Login

russian armor

The Great OKW commander balancing

PAGES (9)down
22 Dec 2019, 12:22 PM
#21
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Because effectiveness =/= efficiency. Getting Jagdpanzer IVs or Panthers and continuously sink munitions into HEAT shells is effective too, but why take the risk when it's more efficient to go for a Tiger I that doesn't need munitions to fight the IS-2 and can also fight infantry at the same time?


Okay let’s try again:

Of all okw vs usf games, there are 2 commanders picked more than once. 12 times Grand Offensive was picked, for 8 wins. 13 times Luftwaffe was picked for 4 wins. I ask again: Is the Tiger I a crutch counterpick vs the IS2 or a general faction crutch?
22 Dec 2019, 12:25 PM
#22
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

Okay let’s try again:

Of all okw vs usf games, there are 2 commanders picked more than once. 12 times Grand Offensive was picked, for 8 wins. 13 times Luftwaffe was picked for 4 wins. I ask again: Is the Tiger I a crutch counterpick vs the IS2 or a general faction crutch?


Sure, let's determine an entire faction's performance on a grand total of 25 games.
22 Dec 2019, 12:31 PM
#23
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Sure, let's determine an entire faction's performance on a grand total of 25 games.


At least I have stats, what do you have?

If you wanna run off and ask every single top 150 player for the opinion on whether the Tiger I is a faction crutch or a crutch vs the IS2, go for it. At least then you’ll have an argument based on something.
22 Dec 2019, 12:47 PM
#24
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 556



Okay let’s try again:

Of all okw vs usf games, there are 2 commanders picked more than once. 12 times Grand Offensive was picked, for 8 wins. 13 times Luftwaffe was picked for 4 wins. I ask again: Is the Tiger I a crutch counterpick vs the IS2 or a general faction crutch?


So, with your way of thinking, from here can we say Fallschrimjager is underperforming too ? Because obviously they are not.
22 Dec 2019, 12:50 PM
#25
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 12:47 PMJilet


So, with your way of thinking, from here can we say Fallschrimjager is underperforming too ? Because obviously they are not.


You already have the answer: the faction is underperforming save for a faction crutch “tiger” that’s keeping it competitive.
22 Dec 2019, 12:51 PM
#26
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 11:26 AMKatitof

Well, OKW didn't really rely that much on heavies as ost or soviets.
New tiger sure is what they go for in replacement of command panther, but that's more because its safe choice, not faction holding pillar(brits can have a word about these and how it turns out losing them).

The "safe" theory is simply not supported by Stats, they say a different story:
Other OKW Commander had a 42% win ration, "Grand offensive" had a 54% win ratio.

It is not simply the "safe" choice is a far superior choice if you want to win.
22 Dec 2019, 12:54 PM
#27
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 12:47 PMJilet


So, with your way of thinking, from here can we say Fallschrimjager is underperforming too ? Because obviously they are not.

Luftwaffe Ground Forces Doctrine win ratio 33%
Grand Offensive Doctrine 54%

The Fallschrimjager might not be UP but the stat indicate the commander inferior.
22 Dec 2019, 12:55 PM
#28
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 556



You already have the answer: the faction is underperforming save for a faction crutch “tiger” that’s keeping it competitive.


I strongly disagree. OKW has all -simply all- the tools in their stock arsenal. If there is something underperforming in that faction it can only be doctrines. (Which I also don't think underperforming) Your feeling is because SOV is crutching on 7man cons, T70, IS-2 trio and USF crutching on Rifles and Jacksons.
22 Dec 2019, 12:56 PM
#29
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 556

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 12:54 PMVipper

Luftwaffe Ground Forces Doctrine win ratio 33%
Grand Offensive Doctrine 54%

The Fallschrimjager might not be UP but the stat indicate the commander inferior.


Which is exactly what I say in the first post after the replied comment above.
22 Dec 2019, 13:27 PM
#30
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

It's not the tiger that makes grand offensive it's the fussiliers. The tiger is the bonus ontop. The whole commander is incredibly rounded but it's the flexibility of fussiliers and the fact that with fussiliers okw can't be bullied by light vehicles that makes it so strong.
If you took away grens snare ostroppen would be much more attractive, make a tiger+ ostroppen commander and you wouldn't see anything else
22 Dec 2019, 13:30 PM
#31
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

It's not the tiger that makes grand offensive it's the fussiliers. The tiger is the bonus ontop. The whole commander is incredibly rounded but it's the flexibility of fussiliers and the fact that with fussiliers okw can't be bullied by light vehicles that makes it so strong.
If you took away grens snare ostroppen would be much more attractive, make a tiger+ ostroppen commander and you wouldn't see anything else

That theory is not supported by stat:
Fusiliers where used only in half the games that they where available and even then only 2 per game average. And that even thou the are available from CP0 and they have the great AT grenade utility.

On the other hand FJ which come allot later where used 94% of the games that they where available and slightly above 2 per game average while being more expensive come later and having less utility.
22 Dec 2019, 13:36 PM
#32
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Imo the stat indicate that G.O. commander is OP compared to other commanders (that can be checked banning the commander in the next tournament) and is impacting the OKW too much so their might be a possibility that OKW are actually UP with the commander.

Having that said I disagree with OP that this is reason enough to buff the other commanders. Instead G.O. should be nerfed at the same power level of other commander and any changes to fix any OKW issues should focus on stock units.

On the other hand nerfing Soviets and USF would be a far better solutions than buffing OKW units/commanders because it would:
Help with Ostheer problems
Help with UKF problems
Stop the Power creep
22 Dec 2019, 13:40 PM
#33
avatar of flyingpancake

Posts: 186 | Subs: 1

I think OKW is in a balanced spot if one ignores the Tiger1.

It has a tool for every situation I can think of while still having it's factions strengths and weaknesses.

The problem I think is not even the Tiger1 perse but the CP requirement for it. Heavy tank CP requirement is a problem for all factions but because OKW has a good light verhicle lineup one can stall for a heavy tank by skipping medium. Soviet has a similar problem with the IS2 and sov light verhicles. This is bad for the game flow in my opinion.

My suggestion would be to increase the CP requirement on all heavy tanks across the board to be similar to heavy TD levels (ISU152, Jagdtiger, Elephant), this would ensure that mediums and premium mediums get there time to shine and makes games less decided by who gets their heavy out first.
22 Dec 2019, 13:41 PM
#34
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

At least I have stats, what do you have?


Skewed win ratios of 25 games is not "stats".

I used pick rates, that with such a low sample size are more reliable and revealing than win ratios (although absolutely not definitive), over a better (but still very low) sample size of 73 games. And I have my game intuition and analysis, as that is basically my job for Relic, as well as experience and knowledge from the internal balance discussions we've had lately.
22 Dec 2019, 13:53 PM
#35
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Skewed win ratios of 25 games is not "stats".

I used pick rates, that with such a low sample size are more reliable and revealing than win ratios (although absolutely not definitive), over a better (but still very low) sample size of 73 games. And I have my game intuition and analysis, as that is basically my job for Relic, as well as experience and knowledge from the internal balance discussions we've had lately.


Okay then, poll the top 150 and let’s see how many agree with you.
22 Dec 2019, 14:13 PM
#36
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

Okay then, poll the top 150 and let’s see how many agree with you.


Given how basically no one, besides you, claims "OKW is underpowered and crutches solely on the Tiger I", I'll assume the silent majority agrees that OKW is generally fine or they would've made a fuzz about it otherwise. So I'll leave the polling up to you to prove otherwise.
22 Dec 2019, 14:18 PM
#37
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 13:36 PMVipper
Imo the stat indicate that G.O. commander is OP compared to other commanders (that can be checked banning the commander in the next tournament) and is impacting the OKW too much so their might be a possibility that OKW are actually UP with the commander.

Having that said I disagree with OP that this is reason enough to buff the other commanders. Instead G.O. should be nerfed at the same power level of other commander and any changes to fix any OKW issues should focus on stock units.

On the other hand nerfing Soviets and USF would be a far better solutions than buffing OKW units/commanders because it would:
Help with Ostheer problems
Help with UKF problems
Stop the Power creep


By all means, if they:

1) Remove xp gain and cheaper reinforce from 7 man cons
2) Make the IS2 +40 fuel
3) Make M4s +5 fuel and Jacksons +10 fuel

Then by all means
22 Dec 2019, 14:20 PM
#38
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Given how basically no one, besides you, claims "OKW is underpowered and crutches solely on the Tiger I", I'll assume the silent majority agrees that OKW is generally fine or they would've made a fuzz about it otherwise. So I'll leave the polling up to you to prove otherwise.


Like I said, make your own poll, frame it as “we as the balance team want to see people’s opinion” and see what people think. I’m sure a lot more will bother than if I do it.

If the majority agrees, you can then talk to top players and see what they think.
22 Dec 2019, 14:22 PM
#39
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Skewed win ratios of 25 games is not "stats".

I used pick rates, that with such a low sample size are more reliable and revealing than win ratios (although absolutely not definitive), over a better (but still very low) sample size of 73 games. And I have my game intuition and analysis, as that is basically my job for Relic, as well as experience and knowledge from the internal balance discussions we've had lately.

Yet OKW have been using the same commander again and again, going from special ops to G.O. that thus stats as faction are unreliable. They might indicate that the faction is about balanced or simply that the specifics commanders contribute to the faction doing ok. It is possible that they will not do that great without the specific commanders.

As I already have pointed out their win rate without G.O. was as low as 42%.
22 Dec 2019, 14:43 PM
#40
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I think the prevalance of Grand Offensive has a lot less to do with OKW than it has to to with the IS-2.

The IS-2 has 375 armour, which means only other heavies and the Panther are effective against it.

In a meta where the IS-2 has a habit of being the first built vehicle larger than a T-70, the Tiger is going to be favoured: for a relatively small premium over the Panther you get potent manpower bleed too. Nobody's going to go Panther against the IS-2 if they've got a Tiger.

The problem isn't OKW's nondoc roster, it's that the 1v1 heavy tank rush meta hasn't been successfully killed off yet and the best counter to a heavy right now is another heavy. Until it is, you're going to keep seeing Grand Offensive.

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 14:22 PMVipper
Yet OKW have been using the same commander again and again, going from special ops to G.O. that thus stats as faction are unreliable. They might indicate that the faction is about balanced or simply that the specifics commanders contribute to the faction doing ok. It is possible that they will not do that great without the specific commanders.

As I already have pointed out their win rate without G.O. was as low as 42%.


And what happened if you didn't go Panic Panther in the last meta?

You'd get whacked in the face with a techless heavy.

It's the same problem we've had for a year: stalling for heavies works, so the 1v1 degenerates into heavy tank standoffs.

I'm starting to think the only solution is to make heavy stalling completely unviable. The very existence of that strategy kills off so many others.
PAGES (9)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

592 users are online: 592 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM