Update on progress

[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

[Groundfire]

If you guys are going to insist on taking away the one viable AI mechanic Airborne has to keep assault troops from chasing them down, your gonna have to suggest a better alternative than a 2 time suppression offmap. (2 uses of offmap ((3 with a T4)) is not offmap spam)

Otherwise, AB are forced to lean on top of the Quad and Croc, both of which are garbage unless you play vs. someone who is comatose at the keyboard. The AT saturated environment of EIRR prohibits their successful useage, and is a more worthy balance concern.

I for one, am in favor of spotters because offmaps can then be countered by anti sniper mechanics and good play.

[Illegal_Carrot]

Just turn arty into slow, rolling barrages that clear out positions and force enemies to reposition, rather than instant ownage buttons of doom that one-shot everything.

Also, lol @ Strafe being AB's 'only viable AI mechanic.'

[LeoPhone]

strafle suppresses super uber AT and AI heavy muni inf -> cheap m10 roflrapes forward crushes inf and kills a few tanks

still stupid but at least it forces the allied player to use some sort of tactic instead of only pressing the "I win buttons"

[nugnugx]

Say no to strafle run propaganda !




Say yes to the brave croc drivers !

[Artekas]

Keep assault troops from chasing them down? Which ones, the KCH? Or Assault Grens? BAR suppression, grenades, and an instant pin will all do the job rather well. Not to mention all US players have access to .30 cals, and AB even has it's own .30 cal. Of course, no KCH or AGs are going to assault into a Sherman, Croc, or any LV as they don't have any real anti-tank capability of their own.

If you think an instant kill every assault squad button is the only thing keeping AB alive against assault troops, you are crazy.

Also, speaking of the T2 offmap for Armour... that needs to be fixed too. Right now it does nothing. If it's supposed to hurt units, it's not noticeable. I've had it land right on me multiple times and not have anything happen. If it's supposed to be smoke... it should be more than a small little cloud that's not that accurate.

[Groundfire]

I only ask that this community look at the problem objectively instead of basing their balance arguments on gut feelings and factional biased sentiments that date back to previous patches.

please, no theory crafting Artekas, it just leads to circular arguments. Balance changes are not made upon hypothetical scenarios in which AB companies, usually heavy with RRs also (for some reason) has a large compliment of BAR riflemen for BAR suppress, or rely on the garbage 30cal, or AB rifles that can be offed by the lowliest of flame pios.

[Artekas]

You're saying that the only thing AB has that can stop assault troops is Strafle, I'm saying it's not. That has NOTHING TO DO WITH THEORY CRAFTING WHATSOEVER.

[Groundfire]

You suggest that AB players use Unit A/B/C to compensate for the innate lack of AI apparent in the AB doctrine (consider Assymentric warfare gone as we know it btw), of which, most competent Axis players have no trouble dealing with.

In many circumstances, their 1 or 2 use Strafe is a saving grace. (Im not saying it doesnt have problems, but insta pin offmap might just be as bad)

now BACK to my PR room hidey hole!

[Artekas]

Your argument is hypocritical bullshit, it's okay for you to say that strafle is an anti-infantry thing that AB can use to deal with assault infantry, but the moment I say anything else is an anti-infantry thing that AB can use to deal with assault infantry it's theorycrafting. Fuck hypocrisy.

Not to mention, simply suggesting that AB has access to anti-infantry units besides Strafle is not theorycrafting. Also, by your terrible logic... saying that using Marders/50mmATHT/etc A/B/C to compensate for the innate lack of AT in the SE doctrine (Of which there are literally zero buffs to units or new units with AT capabilities, unlike AB and infantry) is theorycrafting.

And to add yet another point to this growing post, you accuse me of theorycrafting while providing situational theorycrafting bullshit like "well, AB always has tons of RRs, and AB riflemen get raped because every time you use them there's flame pioneers around".

Edit: I just remembered even more hypocrisy! Yay! I remember when asking why the Hotchkiss penetration got nerfed when PE has nothing else that can deal with heavy tanks because they can't penetrate them, you said that other things having problems doesn't justify something being OP. Alright, I can agree with that. So why the fuck is it okay for strafle to be OP now? If there actually is a problem with their anti-infantry without strafle, discuss it and fix it. Nerf strafle anyways in the meantime.

[Mysthalin]

I'd say artekas is making a fair point here. With the addition of AB riflemen AB is no longer forced to use vehicles when attempting to take on enemy anti-infantry infantry, and considering a nerf to strafe isn't all that much of a blasphemous idea as it was before.

[Groundfire]

I'd say artekas is making a fair point here. With the addition of AB riflemen AB is no longer forced to use vehicles when attempting to take on enemy anti-infantry infantry, and considering a nerf to strafe isn't all that much of a blasphemous idea as it was before.

I would say that AB rifles superiority has come and gone with ASW gone. They are marginably better than BAR rifles for their cost in Pool and no access to Sup.Fire, while effective AB counters still remain the same and can be ammassed in large quantities really fast. Axis has many cost effective counters to deal with such threats, as such im not entirely convinced that the addition of AB rifles completely removes the reliance of AB on vehicle AI and strafe. You get out-attritioned very fast if you dont rely on a combination of all.

I also agree that a nerf to strafe isnt blasphemous anymore as it is not "that" integral to ab playstyle, but we need to be careful on how to approach it as 30cals and quads will still not protect your AB when the fireup exhaustion starts. Admittably, half of that is reliant on proper AB usage, and we shouldnt protect AB players too much as they do have it very easy, but turning strafe into a suppression only offmap is a knee-jerk community outrage change.

P.s. artekas, the root problem for AB reliance on strafe, and thus its warranted protection has its root elsewhere, its not the power of the offmap im defending, please stop with your inflammatory remarks towards me.

[Illegal_Carrot]

You mean an AB player might have to do something other than blob lots of AB squads??

[Groundfire]

You mean an AB player might have to do something other than blob lots of AB squads??

This has nothing to do with Strafe, but yes, I would like AB players to do something other than blob their AB.

The need for an alpha strike relies on the fact that the tools to defend AB are inadequate and must eliminate their target in the brief window they have.

So instead of combined arms, the more effective AB usage is to blob 4 RRs and alphastrike everything, PE vehicles, ATGs, fireup and nade, if the aggression lets up they're toast.

Again, roots elsewhere. I would like to see a pool for upgrades implemented to limit the amount of RRs, forcing players to rely on other means for offensive capabilities, but this is just me.

[Artekas]

I like how you more or less ignored most of my post, while calling it an inflammatory post when all I did was say your argument is hypocritical bullshit. Which it was, and you made no move to defend this, just passed it off as "inflammatory". Meanwhile you pass off our arguments as a "knee-jerk community outrage change".

Tell me: What part of my argument against strafe is a knee-jerk anger reaction? I've never even been hit by it, so I have little to be mad about. I made a perfectly reasonable argument: ALL of the balancing factors of Strafe in vCoH have been removed. This is not a knee-jerk reaction. There can be no doubt that it is overpowered, because removing everything that made a balanced ability balanced was removed. You made the thing completely for free, instead of having a huge resource cost. You removed two abilities that made it possible to survive it (Elite Armour for Wehrmacht infantry and Group Zeal for PE infantry). And the mod inherently removes a way to simply avoid it, retreating.

Nothing PE has is capable of cost-effectively protecting from Pershings except for Hotchkiss, but that didn't stop you from nerfing that solution. The Hotchkiss was necessary to fight Pershings, especially doctrinally buffed ones. I now have no way to do anything about Pershings, because for their cost and health Marders with their 32% chance of penetration and .35 deflection multiplier don't cut it. So I stopped playing PE. You weren't careful at ALL with removing one OP thing from PE, yet you want to be super careful with removing one OP thing from AB. This is a joke.

[Illegal_Carrot]

So I stopped playing PE. You weren't careful at ALL with removing one OP thing from PE, yet you want to be super careful with removing one OP thing from AB. This is a joke.

Welcome to EiRR, enjoy your stay.

[Mysthalin]

I also agree that a nerf to strafe isnt blasphemous anymore as it is not "that" integral to ab playstyle, but we need to be careful on how to approach it as 30cals and quads will still not protect your AB when the fireup exhaustion starts.

I see no reason why the .30 cals and the quads can't be adequate considering they're both as fast/faster than the airborne. Furthermore, I see no reason why airborne shouldn't be weak and vulnearable at the time of exhaustion. It's sort of what the exhaustion is meant to do? Make the airborne weak after using fire-up?

If anything, airborne has had a "buff" in terms of the ability to use quads from before, as quads now only cost fuel, with no munitions cost - which allows to buy extra ATGs/RRs while still maintaining adequate Anti-infantry in the form of quads. Sherman Crocodiles have also recently gone down in price. The deficiencies you seem to be pointing out don't exactly stand up to the test of basic examination of the doctrine.

[Hicks58]

Nothing PE has is capable of cost-effectively protecting from Pershings except for Hotchkiss.

Panther if you kite like a bitch, and Marders if you support them properly.

Try to hold in mind that the Panther can reliably penetrate the Pershing, and the Pershing Isn't all that great at penetrating the Panther reliably unless you have HVAP.

Lock down your Marders and keep them supported and they will keep Pershings well away.

[Mysthalin]

A marder in lockdown + any other consistent AT source will generally be able to take out a pershing with relative ease.

[Artekas]

Alright, I give you that. A Panther can do it. The problem is, that's a 15 pop 500 fuel investment that can't do too much to infantry. All to counter a Pershing. Now I love Panthers, and I've had one in my Wehr company since I started using it, but I don't want to be forced into a 500 fuel tank in order to have a chance as PE. Speaking of which, AB shouldn't be forced into strafe to have a chance either.

However, this is more or less irrelevant. We could argue all day about PE's ability to deal with Pershings, just like we can argue all day about AB's ability to deal with infantry.  That's not the point. The point is that in both cases an argument was provided on why something relies on an OP thing: in one case, the OP thing was nerfed without any care or even discussion. In another case, an OP thing won't be nerfed without extreme caution.

[Killer344]

The point is that in both cases an argument was provided on why something relies on an OP thing: in one case, the OP thing was nerfed without any care or even discussion.

That you weren't here when it was discussed or don't have access to the forums where it was discussed it doesn't mean it "was nerfed without any care or even discussion".