006n Hotfix List

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[CafeMilani]

Airborne are also the toughest infantry in the game at 6 men and 70hp each.

And its pretty funny how they STILL get countered by every single axis unit out there.

Infantry:

Flame pios > airborne
Lmg grens > airborne
Kch > airborne
Mp44 Storms > airborne
Mp 40 volks > airborne
Pgs with mp44 > airborne
Assault grens > airborne

Vehicles

Pumas > airborne w RRs (cant be hit)
AC > airborne w RRs (cant be hit)
Inf Halftrack > airborne w RRs (when used at max range, due to suppression. No, fire up wont counter it because the ht will just drive away)
Ostwind > airborne w RRs (kiting)
P4 > airborne w RRs (kiting, skirts)
Panther > airborne w RRs (kiting, skirts - and thats not even an AI tank)
Tiger > airborne w RRs (range)
King Tiger > airborne w RRs (armor, range)

ffs ABs are made to kill  tanks! and they do very well at killing tanks.

RRs completely rape all armor, thats my experience.

[SaintPauli]

DuckOfFailure?
FailureOfDoom?

[DuckOfDoom]

Oh and they have 6 availability and cost an arm and a leg, not counting the cost of rrs which cant get in fucking range of their target half the time.

Seriously, the only reason I would play airborne in Eir is Roleplaying.

The problem WITH eirr atm is that there is only 1 viable doctrine for each of the allied sides - Armor for us (oh wait that got nefed to shit) and Commandoes for brits (probably will get nerfed to shit soon due to axis whining).

US airborne is terrible because airborne are terrible, expensive anti tank unit that cant kill tanks on its own. RR range is pretty average and the retarded pathing nearly always grantees that only 1 rr will be firing instead of 2. The entire doctrine tree is dedicated to buffing 6 squads of overpriced, hard to use and hard to micro infantry with a terrible damage output.

[CommanderHolt]

And that's pretty much all they can do besides the 2x use of Grenades against infantry, counter Tanks. Besides their Armour modifiers and RRs low scatter rate, they are pretty much in the same boat as Grenadiers when they are going against Tanks as their High health doesn't protect them from getting instagibbed by a shell.

[gamesguy2]

Oh and they have 6 availability and cost an arm and a leg, not counting the cost of rrs which cant get in fucking range of their target half the time.

Seriously, the only reason I would play airborne in Eir is Roleplaying.

The problem WITH eirr atm is that there is only 1 viable doctrine for each of the allied sides - Armor for us (oh wait that got nefed to shit) and Commandoes for brits (probably will get nerfed to shit soon due to axis whining).

US airborne is terrible because airborne are terrible, expensive anti tank unit that cant kill tanks on its own. RR range is pretty average and the retarded pathing nearly always grantees that only 1 rr will be firing instead of 2. The entire doctrine tree is dedicated to buffing 6 squads of overpriced, hard to use and hard to micro infantry with a terrible damage output.

Hahahaha.

Airborne is quite possibly one of the best elite infantry units in the game.  I had 6 vet 3 airborne in 005 and they raped so hard.

Airborne the doctrine sucks right now because its half finished and most of the abilities in it frankly sucks.    Airborne the unit is extremely good.

[gamesguy2]

And that's pretty much all they can do besides the 2x use of Grenades against infantry, counter Tanks. Besides their Armour modifiers and RRs low scatter rate, they are pretty much in the same boat as Grenadiers when they are going against Tanks as their High health doesn't protect them from getting instagibbed by a shell.

Except RRs have extremely aim time, so they are extremely difficult to kite, unlike shreks.

Airborne also have a dodge bonus that works against tanks, which also stacks with their tier 2 and their vet.

For anti-tank purposes airborne are as good as dual shrek storms, though they operate completely differently.   Airborne are long range skirmishers when it comes to anti-tank, while storms are close range ambushers.

[DuckOfDoom]

Airborne hard counters tigers almost.

Tigers have greater range then airborne. If unit A (tiger) has greater range then unit B (airborne) and superior speed to unit B (ie any fucking tank is faster then infantry, including Fired up infantry, bar a king tiger), then unit A can kite unit B almost indefinitely. The whole argument of tigers vs airborne is pretty stupid anyway, as there are very few people who would use a tiger in Eir since there are much better doctrine choices on the t3 blitz reel.

[DuckOfDoom]

I would take shreks over rrs any day of the week. While I concede that RRs hit and penetrate nearly every time, the shrek has superior range and the incredible pin point accuracy of axis infantry (grenadiers especially) allows you to use the shrek EITHER as a long range skirmisher or a lethal ambusher. RRs dont get ANY bonuses for being closer to their target, where shreks get significantly better as the target gets closer. Also the damage output of shreks is much higher.

Literally, the only advantage RRs have over shreks is somewhat lower cost and the ability to fire on the move. If I was to list all the shrek advantages I would literally run this thread into the next page from here.

[CommanderHolt]

And that's pretty much all they can do besides the 2x use of Grenades against infantry, counter Tanks. Besides their Armour modifiers and RRs low scatter rate, they are pretty much in the same boat as Grenadiers when they are going against Tanks as their High health doesn't protect them from getting instagibbed by a shell.

Except RRs have extremely aim time, so they are extremely difficult to kite, unlike shreks.

Airborne also have a dodge bonus that works against tanks, which also stacks with their tier 2 and their vet.

For anti-tank purposes airborne are as good as dual shrek storms, though they operate completely differently.   Airborne are long range skirmishers when it comes to anti-tank, while storms are close range ambushers.

In exchange for their ability to fire, the also do only Half the damage of Shreck.

False, their Airborne Armour Moving accuracy modifier only effects infantry weapons. Against Tank Cannons, they follow the same as Infantry Armour. So in fact they can be gibbed just as well as Grenadiers can be.

http://wiki.coh-stats.com/index.php?title=FlaK_43_37mm_AA_Gun-Ostwind
http://wiki.coh-stats.com/index.php?title=KwK40_75mm_Gun-Panzer IV
http://wiki.coh-stats.com/index.php?title=KwK42_75mm_Gun-Panther
http://wiki.coh-stats.com/index.php?title=KwK36_88mm_Gun-Tiger
http://wiki.coh-stats.com/index.php?title=88mm_PaK_43_Gun-King Tiger
(Didn't put StuG because, quite frankly who uses a StuG to counter Infantry?)

[CommanderHolt]

Edit: StuH42 has a Slightly less accuracy against Airborne so MOST Tanks treat Airborne Armour the same as Infantry armour.

[DuckOfDoom]

(Didn't put StuG because, quite frankly who uses a StuG to counter Infantry?)

ACTUALLY, a skirted StuG with an mg42 is an amazingly effective hard counter to Rangers. But yeah, they cant counter airborne that well.

[gamesguy2]

I would take shreks over rrs any day of the week. While I concede that RRs hit and penetrate nearly every time, the shrek has superior range and the incredible pin point accuracy of axis infantry (grenadiers especially) allows you to use the shrek EITHER as a long range skirmisher or a lethal ambusher. RRs dont get ANY bonuses for being closer to their target, where shreks get significantly better as the target gets closer. Also the damage output of shreks is much higher.

Literally, the only advantage RRs have over shreks is somewhat lower cost and the ability to fire on the move. If I was to list all the shrek advantages I would literally run this thread into the next page from here.

You don't know anything about this game duck.

Shreks and RRs both have the same range, 35.

Infantry don't have accuracy modifiers other than vet.  A rifleman carrying a shrek has the same accuracy as a grenadier carrying a shrek.

RRs don't get any better because they already hit tanks 100% of the time, shreks miss a lot at long range, and thus they gain a benefit from getting closer.

RRs cannot fire on the move.

Seriously duck, you have no idea wtf you're talking about.   All the "facts" you listed in your post is dead wrong.

[gamesguy2]

In exchange for their ability to fire, the also do only Half the damage of Shreck.

What?   Shreks can't fire?   This sentence makes no sense.

Advantages of RR over shreks.

