Power creep

Yeah, can't deny that some units are changed in order to stay competitive. Panzer Grens are a really recent example. They got a new ability and also moved to the HQ building.
...

Thank you. That was the point I was trying to make and imo power creep is the reason behind it.

Having a specific commander being OP at a certain point is separate issue.

Or maybe they were nerfed from their original concept?

We are not talking about their original concept.

We are taking about unit and abilities that where fine for year or even considered op in a time frame and than they had to buffed to stay competitive.

Obers are no longer free LMG units with free passive suppression (although they still retain it on their Kars), sprint, damage modifiers on retreat and armor.

That is a bit inaccurate since ober where "fixed" in 2017 and they recently had to be buffed to stay competitive:
Show Spoiler

similar comment with the rest of your explanations.

Powercreep is not inherently bad. Depends on how you apply it and how you act upon things that might lag behind.

WFA levels of DPS re-introduction was bad. Adding complexity and depth in certain areas is not IMO.

Yes it is bad. Both for player and developers.

There is pace in the game that is optimum and the faster it get the more the game move from RTS to arcade.

It also force continuously rebalancing of units instead of fine tuning.

Yes, just because things in general are weaker than they used to be it means there is no power creep, not in long term anyway...

Not really. Nerfing OP thing does not mean that the pace of the game has not increased.

I could write an entire list of units that have been weakend (entire GROUPS of units even) but what's the point? You can read the patch notes just fine (I believe in you!) just read them all and not only the bits that support your claim (pro tip of the day).

Can we cut down on personal comments?

Changes to the unit timings come specifically to introduce units back into the meta WITHOUT buffing their stats to OP leves, and to diversify builds (which has been a big point of the last few patches)

Changing the timing of unit can be a major buff. It was proven when Guards/Shock where moved at CP 1 and recently with changes to Super heavies.

Also, even though elchino already adressed your points, these changes came from: changes of the unit power level (which made their place in the tech tree no longer reasonable), and/or way to diversify the builds (PGrens) or as a result of past (over)nerfs.

And that is translates to power creep. More powerful units have become available earlier compressing the window of opportunity for unit and having to be buffed to become solid investments with in that time frame.

Not really. Nerfing OP thing does not mean that the pace of the game has not increased.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that most things being nerfed means the general power level is constant, or going down.

Can we cut down on personal comments?

No promises, but I'll try Vopper.

Changing the timing of unit can be a major buff. It was proven when Guards/Shock where moved at CP 1 and recently with changes to Super heavies.

Well, they had to incentivise their use somehow, to DIVERSIFY builds.
Changes to super heavies are an obvious mistake on the mod team part, (that is being FIXED btw so yeah, there's your power creep) They figured tech requirements would be enough, they were wrong, happens.

And that is translates to power creep. More powerful units have become available earlier compressing the window of opportunity for unit and having to be buffed to become solid investments with in that time frame.

Super strong unit gets nerfed, super strong unit isn't super strong anymore, The cost and timing of the nerfed super strong unit is adjusted to it's new power level. Not that difficult is it?
Look at Pfusis, they come earlier, but are weaker before upgrades (acutally, they are just weaker , power creep yo)
Look at Obers, they come earlier, but they can't get MG34 before flak is complete
I mean, if you want to ignore the fact that some of these units weren't used at all (or just very rarely) then be my guest.

I for one thing having more weaker units available earlier is better for the game than making sure that 400mp unit behind 120 fuel wall is somehow worth the investment, and not cancerous to play against, especially when blobbed.

BTW as for "units which were fine for years", just because a unit was neglected for a long time doesn't mean it is or was "fine", it just means no one paid attention to it (Assault Guards, anyone?)

...

Pg are currently strongest than they have been the, at least, last at least 3 years.

Pg are currently strongest than they have been the, at least, last at least 3 years.

They were much stronger pre march deployment patch.

They were much stronger pre march deployment patch.

Great, thanks for the info. Now pls return back to 2020 because march deployment was 214 which is 6 years back and 6 is greater than 3.

Great, thanks for the info. Now pls return back to 2020 because march deployment was 214 which is 6 years back and 6 is greater than 3.

Sure thing.

It still disproves your incorrect theory about power creep as whatever unit you'll want to label with this phrase, we will be able to point you its much stronger state of the past, so take a red pill and stop living the dream of own delusion.

Likely, the only unit in the whole game which wasn't much stronger in the past then it is now are conscripts without doctrinal upgrade.

Btw, I'm going to be passing by 2015, do you want me to pick you up on the way or are you good, sitting on that "ost is benchmark" dead statement?

Is it really powercreep if underused units are buffed? People are used to units performing well, and making others perform at that level doesn't speed the game up as much as it allows more build diversity.

There is pace in the game that is optimum and the faster it get the more the game move from RTS to arcade.

I would disagree here. Given equal complexity, the faster the RTS is, the more competitive it is. It's a way to raise the skill cap and cut down on wait times.

Is it really powercreep if underused units are buffed? People are used to units performing well, and making others perform at that level doesn't speed the game up as much as it allows more build diversity.

No bad that is not the case. Many units or abilities where fine or even op at time and have gradually paled.

Take for instance PPsh with changes in December Patch PPSh dominated the meta. Since then it was moved from CP 3 to CP 2 and even so it compares pale to the SVT upgrade or 7th conscript upgrade. That indicates that the power level of units has increased and what was one Good is currently UP.

I would disagree here. Given equal complexity, the faster the RTS is, the more competitive it is. It's a way to raise the skill cap and cut down on wait times.

Think that you are confusing game duration with pace. The earlier appearance of super heavy tank might have a small impact in the duration of the game but it has increased the the pace of the game making more about who will get the heavy tank out first than trying to advantage of each unit type in each stage of the game. For instance in the current meta there is little point in trying to win the medium tank phase because even if you do you might lose when the Tiger/IS-2/Pershing appears.

I think we may have completely different views on what constitutes power creep.


I could be wrong and i'm sure someone who works as a game designer or has taken classes into it could correct me but this is my POV.


The concept basically comes from TCG (trading cards games) such as Magic the Gathering, Yu-Gi-OH, Pokemon, etc. The game model design is to keep releasing new content at constant time frames to keep the game fresh and interesting. This means the new cards must be worth buying/playing but this may conflict with old content, specially if it becomes obsolete.
As a physical format, you don't have the luxury to "nerf" by just reprinting existing cards in the market. Therefore you have 2 venues of action. One is banning cards from "regular" play. And the other is creating formats which contain different power levels.
This means that the "official" setting of play only takes into account a certain period of time. If you don't play MTG or Hearthstone, it's called Standard.

The other 2 genres that you can frequently heard the concept is MMOs and MOBAs.
MMO more so than MOBAS work in the basis of having fresh new content keeping the playerbase engaged. With MMOs, this generally causes that equipment and old Dungeons/bosses become irrelevant once the game get's to a certain age. Ways to "fix" this is by limiting playstyle all together (say Vanilla WoW) or reworking those levels to the current standards (Heroic, increasing difficulty).
The way MOBAs tend to suffer is that new heroes/champions can do way more things than older ones, usurping the roles, niches or strengths of prior characters. This not only applies to MOBAS but in the genre of FPS/Arena shooters like Rainbox 6 or Overwatch. Fixing it means either reworking old content to bring them up or nerfing new content down to the current power level.

This is where i think i have to make 2 distinctions. It's not the same addressing power creep through sheer raw stats changes than doing so by changing complexity.

Now let's go back to CoH2.
If i can simplify the strength value of each faction in a numerical value from 1 to 10.
EFA were released at an 8/9, with newer commanders been 9 and TA/Windustry been at 10 (11). Several nerfs and balance changes later, the overall power level was a 6-7 and the game was fine.
Forward to WFA release, USF and OKW were a 9/10 (OKW less so in 1v1 and USF less so in teamgames). Balance changes later all factions they were brought down to a 7/8.
Finally UKF was a 6/7 in 1v1, a 9/10 in teamgames and commanders were 10 (PArty Cover been a close 11)

This means, that the game doesn't necessarily power creep, cause it's not about old content been creep out due to new factions making old ones obsolete. It's just that new factions were not balanced yet. Same with reworks and new commanders.
If instead of nerfing back then commanders like Windustry or Tiger Ace, PG + PV spam, maxim spam, sprinting snipers in clowncars with reversing race car Su85 and brought everything to that level it would had been power creep. If we kept new factions as they were and instead tried to brought everything to their level, that would had been power creep.


You bring different examples that i don't think necessarily applies to the concept of power creep.

PPSH: well going from 20/10 munition upgrade to 60 munition is not power creep. The short lived PPSH meta relied on different changes applied at the same time. For example: Conscript vet changes and what they were facing at the time (mostly OH, not OKW).
IF today PPSH are not as strong it might not be only because other things are stronger and needs to be brought to their level but it might be that the nerfs were too effective as well.

7 man con upgrade is strong and getting nerfed. SVT will probably have to be nerf at some point. PPSH without nerfs and at 40 muni cost would compete perfectly fine with todays SVTs.


If things got too long or confusing.
I don't think COH2 suffers from any power creep. I think CoH2 suffers from things yet to be balanced.

...
If things got too long or confusing.
I don't think COH2 suffers from any power creep. I think CoH2 suffers from things yet to be balanced.

It makes sense that when new things appear in video game they are on the OP side so that people actually used them and data can be collected to better fine tune them.

It make less sense when they are not really that "new" and/or data is already available.

It also true that many thing are being iron out in it.

But there are some cases where its seem that Relic is determined to stick to its guns no matter and adjust everything else instead of the root of the problem.

For instance:
1) Many people think that ST44 VG weapons are badly designed and OP. instead of addressing the core issue Relic has tried everything from nerfing vet bonus and increase to buffing Conscripts/riflmen to new levels. For me that is power creep.

2) Many people think that M36 is OP especial in numbers. Instead of addressing the core problem Relic choose to buff Super heavies and created this rather stale meta while shrinking the window of opportunity for some less powerful units. For me that is power creep.

Closing I would like to point out that without using a benchmark it rather difficult to check if you have increased the power level or not.

It makes sense that when new things appear in video game they are on the OP side so that people actually used them and data can be collected to better fine tune them.

It make less sense when they are not really that "new" and/or data is already available.

It also true that many thing are being iron out in it.

But there are some cases where its seem that Relic is determined to stick to its guns no matter and adjust everything else instead of the root of the problem.

For instance:
1) Many people think that ST44 VG weapons are badly designed and OP. instead of addressing the core issue Relic has tried everything from nerfing vet bonus and increase to buffing Conscripts/riflmen to new levels. For me that is power creep.

2) Many people think that M36 is OP especial in numbers. Instead of addressing the core problem Relic choose to buff Super heavies and created this rather stale meta while shrinking the window of opportunity for some less powerful units. For me that is power creep.

Closing I would like to point out that without using a benchmark it rather difficult to check if you have increased the power level or not.

1-Relic also tried increasing vet requirements, removing double 1919s, removing defensive stance, making BARs closer to AR instead of LMGs, removed smoke, removed flamer. USF issue has always been early opening against OKW be it pre or post rework. RET has also been properly nerfed out of been spammable and usable early on with volley fire.

Conscripts "worked" with the premise that they were cheap to reinforce and gave map control/hold position. Everything else in their repertoire would deal damage and wipe units. Be it lucky flame criticals, OP maxim or snipers, cheesy wipes through a pletora of units and abilities (precision strike, demos, mines, flares, indirect fire, KV8, T70, IS2, ISU152, offmap) while having almost no muni expenditures on upgrades. Free/5 muni Oorah or cheaper lolotovs.

I don't see it as power creep at all. Removing cheese and nerfing OP shit and moving that power budget in another direction.

2-Jackson is a unique problem outside of heavy meta issue which occur for different reasons. Some nerfs, some buffs and some neutral changes. (expected)
-What would happen after completely forcing all heavies to require some degree of tech.
-A heavily implied change to benefit 3v3+ gamemodes at the expense of 1v1-2v2 (CP reduction)
-Reliable AoE damage. Less wipes but more consistent damage.

So you have a nerf with tech requirement and a buff with CP reduction. Intention was to basically keep it equally on lower modes while making the heavies more viable on the bigger modes. We know this backfired badly.
Same with the AoE changes which ended been a bigger buff than expected.


Power creep is not something you can judge by the effect of a single patch, specially if the following one tries to nerf the effects of the previous one.
Only when you take EVERYTHING into context and through a large time lapse comparison you can see where you are standing.

...
Power creep is not something you can judge by the effect of a single patch, specially if the following one tries to nerf the effects of the previous one.
Only when you take EVERYTHING into context and through a large time lapse comparison you can see where you are standing.

Agree on the other hand M36 and ST44 are out there for year so they have become standard.

Agree on the other hand M36 and ST44 are out there for year so they have become standard.

STG44 + snare competed with all around Volks shreck spam with better vet.
Jackson was a bad unit carried by other OP elements. Now it's the other way round.

STG44 + snare competed with all around Volks shreck spam with better vet.
Jackson was a bad unit carried by other OP elements. Now it's the other way round.

And that is my point these things are currently OP and have been for years and have forced other units to be buffed to keep up.

For me that is power creep, you are entitled to have a different opinion.

Once more I need to point out that with a point reference (benchmark) it very hard to detect power creep.

Who's your dealer? He seems to have legit good stuff.

Please, don't be mean. After all you have to agree that some units got buffed quite hard and are on the OP side like Falls or heavies. PG coming earlier improves variety, but on the other hand it gives you stronger infantry earlier, which is a form of power creep, even if small. Ppsh cons are less appealing against wehrmacht as PG who come earlier counter them well. Assgrens needed a buff, but now they are a very early strong infantry, have 5 smg and sprint and make Ppsh upgrade look embarassing. Similar 5 men smg squads have been made available to other factions early as well.

Bunch of infantry got some minor buffs or changes to vet that increased their lethality or improved survivability which is more or less balanced against infantry, but when this buffed infantry faces a MG or even a single squad has ATG in the firing range, there's a high chance it's a dead teamweapon. To deter an enemy vehicle from advancing, due to the aim time and animations and despite your best effort, your ATG may come within firing range of enemy infantry. The damage that you inflict to their infantry is incomparably lower than that dealt to the teamweapon.

As Obersoldaten can be implemented in the build order quicker, there was a surge of elite infantry compositions in teamgames. Even if their upgrade is hidden behind full tech, you already have the unit in your army composition. Was it available later, you would already have that slot filled by another Volk squad and wouldn't build that Ober squad. This results in stronger infantry itself and stronger army compositions.

I agree that a lot of OP units were nerfed like Brumbar, KV-8, JLI (though they are still a bitch with 75% crit bs) and some abilities were nerfed like Overwatch flares or IL2 loiter dmg, I am also happy about the spotting scope changes. I am fairly sure though that the average time-to-kill went down over the last 2-3 years. I am looking forward to the announced ability nerfs to fragmentation bombs and butterfly bombs, faust removal from Falls and hopefully AOE or ROF nerfs for heavies. It would also be nice if IL2 rocket strafe was less of a cheese mechanic. With IL2 bombing at least you have to be perfectly aimed and on time and can't spam it due to cost, meanwhile IL2 rocket strafe comes faster and is a huge threat to super heavies. At the same time it's a blessing in current meta, because super heavies are OP in teamgames, all of them except for maybe KV-2.

Example and sidenote:
Raketenwerfer changes were a huge improvement compared to the past cheese stealth. In case of raketen, it sacrificed cheese for combat capabilities, so it can be used more like an ATG. I think similar could be done about T34/76.

T34/76 could see 10FU and 15 pen increase so it bounces less vs vehicles like Ostwind and can be used as an actual tank instead of snare. <- This change I would not consider power creep, as this makes player calculate more before he throws his T34/76 in a ram maneuver, it doesn't increase AI capabilities and makes it actually possible to use T34/76 in medium tank engagements without being as heavily dependent on rng.

I don't want to derail this thread with this sidenote. My point is that the game can be improved by shifting power from the cheese aspect of a problematic unit to something else.

I forgot to mention that I am rather happy about game balance decisions. This might not be obvious from my post.

Please, don't be mean. After all you have to agree that some units got buffed quite hard and are on the OP side like Falls or heavies.

Heavies were much stronger in the past for the sole reason that you could get multiple of them.
Falls were batshit insane with base 0.75 rec acc and completely insane scaling.
They weren't buffed to the op state, they returned to it and are now going down again, until balanced.

PG coming earlier improves variety, but on the other hand it gives you stronger infantry earlier, which is a form of power creep, even if small.

No, its timing change. Their power level is relatively the same, however they synergize better with vehicles now. Its another unit that was incomparably stronger in the past then it is now.

Ppsh cons are less appealing against wehrmacht as PG who come earlier counter them well. Assgrens needed a buff, but now they are a very early strong infantry, have 5 smg and sprint and make Ppsh upgrade look embarassing. Similar 5 men smg squads have been made available to other factions early as well.

PPSH arrived at 3CP for years, they were always coming up against PGs, due to own stats and ability combinations, they were also much stronger in the past.
Ass grens released in such a broken OP state, relic had to slap 50 muni on initial call-in as a hot-fix just to not break the game completely until balance patch came.
PPSH cons can go toe to toe with ass grens, especially when vetted due to rec acc scaling they have.

Bunch of infantry got some minor buffs or changes to vet that increased their lethality or improved survivability which is more or less balanced against infantry, but when this buffed infantry faces a MG or even a single squad has ATG in the firing range, there's a high chance it's a dead teamweapon.

Team weapons, ost specifically, used to be 3 man crews and there was a time, when HMG42 could not be flanked by anything as any amount of infantry, even advancing from opposed ends of firing arc would be instantly pinned, when flanked all weapon teams went down fast to CQC troops. ATGs were always dead when anything came close to them and you couldn't push it away.

Regarding infantry, ALL of infantry units in game, with exception of Conscripts, Grenadiers and Partisans had their veterancy severely nerfed over time.

To deter an enemy vehicle from advancing, due to the aim time and animations and despite your best effort, your ATG may come within firing range of enemy infantry. The damage that you inflict to their infantry is incomparably lower than that dealt to the teamweapon.

Because base weapon crews have 1.25 acc modifier, so they are easier to hit, because weapon DPS of most units was nerfed to the point, where flanking wasn't rewarding and team weapons crews could just facetank flanks.

As Obersoldaten can be implemented in the build order quicker, there was a surge of elite infantry compositions in teamgames. Even if their upgrade is hidden behind full tech, you already have the unit in your army composition. Was it available later, you would already have that slot filled by another Volk squad and wouldn't build that Ober squad. This results in stronger infantry itself and stronger army compositions.

There was a time, when getting obersoldaten for OKW meant allies were no longer able to engage with infantry and had to use vehicles against them exclusively, because obers would always win, suppress passively and murderfuck squads on retreat, regardless of health, because they had massive bonus accuracy against retreating units. Obers are much weaker nowadays then they used to be.

Other elite infantries used to be cheaper and had stronger weapons and/or scaling, or even powerful ability that was removed(shock troops for example).

Again, out of all units in game, exclusively stock conscripts, T34/76 and Jackson are stronger now then they were in the past, every single other unit in the game used to be in much stronger state.

There is no power creep, never was.

There is just one salty axis fanboy who wants to have allied toys, but refuses to play allies and labels everything that is capable of killing grens and P4s, regardless how much higher cost investment it is as power creep.

Having to invest less resources and getting a unit faster doesn't make it better at all. Let's put p4s in t2 and apply your drug free logic to that as well.

Having to invest less resources and getting a unit faster doesn't make it better at all. Let's put p4s in t2 and apply your drug free logic to that as well.

Psst, let me in you on a little secret: Unit arrives faster now, because it is not as strong as it used to be.

For instance:
1) Many people think that ST44 VG weapons are badly designed and OP. instead of addressing the core issue Relic has tried everything from nerfing vet bonus and increase to buffing Conscripts/riflmen to new levels. For me that is power creep.

For the last time:

Volksgrenadiers with STGs are NOT OP. They literally lose to all upgraded allied mainlines in shootouts and get wrecked by elite infantry. Cons behind sandbags, Double BAR riflemen, Bren Sections in trenches can easily win 1v1 and elite infantry win without a contest.