[WF Factions][All]Forward Retreat Points

2

Comments

  • #32
    1 year ago
    ElSlayerElSlayer Posts: 230

    I'd like to see more Captain's "On me"-like abilities instead of FRPs.

  • #33
    1 year ago

    They need to be removed, period.

    At large maps like hill 331 or general mud if you play an EF faction you'll get nowhere since the WFA can just retreat to their nearby point while you need to run back to base.

    They also encourage blobbing. Even if you inflict superior damage to a WFA as EF, you still wont be able to dislodge them after the engagement because you had to recover all the way back at base while they can heal and reinforce much nearer.

    If you don't remove them, give them also to Sov and wehr. That will level the playing field.

  • #34
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    I wouldnt mind seeing them doctrinal at most, a commander like urban defense relies on cheesey powerful aura to be relevant at all... Seeing it toned down /removed would and maybe a FRP would make it a little better/and more viable as a commander.

    For it might actually be feasable to allow an frp bunker upgrade AT bp3, the reasoning for rhat being the small (and never increasing like the brits..) Squad sizes and not attack move to victory enabled infantry...
  • #35
    1 year ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647
    edited July 2017

    I think if your going to see FRP remain in the game, you have to follow the idea that @Lazarus suggested. Whereby healing sources across all factions are limited to the headquarters sector, maybe even combined with a reinforcement cost penalty at an FRP.

    That would level the playing field between the dlc and vanilla factions by introducing the concept of soft and hard retreats to the WFA, something OST and SOV already currently work well with. A mechanic that when coupled with slower repair speeds, pushes the game away from the mindless a-moving into your opponent ground that the western factions currently inhabit, into a more tactical game that forces players to actually consider engagements. That reinforces the original strategic depth that the vanilla game had, something that was considerably watered down with the later add-ons for the WFA, who with their aura healing, FRP and insane repair rates, changed the gameplay into a more arcade like, C&C style of strategy game.

    Currently there is no real disadvantage to any of the three WFA FRP's short of the initial investment, as they all have easy access to cost efficient and effective aura healing. So they are still a no brainer purchase, one that really skews the balance when its an EFA faction vs a WFA counterpart, and a mechanic that on the larger maps can easily become a rather broken advantage.

    My only concern with keeping FRP even with certain limitations such as healing or reinforcement penalities, is that players will continue to use them as a means of dodging off-maps, barrages and have them remain a way to avoid any bad engagements with relatively little punishment.

  • #36
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263

    Bump

    FRPs need to be more limited somehow if not removed entirely. The changes we had coming looked like a good start, but they're gone now so I think we should make sure this discussion stays relevant. Having better infantry scaling and a shorter retreat as the game goes on is the largest issue of imbalance in Wfa vs Efa imo.

  • #37
    1 year ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,011

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    Bump

    FRPs need to be more limited somehow if not removed entirely. The changes we had coming looked like a good start, but they're gone now so I think we should make sure this discussion stays relevant. Having better infantry scaling and a shorter retreat as the game goes on is the largest issue of imbalance in Wfa vs Efa imo.

    Agreed, WFA suffer very little in terms of bleed for how powerful their infantry is and what their retreat times are. Somewhat related that I'd like to also bring up - AoE healing. Now only specifically the Western Allies have AoE healing but OKW has so much passive healing that it might as well be AoE healing so it really is once again, a Western problem. AoE healing not only enables blobbing, in the specific case of the UKF it encourages it. I've got a moving medic who can heal either 1 squad or 1,000 just the same, as long as they all stand near him for the ability, and what better time to pop that than when you're all returning to the front after a brisk walk back to your FRP?

    If we're going to have forward healing from anything tougher than a bunker or ANYTHING mobile, it needs to be applied soldier by soldier by soldier. This AoE business, combined with FRPs and FHQs just vomits soldiers out like they're on an assembly line.

  • #38
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,263
    edited August 2017

    @Lazarus said:
    If we're going to have forward healing from anything tougher than a bunker or ANYTHING mobile, it needs to be applied soldier by soldier by soldier. This AoE business, combined with FRPs and FHQs just vomits soldiers out like they're on an assembly line.

    +1000

    US AOE healing was okay back when you had to click the ability to get your 30 seconds of healing (can't believe that was ever a thing) and now its just really really effective. I think they should cheapen the ambulance a bit and slow the rate vastly or rework entirely how the healing gets dispersed.

  • #39
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    I dont know why the ambo doesnt just "deploy" its medics. A small set up/pack up time, scrap (or at least reduce) the fuel cost and make it a mobile ost bunker

    Side note: it would be cool if the medic "crew" of the ambulance could covert a building into a field hospital
  • #40
    1 year ago

    I'm with you guys

    1) A sfk 250 for OKW would be cool, as forward mobile reinforcement halftrack (healing at the battlegroup or by sturm)
    2) USF would really appreciate a m5 for reinforcement as well (healing through medics droppable by ambulance, not aoe).
    3) UC would really benefit if it had some kind of medical upgrade, with some medics being the only passengers, that can be deployed to heal nearby units + reinforce squads, but...
    3.1) Medikit is just as stupid as FRP healing, you play a fixed price to heal EVERY unit everytime you want as long as you blobbed them, give UKF sturmlike medikits instead droppable by either IS or Sappers.

  • #41
    1 year ago
    gydh56gydh56 Posts: 71

    I don't think it's necessary for eastern front factions to have FRP, for they have halftracks, have nice upgrades, while being able to reinforce while in battle (only in your own territory, though). Also, blobs are rather easy to deal with. An MG is enough to handle it, while if you lack one, then you will have to use vehicles very effectively, while being able to kite perfectly.

  • #42
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,724
    If anyside desirves FRP over the other its would be EFA. WFA everything is already supercharged compared to EFA and the FRPs just amplify that.
  • #43
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    If anyside desirves FRP over the other its would be EFA. WFA everything is already supercharged compared to EFA and the FRPs just amplify that.

    Soviet + FRP would be much more cancer than wfa + frp.
    Any faction needs a specific unique halftrack tho.
    There are tons of models of doc halftrack that could be adopted for wfa axis and allies, like Spec Weap one with a new camo, open sfk halftrack with no mg and flame upgrade...

  • #44
    1 year ago
    > @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    > @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    > If anyside desirves FRP over the other its would be EFA. WFA everything is already supercharged compared to EFA and the FRPs just amplify that.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Soviet + FRP would be much more cancer than wfa + frp.
    > Any faction needs a specific unique halftrack tho.
    > There are tons of models of doc halftrack that could be adopted for wfa axis and allies, like Spec Weap one with a new camo, open sfk halftrack with no mg and flame upgrade...

    Penals? Maybe. Soviet as a whole? No because soviet have MANY drawbacks- thier cqb infantry deal no damage outside a certain range, their long range infantry are shackled with not only an AI debilitating AT weapon, but also a heafty munitons cost that reduces their moving damage output to 2 (2!)/ 6 weapons. And cons are...well cons.... a frp for the soviet would also lack any for of healing (at all) because their sole way to heal costs 250mp (more than a con squad) and is limited to 4 medics in base (no passives, no soft retreats, no AOE "lets blob to keep healthy" mechanics)

    Its not the mechanic that makes FRP OP, its the exclusive (to dlc) nature, combined with particularly potent infantry, combined with super easy healing (either AOE or passive self healing) combined with no brainer "improve everything about our output" weapon upgrades.
  • #45
    1 year ago

    @thedarkarmadillo
    Nah, i can see cons ppsh blob and penals dominate with FRP.

    "their long range infantry are shackled with not only an AI debilitating AT weapon, but also a heafty munitons cost that reduces their moving damage output to 2 (2!)/ 6 weapons."
    That any good player will avoid, as penals have the upper hand on everything okw and cons can have at tier 0 and be able to rush a tier 0.
    They also have flame clown car that would force raketen, while sturm tactics are harder (but not impossible) to pull off against penals that needs less volleys to kill sturms.

    "And cons are...well cons.... "
    Cons are perfect, their only problem is maxim suppression that coud use a buff (but cons + tier 2 builds are extremely viable anyway), they actually scale incredibly well by late game when they reach vet 3.
    Cons ppsh are extremely potent if well used (but even without ppsh, their veterancy is insane, cons mosin are viable and effective with thse accuracy buffs and that insane RA), i surely DON'T want a frp for a faction that has elite and mainline focused on the offensive, and that can sprint for 10 muni to go back in the fight in seconds.

    "a frp for the soviet would also lack any for of healing (at all) because their sole way to heal costs 250mp (more than a con squad) and is limited to 4 medics in base (no passives, no soft retreats, no AOE "lets blob to keep healthy" mechanics)"
    That's an issue with wfa allies, not SU.

    "combined with no brainer "improve everything about our output" weapon upgrades."
    Which is kinda ironic, it is true that cons vet 3 with mosin get a mid range oriented dps unlike their vet 0 form, but regardless of ppsh or mosin a good player will always close in to capitalize on high damage low accuracy weapons (which become high damage, medium accuracy weapons by vet 3) since axis infantry has always been long range oriented, except a few specialists that you should have some light/mediums to deal with when they arrive.
    Honestly....why would you ever want to keep mosin if you have the opportunity to get ppsh for cons and both are meant for close range ?
    True no brainer ae mg42 and panzershreck.
    Allies had no brainer upgrades since vanilla, axis since wfa.

  • #46
    1 year ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 682
    edited September 2017
    @SAY_MY_NAME

    The lmg42s and g43s were added in wfa?

    At first the lmg42 was a no brainer it decimated any man that dared to close in even harder then at long range.
    If that was not a no brainer i dont know what is. If memory serves my right you could throw in g43s on top of that.

    So that last statement of axis lacking no brainers and only soviets did before wfa release. Imo that is not true.

    The psshs and dp28 both being doctrinal limits their no brainer aspect by a lot.
  • #47
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017
    > @TheLeveler83 ha detto:
    > @SAY_MY_NAME
    >
    > The lmg42s and g43s were added in wfa?
    >
    > At first the lmg42 was a no brainer it decimated any man that dared to close in even harder then at long range.
    > If that was not a no brainer i dont know what is. If memory serves my right you could throw in g43s on top of that.
    >
    > So that last statement of axis lacking no brainers and only soviets did before wfa release. Imo that is not true.
    >
    > The psshs and dp28 both being doctrinal limits their no brainer aspect by a lot.
    >

    Lmg 42 don't fire on the move, it's not a no brainer AT ALL.

    Only g43 was a no brainer (but used to suck before buff and nobody used it).

    Being doctrinal doesn't mean it isn't a no brainer.
    The fact that soviet penals have no upgrades but get 6 ultra powerful semi auto rifles for free despite the squad costs as much as volks isn't a disadvantage lol

    300:6= 50. + 25 mp per reinforce
    250:5= 50. + 25 mp. per reinforce

    Seems legit.
  • #48
    1 year ago
    @SAY_MY_NAME

    I am well aware of the current state of grens and lmg 42. I said it was a no brainer before wfa release.
    Even if it doesnt fire on the move it ate infantry at close range for breakfast back then also did at longe range. That is not a downside big enough to not always go for it esp back then.

    Ppsh being doctrinal does make it less of a no brainer. Its not available at all times. Its good yes but unlike lmg42 lmg34 bars brens and stgs its not always available. Only when the right doctrine is selected.

    You dont pay 300 mp just for the troops the svts are not free. Cons also 6 men but have weaker weapons. They are cheaper then penals for this reason by far.
    Also just because volks happen to cost 25mp to reinforce as wel does not mean they should trade as they do against penals. While being 50mp cheaper to purchase and without tech required to build.
  • #49
    1 year ago

    @TheLeveler83

    Teching is irrelevant, vanilla factions get first tier for free right from the start, and their starting building is called tier 0, not 1 for this exact reason.
    They are not more expensive, they cost exactly the same as volks, 50 mp per model at start and 25 to reinforce, it just happens that they are a 6 man ultra durable squad, which is a huge advantage since the squad is harder to wipe.
    STV ARE free, and it happens to be the most effective rifle on the move and to have an higher dps than volks rifle at all ranges, even long range, all while they still cost as much as volks.

    But that's not what a no brainer is, a no brainer upgrade dps in all situations and is a positive improvement you have no reason to not use, mg 42 donesn't do that, as it won't fire on the move.
    But what's the reason to not upgrade ppsh ?

  • #50
    1 year ago
    @SAY_MY_NAME

    1 man more does not make them ultra durable. Volks are durable for axis standards. Wich only have 1 man less then penals.

    I find this a bit weird coming from you. Claiming t1 for ost and su is free same with the svts for penals. And then saying that axis dont get free acces to lmg stg upgrade and faust.

    As for the reason for not upgrading to the ppsh is simple. Not selecting the doctrines with ppshs in them. And the fact that psshs hurt longer range dps a lot for cons unlike stgs for volks.

    Do you keep grens without lmgs all the time or you only take the g43s all the time?
  • #51
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017

    @TheLeveler83
    That's your opinion, one man can make the difference between wipe and retreat, and you are completely forgetting that in ths game the dps in PER model, and it's always favorable to have dps dinstributed between several models so getting a loss has less impact in overall squad efficiency.
    Further add that penals are the only squad in coh 2 that get bonuses for every model lost after vet 1,

    You can find it funny, weird, whatever....since second 0 you can build either tier 1 and 2, same for wehr tier 1, but you can't build okw/allies/uk anything, included trucks because tier starting building is already tier 1.
    If we wanna talk about weird things, i find weird you didn't mention penals get satchels for "free" and a penals build require no side teching at all...

    And that's not a point, being doctrinal.
    The point is that, even if a doctrine like lighting war is chosen, i would never use g43 against soviets or usf, while those are great against UKF, that rely on range (why would you ever use your low durability squad at close range against close range enemies ?), thus i find myself using mg42 + panzergrens rather than g43 even when i have chosen a g43 doctrine....that is....not being a no brainer.

    If you choose a ppsh doctrine there is no reason absolutely to not upgrade ppsh, pointing the 0.4 max dps is nitpicking at hs finest, you are ALWAYS gonna use cons at the closest range possible EVER, against any threat, regardless of ppsh or nagants.

  • #52
    1 year ago
    Weapon upgrades should be about role refinement not "this always works" as is the case for BARs and STGs. As said EFA upgrades have trade offs, you lose some and you gain others.

    Also for EFA "free" teching, yes the small fuel cost is included, but not the manpower cost, nor the time for an actual physical unit with pop to take actual in game time to throw up an actual structure. For each and every structure

    One of the things i make sure of when playing against EFA is to focus their engineer because should i be lucky enough to wipe it they HAVE to replace it.

    Yea penals are strong, too strong even, but they themselves are not without drawbacks. As okw you can have 2 units on the field and capping before the engineer finishes building, at least 3 before the penals hit the field give or take if they built a con squad in the mean time.
    That affords you a great deal of map control (especially with the kuble)
  • #53
    1 year ago

    @thedarkarmadillo

    I can't do anything about it, that's how it has been designed, but complaining about THAT SINGLE NO BRAINER to get a a balance argument is nonsense if the game is filled of no brainer upgrades.

    Yeah, they actually pay manpower for that unit, but that unit comes with abilities (satchel, fausts, rifle grenade) that wfa don't have from the start, and the only efa requiring side teching for abilities is the only efa combat unit that get built from tier 0.

    One of the things i make sure when playing against a player that doesn't care about having an engineer because aren't needed for teching is to plant a lot of mines...any faction needs at least one engineer, and allies wfa have viable handheld at for them.

    Having some drawbacks doesn't mean it is balanced, panzerfus have a huge drawback by having a shitty nade.
    Penals outgun any unit from start at all ranges, and perfectly scale without any muni based upgrade.
    Any competent player can capitalize on the shock impact they have and dominate over everything and gain back all the map control before axis can even pull out a vehicle.

    You have also forget that m3 is mandatory given current meta, and it force a raketen,
    "at least 3"
    One of those is a raketen.

  • #54
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,575

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    @TheLeveler83
    That's your opinion, one man can make the difference between wipe and retreat, and you are completely forgetting that in ths game the dps in PER model, and it's always favorable to have dps dinstributed between several models so getting a loss has less impact in overall squad efficiency.

    Completely incorrect.
    Game favors DPS centered around singular model, prime examples are LMG grens and obers, model loss means minimal DPS loss, contrary to what you said, where each model loss is always huge dps hit.

    Further add that penals are the only squad in coh 2 that get bonuses for every model lost after vet 1,

    That bonus is a multiplier, not addition.
    Its bulletin small and makes almost no difference, still beats ever present tripwires.
    The bonus is completely irrelevant in comparison to even weakest weapon upgrade.

    You can find it funny, weird, whatever....since second 0 you can build either tier 1 and 2, same for wehr tier 1, but you can't build okw/allies/uk anything, included trucks because tier starting building is already tier 1.
    If we wanna talk about weird things, i find weird you didn't mention penals get satchels for "free" and a penals build require no side teching at all...

    Now you're just randomly rumbling.
    Can't wrap your head around asymmetrical teching and the fact that some factions got all from HQ while others need to set a quick structure first with comparably more powerful units?

    And that's not a point, being doctrinal.
    The point is that, even if a doctrine like lighting war is chosen, i would never use g43 against soviets or usf, while those are great against UKF, that rely on range (why would you ever use your low durability squad at close range against close range enemies ?), thus i find myself using mg42 + panzergrens rather than g43 even when i have chosen a g43 doctrine....that is....not being a no brainer.

    G43 isn't just weapon upgrade, its also map hack if you utilize its ability, moreover mix of LMGs and G43s allows grens to be effective at both, offense and defense and flanking at relatively low cost.

    If you choose a ppsh doctrine there is no reason absolutely to not upgrade ppsh, pointing the 0.4 max dps is nitpicking at hs finest, you are ALWAYS gonna use cons at the closest range possible EVER, against any threat, regardless of ppsh or nagants.

    Sure, there is no reason to not use PPSH, but you completely ignored what he said - PPSH doctrines are NOT meta, therefore PPSH are out of question unless you do some hipster strats.

  • #55
    1 year ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 682
    edited September 2017

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    @TheLeveler83
    That's your opinion, one man can make the difference between wipe and retreat, and you are completely forgetting that in ths game the dps in PER model, and it's always favorable to have dps dinstributed between several models so getting a loss has less impact in overall squad efficiency.
    Further add that penals are the only squad in coh 2 that get bonuses for every model lost after vet 1,

    Low dps high models squads like cons may suffer less when loosing a model. They also kills less to begin with and need to close all the time. High dps low(er) model squads suffer more. But they also kill more. Now add the fact that grens and volks can get easy acces to ai upgrades and cons do not. Cons 40% acc buff is needed to stand a chance against that firepower. Without that cons have no place in the late game at all.

    Penals still suffer dispite that bonus just not as much.

    You can find it funny, weird, whatever....since second 0 you can build either tier 1 and 2, same for wehr tier 1, but you can't build okw/allies/uk anything, included trucks because tier starting building is already tier 1.
    If we wanna talk about weird things, i find weird you didn't mention penals get satchels for "free" and a penals build require no side teching at all...

    T1/T2 cost fuel and mp to build thus not free. Volks Rifles and Tommies all t1 for wf armies and all are better then grens and cons and come close to penals. They all get stuff ost and su dont get such as fw rtrt point free squads and fuel free vehicle. So i am not sure why this is an issue anyway.

    The satchal is easely avoided but does high damage. Not needing tech for it is compensated by cons needing specific teching for basic abilities and doctrines for any upgrade.

    And that's not a point, being doctrinal.
    The point is that, even if a doctrine like lighting war is chosen, i would never use g43 against soviets or usf, while those are great against UKF, that rely on range (why would you ever use your low durability squad at close range against close range enemies ?), thus i find myself using mg42 + panzergrens rather than g43 even when i have chosen a g43 doctrine....that is....not being a no brainer.

    Thats your opinion.
    The bonusses must outweigh the cons greatly, not only have no drawbacks what so ever. Thats what wf armies have.

    If you choose a ppsh doctrine there is no reason absolutely to not upgrade ppsh, pointing the 0.4 max dps is nitpicking at hs finest, you are ALWAYS gonna use cons at the closest range possible EVER, against any threat, regardless of ppsh or nagants.

    Call it nit picking but it hurts their long range dps greatly. Its ballanced that way. Its just that with nagants they will eventualy get outclassed by any and all threats. I do agree when you got psshs there is no reason not to get them. The doctrines they are in are not no brainers however.

  • #56
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017

    @Katitof ha detto:

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    @TheLeveler83
    That's your opinion, one man can make the difference between wipe and retreat, and you are completely forgetting that in ths game the dps in PER model, and it's always favorable to have dps dinstributed between several models so getting a loss has less impact in overall squad efficiency.

    Completely incorrect.
    Game favors DPS centered around singular model, prime examples are LMG grens and obers, model loss means minimal DPS loss, contrary to what you said, where each model loss is always huge dps hit.

    Further add that penals are the only squad in coh 2 that get bonuses for every model lost after vet 1,

    That bonus is a multiplier, not addition.
    Its bulletin small and makes almost no difference, still beats ever present tripwires.
    The bonus is completely irrelevant in comparison to even weakest weapon upgrade.

    You can find it funny, weird, whatever....since second 0 you can build either tier 1 and 2, same for wehr tier 1, but you can't build okw/allies/uk anything, included trucks because tier starting building is already tier 1.
    If we wanna talk about weird things, i find weird you didn't mention penals get satchels for "free" and a penals build require no side teching at all...

    Now you're just randomly rumbling.
    Can't wrap your head around asymmetrical teching and the fact that some factions got all from HQ while others need to set a quick structure first with comparably more powerful units?

    And that's not a point, being doctrinal.
    The point is that, even if a doctrine like lighting war is chosen, i would never use g43 against soviets or usf, while those are great against UKF, that rely on range (why would you ever use your low durability squad at close range against close range enemies ?), thus i find myself using mg42 + panzergrens rather than g43 even when i have chosen a g43 doctrine....that is....not being a no brainer.

    G43 isn't just weapon upgrade, its also map hack if you utilize its ability, moreover mix of LMGs and G43s allows grens to be effective at both, offense and defense and flanking at relatively low cost.

    If you choose a ppsh doctrine there is no reason absolutely to not upgrade ppsh, pointing the 0.4 max dps is nitpicking at hs finest, you are ALWAYS gonna use cons at the closest range possible EVER, against any threat, regardless of ppsh or nagants.

    Sure, there is no reason to not use PPSH, but you completely ignored what he said - PPSH doctrines are NOT meta, therefore PPSH are out of question unless you do some hipster strats.

    That's not true, every model weapon scale and contribute to the dps, and all penals model have all the same rifle.
    You can't say things like that, ever model killed is an hit to the dps (especially a squad that get free semi auto rifle for each model), and you somehow forget that having less models to fire at and focus fire is an advantage per se.

    It's bullettin small for a single loss, it gives 15% RA bonus to the last model retreating.
    And are three bonuses, RA, accuracy and weapon cooldown.

    Nah you can't aknowledge that the cost of the first structure is purposely minimal, and that penals and grens don't need any other side teching to unlock fausts and satchel, nor upgrades like okw, ukf and usf do with either side teching or SWS trucks

    It can be the best maphack ever, you got no reason to use it over mg42 when the enemy is soviet/usa, as you are gonna use grens from the longest range possible.
    Those 2 upgrades are extremely different in the way you are gonna use grens, it's far from being a no brainer in this case.

    Soviet shock army and advanced warfare tactics are a lot used for cons build and extreely viable.
    Meta adjusted towards penals and so did the commanders, not the opposite.
    And anyway that's not being a no brainer, a no brainer is something you would upgrade always regardless of the situation and being doctrinal has nothing to do with it.
    If you choose a doctrine with ppsh you have no reason ever to not upgrade ppsh, thus it's a doctrinal no brainer.

    @TheLeveler83 ha detto:

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    @TheLeveler83
    That's your opinion, one man can make the difference between wipe and retreat, and you are completely forgetting that in ths game the dps in PER model, and it's always favorable to have dps dinstributed between several models so getting a loss has less impact in overall squad efficiency.
    Further add that penals are the only squad in coh 2 that get bonuses for every model lost after vet 1,

    Low dps high models squads like cons may suffer less when loosing a model. They also kills less to begin with and need to close all the time. High dps low(er) model squads suffer more. But they also kill more. Now add the fact that grens and volks can get easy acces to ai upgrades and cons do not. Cons 40% acc buff is needed to stand a chance against that firepower. Without that cons have no place in the late game at all.

    Penals still suffer dispite that bonus just not as much.

    You can find it funny, weird, whatever....since second 0 you can build either tier 1 and 2, same for wehr tier 1, but you can't build okw/allies/uk anything, included trucks because tier starting building is already tier 1.
    If we wanna talk about weird things, i find weird you didn't mention penals get satchels for "free" and a penals build require no side teching at all...

    T1/T2 cost fuel and mp to build thus not free. Volks Rifles and Tommies all t1 for wf armies and all are better then grens and cons and come close to penals. They all get stuff ost and su dont get such as fw rtrt point free squads and fuel free vehicle. So i am not sure why this is an issue anyway.

    The satchal is easely avoided but does high damage. Not needing tech for it is compensated by cons needing specific teching for basic abilities and doctrines for any upgrade.

    And that's not a point, being doctrinal.
    The point is that, even if a doctrine like lighting war is chosen, i would never use g43 against soviets or usf, while those are great against UKF, that rely on range (why would you ever use your low durability squad at close range against close range enemies ?), thus i find myself using mg42 + panzergrens rather than g43 even when i have chosen a g43 doctrine....that is....not being a no brainer.

    Thats your opinion.
    The bonusses must outweigh the cons greatly, not only have no drawbacks what so ever. Thats what wf armies have.

    If you choose a ppsh doctrine there is no reason absolutely to not upgrade ppsh, pointing the 0.4 max dps is nitpicking at hs finest, you are ALWAYS gonna use cons at the closest range possible EVER, against any threat, regardless of ppsh or nagants.

    Call it nit picking but it hurts their long range dps greatly. Its ballanced that way. Its just that with nagants they will eventualy get outclassed by any and all threats. I do agree when you got psshs there is no reason not to get them. The doctrines they are in are not no brainers however.

    That's true, i never said cons veterancy is broken, i said that if they get a non doc upgrade they should cost a little more to keep those bonuses(in a scenario in which maxim is good).
    vet 3 cons retain more damage resilience than vet 5 volks and almost as much as vet 3 rifles.
    Don't even for a second forget that each gren model cost 30 mp, cons 20 and penals 25.

    Ahhh cmon, i already told you, grens and penals require NO side teching, wfa mainlines do, and starting tier cost is minimal for this reason, the balance argument "they require teching" is bs, and i don't see grens being OP for that.
    Fuel free vehicles are either not worth fuel at all (kubel), or needed as specific anti garrison upgreadable platform (UC).
    I don't get that, no metion to non doc flamethrowers ?

    Satchel are powerful, and can be used on vehicles with flanking and cutting retreat, (people expected to straight up charge at a vehicle and kill it ?), by the same logic grens get "free" panzerfaust, penals get "free" satchel, we don't get to decide it, it's a fact that a penal build require no side teching at all.

    0.4 dps per model that get ppsh is nothing, and it's a no brainer because you are gonna use both upgraded and unupgraded cons at close range, without changing anything.
    Would you ever spit on such high dps at close range for a minimal dps difference AT MAX RANGE (35 highest range, it means that even at half range the difference is 0).
    Both mosin and ppsh are close range weapons.

  • #57
    1 year ago
    @SAY_MY_NAME

    I am not sure if cons need a price increase if they get a close or medium range non doc upgrade. Their vet 0 stats are still the same. There is also the 250mp 40 fuel upgrades just for cons to be more then meatshields.
    The non doc upgrades costing the part should be enough. Maybe requiring an unlock.

    Both penal satchels are extremely situational in taking out vehicles. Even infantry dont get killed a lot by it. Hitting a mg with the grens rifle grenade is more feasable.

    Still i dont see psshs used nor do i use them every game. Unlike wfa and ost lmg upgrades. Imo psshs while a good upgrade are not a no brainer of the same caliber of the others because there doctrinal.
  • #58
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017

    @TheLeveler83 ha detto:
    @SAY_MY_NAME

    I am not sure if cons need a price increase if they get a close or medium range non doc upgrade. Their vet 0 stats are still the same. There is also the 250mp 40 fuel upgrades just for cons to be more then meatshields.
    The non doc upgrades costing the part should be enough. Maybe requiring an unlock.

    Both penal satchels are extremely situational in taking out vehicles. Even infantry dont get killed a lot by it. Hitting a mg with the grens rifle grenade is more feasable.

    Still i dont see psshs used nor do i use them every game. Unlike wfa and ost lmg upgrades. Imo psshs while a good upgrade are not a no brainer of the same caliber of the others because there doctrinal.

    Thye do indeed, and keep their vetting bonuses on a mainline that just got scaling dps.
    Would be OP AF to have 20mp models more durable than volks with an improved dps and hourra.

    Less than you would think.
    It gets maximum efficiency with heavy penals build orders, flanking,
    A single squad would never make it, but with 4 is fairly easy, if you don't charge from a single direction.

    Why even bother ? There are ultra effective OP penals that require no micro at all, no muni, that can effectively fire on the move with ridicolously low penalties (better than rifles, volks and any mainline) their stv, have an handheld nuke for everything that their rifle don't kill (maybe it can leave enough time to mg to leave, if you don't place satchel near door, but it would insta blow building) and a 120mm/dshk call in to complement it.
    The problem here isn't cons ppsh, it's just that 6 penals into kv8 is more appealing and involve low to no skills.

  • #59
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,575

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    That's not true, every model weapon scale and contribute to the dps, and all penals model have all the same rifle.
    You can't say things like that, ever model killed is an hit to the dps (especially a squad that get free semi auto rifle for each model), and you somehow forget that having less models to fire at and focus fire is an advantage per se.

    You want to pretend 2 DPS weapon contributes as much as 10 DPS one?
    You want to pretend 6x2DPS squad which loses 1 model lost just as much % DPS as 3x2 DPS and 1x10 DPS one?

    Base weapon is completely and utterly irrelevant, it doesn't matter if they use 5 sticks or 6 ober LMG34, losing one model means losing 1/6th of DPS, while squads like LMG grens suffer much lower DPS loss by model loss due to having single potent weapon.

    I've said it again with examples and numbers now, if you still don't get it, you're beyond redemption.

    It's bullettin small for a single loss, it gives 15% RA bonus to the last model retreating.
    And are three bonuses, RA, accuracy and weapon cooldown.

    Its 15% of base value, not 15% on top of base value.
    If you knew how % calculations work, you'd knew its not much.
    And if you retreat on last model, you play the game horribly wrong.

    Nah you can't aknowledge that the cost of the first structure is purposely minimal, and that penals and grens don't need any other side teching to unlock fausts and satchel, nor upgrades like okw, ukf and usf do with either side teching or SWS trucks

    Its irrelevant, you still need to pay that cost and wait that time.
    The only faction with actual minimal cost is wehr since they get bonus req at start and it takes just a couple of seconds to get T1.

    I'm not sure what you're rumbling on about here, some units have starting abilities, some don't, you're comparing apples to oranges, you know the factions are asymmetrically balanced, yet you still try to directly compare them to one another.
    Why? EFA factions function on COMPLETELY different principles then WFA and UKF, they are nothing alike.

    It can be the best maphack ever, you got no reason to use it over mg42 when the enemy is soviet/usa, as you are gonna use grens from the longest range possible.
    Those 2 upgrades are extremely different in the way you are gonna use grens, it's far from being a no brainer in this case.

    I might blow your mind here, but you're not supposed to use only grens as wehr.
    Yes, they change how you play with grens, but they don't change the fact that grens needs to be used together with HMG support. And I never said its a no brainer pick, just that its good to mix them up.

    Soviet shock army and advanced warfare tactics are a lot used for cons build and extreely viable.
    Meta adjusted towards penals and so did the commanders, not the opposite.
    And anyway that's not being a no brainer, a no brainer is something you would upgrade always regardless of the situation and being doctrinal has nothing to do with it.
    If you choose a doctrine with ppsh you have no reason ever to not upgrade ppsh, thus it's a doctrinal no brainer.

    For cons build sure, but cons build are not viable.
    VonIvan is the only player who uses cons from the top ones and they don't do anything else then cap for him until real stuff arrives.

    Again, no idea what you're rambling on about now, there is no reason not to get ppsh if you play with cons, just like there is no reason to play with cons and pidgeon hole yourself into 1-2 doctrines which are viable with cons, but not viable in competitive play anyway.

    Playing with cons you cripple yourself willingly, ppsh doc or not.
    That is why no one sane plays with cons.
    Its really a simply concept, why you have such a hard time grasping it?

    Soviet infantry balance is terrible for last 2 years, you always have only a singular competitive choice and anything else puts you at disadvantage, currently all soviet infantry was either nerfed(maxims, guards) to the point of irrelevance or was neglected(shocks, cons), leaving us only with non doctrinal Penals and doctrinal DSHK to play with.

    You go with anything else, you shoot yourself in the foot, regardless of how good doctrines for bad stuff are, its still a bad platform to use

  • #60
    1 year ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,282 mod

    I don't think I've seen any recent plays or replays with ppsh cons, or any good games with conscripts. To anyone, feel free to provide them, it'll strongly support the discussion.

  • #61
    1 year ago
    @Katitof
    So you want to affirm that grens rifle doesn't scale through veterancy ?
    That's bs, a grenadier model has 2 to 6 dps, that increase with veterancy.
    It's in average HALF of an lmg 42, and the dps difference in close range differs of less than a point.
    Same for volks, stg are overglorified garands with a ridicolous 1.9/8 dps, all the models contribute to it.
    Stop pretending veterancy applies only to upgrades.

    That's enough, we don't want t1000 has last penal model.

    Of course, 100 manpower and 10 fuel is relevant, the fact that rifle needs 150 mp and 15 fuel for grenades instead is not worth noting, barely a coincidence.
    Truth is penals don't cost any more fuel than rifles, IS and volks do, cost less techong instead...

    And I.stead I specifically quoted only 2 doctrines because those are the only viable in competitive play (especially advanced tactics), and those are.
    Cons are viable, penals are just braindead easy to use.
    It's not cons play that needs buff, it's penals that need to be nerfed, like FBP was going to do.

    Cons and shock have no problem, but why not use an anti everything mainline that gets powerful weapons from start and forget about cover and moving accuracy penalties ?
2
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.