Login

russian armor

5CP Puma is way too late

6 Mar 2020, 16:44 PM
#21
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 16:42 PMLago

Commanderwise, probably expect even more use of heavy tank doctrines. Mobidef created the heavy stalling meta in the first place because it was the best counter to it.


Heavy tank meta was here before mobile defense got popular. Mobile Defense was a 1v1 thing only anyway and 2v2 has a heavy tank meta since I can remember so I really don't think the two are connected.
6 Mar 2020, 16:49 PM
#22
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Heavy tank meta was here before mobile defense got popular. Mobile Defense was a 1v1 thing only anyway and 2v2 has a heavy tank meta since I can remember so I really don't think the two are connected.


2v2 had a heavy tank destroyer meta. The entire rationale for cutting generalist heavies to CP9 was to make them viable in serious team games.

The Mobidef meta spawned the 1v1 heavy stalling meta: it was developed as a counter to Mobidef and SpecOps. It turned out to be really good despite heavies being otherwise off-meta, and entrenched even after Mobidef was killed off.

Tying heavies to tech was meant to end that, but the accompanying buffs just created an even worse heavy stalling meta.

Bringing back Mobile Defence isn't going to help that one bit.
6 Mar 2020, 16:49 PM
#23
avatar of Svalbard SD

Posts: 327

Back in 2015/2016 I used to make well-intentioned jokes about forum posts by then-fanboys like Katitof and Dane. Well, it's 2020 and I agree with every single word typed by the former in this thread. You have Fausts, Pak and Tellers, which is more than enough to at least bridge the gap to Puma, or even deal with the T-70 on their own.
6 Mar 2020, 17:00 PM
#24
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Back in 2015/2016 I used to make well-intentioned jokes about forum posts by then-fanboys like Katitof and Dane. Well, it's 2020 and I agree with every single word typed by the former in this thread. You have Fausts, Pak and Tellers, which is more than enough to at least bridge the gap to Puma, or even deal with the T-70 on their own.


The problem with the Puma is that it's a game changer. Fausts, Tellers and Paks can hold off a T-70, but they can't chase it down and secure the kill unless the opponent makes a mistake. They're also infantry speed, which means a T-70 can simply switch sides of the map to avoid them.

A Puma can charge down a T-70 and kill it, and that's game changing.

I cannot overstate how much of a power spike the CP5 Puma is for Ostheer's 1v1 midgame: it's a huge enabler for both its infantry and its light vehicle fleet.

This is a problem because it's doctrinal: you can't balance Ostheer with a Puma and Ostheer without a Puma simultaneously: either the Puma is overpowered or the absence of the Puma is underpowered. It's a perfect recipe for a one commander meta.

If Ostheer needs a light vehicle killer, it needs a nondoctrinal light vehicle killer.

It stuns me how the balance team are blatantly ignoring the lessons of the past.
6 Mar 2020, 17:02 PM
#25
avatar of Svalbard SD

Posts: 327

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 17:00 PMLago


The problem with the Puma is that it's a game changer. Fausts, Tellers and Paks can hold off a T-70, but they can't chase it down and secure the kill unless the opponent makes a mistake.

Yes, and that's fine and well-balanced - which was the point from Katitof and myself.
6 Mar 2020, 17:05 PM
#26
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 17:00 PMLago
It stuns me how the balance team are blatantly ignoring the lessons of the past.


We're not ignoring anything. We're well aware that the Puma change might bring back the MobiDef meta. But given the changes to the Command P4 as well as giving the Puma a build timer, we'd like to give the Puma another chance because it's a shame that this unique unit never sees any use anymore. And in the poll, 85% of those who voted wanted the Puma in MobiDef to return in some form or another.

Sometimes balancing the game is to take a gamble and see how things turn out, and we're willing to take this one because it can easily be reverted if it backfires. Without a techless AI tank as a follow-up, and with a build timer added to the Puma so it can't be used reactively, as well as big shifts in meta (for example, the return of Conscripts), I think it's at least worth trying.
6 Mar 2020, 17:15 PM
#27
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



Only question is vs which opponents/commanders and on which maps you employ this.


USF: unless M20, you don't want the 222 and probably go for FHT.
UKF/SU: probably as described before.




We're not ignoring anything. We're well aware that the Puma change might bring back the MobiDef meta. But given the changes to the Command P4 as well as giving the Puma a build timer, we'd like to give the Puma another chance because it's a shame that this unique unit never sees any use anymore. And in the poll, 85% of those who voted wanted the Puma in MobiDef to return in some form or another.

Sometimes balancing the game is to take a gamble and see how things turn out, and we're willing to take this one because it can easily be reverted if it backfires.


Making Mobile defense meta is treating the symptoms and not the cause.

People have brought the T70 as a topic because in the last years, the AEC and Stuart AI has been nerfed to no longer represent a dangerous threat which more or less fixed the issue.
6 Mar 2020, 17:19 PM
#28
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

But given the changes to the Command P4 as well as giving the Puma a build timer, we'd like to give the Puma another chance because it's a shame that this unique unit never sees any use anymore.


That's a second lesson that never seems to be learned: sometimes it's better to cut things. Past balance teams have taken the stance of never removing anything, leading to the bizarre inclusion of an artillery strike on the WC51, the unholy hodge podge of ditched commander abilities that is the Tactical Support Regiment Forward HQ, and the near universally reviled Sector Assault meta.

The BP2 lock on the Puma was tantamount to soft removal, and I have no doubt the balance team at the time knew that.


Without a techless AI tank as a follow-up, and with a build timer added to the Puma so it can't be used reactively, as well as big shifts in meta (for example, the return of Conscripts), I think it's at least worth trying.

You do all get why the Puma was a problem, right?

This isn't a simple problem like JLI, where you're providing an overpowered alternative to an nondoctrinal unit. You're providing Ostheer with a tool they're designed and balanced around not having access to.

You simply can't put something that impactful in a commander and not expect that commander to appear in every loadout. All this is going to do is kill strategic diversity.
6 Mar 2020, 17:41 PM
#29
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 17:00 PMLago


The problem with the Puma is that it's a game changer. Fausts, Tellers and Paks can hold off a T-70, but they can't chase it down and secure the kill unless the opponent makes a mistake..

I'm quite positive teller secures the kill very well.


People have brought the T70 as a topic because in the last years, the AEC and Stuart AI has been nerfed to no longer represent a dangerous threat which more or less fixed the issue.

AEC is AT specialist, it never deserved to have high AI.
Stuart is supposed to be generalist, good vs inf and good vs vehicles, not nowhere near dedicated vehicles like Puma or Luchs/T-70.
T-70 is AI specialist that needs 30 seconds of constant shooting to kill 222.
6 Mar 2020, 17:59 PM
#30
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I'm quite positive teller secures the kill very well.


I must've missed the patch where Tellers move.
6 Mar 2020, 18:03 PM
#31
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 17:59 PMLago


I must've missed the patch where Tellers move.


There are people who use them properly and get kills thanks to them.
6 Mar 2020, 18:13 PM
#32
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 17:59 PMLago


I must've missed the patch where Tellers move.

You're supposed to put them lil bit further then base sector entrance to work.
Ask VonIvan or literally anyone what is "baiting for mines" and how to do it.
Hell, watch literally any tournament, its omnipresent maneuver.
6 Mar 2020, 18:18 PM
#33
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3


You're supposed to put them lil bit further then base sector entrance to work.
Ask VonIvan or literally anyone what is "baiting for mines" and how to do it.
Hell, watch literally any tournament, its omnipresent maneuver.


No need for base entrances, just put them in road junctions and watch the fireworks.
6 Mar 2020, 18:20 PM
#34
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



No need for base entrances, just put them in road junctions and watch the fireworks.

This actually makes me die inside a bit every single time I see it happen.
I mean, roads are so obvious choices, yet people constantly drive over them without sweeping.
6 Mar 2020, 18:23 PM
#35
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3


This actually makes me die inside a bit every single time I see it happen.
I mean, roads are so obvious choices, yet people constantly drive over them without sweeping.


Yup, and it’s not even noobs. Just played refero and he just casually ran over a teller in the middle of the road with the AEC.

Tellers work, people just forget to use them or don’t place them properly.
6 Mar 2020, 18:34 PM
#36
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 17:19 PMLago
You do all get why the Puma was a problem, right?


You're providing Ostheer with a tool they're designed and balanced around not having access to.
.


Of course. But the circumstances have changed quite drastically since then. Now Cons (and so an abundance of AT grenades) are viable. UKF have snares. USF had a rework that made sideteching easier. Amongst other big meta changes. The doctrine itself has lost a significant amount of synergy because of the changes to the Command P4 (locking it behind tech) and will lose more because of the Puma's build time.

The doctrine will now more than ever be a gamble that might fill a gap in Ostheer's early/mid game but leaves practically nothing for the (transition into) the late game.

Plenty of changes to make it worth exploring options to let the Ostheer Puma make a return I think.
And as I said, it's a superficial change, so it's easily reverted if need be.
6 Mar 2020, 18:53 PM
#37
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

AEC is AT specialist, it never deserved to have high AI.
Stuart is supposed to be generalist, good vs inf and good vs vehicles, not nowhere near dedicated vehicles like Puma or Luchs/T-70.
T-70 is AI specialist that needs 30 seconds of constant shooting to kill 222.


I'm just describing the situation we had. AEC spam meta or Stuart for most of it's life cycle after first set of buffs after release.

6 Mar 2020, 20:00 PM
#38
avatar of Diablo

Posts: 20

Concerning puma I would say moving it to t3 build will be a fine idea, or decrease cp requirement to 4

Both are shock units that if not anticipated will easily force you off the field.
Same with flame 251, same with M15.



And if I'm picking shoucks to counter ass grens, shouldn't shocks arrive earlier, before ass grens wreck the place?
Ass grens dont wreck anything if you "anticipate" them, and they are far worse then grens as closing distance causes a lot of health loss and up to 2 models being lost, especially against brits and americans.



Sometimes gren blob into tiger just won't work.
I know you are valiant allies defender and think that axis are overpowered ,but with this attitude you will get nowhere.
6 Mar 2020, 20:07 PM
#39
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Mar 2020, 20:00 PMDiablo
Concerning puma I would say moving it to t3 build will be a fine idea, or decrease cp requirement to 4Ass grens dont wreck anything if you "anticipate" them, and they are far worse then grens as closing distance causes a lot of health loss and up to 2 models being lost, especially against brits and americans.

You've completely missed the point I was making. Shock units have short window of opportunity, if their hardcounters arrive too soon, they are either removed from the game or in need of a buff - do you want to have early puma at potential cost of even stronger T-70? Because its very unlikely it'll keep getting nerfed.


I know you are valiant allies defender and think that axis are overpowered ,but with this attitude you will get nowhere.

I dare you to find a singular post I made across last 2 years that would even remotely point to that.
If you can't do that, then keep the strawman away, there are no crows here to scare away.
6 Mar 2020, 20:11 PM
#40
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3


You've completely missed the point I was making. Shock units have short window of opportunity, if their hardcounters arrive too soon, they are either removed from the game or in need of a buff - do you want to have early puma at potential cost of even stronger T-70? Because its very unlikely it'll keep getting nerfed.


You do realize OKW has even faster access to the Puma than the Soviets have access to the T70 and it’s not an issue, right? T70 is perfectly viable vs okw despite the puma meta.
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

985 users are online: 985 guests
0 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49996
Welcome our newest member, maydongphuctc
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM