OKW still need caches.

#1
1 month ago

Best example, this 2vs2 video:

OKW cant build caches, but everybody else can.
Its not "balanced" to force the Axis play Ost and OKW together because OKW cant build caches....
And please dont say to me there is an OKW commander....that is "force" the faction aswell to use or do something to be "balanced".

When the OKW released they had fuel/ammo converter, in the Past, I said. OK, no caches but converter.

But now,...nothing...

7.0 patch should change the core OKW: OKW should have caches.

Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • #2
    1 month ago
    ckwxckwx Posts: 7

    Then recycle ability should be added to ally's engineer.

  • #3
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    Sure, if 35/fuel per min is equal with recycle ability what is needed destroyed vehicles and then it ll give u 5 fuel xD
    Very big "profit" for the OKW that recycle....

  • #4
    1 month ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,790
    OKW can also deny enemy crew weapons.
    But caches are a no go. Okw has some of the most effecient units around enabling them to be able to float large amounts of manpower. What's more is a fuel Chace speeds up that little non doc super heavy tank they slightly are the only faction to have access to.

    OKW is u parralled at taking ground, but have a harder time taking it. Balance is a weight on both sides.
  • #5
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51
    edited April 28

    So its fair, OKW have to stick to raketens when allies are spamming tanks. Got it..nice balance.

  • #6
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    And how is deny crew weapons doing anything with resource balance?
    Then okey:
    UK Vanguard operations. As brit u have special heavy tank, fall back position, fast capture, elit commandos, air support, arty from base. So u have everything. Which faction has the same? :)

  • #7
    1 month ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,790
    > @szolnok95 said:
    > So its fair, OKW have to stick to raketens when allies are spamming tanks. Got it..nice balance.

    They could also use Shreks, Pumas, panthers, or JP4s. Okw has AT options for every single level of fuel income.
    Many players manage to do just fine with one of the most aggressive factions the game kmows. If you want a defensive axis faction one of those exist. You can't have all the tools to take ground and all the tools to hold it as well. Balance.
  • #8
    1 month ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339

    Okw Heavy Fortification doc.

  • #9
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    Why we are talking about pros and cons when I started with resource balance?

  • #10
    1 month ago
    VegnaVegna Posts: 956

    @szolnok95 said:
    Why we are talking about pros and cons when I started with resource balance?

    This is intended as part of their faction pros and cons so it is part of it. When they took out the ability to convert they changed the pricing of things for them to keep it balanced.

  • #11
    1 month ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339
    Factions difference makes big gaps between 1v1 and team game.

    Ost early-mid game is weak in open-field map
    Okw doesnt have cache
    (This also applied if there are 4 Ost or 4 Okw in team game)

    Allies doesnt have clear weakness make it easier to play in 1v1, though in team game, they required great team work to win. As in Axis side, 3 Okw can be super aggressive and dominates in early game, while an Ost provides resource for them. A King on field at 13m happened once to me (Ost used Luff-supplies for an Okw to pick)
  • #12
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    As I said, the is not "balanced" if OKW forced to play together with other factions...
    If the game would based on counter, like AoE 2, then u should say: Its okay.

    But in COH2 its very not okay, the OKW alone ll always could have less resource because there is no cache.

  • #13
    1 month ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,790
    And in 1s okws aggressive design is more rewarding.
  • #14
    1 month ago
    38Lightning38Lightni… Posts: 194
    edited May 1
    I dont like the idea that okw have no solid ability to get resources either
    And I am mainly an allied player.

    I also think they get major boost in team games because of cache.

    What about a compromise?
    They get half the income boost from cache or something similar but cannot build them.

    On the other hand they can get slightly more resources from deconstructing weapons and vehicles which would help them in solo play?

    You could even make a new truck limited to 1 or 2 that increases resources must be build on a resource point and only effects the okw player that builds it not everyone and does not lock down the resource point you can choose it to be fuel or munitions but receives a boost if set up on any specialized resource point and can be repositioned but has a cooldown before it can setup again.

    Dont just outright deny the guy be constructive.
  • #15
    1 month ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339

    I once suggest the idea of Lower the Cache cost to 150mp or so. But only player who builds Cache will get the bonus resource.

    With that. Its possible for Okw get another buff. Since they're no more being too powerful in team game with Ost.
    There was someone said that will bring toxic to the game that team mates will fight for 'who is worthy to build cache'

  • #16
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    @C3Tooth said:
    I once suggest the idea of Lower the Cache cost to 150mp or so. But only player who builds Cache will get the bonus resource.

    With that. Its possible for Okw get another buff. Since they're no more being too powerful in team game with Ost.
    There was someone said that will bring toxic to the game that team mates will fight for 'who is worthy to build cache'

    Then still RIP OKW in 1vs1.

  • #17
    1 month ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339
    Definitely not
    I said if Cache only give the player who build resouces. Then Okw Can Be Get Another Buff, Which Is Okw Stronger In 1v1.
    People barely build cache in 1v1 since lack of force to protect the cache.

    250mp give a player 3 more fuel per min. At the same time, Okw use that 250mp for another squad to harass another point, which is 3fuel and 5ammo (talking about 1v1)
  • #18
    1 month ago
    Balanced_GamerBalanced_… Posts: 173

    I think what could make them OKW survive better late game is a Pak40 become available after 2 Bases built. Rak really is terrible against stronger medium tanks and heavy particularly. Get wipes easily. Range limited and penetration in late game.

    I think OKW would have Pak 40, they would survive better. Current being placed in a disadvantageous position, their terms of proper AT is one of the key issues I believe. I am fine OKW does not fuel caches as long as they have something to properly counter them.

    If I had to compare WEHR and OKW dealing with Fuel difficulties. I think WEHR has better chance combating vehicles overall. Because Pak40 scales way better and is better overall.

    Give Sturmpio after 1 base built the choice to get 2 Pzshreks.

    Without proper AT support weapon units, I feel they do require fuel caches at the moment. Team games are just beaten easily at times. When the enemy effortlessly places fuel caches giving them the upper hand.

    I think it would be good since they can as well at the moment get kind of a prices reduction for their bases after being destroyed or actually become for "free". The only faction having to pay at full price again is also unjustified. I do not think this idea is balanced. I think after built once should become "free". Why does OKW the only, faction have to suffer by having to purchase it twice. They suffer heavily in terms of fuel also because of this fact.

    If they fix that too, then OKW does not need fuel caches.

    In their current state. They do need fuel caches.

    If the following are fixed.

    1./ Give them proper AT like Pak 40.
    2./ Make Bases become "free" after destroyed. Still delays OKW but not as punishing as it is currently for no reason.
    3./ Sturmpio given the option to get 2 Pzshreks.

    Then they do not need fuel caches at all.

  • #19
    1 month ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339
    edited May 10

    OKW HQs in the middle of battle field is to hold certain point & harass further. To me its smarter to put your PzHQ at the cut off point to prevent your resource is cut. Rather than many players put it at the middle of the map to hold a fuel itself.

    I had a game where Axis team was on the upper hand, then an OKW put their PzHQ at our cut off point (right outside our base), got multiple indirect fires, then lost their 135fuel 300mp. No Allies player wants such a play style get another FREE PzHQ. That PzHQ hold us in the base for more than 3mins. This is not mention every OST MGs bunker can be built in 30sec.

    In 2014, OKW got a free ConvertHT every 3mins (only 1 on field). OKW players exploited that free vehicle to scout & take hit for their infantry. It was changed to cost 15fuel 100mp like today. Then you know your suggestion of getting another free base can exploit the PzHQ play style. - Hey, free Bofors

    Its the risk players willing to take. A Soviet tier building stay at the base cost 90fuel 240mp, thats a high cost though those are never being destroyed. Because they stay in the base.

    Except Ost buildings is cheaper than a halftrack, & USF & UKF 's dont cost.

  • #20
    1 month ago
    Balanced_GamerBalanced_… Posts: 173

    @C3Tooth said:
    OKW HQs in the middle of battle field is to hold certain point & harass further. To me its smarter to put your PzHQ at the cut off point to prevent your resource is cut. Rather than many players put it at the middle of the map to hold a fuel itself.

    I had a game where Axis team was on the upper hand, then an OKW put their PzHQ at our cut off point (right outside our base), got multiple indirect fires, then lost their 135fuel 300mp. No Allies player wants such a play style get another FREE PzHQ. That PzHQ hold us in the base for more than 3mins. This is not mention every OST MGs bunker can be built in 30sec.

    In 2014, OKW got a free ConvertHT every 3mins (only 1 on field). OKW players exploited that free vehicle to scout & take hit for their infantry. It was changed to cost 15fuel 100mp like today. Then you know your suggestion of getting another free base can exploit the PzHQ play style. - Hey, free Bofors

    Its the risk players willing to take. A Soviet tier building stay at the base cost 90fuel 240mp, thats a high cost though those are never being destroyed. Because they stay in the base.

    Except Ost buildings is cheaper than a halftrack, & USF & UKF 's dont cost.

    Maybe not for free. Maybe 1/3 or 30% of original price would make sense. It costs for the Truck in addition to base.

    No other faction in game has suffer as much as OKW has to with their bases. I understand the Last Base is being good for holding ground OKW but that is a major set back for them to lose it. Taking time to get another would take another 10min or so. No other factions has to suffer this way and that is an unjust feature.

    I think it is more ideal for them to have discount for losing a base since OKW cant produce fuel caches. Losing 130 fuel is insane plus 10 from truck, making it 140 fuel.

    The guy you mentioned who Panzer HQ placed at your cut point must be somewhat ridiculous. It is more ideal and cost efficient for a Bofors to be placed there instead.

    There should be a discount costing 30% of original price after having to build it again. Will not be as punishing as it is now. So if my last base is destroyed. It should cost me now 40 fuel. Not 130 fuel again. That is incredibly unfair and ridiculous. Currently there is no other words than it just being a ridiculous feature. Give Discount system for OKW having to building bases again!

    There is nothing OKW can do to compensate for their losses. Every other faction does not have to go through this stage. I think giving discount for having them to build it the 2nd time (and many more countless times) should cost 30% of original price. That would be fair and square. Then it is justified for them to have no fuel caches for OKW.

    If the devs do not decide this to have a discount system, then give OKW fuel caches. Currently, it makes zero sense for them having more than enough difficulties to acquire fuel.

    Do you agree with this idea?

  • #21
    1 month ago
    Balanced_GamerBalanced_… Posts: 173

    70% discount in order words. From 130 fuel to 40 fuel for building it again!

  • #22
    1 month ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,790
    OKW shouldn't be rewarded for being too aggressive with their trucks. If they don't want to risk them they shouldn't be so aggressive with them. Risk/reward. Plain and simple.
  • #23
    1 month ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339
    Love putting your base near the frontline? Now I understand why a guide said Priest company is the best USF commander to counter Okw.
  • #24
    1 month ago
    Balanced_GamerBalanced_… Posts: 173

    Only no brainers would leave the Building entirely exposed or even treat it like a Bofors. The reason why it should get a refund cuz it is like teching, getting vehicle and structure all over again. I suggest 50% would be more than fair enough. For the fact they can not produce any fuel. Should be a bonus for that fact!

    If one compares it to being a bofors, it is just idiotic for that price. For that amount of fuel you can get 3 Bofors and that somehow justifies it. OKW cant produce any more fuel than they currently can. It is already a huge deficit on top of having to repurchase.

    Much of what Allies have in the arsenal is a bunch of artillery especially abilities. Easy, no brainer, call it upon base. Imagine if Axis could do on their bases. There would suddenly be complaints.

    There is just more unjustified risks than there is for such little reward.

  • #25
    1 month ago
    SimpleSimonSimpleSim… Posts: 73
    edited May 11

    No. OKW's heavy posture toward offense gives it a lot of the best tier units on a peer basis with opposing units in the game. If you allow OKW to build as many supply caches as it wants it can just saturate Allied players with those same units, now entirely expendable. As I feel right now actually I think OKW needs some units nerfed or changed entirely to facilitate better play on their end rather than just relying on those cancerous Volksgren blobs or getting free spying with Rakets.

    What I could see is that the HQ trucks could be used to improve supply wherever they deploy. This would give them a double purpose and enable an Allied player with an option to task saturate the OKW player by pushing him to overextend and scatter his trucks (and their important abilities) over the map. I'm cautious about this idea overall though as it could enable cheese play if guys find ways to deploy the trucks in rough sections of map like map corners.

  • #26
    1 month ago
    Balanced_GamerBalanced_… Posts: 173

    @SimpleSimon said:
    No. OKW's heavy posture toward offense gives it a lot of the best tier units on a peer basis with opposing units in the game. If you allow OKW to build as many supply caches as it wants it can just saturate Allied players with those same units, now entirely expendable. As I feel right now actually I think OKW needs some units nerfed or changed entirely to facilitate better play on their end rather than just relying on those cancerous Volksgren blobs or getting free spying with Rakets.

    What I could see is that the HQ trucks could be used to improve supply wherever they deploy. This would give them a double purpose and enable an Allied player with an option to task saturate the OKW player by pushing him to overextend and scatter his trucks (and their important abilities) over the map. I'm cautious about this idea overall though as it could enable cheese play if guys find ways to deploy the trucks in rough sections of map like map corners.

    I do like your idea. It shows more emphasis and reason. A good mechanic. @SimpleSimon said What I could see is that the HQ trucks could be used to improve supply wherever they deploy. This would give them a double purpose and enable an Allied player with an option to task saturate the OKW player by pushing him to overextend and scatter his trucks (and their important abilities) over the map.

    This would most certainly create more diversity and gameplay for OKW. ;) Good job!

    No need for Caches then. Seems more justified and exceptional resolution to this issue.

    Reasons why there is Volks spam is because they are the only viable choice unfortunately. It would be better if they nerfed Volks. Instead make sturmpio and kubel slightly more viable for combat to see more action.

    I think what would also be a nice change if Obers came earlier, now being currently too late. Can get after 1 Base built. Upgrade MG34 only accessible after 2 bases built would be a nice change. Then, I would most certainly not mind a nerf in volks.

    I would like Raketenwerfer revamped with its camo nerfed and range buffed. Nerf camo to the extent where it camos only when stationary, can not move. Maybe can move vet 1, but should be as slow as grandpa.

    Give range the same or nearly as any other Anti tank gun. It really becomes the worst late game. It is not that good a supportive AT unit except early and mid game.

    Those are my thoughts thus far!

    Wonderful, Your opinion is true indeed!

  • #27
    1 month ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    Nice thoughts!

  • #28
    1 month ago
    Balanced_GamerBalanced_… Posts: 173

    Thanks!

  • #29
    3 weeks ago
    BloodygoodBloodygood Posts: 72

    Using HQ trucks to improve supply would be giving them another game busting feature and change the fulcrum upon which okw as a faction are supposedly balanced against the other factions. No one seems to be considering that the flak truck is already capable of repairing armored vehicles, or that the med truck allows for super aggressive early game pushes. Giving one or both of these a fuel bonus would be creating a synergy where the reward for aggressive deployment far outweighs the risk

  • #30
    3 weeks ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 51

    Try to be agressive when OKW get 20 fuel per min, alllies: 40. And allies ez wipe the raketen...

  • #31
    3 weeks ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 339

    Try to be agressive when OKW get 20 fuel per min, alllies: 40. And allies ez wipe the raketen...
    It happens if there is no Ost in Axis team:

    • 1v1 OKW vs an Allies. So you're telling you let the Allies build 6 cache. You fail by your skill, not the no-cache disadvantage.
    • 4v4 4 OKW vs Allies. Your team start the game with 1200mp force vs ~900mp force. If your team can not roam 2/3 the map in early game with potent 10 squads of Sturm, or 10 Kubel, or 10 squad of Volk. Well...

    When Volk didnt have stg44 & Cons was really fast to produce. I always manage to take 2/3 the map with 6 Cons and able to hold them to mid game.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.