Company of Heroes: Eastern Front
Eastern Front Mod (Read-Only) => General Discussion => Topic started by: Toxic19813 on December 20, 2009, 06:02:46 PM
-
I take it that the Russians are kinda infantry oriented (the 8 man squad that costs 200 mp) so how long do you think it would be to get the ability to make tanks? Americans take a while, same with Brits, and the Wehrmacht get it sooner... Just wonderin.
-
Well, actually, depends on how you want/like to play.
The real disparity is slow mortar, no HMGs. How long for
armor? Hmm, I'd need to have the game for that ;)
But since you can get T34/S85 2nd building built, that's
pretty fast indeed. About same speed as you get support
depot for USA for baby pumas...
That's not pure infantry to me :)
-
It will be nice to see some German players being pummeled by tanks early on instead of the allied players fighting waves of pumas with only rifles. Seriously though that is my only real problem with the original game. Goddamn krauts lost the war because our army was better not because we had a better spamability.
-
Er... no... Krauts didn't lose war because US tanks were
better than German Armor... no, no, no... ;)
Not with 7-to-1 ratio Sherman vs Tiger to win ;)
-
Er... no... Krauts didn't lose war because US tanks were
better than German Armor... no, no, no... ;)
Not with 7-to-1 ratio Sherman vs Tiger to win ;)
5>1 ;)
-
Well, actually, depends on how you want/like to play.
The real disparity is slow mortar, no HMGs. How long for
armor? Hmm, I'd need to have the game for that ;)
But since you can get T34/S85 2nd building built, that's
pretty fast indeed. About same speed as you get support
depot for USA for baby pumas...
That's not pure infantry to me :)
I posted this right after I saw that last 20 seconds of "eastern front Maps" and I lol'd at the sheer amount of infantry attacking that position. Anyway, so what you guys have told me is the Russians get tanks sooner than everyone else... wouldn't that make them OP vs Wehrmacht? Or better yet Panzer Elite... :D
EDIT
I mean, the Wehrmacht get only their Volk's Panzerfaust. The PE get... nothing for a while. Maybe their "Anti-Tank" grenades that work against infantry better than tanks.
-
No. PE got flame or AT grenades, which are pretty awesome
truth be told. As for Russian OP early tanks, seems like the
early T34/76 is crappy. Like people think the Vet0 StuG is
crappy. They can get an early SU85 (StuG/Marder3 combo)
but it's purely against tanks, just about, so...
Pro and con, really. Live and tell. Can't wait to get game :)
-
No offense, but do any of you rank at least 10 on the 1v1 leaderboards? The discussion I am hearing so far implies not.
And no...the Allies won the war not because they were skilled, but because of their spammability. Just look at the Allied casualty numbers vs German casualty numbers. Numbers don't lie.
-
Just to clarify. The Allies get tanks a lot faster than the Axis.
The Puma is a vehicle (not a tank) which come after the US's vehicles and the Brits tanks.
On topic: I think the Russia will get tanks pretty fast, seen as they don't have any units that cost fuel, so they can tech fast, and now when we know that the upgrades all cost ammunition the Russians wouldn't have anything that drags fuel. This is ofcause all speculations, we wouldn't know for sure until the mod is released.
-
That's right! T34's don't cost fuel ;)
Hehe. He means upgrades don't cost fuel, rather? ;)
-
Year I see now my post is pretty unclear. I meant that Russia don't have any units that cost fuel before the tanks, the PE could get their tanks out pretty fast, but they have to spend fuel on halftrucks and upgrades, they can choose to go straight panzer IV, but if they do they are going to have a hard time.
-
That's right! T34's don't cost fuel ;)
Hehe. He means upgrades don't cost fuel, rather? ;)
That would be awesome. 8)
-
T34's cost 10 MP and 1 fuel each. And no pop :)
Yup :)
-
T34's cost 10 MP and 1 fuel each. And no pop :)
Yup :)
Even more awesome. Tank Spam! :P
-
Yup, click T34 icon once, for 10 mp and 1 fuel, 0 pop
and 100x T34 come out. Of course, they have 1 health
each, but...
No, wait, that's conscripts... what was I thinking?!!!
-
No offense, but do any of you rank at least 10 on the 1v1 leaderboards? The discussion I am hearing so far implies not.
Back in the day I was a level 12 Ami and a level 11 Wehr. Back in the day, that is. I'm level 9 Ami and level 10 Wehr now. Not impressive per se but I see what you're getting at.
I'm hoping that this Mod will be able to accommodate those players more interested in meticulous strategizing that Company of Heroes became famous for. Also, Wehr Puma rush is no big shake. This game is pretty well balanced IMO (although in my experience, it's easier to get the ball rolling as Wehrmacht).
-
Oh, aye. But, thing is... there are SO MANY CHEATERS RIGHT
NOW... that I'd much rather be laid back about it all. I'm pretty
nasty in 1vs1, but against drop hacks, and in 3vs3 pvp... bleh.
I play for fun. It's a game for #$(@$*!!
Besides, as has been mentionned earlier, no 'offiicial' rankings
for modded EF multiplayer. So the point is moot ;)
I would like it to be as balanced as possible, though.
Personally, I think there should be separate pop for inf,
and vehicles. And that inf pop could intrude on vehicles, but
not the other way around (possibly) would encourage
balanced combined arms.
I also think that tanks should break down semi often,
especially in the case of the bigger german tanks (They
might be buffed in return, though). Which would calm down
the deep penetration by 20x Puma strategy, for exemple ;)
-
Oh, aye. But, thing is... there are SO MANY CHEATERS RIGHT
NOW... that I'd much rather be laid back about it all. I'm pretty
nasty in 1vs1, but against drop hacks, and in 3vs3 pvp... bleh.
I play for fun. It's a game for #$(@$*!!
Besides, as has been mentionned earlier, no 'offiicial' rankings
for modded EF multiplayer. So the point is moot ;)
I would like it to be as balanced as possible, though.
Personally, I think there should be separate pop for inf,
and vehicles. And that inf pop could intrude on vehicles, but
not the other way around (possibly) would encourage
balanced combined arms.
I also think that tanks should break down semi often,
especially in the case of the bigger german tanks (They
might be buffed in return, though). Which would calm down
the deep penetration by 20x Puma strategy, for exemple ;)
Wasn't it like that in the first DoW game? Havn't played that demo since... It came out :P
-
Dawn of War : Relic's previous game? Hmm, nope. Not that
I can recall. I've loved that concept everysince I've seen it
in America's army (1 medic, 1 HMG, 1 sniper max per group
of 7 persons). 'Regular' riflemen were unlimited, though.
Could make exceptions, though, like USA-Armor, could have
60%-70% vehicular pop instead of 50% for example, but it
would be factored in. (Now people will say Wehr blitz should,
too) lol ;)
But that's in the realm of 'changing basic vanilla play'
therefore zip, in the context of this addon. Alas. Good idea,
though.
-
Loup, were you around for the AA3.0 release? Wow, I hope EF doesn't release like AA3 did ;D
-
AA - America's army? No. Stopped playing awhile ago. Nice
game, but... meh. Can only enjoy a game that limits me to
playing 'white' (chess analogy) for a little while ;)
That's why I'm so eager to EF adding 'red' to COH ;)
- What was so special about how it was released??
-
Ooohh man you did NOT want to be there when it released. (for most people) It did not work, (for the people that made it work) it was 95% lag and 5% bugs and glitches. Still has em now. Like, you get shot and a medic heals you, your face goes inside your gun (yes, that's NOT backwards) and you can see that cool crap inside the gun, but no bullets come out, and you can't see where you're going. That's just one example... I could go on all day.
EDIT
Devs are hard at work making new patches about 1.2 GB and making the game slightly better every few months. By 2011 It'll be a game!
Edit again
How did Russian Armour turn into America's army 3 crap? I guess this discussion is over and it's turned into a misc. thread like the rest do eventually :P
-
The AA reference was because I said it'd be nice if
there was split INF/ARMOR pop to encourage combined arms
play. And that it'd be nice if vehicles needed regular repairs as
they broke down to prevent the deep penetration spam of
Puma/Pz4Flak37, etc.
- Nasty AA bugs, that :) *Shudders* :)
Guess the quality of devs went down? 1.2 G patches? UGH!
-
The AA reference was because I said it'd be nice if
there was split INF/ARMOR pop to encourage combined arms
play. And that it'd be nice if vehicles needed regular repairs as
they broke down to prevent the deep penetration spam of
Puma/Pz4Flak37, etc.
- Nasty AA bugs, that :) *Shudders* :)
Guess the quality of devs went down? 1.2 G patches? UGH!
Actually, after that horribly botched release, all the Devs got fired. Every last one. They got replaced and better devs too. I guess. And the patches are gettin smaller every time. ::)
-
Fired? I'd have hoped they'd been eaten alive, at the very
least ;) Oh well. For a fan mod, is fine, I suppose, but for
a commercial army game thingie, eh... ;)
Well, at least it's free ;)
-
I believe it will be all down to play style yet again. If you decide to rush you probably could focus on it. But I believe that having all the upgrades cost munitions (unlike PE) is a HUGE advantage.
-
Pro and con, like everything.
The thing *IS* to balance things so that regardless of
playing style, things are balanced ;)
-
Sure the game is balanced by win/loss but not for casualties. The US takes more killed to do the same job as the Wher in game and this affects how people play.
The US can crush if you put winning before your peoples lives. This is my biggest issue with the game. American commanders cared about their troops, we fought the war to rid the world of tyranny while the Nazi officers cared not for individuals but only for their fascist ideals. The US rushing strategy is so vastly different than how the war was actually fought.
My statement about the US winning with a better Army is true, but not specifically tank on tank battles. A US rifleman with a semiautomatic M1 Garand is far more deadly than a German grenadier with a K98 no matter how experienced he may be. The Germans did have better technology but not in enough numbers to close the gap.
Everybody uses the Tiger VS 7 Shermans scenerio but that rarly happened. More often than not the Tiger kills a Sherman or two then runs then is killed by a P-51. Then the Shermans support the superior US infantry in annihilating the kraut troops who are left behind without tank or air support. For every time a Tiger kills a Sherman, a Sherman kills another 20 Volksgrenadiers. For every time a time an MG 42 cuts up a fireteam, an infantry squad blows away a jerry grenadier section.
Firepower wins wars and no one past, present or future will ever match the US army in the realm of individual killing power.
Except the Marines. Ooh fuckin' Rah.
-
GI John, I can only assume you are trolling. :-\
-
Having only recently become part of the internet, I do not fully understand your insult.
-
Trolling :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet))
http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=trolling&i=53181,00.asp# (http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=trolling&i=53181,00.asp#)
(2) Posting derogatory messages about sensitive subjects on newsgroups and chat rooms to bait users into responding.
Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they — and the troll — understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group.
He sort of meant 'You are joking, trying to deceive us'
etc, etc. I agree that Garand was kickass compared to
K98. Tiger was better, but alone, with no air support...
Squish.
As for US strategy/balance. Well, it's a chess game,
not a simulation. Can go play Men of War for that ;)
-
Thank you good sir. Your statements have helped. I just needed a little rant and it seems like so many others can get away with it I might as well get in on the fun. I shall now get some chocolate milk to ease my frustration and avoid any more unnecessary outbursts.
-
Sure the game is balanced by win/loss but not for casualties. The US takes more killed to do the same job as the Wher in game and this affects how people play.
The US can crush if you put winning before your peoples lives. This is my biggest issue with the game. American commanders cared about their troops, we fought the war to rid the world of tyranny while the Nazi officers cared not for individuals but only for their fascist ideals. The US rushing strategy is so vastly different than how the war was actually fought.
My statement about the US winning with a better Army is true, but not specifically tank on tank battles. A US rifleman with a semiautomatic M1 Garand is far more deadly than a German grenadier with a K98 no matter how experienced he may be. The Germans did have better technology but not in enough numbers to close the gap.
Everybody uses the Tiger VS 7 Shermans scenerio but that rarly happened. More often than not the Tiger kills a Sherman or two then runs then is killed by a P-51. Then the Shermans support the superior US infantry in annihilating the kraut troops who are left behind without tank or air support. For every time a Tiger kills a Sherman, a Sherman kills another 20 Volksgrenadiers. For every time a time an MG 42 cuts up a fireteam, an infantry squad blows away a jerry grenadier section.
Firepower wins wars and no one past, present or future will ever match the US army in the realm of individual killing power.
Whilst I do agree with most of this you cant really say that German Generals didn't care about their troops. Many of them weren't Nazi's in the first place. Besides I'm sure Fascists still have emotions...despite being awful bastards. :D
Cheers
-
Firepower wins wars and no one past, present or future will ever match the US army in the realm of individual killing power.
It is foolish to expect the US to be the most powerful military force for the rest of eternity. Every power has a downfall, whether they are Rome, the British Empire or the United States.
-
Firepower wins wars and no one past, present or future will ever match the US army in the realm of individual killing power.
It is foolish to expect the US to be the most powerful military force for the rest of eternity. Every power has a downfall, whether they are Rome, the British Empire or the United States.
I agree, but the guy has spirit. 8)
-
GI John 412 :
- Calm self with chocolate milk?! How old are you 8?
Either that or you are a girl ;) Girl happiness all starts with
chocolate ;)
- HuRAH! Marine cry is 'Hourrah' from France!!! 'YEAAAH'
is what it'd translate to. But the Marine battlecry is definitively
french :)
Americans, Germans - nazis cared about GERMAN lives
just not non-german lives. And a lot of german officers
in the Wehrmacht were not nazis. Heck, even Japanese
cared more about their own soldier's lives than we
generally know of. But some artistic license was taken
or else, we'd all have generic chess pieces.
Every dog has it's day. Armies rise and fall. Life goes on ;)
-
One does not have to be 8 to enjoy chocolate milk. I personally start every day with one glass of chocolate flavored instant breakfast, a crude sexual joke and an episode of the A-Team.
My rant about the value of life is purely relative. The American way of life values the individual over the whole, sure the German officer corps valued life but their society told them to put the objective first. American officers never ordered their troops to die valiantly for Roosevelt. When Americans die valiantly it is because somebody effed up.
-
"When Americans die valiantly it is because somebody effed up."
yeah mostly that is a president because he could not lead to a negotiable peace ;D
-
"When Americans die valiantly it is because somebody effed up."
yeah mostly that is a president because he could not lead to a negotiable peace ;D
Oh snap. It just got real...
-
"When Americans die valiantly it is because somebody effed up."
yeah mostly that is a president because he could not lead to a negotiable peace ;D
Oh snap. It just got real...
YAH BOY!
Post Merge: January 05, 2010, 05:38:11 AM
"When Americans die valiantly it is because somebody effed up."
yeah mostly that is a president because he could not lead to a negotiable peace ;D
Oh snap. It just got real...
YAH BOY!
lol no
-
Speaking of Russian armor; I love the skin of the IS-2 or JS-2 or whatever you want to call it(yes I've seen a book call it a JS-2) I can't wait to use T-34s and IS-2s to push the facists back to berlin ;D
-
My statement about the US winning with a better Army is true, but not specifically tank on tank battles. A US rifleman with a semiautomatic M1 Garand is far more deadly than a German grenadier with a K98 no matter how experienced he may be. The Germans did have better technology but not in enough numbers to close the gap.
Everybody uses the Tiger VS 7 Shermans scenerio but that rarly happened. More often than not the Tiger kills a Sherman or two then runs then is killed by a P-51. Then the Shermans support the superior US infantry in annihilating the kraut troops who are left behind without tank or air support. For every time a Tiger kills a Sherman, a Sherman kills another 20 Volksgrenadiers. For every time a time an MG 42 cuts up a fireteam, an infantry squad blows away a jerry grenadier section.
Firepower wins wars and no one past, present or future will ever match the US army in the realm of individual killing power.
Except the Marines. Ooh fuckin' Rah.
I dont know what History book you have been reading, but it seems a little off. :p
The garand was not what won the war for the allies, had the US still been using Springfield I doubt it would have made any difference.
@ the last point, the USA is a fairly new country in the scheme of things, everything has its day.
-
Sure the game is balanced by win/loss but not for casualties. The US takes more killed to do the same job as the Wher in game and this affects how people play.
The US can crush if you put winning before your peoples lives. This is my biggest issue with the game. American commanders cared about their troops, we fought the war to rid the world of tyranny while the Nazi officers cared not for individuals but only for their fascist ideals. The US rushing strategy is so vastly different than how the war was actually fought.
My statement about the US winning with a better Army is true, but not specifically tank on tank battles. A US rifleman with a semiautomatic M1 Garand is far more deadly than a German grenadier with a K98 no matter how experienced he may be. The Germans did have better technology but not in enough numbers to close the gap.
Everybody uses the Tiger VS 7 Shermans scenerio but that rarly happened. More often than not the Tiger kills a Sherman or two then runs then is killed by a P-51. Then the Shermans support the superior US infantry in annihilating the kraut troops who are left behind without tank or air support. For every time a Tiger kills a Sherman, a Sherman kills another 20 Volksgrenadiers. For every time a time an MG 42 cuts up a fireteam, an infantry squad blows away a jerry grenadier section.
Firepower wins wars and no one past, present or future will ever match the US army in the realm of individual killing power.
Except the Marines. Ooh fuckin' Rah.
right how much propaganda do they put you guys now
-
Well americans were on the offensive...
Of course they'd have more casualties.
-
I don't see the point in this discussion. WW2 was a team effort, not USA vs Nazi Germany. Had it been a football game, Russia would be man of the match. The Allies would have never accomplished anything had it not been for the Germans expending the majority of their resources on the Eastern Front in the first place. Except maybe defeating the Japanese... but even then you had to Nuke them... twice.
Speaking of Russian armor; I love the skin of the IS-2 or JS-2 or whatever you want to call it(yes I've seen a book call it a JS-2) I can't wait to use T-34s and IS-2s to push the facists back to berlin ;D
This is the newer model here with its final skin
http://www.moddb.com/members/burrodiablo/images/is-2-render (http://www.moddb.com/members/burrodiablo/images/is-2-render)
It is currently being integrated.
IS-2 or JS-2 are both the same... JS is the Westernised 'Joseph', IS is more correct to the Russian cyrillic since Stalins first name in Russian is Иосиф 'Iosif'.
-
Yea, IL2, IS2 and JS2 are same thing.
Same as German V and W.
So it's either JS2 (Joseph Stalin 2) or 'Iosif'-2 ;)
So what? British had the Churchill Tank.
I'm only surprised the Germans didn't have the Hitler tank :)
I agree with HolyBurrito's post completely :) - All of it.
Also to the part that, yea, had it been a football game,
the Russians would be the man of the match.
-
Does anybody know why German tanks are named after felines i.e Puma,Tiger,Panther etc...???
And the skins are awesome!
-
Does anybody know why German tanks are named after felines i.e Puma,Tiger,Panther etc...???
And the skins are awesome!
dude change the size of your little quote
-
Because the germans are pussies! Bwahha ;)
(Just being stupid) :)
They still do, too! Leopard Tank, etc...
-
Because the germans are pussies! Bwahha ;)
(Just being stupid) :)
They still do, too! Leopard Tank, etc...
rofl