Login

russian armor

The Great OKW commander balancing

PAGES (9)down
22 Dec 2019, 19:18 PM
#61
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 18:57 PMVipper
I agree with that and I post about the problem with ST44 VG repeatedly.


In a game where buffed riflemen and 7man uber cons rule the battlefield, you can’t nerf the mainlines on an already struggling faction.

Unless you’re ready to buff Spios and Obers in return, which nobody wants.
22 Dec 2019, 19:21 PM
#62
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



In a game where buffed riflemen and 7man uber cons rule the battlefield, you can’t nerf the mainlines on an already struggling faction.

Unless you’re ready to buff Spios and Obers in return, which nobody wants.

And you can not continue the circle of continue buffs. One should select a unit single units as the base line and balanced the rest according to that one.

The problem with MP44 VGs has to do with capability to fight effectively at all ranges making other OKW infatry pale by comparison. They should perform good at certain range or average in all.

7man conscripts are OP and and they need to be nerfed it is as simple as that. (or 7men conscripts are the base line and all other infantries need to be buffed in their late game)
22 Dec 2019, 19:35 PM
#63
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 19:17 PMVipper
In the long run better solution are proven to be easier.


There is no long run. For all we know, any patch could be the last. Which is why we can't go around radically changing things now, risk completely breaking it and have it in the game for the rest of its life.

For example Penals and Volks are not changed because even if they're not perfect they work well enough, and changing a faction's core line infantry has far reaching and unknown consequences we may never be able to deal with.
22 Dec 2019, 19:39 PM
#64
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



There is no long run. For all we know, any patch could be the last. Which is why we can't go around radically changing things now, risk completely breaking it and have it in the game for the rest of its life.

For example Penals and Volks are not changed because even if they're not perfect they work well enough, and changing a faction's core line infantry has far reaching and unknown consequences we may never be able to deal with.

Then simply revert or partially revert the Heavy tank changes its the "safest" change...

And I feel the need to express here once more the gratitude to the mod team and everyone involved in trying to make the game better...
22 Dec 2019, 19:42 PM
#65
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 19:17 PMVipper


GO having a higher win rate isnt a remotely useful stat. Its actually beyond useless.

An easy, possible explanation is that, by chance, more of the top players preferred GO and more of the lower seeded tournament players preferred luftwaffe. They could be the EXACT same power level, but if 1 extra top player prefers GO and, say, 2 extra low seed players prefers luftwaffe, I wouldnt be surprised at even a 30% win rate difference.

And sure, you could then beg the question of why this is the case. Surely if top players prefer GO, then it must be better, right? Not really? Just look at faction picks among the top 8. Each player had their own preferences. For some reason, people seem to assume that the top 8 tournament players are machines built to make optimal decisions with regards to coh2. What actually happens is that these players pick what theyre comfortable with, what smashed them in their last set of scrims, what fits their style, what they have fun playing, whats more reliable as a strategy, what fits their understanding of the game, and yes, what they think is most powerful.

I mean, I dont doubt that GO is stronger than luftwaffe. But "doctrine win rates" is a useless argument that isnt really worth the time it takes to type or read. Really, most arguments that include the term "tournament win rates" are worse than anecdotes since they try to parade as something with actual justification.

On the command panther, i can, in general, agree that if it doesnt perform as well in the AT role as the tiger there is some thinking to be done. That said, its cheaper than the tiger, will come at a lower cp than the tiger (cp lowering confirmed, pending final approval), is more mobile than the tiger, comes with a vet 0 permanent commander aura, has more range than the tiger, and has mark target (which does likely mean it performs better against the is2 than the tiger does). I imagine the tigers performance against the is2 isnt what puts it over the command panther, its just another factor that puts GO over spec ops, considering that the tiger also mauls infantry. 200 fuel to counter the is2 and get some scouting, or 230 fuel to counter the is2 and everything else the opponent likely has.

On the panthers role. Its actually a bit more of a generalist AT vehicle (great absolute performance at short, medium, and long) with its main advantage being that it can actively hunt for vehicles and chase them down to find and secure kills. It does best when it can spring on tanks and TDs that are weaker than it...but the IS2 is not one such vehicle. So when I consider the panther vs is2, and tiger vs is2 matchups, this dorsnt sound particularly alarming. This isnt the panthers ideal matchup or use case.
22 Dec 2019, 19:47 PM
#66
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



In a game where buffed riflemen and 7man uber cons rule the battlefield, you can’t nerf the mainlines on an already struggling faction.

Unless you’re ready to buff Spios and Obers in return, which nobody wants.

Both of those units got buffed because of their cost ineffectual status compared to volks. Sadly 4 man Tommies are in the same boat where their cover reliance is hard countered by volks out right

Buffint sturms and Obers are actually a much better way that rifle lite volks.
As long as volks are the only infantry you really need (despite there being 2 other ELITE stock units) something is going to over/under perform relatively. This is part what happened to the buffed doctrinal elites: how do you make a unit a reasonable cost and attractive when volks are so cost effective as it is.

Sturms being cheaper but more flexible and covering the anti garrison role would add some much needed diversity. Tuning stgs so they are not a good at all ranges makes long range Obers more attractive. What's more, if the bulk of okw infantry isn't going to tackle every single battlefield problem with the utmost ease, other units from other factions can be adjusted so that they don't need to compete as hard with Volks.
22 Dec 2019, 19:50 PM
#67
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


GO having a higher win rate isnt a remotely useful stat. Its actually beyond useless.

An easy, possible explanation is that, by chance, more of the top players preferred GO and more of the lower seeded tournament players preferred luftwaffe. They could be the EXACT same power level, but if 1 extra top player prefers GO and, say, 2 extra low seed players prefers luftwaffe, I wouldnt be surprised at even a 30% win rate difference.
...

Again I did not compared the Luft win rates with G.O. win rates. I compared G.O. win rates vs any other choice and there is noticeable (x129%) difference in those win rates.

To me that is an indication that G.O is Op compared to other OKW commanders which you do not seem to question yourself "I mean, I dont doubt that GO is stronger than luftwaffe" despite the fact that FJ have been one of most popular target for OP claim.

But my point was different, my point was OKW become so commander depend with Previously special OP and now G.O. dominating the pick that OKW faction performance can not be judged by the results since the faction can easily be carried by those commander for years.
22 Dec 2019, 19:55 PM
#68
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

This isnt the panthers ideal matchup or use case.


But the StuG, JPIV and Puma can't deal with it either.

So what should?

If the best counter to a heavy is another heavy, the heavy tank meta persists.
22 Dec 2019, 20:05 PM
#69
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 19:55 PMLago


But the StuG, JPIV and Puma can't deal with it either.

So what should?

If the best counter to a heavy is another heavy, the heavy tank meta persists.

I didnt say the panther cant deal with the is2, just that its not its ideal use case.

Also, the assertion about forcing a heavy meta isnt true. A sniper is the only real counter to a sniper, and yet we're not in a sniper meta. This is because snipers are not universally a good investment to begin with.

Finally, also confirming (again, pending final approval) that IS2 armor is being lowered so that these other vehicles CAN stand a better change against it.
22 Dec 2019, 20:19 PM
#70
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I didnt say the panther cant deal with the is2, just that its not its ideal use case.


That's not what I was asking.

The Panther, in both factions in which it appears, is the best nondoctrinal anti-heavy unit.

If the Panther isn't ideal against heavies, then what is?


Also, the assertion about forcing a heavy meta isnt true. A sniper is the only real counter to a sniper, and yet we're not in a sniper meta. This is because snipers are not universally a good investment to begin with.


Almost everything can kill the sniper if it gets out of position.

Heavy tanks demand relatively rare high penetration guns to counter, which you only find on big tank destroyers and the other heavies.

Heavies provide a potent anti-infantry advantage over nondoctrinal TDs (including the Panther) for a relatively small additional cost, so it's not hard to see why they're such common picks right now.

You get anti-tank infantry power on par with your weight in mediums, anti-tank firepower equivalent to a medium tank destroyer, and armour that medium tanks can't penetrate.

Faced with that, it's difficult to make an argument for mixed medium builds. The heavy is better than the medium right now in every respect except timing, and the timing gap is too small to make up for it.


Finally, also confirming (again, pending final approval) that IS2 armor is being lowered so that these other vehicles CAN stand a better change against it.


By how much?

If it's still over 300, it's still going to be a problem.
22 Dec 2019, 20:26 PM
#71
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...
On the command panther, i can, in general, agree that if it doesnt perform as well in the AT role as the tiger there is some thinking to be done. That said, its cheaper than the tiger, will come at a lower cp than the tiger (cp lowering confirmed, pending final approval), is more mobile than the tiger, comes with a vet 0 permanent commander aura, has more range than the tiger, and has mark target (which does likely mean it performs better against the is2 than the tiger does). I imagine the tigers performance against the is2 isnt what puts it over the command panther, its just another factor that puts GO over spec ops, considering that the tiger also mauls infantry. 200 fuel to counter the is2 and get some scouting, or 230 fuel to counter the is2 and everything else the opponent likely has.

On the panthers role. Its actually a bit more of a generalist AT vehicle (great absolute performance at short, medium, and long) with its main advantage being that it can actively hunt for vehicles and chase them down to find and secure kills. It does best when it can spring on tanks and TDs that are weaker than it...but the IS2 is not one such vehicle. So when I consider the panther vs is2, and tiger vs is2 matchups, this dorsnt sound particularly alarming. This isnt the panthers ideal matchup or use case.

I think you missed my point.
According to the "correct" stat C.Panther is at least as good (if not better) as Tiger with dealing IS-2 yet it was not picked a single time and that is an indication that current problem in the OKW Soviet match up is not simply the IS-2.

I would guess that T-70 and 7men conscripts are also issues.

According to Sander93's calculations:
...
If I'm calculating it somewhat correctly, the Tiger I has a ~45s TTK while the Panther has a 54s TTK, against an IS-2 at 40-50 range, counting from the first shot. Disregarding accuracy because scatter shots are too unpredictable to quantify.
...

And I have simply that if this is the cases that demonstrates a problem in the units design since the all around Tiger excel over the specialized C.P in its role even in pure numbers.

As for the Aura of the C.Pan, it is not that great in 1vs1 because one can not afford many vehicles to benefit from it. The funny thing is that Tiger also has an aura but I doubt anyone actually used it game thus so much for "command Tiger" aspect of the unit.
22 Dec 2019, 20:32 PM
#72
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Imo one should also start to consider apart from timing if the new AOE profiles are simply too good for the Super heavies and if the units have been over buffed.

Or even if the problem in 3vs3 and above did not originate from the poor performance of the Super heavies but from OP performance of their counter the Tds.
22 Dec 2019, 20:34 PM
#73
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 20:26 PMVipper
According to the "correct" stat C.Panther is at least as good (if not better) as Tiger with dealing IS-2 yet it was not picked a single time and that is an indication that current problem in the OKW Soviet match up is not simply the IS-2.


The Command Panther wasn't picked for the same reason the stock Panther wasn't picked.

Neither vehicle is going to be able to kill the IS-2 because it'll be supported. Both are able to to hold it back.

Faced with a choice between the two, are you going to pick the tank that can keep up with the IS-2 in manpower bleed or the one that can't?
22 Dec 2019, 20:35 PM
#74
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

The T70 is not an issue, it’s the entire Soviet midgame. It absolutely would take a monstrous effort to fix the soviet midgame, so there’s no shot at it happening and trying it coyld have catastrophic consequences.

Only Soviet fix atm is their late game economy. If I were balancing I’d remove the 20% xp gain from 7 man cons and I’d keep their reinforce cost the same as their 6man version.
22 Dec 2019, 20:37 PM
#75
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 20:34 PMLago


The Command Panther wasn't picked for the same reason the stock Panther wasn't picked.

Neither vehicle is going to be able to kill the IS-2 because it'll be supported. Both are able to to hold it back.

Faced with a choice between the two, are you going to pick the tank that can keep up with the IS-2 in manpower bleed or the one that can't?

And that bring it back to the point that the rest of the OKW can not inflict enough bleed especially to the & men conscripts so they have to relay on the Tiger to do both. Deal with IS-2 and inflict bleed to other targets.

And that brings back to my other point, that in order to fix the "diversity issue" of Penal use conscripts where buffed and they are now OP.
22 Dec 2019, 20:40 PM
#76
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 20:37 PMVipper

And that bring it back to the point that the rest of the OKW can not inflict enough bleed especially to the & men conscripts so they have to relay on the Tiger to do both. Deal with IS-2 and inflict bleed to other targets.


The problem isn’t even the IS2. Say your opponent goes Guard motor and has mark target, double T34/85s, a SU85, two maxims, a Guards squad and 4 7man Cons behind thicc sandbags. Good luck attacking this with a Sturmpioneer, 4 Volks, a couple P4s and maybe an Obers squad.

Soviet late game economy is too good.
22 Dec 2019, 20:41 PM
#77
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 20:37 PMVipper
And that bring it back to the point that the rest of the OKW can not inflict enough bleed especially to the & men conscripts so they have to relay on the Tiger to do both. Deal with IS-2 and inflict bleed to other targets.


If you remove heavies from the equation, OKW's fine at lategame AI. It's got a solid stock premium medium.

If the opponent goes for a tank destroyer to counter it, they've invested resources and popcap into a unit that does next to no anti-infantry damage.

The problem with heavies is they counter mediums without giving up anti-infantry firepower, and thus push mediums out of the game in the same way mediums push out lights.
22 Dec 2019, 20:46 PM
#78
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 20:41 PMLago
If the opponent goes for a tank destroyer to counter it, they've invested resources and popcap into a unit that does next to no anti-infantry damage.


They can go T34/85s and mark target to dive a P4 and wreck it.

They can ram with T34/76 and instadelete with 0 effort IL2 rockets.

They can go double AT guns and a medium.

They can go Guards and double AT guns.

They can go Jackson and just hunt you down.

They can go Comet with its wonderful white phosphorus shells.

They can go Easy 8s and outduel you.

They can go M4A3:76 and hunt you down in packs with radio net.

They can go tank hunter cons/ptrs penals and supersnare you.


Meanwhile your roster has expensive engineers without flamethrower, a Panther that cannot help unless it literally 1v1s another tank, a KT that’s so slow it dies with ease and gets penned by everything thanks to power creep, a Sturmtiger that’s been nerfed to death and Obers which are super expensive and take corever to reinforce, with no AT capability whatsoever.

Aside from an open ground blob vs blob engagement, it’s hard to inflict more bleed as OKW in the late game. If LEIGs and the KT were good, this would be a different discussion.
22 Dec 2019, 20:57 PM
#79
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260



If your attitude of "units aren't worth building unless they're virtually uncounterable" is representative of the community at large, no wonder we're drowning in heavy tanks.

Pretty much everything on your list is a consequence of not supporting your vehicles.
22 Dec 2019, 21:01 PM
#80
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Dec 2019, 20:57 PMLago


If your attitude of "units aren't worth building unless they're virtually uncounterable" is representative of the community at large, no wonder we're drowning in heavy tanks.

Pretty much everything on your list is a consequence of not supporting your vehicles.


No, pretty much everything on my list proves that having a single premium stock medium doesn’t mean that much on its own in terms of having “fine late game AI”. They don’t, since the Soviet opponent can just camp behind sandbags and MG spam absolutely obliterates OKW since LEIGs are not good enough and there’s no mortar halftruck 250/7 to help. This could have been alleviated if their breakthrough stock unit (KT) was faster or better armoured, but that’s not the case.

As for heavy tanks, read what i said earlier, +30 to +50 fuel and 10min call in cooldown as soon as they die. If I was balancing the game I’d make them a 1 time call in with no replacement option.

As a sidenote, doctrines can help a lot, which is why I’d prefer other doctrines be buffed. JLI, Falls and Sturmtiger can all cover late game holes in the roster.
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

639 users are online: 639 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49061
Welcome our newest member, Rihedcfrd
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM