I don't think I ever used an MG as US so I'm not saying they're great but it's normal for MGs to occasionally be forced off the field I don't see how that lost you the game
Also that sounds like a terrible build but I really only play 1v1s so idk about team games meta
>Also that sounds like a terrible build but I really only play 1v1s so idk about team games meta
tbh if the game had CoH2 balance in regards to the MGs, and i could actually layer MGs on top of each other to gas out blobbers, it would probably work very well. the build doesn't really lack anything except that anti-blob potential. i can throw so much smoke with my mortars and scout that my opponents can't really use any emplaced weapons or green cover, so they're just forced to retreat, run into my MGs or sit in smoke with my 3 engineers that keep hosing them with ground-targeted flame.
Sounds like you lacked vision, cause if he had to cross the entire fire arc with vision there's no way in frick that'd happen
Damn Ghurkas are pretty fricking good. I didn't realize every model in their squad get lmgs.
you mean SMGs right?
Yeah that one. The LMG upgrade seems mediocre by comparison because it's basically just the same as what the standard infantry get, but the smgs are tommy guns instead of the stens. It makes the Ghurkas basically better commandos.
The recon package upgrade for british infantry is also being slept on just because the AT rifles are so good. But you rarely need more than 1 AT rifle squad since they just immediately check light vehicles and you'll have dedicated AT guns for everything else.
Dunno I've had a game where my SMG ghurkas underperformed against shrecks jagers of all things
>because it's basically just the same as what the standard infantry get
The same weapon might have different damage in different squads.
I haven't tested it but it might actually be better than rifle lmgs
Tomorrow I'll test them out
>It makes the Ghurkas basically better commandos
The Commando's do have stealth which can be really useful sometimes, but other than that I agree. Assault Gurkhas are the shit.
Commandos are weird because they don't have stealth on their unit card like other stealth units do (probably because the 3 different grenades take up all the slots), and it doesn't seem to work very well. Jaegers and Falls will stealth the instant they step into cover and stay stealthed after stepping out for a second or so, so they can move in stealth across ground with a lot of scattered light cover.
Commandos will sometimes sit in full cover for several seconds before stealthing, or never stealth at all and need to be moved until it clicks, and they lose it the instant they move again.
the best part about the AT rifles seems to be that the instantly shoot them. meanwhile rocket launcher units tend to aim for like 2 minutes before they take a shot (which very often misses as well)
>the instantly shoot them
the units instantly shoot them
Why are DAK suddenly showing up to the first fight in a halftrack at sub-2 minutes? I thought they needed to wait longer than that for their first callin.
they can build one from their first building I believe
They can literally start with one but it's really not that strong just stay in cover and you'll force it away with mainline infantry
It will shit on jeeps though
>build infantry support center and research demolitions package
>designate captain retinue as retreat point
>place captain retinue in m29 weasel and drive into enemy base
>mass retreat all riflemen and engineers then call in special operations smoke barrage
>spam timed demo charges in enemy's base
how do you counter this?
Wait is this really a thing? lmao I don't believe it
No, bases have too much hp so you'd have to be in there for multiple cooldowns to snipe it, and smoke doesn't last that long.
>Timed demo charge = 35 munitions, heavy explosive that can destroy buildings and bridges. 9 second fuse that counts down after the 13 second construction.
>The final few seconds of construction is not animated, yet if you give the squad an order they will stop building the bomb and you will have to right click on it to continue the process.
>I tested the damage of the charge;
>I placed a charge directly in front of an M4A1 Sherman. It only did 13 damage (out of 720 durability).
>I placed the charge directly behind the same tank, and didn't move the squad away, and the detonation only did 183pts of damage to the Sherman, killed two of the riflemen, wounded two down to 88hp, and two more down to 18hp.
>So it's damage against units is pitiful and simply not worth it, however against base buildings it is ENORMOUS.
>Even though you cannot place the charge directly next to a base structure, it still one-hit destroyed an enemy HQ building I placed it near.
>Depending on enemy layout its not unrealistic to think you could destroy two base structures with one charge, which could be an incredibly potent backdoor attack, IF you could pull it off.
theres no cooldowns
it only takes one pass and you have all of your rifles and engineers to do it with
i think everyone knows smoke lasts way longer than it aught to
>I placed a charge directly in front of an M4A1 Sherman. It only did 13 damage (out of 720 durability
Sometimes I think they go way overboard with damage types. If you score a hit on a tank with a demo charge, why wouldn't it kill the tank?
if it only takes 1-2 demo charges, couldn't you just do this with a half track and a rifleman? i don't see why you'd need to go all-in and retreat your squads there
a halftrack requires motor pool investment and you can skip it by using the m29 weasel
if you go all in you can wipe out the enemy's entire base
once you have used this tactic once you wont be able to easily do it again
its not uncommon for unreinforced units to be sitting in an enemies spawn and they would be more than enough to deal with a single rifleman squad that needs to take 13 seconds to plant the charge
this strategy is vulnerable to fallschirmpioneers and their sweepers defusing the charges during the countdown so with multiple charges they will simply be overwhelmed
i tried this in skirmish and the main issue seems to be that you can't smoke barrage the enemy hq sector
Master league going live on twitch
does anyone know how the US medical station works? it says it "recovers wounded" and i occasionally see some medics run to the battlefield, so i assume it recovers a certain percentage of your lost units and gives them back as manpower? i wish it was explained in any way lol
They heal nearby damaged units and reinforce squads that have lost men. The latter is toggled off by default, because reinforcing costs manpower to replace the dead squad members. Click the building and toggle it on.
Stations like that which heal and reinforce are very useful. The medics are purely cosmetic.
no, the US medical station has a special ability
>infantry support center
>requires a shitload of fuel to use
bravo
10hp is the difference between basic t1 infantry and endgame elites. Turning all of your riflemen, paratroopers and even pathfinders into juggernauts is a fricking huge stat swing. The cost is entirely justifiable.
What I think people don't realize with things that seem egregiously overcosted is that Relic absolutely playtested these things internally on an early build (in addition to the closed beta a month ago) and quickly realized when something simply couldn't work without a frickhuge fuel cost or other downsides to balance it.
There were a lot of changes between the closed beta and release that were clearly attempts to address prerelease balance issues. For example, Britain had a Tank Killer available from their t2 structure that was cut from release, because having access to highly mobile long range anti-vehicle that early in the game meant they could basically invest all-in on anti-infantry earlygame and just rely on the Archer to answer both light and heavy vehicles. They cut the Archer (it's still in the game files and will likely be added back as a battlegroup callin with DLC) and buffed the Infantry Section's AT rifle upgrade to compensate (since otherwise britain would have absolutely no mobile anti-vehicle until t3).
the difference between basic t1 infantry and endgame elites is that the endgame elites usually have broken abilities, not that they can take 9% more damage
>default scout squad has 240 health
>pathfinders with survival training have 400 health (66% more health)
>default engineers have 320 health
>assault engineers have 500 health (56% more health)
doesnt apply to weapon teams though
???
why are you comparing doctrine versions of the squads to the normal versions and using that as a way to prove that the health upgrade is good?
The idea is that you use fuel for your infantry rather than the vehicles, duh
>base Wehr Grenadiers have 80hp per model, even less than Royal Engineers
Holy frick no wonder they suck so much shit.
Also it's wild actually taking a closer look at some units and what they specialize in. Why do Stormtroopers carry long range sharpshooting rifles and a light machinegun that can't fire while moving? Isn't standing still and picking things off from long range the exact opposite of 'storming'? Why would I ever bother with these things when Jaegers use the same rifle but have stealth and anti-vehicle upgrades?
because they deal way more damage moron
>same weapon
>smaller model count
>"way more damage"
k
>he thinks stormtrooper do less damage than jagers
Play the game moron
Are the Canadian Stormtroopers in the Italian campaign or are they genuinely cut/unfinished assets? I spawned them in the cheat mod and they seemed pretty nuts, beat every infantry except Guastatori at close range.
I'm holding off on playing the Italy campaign until they've finished patching it so I don't know if they're a campaign unit or future DLC or something.
There's Australian squads in the Nord-Afrika campaign.
it appears the 20mm cheese is harder to do than it seems. hard to get it down in a useful location before the enemy can reach the area
It's easier than you think. The thing has fricking enormous range, so you can build it well back from the victory point and have it finished by the time they've capped it and realize something's amiss. Then the flak gun covers you building your medical bunker, and now you have both the OP gun in range of the VP and a staging area to support it and keep your army fresh.
Alternative is to fight for the vp like normal and build the flak cannon with your second falls squad, which should be coming down around the point the vp fight is decided.
On that italian city map, a 20mm built on the northern gas point will be in range to cover the vp. They're seriously fricking nuts.
>team game
>playing plants & zombies against the enemy team running waves of infantry into me
>my teammate just chilling
>finally lose my front and get all my shit taken from me
>ask him if he needs help defending
>"lol does it look like i need help :D"
>team game
I see the problem right there
It's come to my attention that there's a British Forces build floating around where you don't bother with Infantry Sections and instead spam engineers (with some vickers)
The idea is that the Royal Engineers are actually quite strong, because they're a 4-man smg squad. You rush them in close and they absolutely melt their target, and in the right circumstances can punch upwards to higher tier infantry. Since most axis basic infantry are long range rifles, royal engineer spam can just run them over. It's especially effective against the meta Luft builds since they rely too much on stalling with falls pioneers that are vulnerable up close. The British Armoured Battlegroup has a 1cp passive that discounts recruitment/reinforcement of Royal Engineers by 25% and allows you to basically just push tempo aggressively and trade manpower. Then you rush Humbers for more early aggression. The idea is to punish Luft for trying to afk to a panzer. The humbers can force them to slow down to tech anti-vehicle (likely the wirbelwind callin), at which point you can refund them to tech to your own tanks and just wienerblock their wirbel with cheap AT guns.
Since you don't have a tonne of Infantry sections with expensive weapon upgrades, you can spend most of your munitions on mines, then lategame you have a bunch of vetted engineers to support your proper tanks. It seems like a really effective way to run the battlegroup with Churchills.
>by the time I've recruited my 3rd t1 squad, axis is sitting on the victory point with 7 squads
It's a shame team colour is fricked so you can't tell when you're getting 2v1'd while your allies afk vs when the game balance and econ is just fricked.
Just use the unique player color option in the settings.
It's because that option is fricked that I'm stuck using the global team colours option instead.
>gayass luft trying the gayass luft cheese
>rush him and force him off before he finishes his gayass broken flak gun
>less than a minute later, 6 luftwaffe squads flank me from my teammate's side and force me back
>check my teammates side
>the other guy also went for the gayass luft cheese and has a flak gun sitting on the victory point mowing down my ally, so now he's free to just roam with his luftball
>push back to my victory point after recovering
>now there's 2 flak cannons and a medic bunker on it
Fricking christ they cannot fix this broken shit soon enough.
I don't even bother playing as allies rn. Its all flak guns and flamer gustas
tbh im finding that the 20mm rush isnt that great if youre pubbing because your other teammate will run headfirst into 2 opponents instead of playing around your flak, or said opponents 2v1 you with flamers and smokes and steal your flak while your teammate sits on his fat ass doing nothing
honestly i think it might be better to just setup good ambush positions with the fall pioneers and just for small tactics plays until you get out of shit ranks
Fortunately falls pioneers ALSO have smokes so you can just retake your flak if they steal it.
But that said, even the most overpowered strategy will lose Xv1 against a premade group coordinating. You would have gotten rushed and fricked over even if you didn't have a broken emplacement. Though it should be noted that at 25 gas a pop, you can easily afford to spam multiple flak guns under the cover of the first and suddenly your opponent can't smoke enough of them to make a push work.
It's definitely strongest in the large team modes, 3v3 or 4v4, since typically you have a smaller amount of space to cover per player, and the larger maps mean you have more time to get your emplacement established before anyone can approach you. 1v1 the emplacement is basically irrelevant and 2v2 there's just too many ways your opponents can apply pressure without running headlong into it, plus 90% of 2v2s are against a premade duo who will work together to punish it anyways.
But make no mistake, it's broken as frick. For less manpower than a grenadier squad and 25 gas you have an emplacement with as much range as an AT gun that kills infantry faster than any dedicated end-tier anti-infantry tool and is effectively immortal. It's totally fricked, and putting 2 or more on a victory point essentially makes it unassailable until your opponent has t3, at which point you can have the heavy flak callin that 2-shots tanks
>Fortunately falls pioneers ALSO have smokes
no they dont
wtf
you have made like 30 posts in this thread full of total disinformation
nta but I think they have smoke with the gaynade launcher
no
DAK Panzerpioneers get a smoke ability with their grenade launcher upgrade but Fallschirmpioneers don't. Instead they come with a free minesweeper. I think the only offensive smoke abilities available to WM are jaegers, mortars and the artillery upgrade to their halftrack. And, I guess the phosphorous grenades for stormtroopers, technically. Mortar smoke lasts about 50 seconds and falls can throw a satchel charge for 45 muni to instantly decrew it (or ground attack with the grenade launcher upgrade) so a single mortar pickup is enough to let them retake stolen flak guns. I've seen this silly flak roulette on a few streams already where every player steals the flak gun on their push and then loses it on the counterpush, back and forth.
i like getting the mobile 20mm flak on wermacht because every allied player is massing infantry sections and the 20mm flak absolutely demolishes them. also they have an active ability that insta suppresses infantry. they cost the same as an MG too.
marder is in the same tech so you're set for AT as well
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1imoe52Qe0yt0eqJjMxdD8-lv1qo_6F5fCXmC4U9Byo0/edit#gid=0
Handy resource somebody compiled. Faction winrates in each mode made by aggregating statistics available from the official leaderboard site. Custom matches are not tracked, and no distinction is made between premade vs solo queue.
We see the most variance in 1v1s, where Wehrmacht stand clearly above the rest. Since these stats have been tracked since launch and the luftwaffe cheese strategies have been discovered relatively recently, we can expect this gap to steadily widen. DAK and US are basically even in 2nd place and UK is a close 3rd but the gap between 1st and 2nd is concerning
Once we move into team modes, we start to see stats normalize across ally/axis boundaries. Axis have a clear and substantial advantage in team mode winrates owing to Wehrmacht (including an appalling 77% wr in 4v4s). US winrates fall a little behind britain here but that might just be because team modes are a more casual environment and the US have more abilities to manage than the british. The huge gap in winrates suggests that axis were winning the majority of large team games well before the recent meta builds were discovered.
>Since these stats have been tracked since launch and the luftwaffe cheese strategies have been discovered relatively recently, we can expect this gap to steadily widen
I believe the 1v1 wehr winrate is solely because of the jager into wirbelwind strat catching people unaware
The wirbelwind also counters AT rifle sections so that would explain the UK winrate tanking as the go-to build is directly countered.
imo the winrate will stabilize at all but the lowest of ranks as people learn to play around it
Or if it gets nerfed
The cheat mod got updated today. One of the results of the update is that the number of unrecruitable units you can spawn in with it has increased. Presumably these are units that have been added into the files via the hotfixes since release.
Pic related are the british:
>reskinned M3 Stuart
Identical to the existing one, but green
>Valentine II
Same green camo as the above. Same armament and vet ability as the Crusader (might be a placeholder) but better armour
>CMP 15cwt AA Truck
Name is identical to the recruitable version, which is the AA upgrade to the standard utility truck, but reskinned green. It's currently unfinished and has no gun or vet ability.
>CMP 15cwt Repair and Resupply Truck
Same green. Placeholder unit icon. It passively repairs nearby vehicles and has 3 active abilities that cost 75 munitions: Deploys uncrewed Vickers, 3inch Mortar or medical crates
>Command Churchill
Same green. Passively boosts the speed and RoF of nearby infantry. Vet abilities are autorepair and a vehicle accuracy aura. Otherwise identical to a normal Churchill.
>Australian Light Infantry
From the North Africa campaign. They have a full set of voice lines for player control including idle lines. 6 man squad with 80hp apiece and rifles. Abilities are "Sharpshooter" (15muni, instantly kills an infantry model) and snares. Vet ability is Camouflage
>Canadian Shock Troopers
Not from singleplayer as far as I can tell. Close range elite 6m squad with 110 hp/model. Abilities are Breach, White Phosphorous grenades and Satchel Charge. Veteran ability is "Charge" (increase speed and rof for a time). Uniforms are green instead of tan. Also fully voiced.
>2lb AT gun
Weapon squad with aussie voice lines. Has Rapid Fire and a vet ability that disables target's weapons
>25lb Artillery emplacement
Aussie voices. No autoattack. Barrage and Airburst abilities
>Bofors
No abilities currently
>Churchill Crocodile
Standard tan Churchill with front-mounted mg replaced by flamethrower.
I think those green camos are ANZAC forces
Possibly. Right now all of them have generic voice lines instead of aussie ones, but that may change, several of them are obviously unfinished. My guess is that all of the green camo units will either be callins for a yet unreleased battlegroup, or sp units in a future campaign expansion. Hopefully it's ANZAC focused because that's a pretty cool concept.
Or it's a DLC that bundles a new commander and the skins together.
Just to be clear, the only unit that's explicitly a reskin is the Stuart. Everything else green is actually a new unit variation. Existing reskins, like the US ones you get for buying the game on launch, don't appear as separate entries in the cheat menu.
That said, some of these may just be campaign units that I didn't notice when I played the campaign. The green might be a stock texture used as a placeholder (all the green camo units still have emblems of british north africa) or the green units themselves might be placeholders for skins or other cosmetics. We're looking at in-development assets without context so it's hard to say for sure.
I'll add: the canadians have a LOT of idle lines.
They mention the Crocodile Churchill by name if it drives by them. They make references to arriving on the battlefield by a beach landing and describe fighting on a stone beach, mention Sicily by name, etc. It sounds like they're supposed to be an Italian Campaign unit but as far as I can tell you never have access to them? Maybe I missed something.
>describe fighting on a stone beach
I think I just heard this line. They're talking about the Dieppe Raid.
>all those aussie units
>ANZAC day is at the end of April
First DLC confirmed.
just played a 2v2 with a friend and i correctly guessed that they would attempt to do flak 20mm on the 2x muni on the desert map, and so we routed them off the point and destroyed a flak in the process. but then the 70% wermacht winrate kicked in and they won and one of the dudes accused us of stream sniping. turns out he was rank 1 europe. sadly i cant find his stream so i cant call him a little b***h
>german midgame tanks remain useful to the very end
>marders literally 25 fuel and can push shermans off
>allied midgame tanks cost like 50 fuel and get two-shot by marders and can't do anything except harass back capping infantry squads once enemy has AT
im glad there isn't shit like t70 in the game anymore but light tanks seem really shit. i guess the chauffee can help against wirbelwind rush but idk
marders lose to medium tanks because of their shit HPs and low RoF
I've even had a game where I kept picking off DAK marders by just using 2 greyhounds, which by the way die in 3 marder hits, not 2, so I'm pretty sure the stuart and chaffee also die in 3 hits.
Marders are unable to hold their own in a tank fight and need supporting units to keep enemy tanks out of range, meaning that on their own they don't actually counter tanks.
They also take damage from small arms and flamers so if you snare a low health one with infantry you can stay on its ass and finish it with just BARs, the captain mark vehicle also works great for this
>i guess the chauffee can help against wirbelwind rush but idk
The greyhound is great against DAK, chaffee is also decent if you're behind or if the guy is using m13/40 tanks, against wehr it can punish the wirbelwind but very shitty anti infantry damage means shreck jagers will force it away without trouble so it's better to go AT gun and use the fuel to get BARs so your riflemen can actually beat AT jagers
Humbler can hunt down halftracks and be annoying but it loses relevance fast.
Stuart has a huge fuel tech cost up front (probably because you're meant to withdraw it later and get all your resources back) but it loses to the wirbelwind and it's not great against infantry, but supported with AT rifle blobs it can be a soft counter as the wirbelwind can't deal with both at the same time.
Never tried stuart against DAK but that's because AT rifles can take care of most vehicles and the humbler is just better at bleeding infantry because it's cheaper
that's been my 1v1 experience at least
oh yea i forgot about withdrawing, i guess that makes the stuart much better
i should probably try to build the greyhound more often, i just remember it being total ass in coh2 back when i played so i haven't tried
Marders are probably a contender for the single worst vehicle in the game. Its accuracy is so bad that it genuinely cannot hit moving vehicles. It lands like 1/4 shots. That's on top of being so fragile that it dies to a stiff breeze. You're unironically better off with AT crews as either Axis faction. I know for DAK, your vehicle upgrades apply to Marders and make them deceptively durable lategame, but their accuracy is seriously so bad that it doesn't matter. Marders are a trap.
Stuart tech has a 40 fuel cost, so getting out a single Stuart is 85 fuel. The refund will only give you back the 45 fuel for the Stuart itself, not for the tech. Just grabbing two Humbers would be 70 fuel instead and you can refund all of it as soon as you hit t3 because the refund ability has a low cooldown, which will instantly buy you a Crusader.
The Stuart is in an awkward place. It's worse at killing infantry than a single Humber in exchange for being better vs light vehicles, but emphasis on LIGHT. It can't pen a Wirbel's frontal armour and isn't durable enough to dive it to hit the back. Plus Sections already provide a lot of AT, so spending 85 fuel to strengthen your anti-vehicle midgame is a huge waste. You could just grab a gas-free 6lber to help your sections against a beefier vehicle like a Wirbel or an 8 Rad. I'd just stick with grabbing a Humber or 2 midgame for extra map pressure and refunding them later and wait to see if Relic buffs the Stuart.
i guess youre unlucky because my marders almost always hit
>dies to a stiff breeze
did you try putting them behind your other units?? they have tons of range
I'm not sure what game you're playing if you think "keep it further back" protects a unit that can't hit anything. You can keep AT guns back, because they will kill a tank if it dives them.
A Marder will lose to a fricking Chaffee rushing it (and miss 4 times in the process). It just does fricking nothing. You may think "oh great it's only 25 fuel" but an AT gun is 0 fuel and will actually kill armour
>finally get my tankfu hellcat in a coh game
>there's no real reason to get it because germany barely has heavy tanks this time around and sherman kicks too much infantry ass to skip
feels bad man
hopefully infantry + hellcats becomes a viable setup next patch
Patch just dropped, they buffed the hellcat
yeah just noticed, changes look pretty great, they dealt with pretty much every complaint i had with the USF
>US: all buffs except greyhound nerf
>UK: all buffs except AT rifles nerfed massively against infantry
>Wehr: all nerfs
>DAK: all nerfs
I don't like sledgehammer balance
Like the 250 halftrack was strong-ish but it traded somewhat evenly with squads, scaled way worse in the mid game and can't capture points until the late game.
You are obviously meant to use it though, DAK infantry is so expensive and cost-ineffective that spamming it means having no manpower for your vehicles.
Now it has less damage at all ranges and costs more, but pgrens are also worse at attack-move range, which when paired with riflemen buffs and bren buffs it's gonna make them pretty bad.
They also made fire support elements more expensive despite the fact that in 1v1 there's no reason to go for any of those units.
But making the M13/40 come out at 4 CPs total is going to be so strong I'm going to say it's a mistake, they're gonna frick everything up and they'll be so easy to mass before the enemy has proper mediums of their own.
I don't think the dev realize how strong they really are when you rush them.
props for massively buffing the bazooka squad and the stuart though, that was a good call.
Even that 30 seconds barrage bishop is looking somewhat juicy against team weapon spammers.
And yet:
>not a single change to unavoidable skill planes one tapping tanks
REEEEEEEEEEEEELIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIC
The irony is that Werh is still overtuned despite all the nerfs.
DAK got hit a bit too hard but it's clear that some of these were part of a larger shift in the focus of their playstyle that will make sense with more patching. The direction they're taking them is essentially IG from DoW 2, where they had expensive and mediocre infantry and poor capping power in exchange for a big light vehicle emphasis. The buff to the M13/40 telegraphs that to me because it mirrors how they had to balance IG over the course of that game.
Some more testing:
The stuart now counters the wirbelwind, it wins in a 1v1
At short range it actually trades perfectly even with a panzer 3 (but will lose because of the lower health especially after the buffs)
At longer ranges they actually bounce each other's shots quite frequently but the tungsten core upgrade should give the panzer 3 a definitive advantage
Also not new but:
>Tungsten core ammunition also applies to the m13/40 for 16 extra damage and presumably extra penetration.
>Emergency repair kit gives the M13/40 80 health
>Vehicle survival package gives the m13/40 80 health
And I thought these guys were a little underwhelming, of course, I wasn't buffing them fully.
I predict that an 8RAD/StuG D rush into m13/40 spam will be the meta for a while, too bad because I was having fun spamming this silly unit and now it might become FOTM cheese.
>where they had expensive and mediocre infantry and poor capping power in exchange for a big light vehicle emphasis
They're already like this, but now the motorcycle and the 250 are worse choice for opening
Tomorrow I'll get some automatch games in and see how it goes.
>I was having fun spamming this silly unit and now it might become FOTM cheese.
My thoughts exactly
I will be called a meta slave even if I did it before it was cool
Where's the best place to report bugs to Relic? I stumbled on a pretty blatant one that I should probably pass down.
forums I guess
what did you find?
As the british forces, when you build the 17lber, it comes with a free CMP truck to tow it.
If you refund the CMP truck after detaching the gun, you get the full refund for the value of the 17lber (360mp/40f) rather than just for the cost of the truck (240mp/20f), essentially making the 17lber free once you've placed it.
If you refund the CMP truck that comes towing the Heavy Mortar callin from the Indian battlegroup, it refunds at its proper value of 240mp/20f (which is still pretty good since the callin doesn't cost fuel), so the bug is exclusive to the 17lber.
american riflemen seem pretty fricking shit still, like even with 2x bar they just flat out don't do enough damage. like i get it that they're not supposed to be blobbable because muh micro faction but why the frick do they cost so much fuel to get up to speed then? you can't even use them as cannon fodder because of how expensive they are to reinforce. imo if you want to make use of the lower reinforcement costs of the captain tree, then you might as well go paras or commandos and actually have a unit that wins fights
Bro Riflemen are now the single best t1 infantry unequivocally. The job of mainline infantry is to soak damage, screen for more valuable/vulnerable units and push off utility units like pioneers. They aren't supposed to upgrade into your endtier lategame elite infantry. None of them do that. Riflemen shit on everything in tier 1 and then lategame they just draw fire for your paratroopers, who in turn provide AT support for your shermans or push and threaten enemy weapon team positions so your shermans can push.
US upgrades are fuel expensive because they want to encourage you to pick between them rather than just grabbing all of them as you progress. You're supposed to pick your specialization. With the bar, US rifles have comparable damage output to elite lmg units like Stormtroopers or Ghurka. There isn't really much reason to go for an all-in long range infantry specialization right now because Shermans are overtuned and lategame devolves into medium tank spam, but that's not an issue with Riflemen.
they aren't, they don't, and they cost way too much fricking fuel to do stuff that other faction's infantry does with minor munitions upgrades. stop replying to my posts with this garbage
>Guy goes AT gun
>flank it with 250 and wipe it
>crew the gun
>steal it away with the 250
lol
The new assault grenadiers are really good btw
Despite the buffs, Commandos survive barley with one model in 1vs1 against them
Might become the new meta
Won a game where I got the m13/40 spam going and a buffed mass of those things is insane.
People aren't even going AT rifle anymore so I just get a stug to deal with AT guns, it's working like a charm.
Unless you can pick one off before they start buffing each other with vet 1 and before DAK gets the self repair upgrade you're in deep shit.
I think a rushed humbler will deal with them nicely but people seem intent on rushing stuarts against DAK and the problem is that panzerjagers still force them away so unless the other guy is going 8rad you're paying more for a vehicle that's not gonna fare any better against enemy infantry.
Well yeah AGrens and Commandos are similarly priced and tiered close range specialists that both got the exact same buff. They were close to equal prepatch and they're close to equal now. They're definitely good and something DAK needed, but at their price point I don't know how much presence they're going to ultimately have. DAK already had a manpower bottleneck and in t2 they're probably prioritizing that insane 8 Rad instead.
Apparently Boys are bugged currently and the damage nerfs against cover/structures is applying to its vehicle damage too.
>lose unit to early nades because no nade alert
>order disembark on halftrack as it dies and squad disappears
come the frick on
How do I use the kettenkrad? How do I use the shitty basic grenadiers when veterancy doesn't transfer to the jager/panzergren squads?
>How do I use the shitty basic grenadiers
you use them to reinforce other squads with the squad merge ability. they're very good for that
>luftwaffe
You skip them for paratroopers, who are fantastic.
>breakthrough
The assault kit upgrade makes them unironically good, just takes a bit to get out.
>mechanised
You just use them alongside mgs to stall while you quicktech to t2 and then win late.
Werh are designed to be weaker early and stronger late, but the nuance varies by battlegroup. For the most part, the purpose of grens are just to slow your opponent down and buy you time to tech into better infantry, like Jagers, Pgrens, or the assault kit upgrade.
dak feels so weird to play
it feels like you go from dominating to being completely useless and then back to dominating every 2 minutes due to how their teching and call-ins work
Just join the cheese brigade and spam carro armatas
I'm having a lot of success spamming m13/40s, you're vulnerable before you mass them but once you have 2 or 3 of them fully upgraded you can trade so well against allied tanks.
Frick it I had games where I literally lost all infantry and the guy's 3 LMG sections became completely useless since all my units were self healing tanks
But I'm having problems with the early game, if I get too many Pgrens I end up bottlenecking on manpower, if I go ass grens I'm forced to get a medical truck since they always take a lot of damage approaching infantry, and if I go panzerpioneers they always get wiped in the mid game since they're so fragile, also they get pushed around like crazy if the guy rushes anti infantry upgrades or calls in elite infantry.
I wonder if I should rush the combat halftrack upgrade and get autocannons on the 250
btw can we get a proper CoH3 thread instead of the 97 crybaby threads on the catalogue?
I swear half of the anons on /vst/ haven't played a strategy game in 10 or more years and are here just to autistically screech at anything new that comes out.
The current 'meta' for DAK seems to be going for the Italian battlegroup and using Bersalieri as your mainline infantry and stalling for an 8 Rad. You basically constantly lose through the first minutes of the game because your best infantry lose 1v1 to the allies equivalent, but you just slow their capping and back-cap with your speedy italians and as soon as the 8 Rad hits the field you dominate. US has no good answer to it until they have tanks and the British AT rifles are bugged so they literally have no effective answer to ANY light vehicle play right now except to bring their own. Humbers can't fight 8 Rads and Stuarts take longer to get out so you're guaranteed a few minutes of impunity.
Once you stabilize with the 8 Rad, you start spamming the Carro Armata callins. They're stupidly cost effective, being only 38 fuel, and not requiring t3 lets you just stack upgrades on them, turning them into essentially medium tanks. They key is that you get them out so early, and mass them so quickly, that allied anti-armour can't keep up. Upgrades make them too durable for bazookas to be effective, AT rifles are bugged and they're too fast for AT gun teams--you'll flank them before they get a second shot and then kill them before they can set up again or escape. Their Armour piercing active skill allows them to fight on equal grounds with lategame heavy tanks, and combined with the tungsten upgrade, they will consistently penetrate Churchills so they end up just being more cost-effective than any allied tank, you just dive any armour they build with impunity since they can't outrun you to escape.
Just note that as soon as they hotfix AT rifles to work properly again, it will probably kill Carro spam, but right now it's legitimately broken.
Are unupgraded bersaglieri better enough than grenadiers to justify their cost?
Unequivocally. Pgrens, despite being armed with 'long range rifles' actually have terrible long range damage. Their damage curve increase dramatically as you close in, so they basically work like an aggressive, close range squad. The issue is that DAK is almost never being aggressive in t1. Bersaglieri are long range specialists like Infantry Sections where their damage is the same regardless of distance, meaning you can keep them at max range, in heavy cover and stall fights. They'll beat Pathfinders comfortably and can trade well with Riflemen at long range, but their main advantage is that their out of combat movement speed gives them a lot of early map presence for capping and reinforcing. Plus then every CP you earn makes them more effective.
They're better against the US than the British, but they help a lot earlygame regardless.
I see, thanks.
repeating digits don't lie.
What the frick were they thinking lol
There are a lot of really bad abilities around right now. A bunch of british units have this artillery strike skill that just fires like 3 shots in an extremely wide spread that do no damage, but it costs a frickload of muni.
The naval artillery bombardment fires 4 shells in a massive spread, like twice the size of a vp capture zone, has the extra long callin delay like the US carpet bomb and a special audio cue. It will never, ever hit anything. It can't even hit static emplacements because the spread is so huge.
It's 150 munitions. More than the fricking AT loiter.
Shits a mess.
anyone find a use for the US air support center yet? the abilities are already kind of ass, and if your opponent gets any AA then they just flat out stop working even with all the upgrades unlocked lol
the only way i could imagine for it to be good is if they rework the upgrades and add a (small/nerfed) loiter ability and some kind of "damage/suppress AA defenses" as unlockable upgrades
I think the general assumption right now is that most loiters and offmaps are going to get reworked at some point down the line, and that it's just not as big of a priority as fixing big cheese strategies or campaign AI. Nobody likes the way skillplan loiters work, while the remainder of the offmaps hover somewhere between "instantly wins you a major battle" and "literally never does anything but costs 200 muni anyways." The British tank battlegroup has an artillery loiter that literally just fires 3 2-shell volleys in a massive spread, where each shell does less than a pack howitzer, and it costs 150 muni. Meanwhile the anti tank loiter can just wipe an entire army if they don't retreat from its circle in time (or do absolutely fricking nothing if they have AA). Anti-air itself is a mess, with like 2/3 of the AA units being totally incapable of shooting down any aircraft and won't even stop a loiter before it naturally expires, while the other 1/3 will just instantkill any aircraft the instant they enter the map.
Currently the US auto commits to the armoured support center every game no questions asked, so changes to it and the other 2 support centers are inevitable, but I would assume the version of air support we're currently playing with are glorified beta assets and they're going to get a major pass somewhere down the line.
It is utter shit as of now, you will always get better use for your munitions elsewhere, not to even mention the opportunity cost of losing upgrades. Just avoid it.