Company of Heroes 65 hours of game play and tons of reading online and i finally got my first solo victory against hard CPU |
- 65 hours of game play and tons of reading online and i finally got my first solo victory against hard CPU
- Hans has dropped from the game
- Idea for German siege doctrine
- second attempt at making a meme! Yes this is my doggo!
- The lack of self-awareness in some people is unbelievable. He starts the match with a racist rant, loses all of his map control, and promptly drops. Can people be reported for racism?
- USF vs. Wehrmacht Sniper
- Elite 2v2 Invitational Tournament Series by Currahee and Olvadi
- UKF tips for 2v2/3v3? Having problems with manpower bleed, advice needed.
- MG42 still needs a nerf
- Unit idea for Soviets: Marksmen Team, middle ground between Snipers and JLI's/Pathfinders.
- A Balance Member's Response to BaoLiang
- Tips for late game?
- Does the 1 COH Relic guy (It's Andy right?) have an email address or something? I want to ask him a DOWIII modding related question
- [CoH2 Modding tools] Is it possible to combine multiple models, for example the hull of a tank and turret of another?
- How do I retreat, reinforce and go back out?
- Opinion on 170 units mod?
- PTRS Penals balance
- Soviet Balance Idea (Early Flexibility)
- Squads go BOOM
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 05:51 PM PDT
| ||
| Hans has dropped from the game Posted: 15 Jul 2020 08:19 PM PDT
| ||
| Idea for German siege doctrine Posted: 15 Jul 2020 05:37 AM PDT
| ||
| second attempt at making a meme! Yes this is my doggo! Posted: 15 Jul 2020 08:41 PM PDT
| ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 09:12 PM PDT
| ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 08:26 PM PDT Balance team - please look into this. USF needs to have better options dealing with enemy snipers. A half decent wehrmacht player can completely deny any USF gameplay when using a sniper. As USF, the options are going Lt into a M20 or Stuart, which can be easily countered by mines, grenadiers to snare, an AT gun, or a 222. The most viable option is probably the WC51, but that's locked behind the Mechanized commander which effectively forces you to choose that commander to counter a sniper well. USF has always struggled against snipers, but I feel like this issue has been only exacerbated by excessive nerfs to the M20. Please, don't make me choose one doctrine only if I don't want to lose against a sniper. In terms of a suggestion, the core issue lies in going LT for a light vehicle - this can easily gimp you against an early P4, as USF has its AT gun locked behind captain tech. I honestly don't know how to fix this issue without adding a sniper to USF (which will never happen, of course), so perhaps buffs to light vehicles - especially the M20 - could help alleviate this issue. Ok, rant over. Thoughts? [link] [comments] | ||
| Elite 2v2 Invitational Tournament Series by Currahee and Olvadi Posted: 15 Jul 2020 01:24 PM PDT | ||
| UKF tips for 2v2/3v3? Having problems with manpower bleed, advice needed. Posted: 15 Jul 2020 11:08 AM PDT Hey reddit, I could use some 2v2/3v3 tips as the UKF. I'm only playing vs AI right now, I'm not super competitive, but I would like to play some 2v2 PvP eventually perhaps when my micro and game knowledge is a bit better. My issue is manpower bleed as UKF. I could use general tips, either in build order or tactics. I played the British in COH1, and really am a defensive player at heart, I love bite and hold tactics and emplacement play, even if unoptimized, it's just the style that's close to my heart. I usually go 2 tommies/mg/third tommy or 3 tommies into an mg, then go tier 2 and either get a mortar and bofors down at a critical choke point with a trench and At gun following shortly(and then help my ally push elsewhere), or if a wide-open map I get the armored car or two to hunt down the AI's million infantry squads and mortar teams that are spammed on every point(wide open maps are my downfall). The issues I am running into fall into three categories, based on the map and how the game goes:
This isn't a whine post, I'm doing fine, I just want to learn to be better. Any tips appreciated! [link] [comments] | ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 09:43 PM PDT I took a break from the game because I'm seeing more and more players who don't make any Grenadiers and instead just mass spam the MG42. It's boring and breaks the game tbh. After giving the game another try, I'm still seeing and struggling with the same issue. Everytime I raise the issue the stale responses are always "but it was really good irl!!" I get that, but it's still unbalanced as hell. If it's going to have it's insane suppression and damage rate (my infantry squad always loses a model when running into it) then the massive arc should at least be reduced a bit. It doesn't have to be as short as the Maxim or 50.cal but it shouldn't be as wide as the Vickers when the Vickers has such a trash suppression rate just a little bit of an annoyed rant. [link] [comments] | ||
| Unit idea for Soviets: Marksmen Team, middle ground between Snipers and JLI's/Pathfinders. Posted: 15 Jul 2020 08:25 PM PDT TL:DR They are two marksmen with scoped rifles that harass enemies form long range. In my Opinion, this unit should be added to the Soviet HQ after T1 or T2 is built, as a counterpart to PanzerGrens, they are independent of build path. This helps give the Soviet faction more personality as it gives a lower risk, lower reward Sniping option, and a fairly unique kind of squad. When interacting with an enemy sniper, if they ambush the enemy sniper, the intended interaction is that they will likely force a retreat, and when ambushed by the wehr sniper, will be forced to retreat themselves, but will rarely actually kill one other unless one of the players is playing very riskily. At 360 manpower, with a 90 Manpower Reinforce cost, this two person team are moderately expensive long range DPS support. Their two roles are to harass infantry and team weapons via sniper-range direct fire, and to help clean up injured enemy squads mid-combat or post-bombardment. To this end, they have following traits: Vet 1 gives tripwire flares, vet 2 and 3 give combat stats. Traits: Ignores Cover, Stealth (as per sniper), Long Range and Vision (as per Sniper), 40% health Snipe. Sniper Trails on shot (to warn the Ostheer player). Slow fire rate. Their RA is .90, making them Somewhat fragile, but quite durable for a long range support unit. DPS: With both Marksmen alive, they have the DPS and damage profile of a 6 man Conscript team. Their damage tapers off a lot like conscripts, with a minimum damage per second equal to that of Cons at their max range. However, their attacks ignore cover, and snipe models that fall below 40% health. Their weapon cooldown is also as slow as that of the Soviet Sniper. This means that they cannot rapidly execute multiple injured models like JLI's and pathfinders can, their execute effect more drawn out. The idea is, they have the superior range and camouflage of snipers, but they slowly harass enemies to force them to Withdraw or counter attack, or clean up enemies in tandem with other infantry and support weapons like mortars, Zis Guns, etc, thus fitting the soviet combined arms teamwork theme. My Design goal is that the squad unlike a Sniper isn't very productive on its own, but shines when used with any of the other soviet units via combined arms warfare. If the unit needed to be buffed or nerfed, I would purely adjust their DPS or I would remove the Ignores Cover trait, as they are designed as a soft counter to sitting still for a long time, but aren't supposed to just Merc MG42's no matter what, for example, just force the Wher player to shuffle it around and use it more actively. Their main role is to give the soviets another way to harass from long range in tandem with other support weapons, and to give another Non-Doctrinal method of pushing back Static defense lines. Thoughts? [link] [comments] | ||
| A Balance Member's Response to BaoLiang Posted: 15 Jul 2020 12:44 AM PDT
| ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 11:05 AM PDT I'm pretty new to the multiplayer aspect of CoH, so I don't know that many META strats. However I seem to do really well in the early game with infantry, MGs and Light Vehicles, but as I get into the late game I start struggling. Any tips for late game would be appreciated! Note: I play USF in 3v3 [link] [comments] | ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 04:25 PM PDT I basically want to make a mod, test it with a friend, then present it to this subreddit. That said the modding scene for DOWIII is dead, which means I have no-one to learn modding from. I don't intend on spamming or flaming or whatever. And I am aware he probably has a limited ability to answer, but maybe he can refer me to someone who can/would like to help me. I was just curious, I have a (to be honest rather dubious) idea to restore it for multiplayer play without too much effort. Amongst other things, giving it a 'COH 2 mode' effectively with a Retreat Button and adding a mode where every cap point you hold ticks down enemy VP's, and the Power core objectives are still there as an alternate win condition. I think the time is right since the game is officially dead. Sounds stupid, but at this point I think everyone realises how flawed DOWIII's core design is, so now its time to pull it out of the ashes if possible. [link] [comments] | ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 12:24 PM PDT I was planning to make a joke mod with an OP unit, and if I could add parts of other vehicles into it (e.g. the flamethrowers from the flame halftrack, the rocket launchers from the Stuka zu Fuss), it would look better, so I was wondering if it's possible. [link] [comments] | ||
| How do I retreat, reinforce and go back out? Posted: 15 Jul 2020 07:26 AM PDT I'm struggling with the micro. I want to get into 1v1 pvp, so I play skirmishes vs hard ai to try and get a feel, but I keep fucking up this part, keeping several units at base full health for too long. Do I just have to get a habit of doubleclicking f1 alot? Also what's a good starter army? I prefer playing meta, but for now I just want something decent where I can basically force 1 build and rather adapt a little within that one build. Currently doing a soviet conscript build. Maybe I should try for the t1 sniper, scout car build to have less units overall to micro as I get used to retreats and reinforces? Using grid hotkeys also, with no autohotkey binds yet, but considering binding map to tab. [link] [comments] | ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 02:15 AM PDT I'm just curious on how people feel about this mod? I dislike vanilla PvP tbh. The game just feels more content packed and alive with it. Vanilla just feels bland because of the lack of unity variety to me. [link] [comments] | ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 03:40 AM PDT I've seen some discussion concerning the balance state of Penals. To me, it seems that upgrading them with PTRS rifles completely kills the squad's AI capabilities. Guards come out with infantry-sniping versions of the PTRS that don't have such an impact on the squad's DPS versus infantry. Would changing the damage model of the Penal PTRS to that of the Guards PTRS make them broken OP? In their current state I don't see a reason to get PTRS Penals over PTRS Cons/Guards. While I don't think it's necessarily wrong that getting PTRS's makes Penals a dedicated AT squad (it's a sidegrade of sorts, I guess), I'm not sure the current AT damage of PTRS penals is enough to compensate for the lost AI damage. Another idea that comes to mind is giving them three PTRS rifles instead of two. What are your thoughts on Penals and my ideas on balancing them? [link] [comments] | ||
| Soviet Balance Idea (Early Flexibility) Posted: 14 Jul 2020 10:40 PM PDT This idea revolves around alleviating the usual problems the Soviets have during their early game. There will be no unit stat tweaks and this will all be about the Economy and Timing and available options for flexibility of Soviet builds. A few disclaimers to start of course: The assumptions here would be that the ideas would affect standard Soviet builds and the subsequent transitions. That would be the 1 Engi - 4 Cons start; the 2 Engi - 3 Cons start; Penal builds. There will be no adjustments made towards the stats of Conscripts and Penals as I'm sure each of us here have their own ideas of their merits and demerits and what buff/nerf they may deserve. Currently the SU tech tree requires the T1 Special Rifle Command (will be referred to as T1) and the T2 Support Weapon Company (will be referred to as T2) with each costing 160 MP 10 Fuel / 160 MP 15 Fuel respectively in order to unlock building the T3 building. The T3 building currently costs 240 MP 85 Fuel to build. I would like the change to be that the T3 Building will NEED BOTH of the T1 and T2 in order to be built. But of course the costs and build time for each need to be adjusted so that the total cost to ascend to T3 would be the same, if not similar. Building ---------- OLD ---> NEW As far obvious effect economy wise. It would mean to those that would do a T1 opening, an additional 5 fuel will be needed and those who go for a T2 would have no difference in their teching up cost. I simply want to point that out in case people would think that this would be a nerf to their tech timings to require both buildings, to which it is not! Now for the less obvious effects. I'll start with those who do a Penal build using T1. Having it like this would give them an extra 80 MP to work at the start with and faster build time to their T1. The infamously slow ass Penal start would get a needed boost, and with no change to the 300 MP costing Penals, it will still be a slow start, just not as excruciating. Another perk is when there comes a need for them to have support weapons, they don't have to go for a doctrine with dhska and M42 in order to do so and building T2 comes with the territory of teching up. It gives the T1 start their flexibility to not get too bullied during Light Vehicle phases with an option for a deterrent in the name of the Zis and retain their disadvantage of less late scaling Penals (relative to Conscripts). It might give flexibility but it is still quite a manpower upkeep, so I trust that the Axis counterparts can take heed of that to take advantage of in the said case. Now on the flip side, I would estimate that this would mean around 20s faster M3A1 which can be quite oppressive against the OKW. Thus with some testing, I would suggest adding a build time nerf of around 20s to the M3A1 so the overall timing of the car retains it's current form as of this patch. I don't think it would be too much of a problem against OST due to their early availability for snares unless they would of course go for a snareless build of a Pgren rush or Assgrens to which it's on them. Now for the effects this would have onto the standard Cons -> T2 build, nothing much to be quite honest other than unit choices. It does have the positive of having an 'earlier' T2 with the build time and 80 Manpower flex to use in a jiff. One of the current problems of the Cons build is when it's up against the OST T1 skip onto a fast 222/251. In order to counter that, the Soviet player would have to build a Zis. Timing wise, the OST player doing say... an Ostruppen build is already teching up to BP1 by the time the 4th conscript comes out. It would mean that they're close on their way for a 222 to which the Soviet player would need 480 Manpower (barring Medics) to build the T2 and have a Zis. Of course there is the existence of AT nades but it serves more as a deterrent at best unless the opponent misplays. The change would help them in an earlier timing of support weapons by virtue of build time and the T2 building 80 less manpower. In a less specific scenario, teching to T3 also opens up the Soviet player to have access to Snipers after a while, to which I personally think it isn't too much a problem other than my dislike for Snipers. Anyway, to wrap things up, I simply wanted to address the Soviet's early game struggles with an increase of degree to their flexibility by just about requiring them to build both the T1 and T2 building for virtually the same tech cost and timing as just having one. All to give them 80 flexible manpower and some alleviated timing from having to build one of the tech buildings by halving their build times. I purposely avoided any stat changes to any of their units involves as they are another can of worms. Other than purposely possibly nerfing the M3A1 build time in case of the changes (faster T1) so it would come out at the same timing as it has now. [link] [comments] | ||
| Posted: 15 Jul 2020 03:53 AM PDT
|
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/nv1fjeq1a4b51.png){kind=link}
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/53wvxumj05b51.gif){kind=link}
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/ir5pbrp5n0b51.png){kind=link}
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/ga57h6ei45b51.jpg){kind=link}
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/zwx0pogs95b51.png){kind=link}
| You are subscribed to email updates from Company of Heroes - the highly acclaimed Second World War RTS series.. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment