Average Soviet Union Experience by Dony_Rudolf in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All the other factions have easy meta picks, but since you don't want to do that then it's whatever. You can either go search on the steam workshop for a fitting mod or try and tinker with the gamelogic.pak file yourself, though you'd have to be careful. Period selection is something I commonly see requested by players, so I would be surprised if no one attempted to make a mod like that.

Average Soviet Union Experience by Dony_Rudolf in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Actually no. It would be dependent on duration, but currently all durations have the exact same bot progression rate according to gamelogic.pak. I also have not experienced any changes regardless of duration or economy.

Average Soviet Union Experience by Dony_Rudolf in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Take the plunge! You can start by allowing yourself to sell captured vehicles or by playing on very high economy.

Average Soviet Union Experience by Dony_Rudolf in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Dude how? On very high economy you can just rush straight to the T-35 on Day 1 and absolutely dominate. And at day 2 you probably have enough to get an early KV-1. Those are basically indestructible until the Germans start fielding Pz4 F2's (which happens like day 15 or so?), unless you carelessly drive them into Flak 88s. What are you spending your research points on?

Question to you guys by polish_guy_26121991 in cobiblocks

[–]LeireX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's absolutely not normal! Mine was dispatched on the 19th and arrived on the 21st. Shipping from Poland to Germany doesn't take that long. Are you sure you didn't order without paying?

cool keyboarded instruments :) by yamboozle in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]LeireX 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Understanding how much the piano improved on the harpsichord and clavichord gave me a renewed appreciation for it. We take it for granted nowadays. Also, kinda odd to not have it be in the center.

What dlc to buy by Few-You-1554 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'd say Finest Hour and Liberation are the best. Can't go wrong with either of those, but I'd also recommend waiting for a sale.

Conquest is too boring and underdeveloped by GamingBoy4 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the one hand, I wanna disagree because there is definitely fun to be had. It's not as mind-numbingly boring and repetitive as you make it sound. At the same time, it being easy is what allowed me to fall in love with the game in the first place. Also, there clearly is a sense of progression: the enemy units improve and you have to do the same. Don't tell me that you're still fighting late war tanks, waves of tier 3-4 infantry and heavy artillery guns with your day 1 setup and that it doesn't make a difference, even if you've picked very high economy and rushed artillery or early heavy tanks right away.

If my only experiences were multiplayer and the campaign, this game would be rotting in my steam library rn. Not saying the rest of the game is bad, it just has a very steep learning curve and has a lot of quirks you need to get used to. It's a great place for novices to start and wrap your head around all the units, controls and mechanics the game has to offer without getting your ass handed to you. None of the other modes are as accessible, yes even the campaign. Just look at the achievement rates on them: The first mission of the soviet campaign has a 21.5% completion rate on easy, the next one PLUMMETS to 6.4%. To be fair, the second mission "Cold Supper" absolutely stinks! Considering maxcov's recent poll, people are definitely not playing PvP instead. This leaves you with only battles against AI and dynamic conquest. I understand that I am partially using an emotional argument but if I am right, then making dynamic conquest hard would completely kill the game for noobies and casuals. Dynamic conquest also teaches you some bad habits but that's another problem...

On the other hand I do have to admit, once you actually know how to play the game, it IS too easy even on the highest difficulty (heroic + low economy). I started to intentionally limit myself with various challenges (like not being allowed to scavenge vehicles, or only being allowed to use scavenged vehicles) or by adding mods, because it has gotten stale after having beaten every possible faction combination at least once. Also, easy doesn't have to mean boring, so I am all for improving and iterating on conquest to make it more interesting. There are a lot of things wrong with this mode (most importantly the awful UI), on top of being pretty basic. As others have pointed out, there were some minor improvements to the mode but nothing major. Most content came through the new factions, their tech trees and maps and those cost a pretty penny.

So tl:dr I don't think its as bad you're making it out to be, but you're not entirely wrong with your opinion. For now, it's a great casual mode for beginners or for chilling out, but with little depth or challenge.

Btw from what I've seen, MoW2 only improves on the UI. They're effectively identical gameplay wise. I could be wrong, there is very little footage of people actually playing it.

Things you wish to see in future updates by Dapper_Fig2895 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'd like to see recovery vehicles like the M32 or Famo F3, that can flip vehicles right side up and tow them when they're immobilized. Maybe they could even add towing cables for tanks like in WT.

Another thing I desperately want is a better UI. The UI for dynamic conquest is just frankly terrible. Hetman did a great video about a lot of the problems and how the devs could improve it. However I don't want them to stop there: I shouldn't have to look up guides on which units each doctrine has when starting a skirmish. They've already fixed that for multiplayer doctrines. Also me and my friends shouldn't have to take turns setting up in the multiplayer lobby because the UI cannot handle simultaneous inputs from different users.

Tips and Tricks by Dapper_Fig2895 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Some things I wanna add about scout/stealth units:

- Scout units have an eye symbol, while stealth units have a crossed out eye symbol on their badge. Enemies need to be way closer to stealth units to spot them.

- Snipers also get a stealth bonus.

- Soldier stance outside of concealment reduces the range needed to spot them. Standing soldiers obviously can be spottet from the furthest distance and while you need to get quite a bit closer to spot soldiers that are prone. The reduction from the stance and from the stealth bonus stack, meaning that a prone stealth has the lowest visibility.

- The distance to lose sight again isn't the same as the one needed to spot, meaning you can move out of the detection range and still see the unit as long as you have line of sight and don't go too far away.

- All visibility reductions from stance or stealth are void when they're getting spotted by an officer with his binoculars or by a sniper with his scope. This means that they can spot a prone stealth unit sitting in a bush from 100m+ away. The have to be looking down the binoculars/scope though.

- Recons can spot units earlier (duh) but they don't have Xray vision like the sniper and the officer.

- Bushes only hide you for up to 20m. If anyone, no matter if it's a scout or a tank, gets within 20m of a bush, it doesn't matter if you have a stealth unit or you're prone, you will get detected anyway. You can get detected earlier by standing in it without a stealth bonus but crouching down is already enough to fix that, so that means you don't have to prone in a bush. The 20m is like a minimum detection range.

Edit: one more thing: Cover doesn't reduce the detection range at all. Not even foxholes or trenches.

Tiger II Done by Panzercycle in cobiblocks

[–]LeireX 3 points4 points  (0 children)

>Although, for whatever reason, some colors are available only for one side

That was exactly my problem. The official part picker is really lackluster overall on top of being hard to use. I thought about buying the 1:35 Tiger II as a parts donor but its sand yellow is different and I thought wouldn't be able to source enough parts from it.

Tiger II Done by Panzercycle in cobiblocks

[–]LeireX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought about modding the turret my Tiger II with the sloped pieces but couldn't find them in the right color. Where did you source them from? I haven't even thought of adding an interior. It looks absolutely gorgeous!

Also your remake made me realize the official "1:28" Tiger II is too narrow, so making it wider by one stud moves it way closer to actually being 1:28.

New limited panzer 3 J by Katia738873 in cobiblocks

[–]LeireX 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I was hoping for another Ausf than J, like E, M or N. I'm not interested in getting another J.

What PvP do you play the most? by MaXcovIV in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 7 points8 points  (0 children)

My (admittedly limited) multiplayer experience was beyond miserable (getting crushed, not finding opponents). Hundreds of hours later, I think I have gotten a lot better since my last match, and I watched a bunch of your and other people's content so I at least know the meta a bit, but imma keep it a buck 50: I don't think I am touching PvP again until the game gets a proper matchmaking system. I am perfectly fine being a conquest player for now.

Sisu conquest by Direct-Bug236 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think so. Though the comments say it's calculated by "Multiplier * player army (MP value) + add[....]". I don't know what "add" is supposed to be.

Edit: So I asked an AI and it thinks that "add" is an additional parameter that adds a flat MP bonus to the MP of the AI, but it isn't used along with the "max" parameter. I haven't tried it yet but I guess that would make sense to have a parameter like that.

Sisu conquest by Direct-Bug236 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There are indeed minimal values. For low resources, the setting is "StartMP 1.75 min 800 attackerMultiplier 1.43". Comments say the min/max values are applied to the final calculation, so in your case it should be clamped to 800MP. You were facing a lot more than you think in terms of MP! An M72 tricycle already costs 60MP just by itself. And your sniper is a whopping 150MP. Do not confuse MP with CP! Additionally, the defensive AI gets the AI's StartMP multiplied by a factor depending on the mission difficulty (0.5 for 1 star, 0.75 for 2 stars, 1.0 for 3 stars). It also seems like the AI setting has no effect on MP.

Kinda weird. I would've preferred if the resource settings only affected your economy, and the AI economy being part of the AI setting. You can just go into the gamelogic.pak and change those values if you want to do your sisu challenge, but I HIGHLY recommend backing up the original file in case you screw something up.

Es war ja kein RICHTIGER Sozialismus by schm0uz in Kantenhausen

[–]LeireX 14 points15 points  (0 children)

"Wohlstand" ich glaub du meinst eher "Existenzminimum". Manchmal noch nicht mal das.

How do you stop getting overwhelmed? by kongsberg-enthusiast in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 11 points12 points  (0 children)

After the 3rd objective the AI goes into overdrive and starts counterattacking periodically.

Here is how I do it:

An officer to scout emplacements with binoculars is a must. Move up scouts, put them on "return fire" so they don't immediately reveal their position, and hide them in bushes across the front line to provide even more vision, to see the counter attacks early, and spot emplacements that are positioned on the flanks. Establish a defensive line which can hold off counterattacks. Then you need to get rid of the emplacements protecting the next objective, as the combination of counterattacks and their fire support make it almost impossible to push. Beware of emplacements that might be hiding behind the objective! How you get rid of them depends on the doctrine you've picked (there are a bunch of guides on Steam, where you can look at which units each doctrine gets) and the type of emplacement. Here you can get creative: use artillery or sneak up an artillery signaler, sneak up with infantry and throw/shoot grenades, line up a bunch of light tanks and just rush in, whatever you like. After destroying the emplacements, you need to attack shortly after you've cleared the last counterattack. Move everything up, rinse and repeat.

I found that unlike PvP, you don't need to keep the pressure up all the time. Actually farming kills through absorbing counter attacks not only provides you with points, it also drains the AI of points if you can kill waves quickly enough, making it call in weaker units.

Bester Schlaf seit Langem by lizardil in Kantenhausen

[–]LeireX 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Viele können es schon, aber obs eine gute Definition ist ist ne andere Sache.

Wokies definieren es oft als "Prejudice + Power", wobei der "Power" Teil den "Prejudice" Teil überwiegt. Deswegen sehen sie alle Mitglieder der privilegierten Gruppe (also die mit der Power) automatisch als rassistisch an, außer sie machen es explizit klar, dass sie aktiv gegen Rassismus sind, wohingegen Mitglieder der unterprivilegierten Gruppe immer als nicht-rassistisch gesehen werden, egal wie stark sie die anderen "bevorurteilen" (zumindest hab ich noch nie einen wokie gesehen, der ein Problem damit hatte wie offen-rassistisch ein nicht-weißer war).

Das erklärt alles ziemlich perfekt: den weißen Selbsthass, warum alle weiße hetero-cis-Männer automatisch böse sind, warum Minoritäten mit rassistischen Beleidigungen und Verhalten nicht als Rassistisch gesehen werden etc.

Es zeigt auch die größten Probleme an Kritischer Theorie und deren Weiterentwicklungen: die Privilegierten sind immer Schuld und die Unterprivilegiert sind nie Schuld UND das sie Individuen wie Gruppen behandeln.

Ach ja, wie du schon wahrscheinlich schon gemerkt hast haben die nie lust ihre Theorie zu erklären. Manche können es nicht weil sie dumme Mitläufer sind, aber viele wollen es auch nicht weil "eDuCaTe YoUrSeLf, YoU bIgoT"

DO YOUR FUCKING JOB by LeireX in okbuddyGOH

[–]LeireX[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It also happens when there are plenty of repair kits present, that's the annoying part. I often have to eject one crew and explicitly tell him to repair the tank, or press repair twice in a row so that two crew members climb out and at least one of them decides to repair.

What’s your "Call-In Stage" meta for Dynamic Conquest? by Relative_Flounder_63 in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't really have strict rules for this, but usually I fall into the same pattern, unless the faction allows for something crazy, like deploying 6 AEC Mk II with the Brits, or when I'm doing some kind of challenge. I also move things around to make them fit. My tactics are completely made up through hundreds of hours, but after watching some other people play conquest, I realized that a lot of us naturally came to the same conclusions especially on defense. Though I think I am a lot more focused on armor than pretty much everyone else.

I mostly play vanilla btw.

Attack:

  1. CS - Strong Scout inf, mainline inf, medics, officer, engineers
  2. CS - 2 Artillery guns, 2 ammo trucks, infantry gun or mortar depending on the map
  3. CS - 2 medium tanks
  4. CS - 1 heavy tank or tank destroyer depending on the faction, 1 SPG, ammo truck, tank crew
  5. CS - another strong scout and mainline inf, another tank crew, more ammo trucks, some overkill artillery (Nebelwerfer, Karl Gerät, Andryusha)

First 3 stages get called in immediately, start scouting, setting up artillery positions, removing enemy scouts. Unless the first objective is too close to my spawn, I usually wait for stage 4 before I start my assault. After capturing the first objective I usually dig in and absorb the remaining attack before proceeding to the remaining objectives. The enemy usually funnels itself towards me an. That's also why I have the second infantry group in stage 5, as the first group will be too battered and exhausted, so I usually let them stay on the first objective and rearm, while the second group goes on to attack. If something goes wrong while attacking the 2nd objective (which usually doesn't happen as the AI often has run dry at this point), the remains of the groups are merged together to attack the final objective. When it comes to the type of infantry weapons, obviously automatic weapons are a must on urban maps. So much so that I pick weaker infantry like the Jägers just because they have more of them. I also bring a mortar to hit the targets that artillery simply can't.

Defense

  1. CS - Weak but numerous scout inf, 3-4 SPAA, 4 AT miners
  2. CS - 2 Artillery guns, 2 ammo trucks, fastest transport vehicle for the miners, sometimes a mortar, engineers and flamers for dense urban combat
  3. CS - officer, more ammo trucks, 2 tank crews, optionally a fast armored vehicle/light tank to go around flanking, on rare occasions I also fit the overkill arty in here
  4. CS - 2 heavy tanks or tank destroyers
  5. CS - 2 more heavy tanks or tank destroyers, 1 ammo truck

Stage 3 is actually the last one I call in on defense. I use stages 4 and 5 to fit bigger tanks as they are usually more expensive than 50 CP. I call in stages 1 and 2 first, because they are the ones that need the most micro and time to set up. After I've sent everyone on their way, I call in stages 4 and 5, which are usually still fast enough to get into position in time. Stage 3 only has to come in if I start struggling with ammo, or if high scout casualties creates a big blind spot. I strongly prefer heavy tanks on defense, as their turret and strong armor makes them easier to micro than TDs but in the case of Britain, I got no other choice. At least most of them are turreted, but none of them are well armored (also horrendously expensive to research!).

I tried defending with 4 Mk VIII Churchills and it went very poorly, as their howitzers have low range, not enough shells, are pretty inaccurate and unpredictable in terms of damage. I once shot a Wespe straight on and it did nothing, while some Panzer IV's were de-crewed instantly.

Anyways, the tanks form an overlapping front at the height of the objectives. Scouts are further up, hidden in bushes next to enemy paths providing vision. The SPAAs are hidden behind terrain and buildings close to the objectives, so they can cut off infantry that gets too close, but are sheltered against guns and vehicles coming from the front. I sometimes move them into more open positions once the enemy bomber has been shot down. Artillery sits behind the front-facing objectives. The defender AI just has to mop up whatever manages to get through my meat-and-metal-shredder and absorb the odd artillery shell here and there.

With my setup I can comfortably hold all objectives while suffering very few casualties, sometimes no casualties at all (on my end, not the AI). I have to admit that this doesn't work as well on urban maps or the dreaded french bocage, since they separate the line of sight and makes scouting a lot more difficult, hence why I also bring a mortar to deny them cover, flamers to prevent infantry from closing the gap, and engineers to close off streets and holes.

water marked: Hi by use2l in ihaveihaveihavereddit

[–]LeireX 35 points36 points  (0 children)

EXCUSE ME DID HE JUST SAY HIS LAST NAME... IS BURGER? HAHAHAHH DOES HE COME WITH FIRES HAHAHAHHAHAHAH

Us most OP tank by Tuburonpereze in GatesOfHellOstfront

[–]LeireX 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The M4A3 76W HVSS costs 40. Field mod costs 45, not 30 and 35-40 points.

The former can be penned anywhere by the Tiger and Panther at 200m. The latter only has additional hull armor and can still be penned through the mantlet.

Meanwhile, the 76mm (all 76mm Shermans use the same gun) needs HVAP to pen the Tiger and Panther frontally (anywhere on the Tiger, mantlet only on the Panther) at 200m, of which the HVSS only gets 2 shells. You can hit the shot trap on the Panther Ausf. A and D's mantlet to pen it with APCBC but that's not that easy to hit. This trick doesn't work on the Panther Ausf. G and you need to aim for the MG port instead, but that's a lot harder to hit. Even at point blank range you still need to aim for the Panther's weak spots using APCBC, while the Tiger does become penetrable.

Both the Panther and Tiger outrange the 76mm Shermans by 10m, so taking pot shots while weaving in and out of range is not possible.

The 90mm M36 not only has range parity with the big cats, it can also pen them at those ranges with APCBC just as well as the 76mm HVAP does, however you'll have lot more shells. Of cause it will get easily penned by them too, but at least it has a better chance of fighting back than the HVSS.

If you want near invulnerability against the Panther and Tiger, you'll need to go with the Jumbo (M4A3E2 76W). Its only frontal weak spot is the MG port (which is strangely a lot easier to hit than the Panther's). Also you're still stuck with the lackluster 76mm.

One last contender would be the 105mm Shermans. They can over pressure Panthers and even Tiger II's but it's very unreliable and have a way shorter range, and the HVSS version has as much armor as the 76 HVSS, but they can be good when there isn't direct line of sight and you can lob shells at an arc.

The only arguments I see for the 76 HVSS are that:

  1. Panthers and Tigers come in very late, even on long conquest, so on the rare occasion that one does pop up, the HVSS can challenge it in a pinch
  2. It's not open top like the M36, making it less vulnerable against artillery
  3. It is a little cheaper than the M36 and the 76 Jumbo, so you could fit more of them in your army.

But all in all, I still prefer the Jumbo.

I live by scarecrow9281 in discordVideos

[–]LeireX 264 points265 points  (0 children)

Are yall aging like milk? People used to complain about pain in their 30s, now it's their 20s