Login

russian armor

Winter balance (1/2020) feedback OKW

PAGES (8)down
8 Feb 2020, 03:58 AM
#61
avatar of Kubelecer

Posts: 403

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Feb 2020, 20:23 PMVipper

You are confusing consistency and faction design. Each faction has its own trademark and OKW being able to built outside their base is one of their trademarks.

If OKW losing a T4 should deny their Tiger, then USF Major who comes with allot of utility should have an added 90 fuel cost and be required to be alive to call-in a Pershing...

Bottom line is that requiring T4 to call-in a JT or Tiger does not have to with balancing OKW that still have access to KT but has to do with the respective commanders and denying access to this units is not a good way to balance these commanders.


USF's trademark is it's tech giving you a "free" squad, which in this case is the major. Why can you use the trademark for OKW defending points but not for USF getting a squad?

BTW major's "a lot of utility" is not worth the fuel.

Also, whats easier to keep alive, a 3man squad or a building?

If you want to stall for very heavy doctrinal tanks, why should you also be allowed to take early game benefits (putting trucks far forward) without risking being punished for it? If your commander has lategame vehicles, why shouldn't you play like you are playing for the lategame?
8 Feb 2020, 07:44 AM
#62
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



USF's trademark is it's tech giving you a "free" squad, which in this case is the major. Why can you use the trademark for OKW defending points but not for USF getting a squad?

BTW major's "a lot of utility" is not worth the fuel.

Major cost no fuel to rebuild if it dies.


Also, whats easier to keep alive, a 3man squad or a building?

It really depends what you do with them


If you want to stall for very heavy doctrinal tanks, why should you also be allowed to take early game benefits (putting trucks far forward) without risking being punished for it? If your commander has lategame vehicles, why shouldn't you play like you are playing for the lategame?

Since there tech cost to super heavy vehicles there is no "stall".
8 Feb 2020, 12:39 PM
#63
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

No fuel points or ammo points are worth losing a tank production.



Because of that i can say there is no further need to punish OKW players for its T4 placement.


This is exactly the reason why the Tiger and the Jagdtiger require T4. The risk of putting T4 at a greedy position on a high resource point is not worth the reward. That's why the risk can't be removed. Otherwise there would be only reward. If these tanks didn't require an active T4, players planning on rushing a Tiger/JT would be able to simply put their T4 on the fuel to create a free no go zone for as long as the T4 can hold it and losing it wouldn't really matter (assuming the call-in will close the game). This is already the case with the Tiger II, but at least that one requires additional teching costs.

The base line remains the same. T4 can be used as a free area denial tool in a relatively forward position where it can still be defended. Greedy placement should be punishable. And if a player is planning on getting a call-in, they should place it somewhere safe.
8 Feb 2020, 13:19 PM
#64
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



This is exactly the reason why the Tiger and the Jagdtiger require T4. The risk of putting T4 at a greedy position on a high resource point is not worth the reward. That's why the risk can't be removed. Otherwise there would be only reward. If these tanks didn't require an active T4, players planning on rushing a Tiger/JT would be able to simply put their T4 on the fuel to create a free no go zone for as long as the T4 can hold it and losing it wouldn't really matter (assuming the call-in will close the game). This is already the case with the Tiger II, but at least that one requires additional teching costs.

The base line remains the same. T4 can be used as a free area denial tool in a relatively forward position where it can still be defended. Greedy placement should be punishable. And if a player is planning on getting a call-in, they should place it somewhere safe.

Then simply make AA gun a separate cost and increase armor/HP when built in base.

Currently OKW are being penalized, for having an extra option from faction design (Truck placement) that is actually bad...

As for JT there is simply no comparison with the Tiger. The idea might make some sense for the tiger but none for the JT that is already UP.
8 Feb 2020, 16:18 PM
#65
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2020, 13:19 PMVipper
and increase armor/HP when built in base.


As far as I know Schwerer has similar HP (armor doesn't matter) as other tech structures.
Putting it in base means it's safe from off-maps.
8 Feb 2020, 16:23 PM
#66
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

Why can the KT be called in without active T4 but JT and Tiger can't? I never really understood the reasoning behind it.

IMO KT, ST and JT should remain available if the T4 structure has been destroyed. Tiger should be the only one that is locked behind active T4 due to how strong it is. At least for how the balance is right now, this would make the most sense.
8 Feb 2020, 16:32 PM
#67
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



As far as I know Schwerer has similar HP (armor doesn't matter) as other tech structures.
Putting it in base means it's safe from off-maps.

Unless I am mistaken Schwerer has around 1.600 HP, Heavy Panzer Korps has 2.000 HP. They probably also have different armor values and different hitbox sizes.

From my experience it is generally easier to kill OKW trucks than other bases buildings.
8 Feb 2020, 16:44 PM
#68
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Why can the KT be called in without active T4 but JT and Tiger can't? I never really understood the reasoning behind it.

IMO KT, ST and JT should remain available if the T4 structure has been destroyed. Tiger should be the only one that is locked behind active T4 due to how strong it is. At least for how the balance is right now, this would make the most sense.

Agree. I would also add the C. Panther, Hetzer and Ostwind.

The Tiger should be fixed in timing, cost and power and then it should be available even without the building.
8 Feb 2020, 17:40 PM
#69
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2020, 16:44 PMVipper

Agree. I would also add the C. Panther, Hetzer and Ostwind.

The Tiger should be fixed in timing, cost and power and then it should be available even without the building.


I am curious. How do you come to the idea of excempting the ostwind c panther and hetzer from t4 being destroyed to be called in?

Isent it and imo it is netter to ty callins to tech. The kv1 t34 85 need the structure to be up. So do most medium callins to my knowlidge. So again why units such as you mentioned woudnt need to in your opninion.

Not being angry salty or something simaler. I am curious as to why.
8 Feb 2020, 17:46 PM
#70
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I am curious. How do you come to the idea of excempting the ostwind c panther and hetzer from t4 being destroyed to be called in?

Isent it and imo it is netter to ty callins to tech. The kv1 t34 85 need the structure to be up. So do most medium callins to my knowlidge. So again why units such as you mentioned woudnt need to in your opninion.

Not being angry salty or something simaler. I am curious as to why.

Because OKW truck die easier even in base and are more expensive to replace.

UKF/USF can even repair their building at no cost if they lose them.

In addition hezter/ostwind are specialized unit and not main battle tanks that can fulfill all roles. The T4 requirement for premium mediums is fine and I guess one could redesign the KV-8 and leave it out of the T4 building.

C. Panther follow the super heavy designed and should require the T4 to be on map as other Super heavies do not require the T4 to be on map.

(edited to be more clear: I can usually tell one someone is asking and genuine question and when one is simply trolling and you do not seem to be trolling)
9 Feb 2020, 07:38 AM
#71
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2020, 17:46 PMVipper

Because OKW truck die easier even in base and are more expensive to replace.

UKF/USF can even repair their building at no cost if they lose them.

In addition hezter/ostwind are specialized unit and not main battle tanks that can fulfill all roles. The T4 requirement for premium mediums is fine and I guess one could redesign the KV-8 and leave it out of the T4 building.

C. Panther follow the super heavy designed and should require the T4 to be on map as other Super heavies do not require the T4 to be on map.

(I can usually tell one someone is asking and genuine question and when one is simply trolling)


I aint trolling if you think i am you are wrong this time. I was just suprised esp about the ostwind. But i put it in the med calllin catagory. I understand the reasoning behind it now.
9 Feb 2020, 21:21 PM
#72
avatar of Unit G17

Posts: 498

The Sturmpio combat package still costs 70 muni (like that winter coat is sooo important in auto match games, which should be the main focus of balancing).
Needs a price reduction or, as it was suggested before, allow the minesweeper to be acquired too. I know sturmpios having a schreck also means they can vet much faster, but still, that 70 muni is just too high. On top of that it means you need to get a second squad of pios for the sweeper, which is generally unadvised for OKW.
9 Feb 2020, 21:39 PM
#73
avatar of WAAAGH2000

Posts: 732

The Sturmpio combat package still costs 70 muni (like that winter coat is sooo important in auto match games, which should be the main focus of balancing).
Needs a price reduction or, as it was suggested before, allow the minesweeper to be acquired too. I know sturmpios having a schreck also means they can vet much faster, but still, that 70 muni is just too high. On top of that it means you need to get a second squad of pios for the sweeper, which is generally unadvised for OKW.

Better Combat Package and flamethrower not lock out sweeper,and maybe after upgrade combat package give Stormpioneer some ability or buff
10 Feb 2020, 02:52 AM
#74
avatar of PrussianGlory

Posts: 15

If the Fallschirmjager are losing their Panzerfaust, can we get rid of the bulletin for it too? I'd hate to have a useless bulletin just sitting around if this unit is going to be losing a piece of kit they've had since they were introduced with the faction.
10 Feb 2020, 06:18 AM
#75
avatar of Unit G17

Posts: 498

If the Fallschirmjager are losing their Panzerfaust, can we get rid of the bulletin for it too? I'd hate to have a useless bulletin just sitting around if this unit is going to be losing a piece of kit they've had since they were introduced with the faction.


The bulletin won't be completely defunct as it still affects their grenade costs. However bulletins in general need a major ui overhaul, and sorting out defunct ones.
12 Feb 2020, 16:47 PM
#76
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Since assault section are becoming a separate unit why not turn MP-40 VGs into a separate unit also?

One would be able to better changes abilities and vet bonuses for the unit.
12 Feb 2020, 17:47 PM
#77
avatar of Mcq_knight

Posts: 44

Can we please also looking removing the exclusivity of C. Panther + KT. It is no longer the super unit it once was (nerfed arrival, cost, and aura bonus).


With the KT in an awful spot, combining it with a CP will help bring it back into competition with C Tiger.
12 Feb 2020, 20:35 PM
#78
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Can we please also looking removing the exclusivity of C. Panther + KT. It is no longer the super unit it once was (nerfed arrival, cost, and aura bonus).


With the KT in an awful spot, combining it with a CP will help bring it back into competition with C Tiger.

Its still a unit limited to 1 and do you really see nothing wrong in KT being able to 2-shot most vehicles with CP mark target?

The only unit limited to 1 that could potentially not be exclusive is ST.
12 Feb 2020, 21:58 PM
#79
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

Can we please also looking removing the exclusivity of C. Panther + KT. It is no longer the super unit it once was (nerfed arrival, cost, and aura bonus).


With the KT in an awful spot, combining it with a CP will help bring it back into competition with C Tiger.


Kinda agree. Considering it isn't as good as it used to be and the doctrine is almost completely dead it would make sense to make it possible for OKW to get both.
13 Feb 2020, 15:56 PM
#80
avatar of Mcq_knight

Posts: 44

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Feb 2020, 20:35 PMKatitof

Its still a unit limited to 1 and do you really see nothing wrong in KT being able to 2-shot most vehicles with CP mark target?

The only unit limited to 1 that could potentially not be exclusive is ST.


Is there an issue with Heat Rounds? By the time you would have CP + KT there should be plenty of vetted counters in the field.
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

United Kingdom 178
United States 19
Peru 5
United States 3

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

357 users are online: 357 guests
0 post in the last 24h
2 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49263
Welcome our newest member, Wethe184
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM