An idea to buff G43 rifles for grens

If you want to go that way, sure, if you ignore existence of OKW, usf and ukf, CoH2 is perfectly balanced too.

Not really. OST vs Soviets isn't completely balanced. It's balanced well enough (I think maybe wrong).

i think the G43 package should transform grens from long range to mid range.
For a cost of 80 munis for example, give them 4 G43s which are slightly buffed mid range.
having a mix of G43 and kars is not healthy i think

g43 gren dont need buff

Partials modifier with out the end result are rather pointless.
(Unless I made a mistake this) a comparison of moving DPS between Penal/PF

Moving DPS 20/35
Penals
10.5/6.3
PF
11.6/7.6

110%/120% more for 80 munition does not seem a good investment.

Buddy the G43's are way superior on the move m8. Here are the curves to show you.

"Buddy" that is correct but not entities get the weapon, so check the reply above

..
And Im not sure about 1v1 but from what I hear from many 1v1 streamers/players, they dont like the G43 upgrade on grens either.

A text book case result of power creep, especially if one compares them with SVT air drop...

Yet Special modifiers are what made coh1's balance (atleast wehr vs ami) work.

There is nothing to support that claim.

On the other hand it made the game a complete mess where certain units devastated certain units and where useless vs other forcing the player to learn a whole lot of match ups.

The COH2 system is far superior due to simplicity. (It would be even better if there where less deviation from "weapons profiles" and "relative positioning" and if units where balanced for all vet levels).

having a mix of G43 and kars is not healthy i think

Yeah this is another problem. The gren G43 is pretty ass at mid range and beyond, making it hard to find a good engagement for them since Kar98 works different. But I think giving it too much of a mid-range and/or longrange buff is no option because it would either be OP or overlap too much with lmg42 and Panzergrens.

So I thought basically a "weaker Ober stg44" would be ideal to help them finding better engagements without fiddling with their wipe potential and longrange performance too much. And I also dont think this change would allow them to just brainlessly charge into an enemy that waits behind heavy cover since grens still have the low survivability

There is nothing to support that claim.

On the other hand it made the game a complete mess where certain units devastated certain units and where useless vs other forcing the player to learn a whole lot of match ups.

The COH2 system is far superior due to simplicity. (It would be even better if there where less deviation from "weapons profiles" and "relative positioning" and if units where balanced for all vet levels).

COH2's system is simpler. But having to learn different matchups is not a bad thing but a good thing. It puts a higher skill ceiling on gameplay.
Here's a problem with COH2's system. You can't make TD be strong vs heavies without beeing oppressing mediums in coh2 but you could in coh1.

COH2's system is simpler. But having to learn different matchups is not a bad thing but a good thing. It puts a higher skill ceiling on gameplay.

Hardly. It means you have to look up all these little modifiers on the internet. That's bad design, not good.

The ideal is complex interactions from simple rules, not memorising a long list of exceptions.

People may mock Vipper for their unrealistic expections of the Balance Team's resources, but on this they're completely right: mechanical consistency is a very good thing.

Here's a problem with COH2's system. You can't make TD be strong vs heavies without beeing oppressing mediums in coh2 but you could in coh1.

You can pretty easily, in several different ways.

They haven't because making a unit that only counter doctrinal heavy tanks is dumb.

Hardly. It means you have to look up all these little modifiers on the internet. That's bad design, not good.

The ideal is complex interactions from simple rules, not memorising a long list of exceptions.

People may mock Vipper for their unrealistic expections of the Balance Team's resources, but on this they're completely right: mechanical consistency is a very good thing.

Yes, game experience is not a thing at all. How could I have forgotten about the fact people don't learn anything from playing. That mechanics and matchups don't become second nature at what point at all.

You can pretty easily, in several different ways.

They haven't because making a unit that only counter doctrinal heavy tanks is dumb.

No you can't. If i'm wrong please enlighten my ignorant self. I beg of you please provide example cus i'm slow.

Yes, game experience is not a thing at all. How could I have forgotten about the fact people don't learn anything from playing. That mechanics and matchups don't become second nature at what point at all.
...

Simply read the patch notes about weapons profiles and relative positioning.

The idea simple and allows player to know how to best use their units without having to test and memorize every single engagement. And keep in my that possible combination of much up at different ranges and cover bonuses (that effect results) are ridiculous high.

..But having to learn different matchups is not a bad thing but a good thing. It puts a higher skill ceiling on gameplay.
...

With current number of weapons squads ranges cover that would nearly impossible...

Simply read the patch notes about weapons profiles and relative positioning.

The idea simple and allows player to know how to best use their units without having to test and memorize every single engagement. And keep in my that possible combination of much up and ranges are ridiculous high.

Doesn't matter bro people will learn every quirk of a game doesn't matter how wild or unintuitive it may be. When I guy figures it out everybody who is semi serious about the game will. What do you think that coh1 players were uber geniuses. And no one learned the game at all.

Yes, game experience is not a thing at all. How could I have forgotten about the fact people don't learn anything from playing. That mechanics and matchups don't become second nature at what point at all.

No, they don't. All stats are hidden from the player ingame, leaving them reliant on visual language, vague tooltips and experience to assess the capabilities of units.

And humans are terrible at assessing probability that way. It's why you get so many players ardently convinced the faction they play most is underpowered.

No you can't. If i'm wrong please enlighten my ignorant self. I beg of you please provide example cus i'm slow.

The easiest way? Halve the fire rate of all tank destroyers and quadruple their penetration. Quadruple the frontal armour on all heavy tanks and halve their health.

Tank destroyers remain equally effective against heavies, but are vastly less effective against mediums because of their halved DPS. Mediums can't penetrate heavies from the front, but are twice as effective attacking from the rear.

Congratulations, you just turned tank destroyers into a silver bullet for doctrinal units.


There's also Vipper's method, where you whack the target size on heavies up really high so anything can hit them. You then give Tank Destroyers switchable rounds: high penetration, low accuracy rounds for heavies, and mid-penetration, high accuracy rounds for mediums. Performance against the two classes of vehicle are now separated.

No, they don't. All stats are hidden from the player ingame, leaving them reliant on visual language, vague tooltips and experience to assess the capabilities of units.

And humans are terrible at assessing probability that way. It's why you get so many players ardently convinced the faction they play most is underpowered.

Right coh1 players are all gods who know all the games stats top to bottom without fail. Like even I can tell you what p4's hp was as well as brenguns dps vs KCH at rage 14.

The easiest way? Halve the fire rate of all tank destroyers and quadruple their penetration. Quadruple the frontal armour on all heavy tanks and halve their health.

Tank destroyers remain equally effective against heavies, but are vastly less effective against mediums because of their halved DPS. Mediums can't penetrate heavies from the front, but are twice as effective attacking from the rear.

Congratulations, you just turned tank destroyers into a silver bullet for doctrinal units.

Good job now you've made you heavy tanks useless as will get dominated by mediums who are more agile and
are way more cost effective. + you'v also now made it possible that mines kill your tanks incredibly fast now.

There's also Vipper's method, where you whack the target size on heavies up really high so anything can hit them. You then give Tank Destroyers switchable rounds: high penetration, low accuracy rounds for heavies, and mid-penetration, high accuracy rounds for mediums. Performance against the two classes of vehicle are now separated.

And that's a simpler solution than coh1????? Your contradicting your self.

Right coh1 players are all gods who know all the games stats top to bottom without fail. Like even I can tell you what p4's hp was as well as brenguns dps vs KCH at rage 14.

No actually there was a very good site that explained all different armor type and their interaction with different weapons. With out it one would be at complete loss, and experience would be of litttle help to him...

I feel impressed (and probably a bit flattered that you actually are aware of my suggestions), I am more used of people trying to repeat my suggestions and come up with something completely different (many times intentional I guess).

Right coh1 players are all gods who know all the games stats top to bottom without fail. Like even I can tell you what p4's hp was as well as brenguns dps vs KCH at rage 14.

No, I'm saying people don't memorise huge lists of stats. Then they get confused when units don't perform the way they expect them to and post threads on the forums.

Good job now you've made you heavy tanks useless as will get dominated by mediums who are more agile and
are way more cost effective. + you'v also now made it possible that mines kill your tanks incredibly fast now.

Maybe at your level. Throughout most of the ladder people support their tanks against flanks and don't roll over several mines at once.

And that's a simpler solution than coh1????? Your contradicting your self.

CoH 1 used deflection damage, which is something you could add to CoH 2 fairly easily. Bazookas already use it.

The countless individual exceptions Vipper is talking about are present in both CoH 1 and 2. CoH 1 used a lot with infantry.

No, I'm saying people don't memorise huge lists of stats. Then they get confused when units don't perform the way they expect them to and post threads on the forums.

You do realize you are making the mistake of people having assumptions before they fully learn a game. Side question: What was it coh1 that you found that didn't line with your expectations???

Maybe at your level. Throughout most of the ladder people support their tanks against flanks and don't roll over several mines at once.

Yes, Right and people don't support their attacks either they just blindly send tanks one by one and hope for the best. Flanking, infantry support, artillery, Recon are all things that don't exist.

CoH 1 used deflection damage, which is something you could add to CoH 2 fairly easily. Bazookas already use it.

The countless individual exceptions Vipper is talking about are present in both CoH 1 and 2. CoH 1 used a lot with infantry.

I think for sake of trying to prove me wrong you forgotten what the point you yourself was trying to make.

No actually there was a very good site that explained all different armor type and their interaction with different weapons. With out it one would be at complete loss, and experience would be of litttle help to him...

Really, could you get DevM to pitch in and say he was at a complete loss without those sites.
I didn't memorize or even know what the stats were of things until patch 2.6(I think) of coh1. Like sure, one(you can't say him/he cus girls/women play the game too) would not be able to pick up on some weird out their detail like, regular arty shell did nothing to brit emplacements but flames (Mortar HT and Nebels) absolutely shred them. But Flames did more damage to structures anyway and Brit emplacements were a bitch to kill with anything else. Or the really weird one, skdfz 234's 50mm gun(puma) upgrade would normally make you shit vs infantry but it would make you good vs light vehicles. However vs Brit the upgrade made it good vs both brit LV's and infantry.

Understandable concern. Thats why it would need to be tested first.

The thing is, the way you described the G43 upgrade above makes it seem fantastic even without a better cover modifier. But I have tested G43 gren spam with HMG42 so many times now in 3v3 and (with a smurf account) in 2v2, both top 50 and I came to the conclusion that it either doesnt work or is significantly worse than lmg42... unless the enemies were potato.

And Im not sure about 1v1 but from what I hear from many 1v1 streamers/players, they dont like the G43 upgrade on grens either.

Its the chase potential that really makes the g43s strong atm. You are taking grens weakness (closer ranges and mobility) and removing it. The lmg is usually a better choice because it plays to grens strengths already so it's a double plus. They both have different playstyle so it's hard to say one is better than another since they arnt actually competing objectively. You pick g43s for your playstyle and the saved muni more than anything. Making cover less effective while also making them better at closing and chasing would be a nasty combo, it's one of the things that make volks so strong.

I'd sooner try a different route. Denying/reducing cover is too powerful for someone so rounded already as grens.

Let me try to explain this once more and then move on because we are drifting off topic.

Each infatry unit in COH 1 had a different number of HP and a different type of armor. The result was mess.

Standardizing HP in COH 2 and having a similar "type of armor" for the majority of infantries is a huge advantage that has improved games mechanics for both the players and for developers.

Creating weapon profiles again was a great improvement helping both the player to get the most out of their units and developers to easier fine tune units.

Actually Relic has claimed that "target tables" that where used in COH 1 where a nightmare to implement/balance and they actually went to extremes to avoid them in COH 2.

I really do not see any advantage in COH 1 infatry system it was unnecessary complicated for both player and developers and that is why COH 2 moved on.

Now can we go back to G43 upgrades?
Once more one has to keep in mind that the upgrade is even named "G43 upgrade" so options for bonuses it can provide is huge.

Let me try to explain this once more and then move on because we are drifting off topic.

Each infatry unit in COH 1 had a different number of HP and a different type of armor. The result was mess.

Standardizing HP in COH 2 and having a similar "type of armor" for the majority of infantries is a huge advantage that has improved games mechanics for both the players and for developers.

Creating weapon profiles again was a great improvement helping both the player to get the most out of their units and developers to easier fine tune units.

Actually Relic has claimed that "target tables" that where used in COH 1 where a nightmare to implement/balance and they actually went to extremes to avoid them in COH 2.

I really do not see any advantage in COH 1 infatry system it was unnecessary complicated for both player and developers and that is why COH 2 moved on.

Now can we go back to G43 upgrades?
Once more one has to keep in mind that the upgrade is even named "G43 upgrade" so options for bonuses it can provide is huge.

Each unit had different HP i know that. And that was good cus that didn't mean having 4 men squads was a disadvantage but a tradeoff. But in coh2 having 4 men squad is all disadvantage with no benefit at all.

Yeah I know it's a nightmare to implement coh1 system. If you do even a little bit coding you would know.

I can get back to g43's but that does not mean that system was bad for balance or taxing on the player.