1. Accuracy, it always hits tanks at long range due to practically no scatter.

2. Penetration, it has the best penetration of all infantry AT weapons in the game.

3. The platform.   Airborne is the most durable infantry in the game.

Benefits of shreks over RR:

1. Damage.   Two RR=1 Shrek for damage.

2. Versatility.  Available on grenadiers.

False, their Airborne Armour Moving accuracy modifier only effects infantry weapons. Against Tank Cannons, they follow the same as Infantry Armour. So in fact they can be gibbed just as well as Grenadiers can be.

Ok ya thats my fault.  I thought they got the dodge bonus vs tanks as well.

The point remains, airborne much more survivable compared to grens.  They have 6 guys intead of 4, and they can fireup to run away from suppression.  And their AT weapon is best used at long range as opposed to shreks, which is good at short and medium ranges.

[DuckOfDoom]

You don't know anything about this game duck.

Funny how I still manage to beat you then.

Shreks and RRs both have the same range, 35.

Except shreks have a greater scatter range, which adds up to their normal range. I have seen shreks overshoot their range many times and still hit their target due to scatter.

Infantry don't have accuracy modifiers other than vet.  A rifleman carrying a shrek has the same accuracy as a grenadier carrying a shrek.

Grenadier BASE ACCURACY is much higher then that of any allied infantryman. Combined with vet, grenadiers are pin point accurate.

RRs don't get any better because they already hit tanks 100% of the time, shreks miss a lot at long range, and thus they gain a benefit from getting closer.

RRs dont have the damage output of shreks and dont have the base accuracy of their carriers.  Nether shreks nor RRs get a stat bonus based on range, shreks perform much better at close range while having nearly indentical stats at long range*, however, so shreks ARE better then RRs.

*Recoiless rifle needs to hit TWICE to do the same damage as a panzershrek, which offsets shreks lack of long range accuracy. For example,  shreks can get lucky and hit a tank at long range, dealing massive damage in the time window it takes for the infantry to fire, while RRs will need to spend 2 reload cycles to catch up to that lucky shrek hit. Thats just how coh works - High damage, low accuracy weapons are always preferred game mechanic wise over low damage, high accuracy weapons, because statistically the dps output of a high damage weapon will be nearly always higher given the same time window.

RRs cannot fire on the move.

While technicaly that is true, RRs have no deployment time like shreks and all the infantry needs to do is STOP for a split second to fire the RR and continue moving, which doesnt slow it down, unlike the panzershrek which takes a second and a half to deploy and fire.

Seriously duck, you have no idea wtf you're talking about.   All the "facts" you listed in your post is dead wrong.

Or maybe I do and I am getting quite sick of the blatant axis fanboyism on these forums.

[DuckOfDoom]

And if you still dont believe me, ask any player whether they would rather have a panzershrek or an RR on their squad. I am pretty sure I know what the majority would say (if the majority of allied players havent left already)

[CommanderHolt]

The point remains, airborne much more survivable compared to grens.  They have 6 guys intead of 4, and they can fireup to run away from suppression.  And their AT weapon is best used at long range as opposed to shreks, which is good at short and medium ranges.

Well, I'm not saying that Airborne w/RR don't have any advantage over Grens w/Shrecks. Just stating that they aren't all that cracked up as they are portrayed.

If Allied Elite Infantry didn't have any advantage over Axis Heavy Infantry then there is something seriously wrong.

[gamesguy2]

Funny how I still manage to beat you then.

Would that be the game where me and smokaz beat you victor and tank 2v3 on Linden?

Except shreks have a greater scatter range, which adds up to their normal range. I have seen shreks overshoot their range many times and still hit their target due to scatter.

Again you show you know nothing about this game.   Weapons have a certain range, they cannot fire until the target is in this range.   Once a hit is calculated, shreks and RRs will both chase their targets across the map.

Grenadier BASE ACCURACY is much higher then that of any allied infantryman. Combined with vet, grenadiers are pin point accurate.

There is no such thing as base accuracy for infantry.    Accuracy is calculated solely on the weapon itself and any veterancy modifiers.

Once more, you know nothing about this game.

RRs dont have the damage output of shreks and dont have the base accuracy of their carriers.  Nether shreks nor RRs get a stat bonus based on range, shreks perform much better at close range while having nearly indentical stats at long range*, however, so shreks ARE better then RRs.

Again you are completely wrong.  There is no such thing as "base accuracy" for infantry.  A vet 0 engineer with a shrek is just as accurate as a vet 0 grenadier with a shrek.    RRs and shreks do not have identical accuracy at long range.   RRs have much lower scatter allowing them to hit almost every shot against tanks at long range, while shreks will miss quite a bit due to larger scatter.

*Recoiless rifle needs to hit TWICE to do the same damage as a panzershrek, which offsets shreks lack of long range accuracy. For example,  shreks can get lucky and hit a tank at long range, dealing massive damage in the time window it takes for the infantry to fire, while RRs will need to spend 2 reload cycles to catch up to that lucky shrek hit. Thats just how coh works - High damage, low accuracy weapons are always preferred game mechanic wise over low damage, high accuracy weapons, because statistically the dps output of a high damage weapon will be nearly always higher given the same time window.

Except you get 2 RRs for 160 munitions, and against tanks RRs always hit and almost always penetrate.   You cannot have dual shreks anymore except on storms, and I'm trying to get the devs to increase the price on that back to the old 300 munitions again, at which point it will cost twice as much as an airborne squad with RR.

While technicaly that is true, RRs have no deployment time like shreks and all the infantry needs to do is STOP for a split second to fire the RR and continue moving, which doesnt slow it down, unlike the panzershrek which takes a second and a half to deploy and fire.

Shreks take 0.35 seconds to aim and fire, RRs take 0.1.  

Or maybe I do and I am getting quite sick of the blatant axis fanboyism on these forums.

Ya you telling me this, the guy who plays all factions and has a leaderboard American armor account.

As opposed to you, who only play allies.

While axis only fanboys are prevalent in this mod, there is such a thing as the opposite.

[gamesguy2]

The point remains, airborne much more survivable compared to grens.  They have 6 guys intead of 4, and they can fireup to run away from suppression.  And their AT weapon is best used at long range as opposed to shreks, which is good at short and medium ranges.

Well, I'm not saying that Airborne w/RR don't have any advantage over Grens w/Shrecks. Just stating that they aren't all that cracked up as they are portrayed.

If Allied Elite Infantry didn't have any advantage over Axis Heavy Infantry then there is something seriously wrong.

Well used airborne is a terror against axis armor.  In 005 I had an airborne company and all of them were vet 3, they kill so much armor every game and last me the entire game.

Without a triage however, airborne gets a lot weaker, that combined with the crappy airborne doctrine(although thats being fixed) means not a lot of people are going airborne.   But none of these have anything to do with the unit itself.  Airbone infantry with RR remains one of the best doctrine infantry in the game. 

[CommanderHolt]

Well used airborne is a terror against axis armor.  In 005 I had an airborne company and all of them were vet 3, they kill so much armor every game and last me the entire game.

Without a triage however, airborne gets a lot weaker, that combined with the crappy airborne doctrine(although thats being fixed) means not a lot of people are going airborne.   But none of these have anything to do with the unit itself.  Airbone infantry with RR remains one of the best doctrine infantry in the game. 

Terror, yes, but only against Armor, there is alot more Infantry units then Armor nowadays.

Honestly I believe that Falls w/ FG42 are the best doctrinal Infantry as they pretty much terrorize Allied Infantry especially while rolling around in Inf HTs. They are pretty much good at any range like RRs.

[gamesguy2]

Terror, yes, but only against Armor, there is alot more Infantry units then Armor nowadays.

Disagree. The only games I have lost with Americans is when I ran out of AT.   You haven't seen the terror that is the Heat rounds P4 with improved barrels.

Honestly I believe that Falls w/ FG42 are the best doctrinal Infantry as they pretty much terrorize Allied Infantry especially while rolling around in Inf HTs. They are pretty much good at any range like RRs.

Anything in an IHT would rape allied infantry with no AT regardless.   Falls with FG42s are like the grim reaper against infantry, but caught in the open you can beat them with bar suppression and with the new faust they do very little against tanks.

A super AT doctrine infantry unit is a lot more powerful than a super AI one for axis, because they already have a plethora of units that rape allied infantry.