Death_Kitty

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 121 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Panther Balance? #8361
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    Very happy to see this change

     

    in reply to: Halftrack Armor vs AT guns? #8045
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    Puma will win 1v1 vs a soviet quad 50 half-track, as long is there only one, and it hits the HT twice.

    in reply to: New Mechanized thoughts #7912
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    Here is where I would put the current doc structure in terms of tiers:

    OP tier: US and CW armor

    Strong tier: IW (only reason its not OP tier is b/c it’s hard to play), Wunderwaffe, US infantry, US arty, CW arty, Lowland, Mechanized

    Viable Tier: Scorched Earth (OKW early game holds it back)

    Weak Tier: Luftwaffe

    UP Tier: Combined Arms, US airborne.

    You do have a very nice offensive tool midgame: its called the flametrack and pio call in. Rips through any infantry without anti-tank. Kills buildings. You can bum rush a base and de-tech someone who is not ready for it. This doctrine needs aggressive handling early game; with MG’s and StG, panzer fusiliers and grens MELT allied infantry, rifles especially, and can hold off elite units. Without their weapons, put them in a building and they will murder allied infantry anyway. Or keep them at max range. But they are FAR from the worst mainline infantry in the game. With the Puma, AT rifle, and shreck, you are more than equipped to hold off light vehicles.

    Panzer 4’s with vet 1 will hit most of the time, as for the other gripes: just as sluggish as the M4, thought much less maneuverable than the Cromwell, inferior to the E8 and the Comet, no stabilized gun, so worse accuracy on the move… Its just a tank that you need to use defensively, then chase down shermans as they retreat.

    Combined with getting out panzers as fast as armor can get shermans (if you use the 3 fuel cache build) and the tools to fortify are more than there. The main issue here is surviving the tank spam from the 2 allied armor docs. The answer is called a Pak. Seriously, build some sandbags or hedgehogs, 1-2 paks, set to ambush/target vehicle, and let the kills roll in. Use your tiger to deal with problems, like Pershing/Churchill/Comet.

    If anything, armor needs a nerf. But this doc is fine

    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    And with MG’s, rushing toward a squad with a flamer usually does not work, unless its an assault squad like rangers or falls, which I can agree, is a little BS. But I agree with your point about the kar. It is a little underwhelming right now, especially in the hands of more experienced infantry

    in reply to: Balance Ammo Dump #7860
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    I like morgoths idea. A well thought out solution. especially giving nade range back at a later vet.

    in reply to: Centaur AA needs buff against infantry #7856
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    I find it really annoying that a 50 cal or an MG with armor piercing rounds blows up vehicles faster than light cannon or 20mm autocannon fire.

     

    in reply to: Some idea to give a slightly buff for Luftwaffe #7772
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    You know, you and me often clash over balance. not as much as me and ordo, but enough. This time however, I like all of these ideas. I don’t really understand the 2nd one, but it seems ok. If the girbs go up to 2, then the sniper has to be a vet upgrade, like UK light infantry (Lowland doc). Alternatively, the sniper gets moved to the officer squad, or they can get a marksman ability, or g43 with supressive volley fire. But yeah, I’m all for buffing Luft.

    Also would like to see some buffs to US airborne. Other than giving them better stealth capability which I suggested in another recent thread, I cant think of anything rn.

    in reply to: Dead vehicle shot bug #7755
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    I believe it was a Sherman variant: I think both the 76 (for sure) and the easy 8.

    in reply to: Axis early game AT and tiering buffs #7706
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    i also like this AT change. I can agree with locking zooks behind later tech-ups.

    in reply to: A problem with The French Resistance #7705
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    I almost wish you could indicate a resistance building, but the enemy could not see it. The only way they would be able to see the resistance building is if they try to garrison it. But im gonna guess the tools dont allow for that.

    in reply to: A problem with The French Resistance #7692
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    this should totally be a thing.

    in reply to: Axis early game AT and tiering buffs #7689
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    It should not be more expensive, because moving your trucks closer to the front is not a free benefit… it is a huge risk. 1 satchel charge, a couple of tank shots, 1 well played bombing run or arty strike will destroy your outpost almost instantly. If you lose your final truck with heavy panzer post, that is particularly dire. What makes it worse is that you cant move your trucks like you could with the British in coh 1, and you don’t get bonus resources for the added risk, so to sum it up:

    You pay more for bases that are by far the easiest to dystroy, but can be set up toward the front.

    In return for this, you gain nothing but a forward retreat point that heals your units (for which an ambulance exists that does this much faster, is mobile, cheaper, infinitely less risky.), a repair point, but grens already do this, or a flak, which cant pen Sherman’s, your primary threat by the time last truck gets set up.

    so a couple of things need to happen, I think:

    lower the tier up cost of the trucks or: make them mobile (re-packable), add some resource bonus for setting them up closer (allowing OKW to reach old PE levels of threat due to bonues manpower/fuel/muni flow, at the risk of being de-teched and maybe losing the game as a result), or some other bonus for having them forward. Some combination of these things.

     

     

    in reply to: UKF combined operation command changes #7681
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    I don’t think having the tiger call in being repeatable is going to happen; that said I would love to see a capture pak 40, as well as as better gammon bombs.

    Perhaps airstrikes could also get cheaper?

     

    in reply to: Combined arms and how it just does not work #7616
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    I think you misunderstand me a bit. This doc could be good. I just think the stealth mechanics and snipers revealing units is what holds it back.

    Also, the fact that you need to go down so many command point trees can really hamper you. Like you said, you use resistance early game, commandos and SAS mid game, but these are all different trees. Ive noticed luchs and flack halftrack are particularly good against this doc. the commandos with their 4 and 5 man squads and the weak resistance get shredded very quickly.

    All I’m asking for is to give more mobile stealth to the resistance, commandos, maybe SAS, AND pathfinders and paratroops from Airborne, as well as taking away the snipers stealth detection.

    in reply to: The real balance issue! (no clickbate) #7468
    Death_Kitty
    Moderator

    With all due respect here, this post was for when AT infantry came a 2 tiers earlier than tanks. So they came at tier 1! They made using half tracks impossible, light tank impossible, and medium tanks hard. It is much better now. My suggestion is not to use tanks to spearhead assaults, if that is what you are doing, but to start off with infantry first. Tanks do not have good viability, and can be ambushed to the left or right of their vision range, or even beyond it. I personally don’t think there is an issue here, but ill keep in in the back of my mind as i play.

    Perhaps your opponents have not been using scouting or all arms cooperation.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 121 total)