Mod Release, Design and Live Fixes and Issues

Removing snipers is a big no go.

One could try lowering the damage to 40-60 vs infantry shot that I shot does not wipe and add a number of critical kills.

Then they preform horribly against infantry in open fields where the splash would only effect 1 unit. That would be around 10 cannon shots to kill a riflemen squad. While the MG buffs would help, it still would be quite slow. Even with my reduced scatter shots can still miss as well.

My main goal is right now consistent regardless of squad formation, in which many times, it is out of the player's control. I will play around with it.

I have only one purpose while on stream, murdering snipers. Snipers disgust me to no end, Hopefully with the combined effort of the community we can get rid of this eternal plague. Or atleast make sure coh3 doesnt have any

Removing snipers is a big no go.

One man snipers cause so many issues.
Sniper vs Sniper plays are not fun for one.
Sniper counter should not be other snipers. Not all factions have access to snipers.
Snipers promotes the over reliant usages of light vehicles to rush them down. Forcing entire tech paths, not just units.
Snipers a lot times rely on luck to kill if they went down the other tech path, ie morter.
Snipers generally promote blobbing to rush them down.
Light vehicles are the reason why teller one shot light vehicles since Ostheer has no good hard counter.

Soviets:
If they went t2, they are SOL until they get a T70 and denys the appearance of SU 76. Or, forced to build t1 and cause an endless cycle counter snipers with snipers.

Ostheer
Endless cycle of snipers. Severely punish players trying to skip t1, who generally trying having more fun playing differently. Or, forces out a 222 and hope that 1-2 tellers can kill the responses. Entire tech path and units predetermined for both players because one person built a sniper.

USF, pretty much deny's captain tech and forces out LT.

OKW, forces out T2 Mechanized hq and deny MEDICS.

UKF, endless cycle of Snipers once again, or hope the AEC can get a lucky hit on the sniper.

Then they preform horribly against infantry in open fields where the splash would only effect 1 unit. That would be around 10 cannon shots to kill a riflemen squad. While the MG buffs would help, it still would be quite slow. Even with my reduced scatter shots can still miss as well.

My main goal is right now consistent regardless of squad formation, in which many times, it is out of the player's control. I will play around with it.

If the kills come from critical should one get a kill even if the shot misses and it is hit AOE?

Lower damage in center but more in AOE also means that unis will get health damage and be in bigger risk after the first shot.

One man snipers cause so many issues.
Sniper vs Sniper plays are not fun for one.
Sniper counter should not be other snipers. Not all factions have access to snipers.
Snipers promotes the over reliant usages of light vehicles to rush them down. Forcing entire tech paths, not just units.
Snipers a lot times rely on luck to kill if they went down the other tech path, ie morter.
Snipers generally promote blobbing to rush them down.
Light vehicles are the reason why teller one shot light vehicles since Ostheer has no good hard counter.

Soviets:
If they went t2, they are SOL until they get a T70 and denys the appearance of SU 76. Or, forced to build t1 and cause an endless cycle counter snipers with snipers.

Ostheer
Endless cycle of snipers. Severely punish players trying to skip t1, who generally trying having more fun playing differently. Or, forces out a 222 and hope that 1-2 tellers can kill the responses. Entire tech path and units predetermined for both players because one person built a sniper.

USF, pretty much deny's captain tech and forces out LT.

OKW, forces out T2 Mechanized hq and deny MEDICS.

UKF, endless cycle of Snipers once again, or hope the AEC can get a lucky hit on the sniper.

A lot of your "problems" are solely relevant in 1v1, if you wanna call them that. IN team games you have a teammate who can help.

Mostly dealing with snipers is a l2p issue. Playing more passive, back teching etc. infiltraion, mines, counter snipe, lv´s. There area lot of things you can do. And comming with a price tag of 360mp = 1 1/2 squads a huge investment that can be killed very fast. NOt to mention way less map control early on.

Counter sniper play is fun, since you have to actually use your brain.

OKW and USF can run snipers down with very good mainline inf. And m20 and even kübel are counters to it.

Imo only players of lower skill level think that snipes are bad for the game.

Lastly, if they were to strong, one would have seen them in the tourneys way more often.

A lot of your "problems" are solely relevant in 1v1, if you wanna call them that. IN team games you have a teammate who can help.

Mostly dealing with snipers is a l2p issue. Playing more passive, back teching etc. infiltraion, mines, counter snipe, lv´s. There area lot of things you can do. And comming with a price tag of 360mp = 1 1/2 squads a huge investment that can be killed very fast. NOt to mention way less map control early on.

Counter sniper play is fun, since you have to actually use your brain.

OKW and USF can run snipers down with very good mainline inf. And m20 and even kübel are counters to it.

Imo only players of lower skill level think that snipes are bad for the game.

Lastly, if they were to strong, one would have seen them in the tourneys way more often.

You just proved multiple of my points.

Team games are focused 1v1s in general. Only in 4v4s where this is not true. My experience is largely 3v3s with entirely randoms.

Killing a sniper with a mine is just luck.

Most counter sniper play is build a sniper and wait. Nothing fun about it and very repeative.

When is the last time you seen a kubel run down a sniper. Again, the M20 is LT tech, denying captian entirely.

Playing passive is horrible advice against snipers, you have to be aggressive vs snipers or else it will bleed you dry.

Sure, running into MGs is best way of killing snipers.

A lot of your "problems" are solely relevant in 1v1, if you wanna call them that. IN team games you have a teammate who can help.

Mostly dealing with snipers is a l2p issue. Playing more passive, back teching etc. infiltraion, mines, counter snipe, lv´s. There area lot of things you can do. And comming with a price tag of 360mp = 1 1/2 squads a huge investment that can be killed very fast. NOt to mention way less map control early on.

Counter sniper play is fun, since you have to actually use your brain.

OKW and USF can run snipers down with very good mainline inf. And m20 and even kübel are counters to it.

Imo only players of lower skill level think that snipes are bad for the game.

Lastly, if they were to strong, one would have seen them in the tourneys way more often.

+1

snipers are in a pretty good spot right now - not too potent and with several counters available to all factions, even if countersniping may not be available to usf and okw. IMO removing one-man snipers would only remove another layer of tactical and strategical depth from the game.

+1

snipers are in a pretty good spot right now - not too potent and with several counters available to all factions, even if not countersniping may not be available to usf and okw. IMO removing one-man snipers would only remove another layer of tactical and strategical depth from the game.

They offer no strategic depth. Removing HMGs, that is a mortar's jobs. Removing infantry, that is HMG's job. Scouting, that infantry's and engineer's job. Camouflage and infiltration, that is what call in elite unit's job. Killing, that is everyone's job. Sniper's tries to do everyone's job. Light infantry are a support unit to engage at long range. Snipers, are one man armies.

You just proved multiple of my points.

Team games are focused 1v1s in general. Only in 4v4s where this is not true. My experience is largely 3v3s with entirely randoms.

Killing a sniper with a mine is just luck.

Most counter sniper play is build a sniper and wait. Nothing fun about it and very repeative.

When is the last time you seen a kubel run down a sniper. Again, the M20 is LT tech, denying captian entirely.

Playing passive is horrible advice against snipers, you have to be aggressive vs snipers or else it will bleed you dry.

Sure, running into MGs is best way of killing snipers.

Playing passive means picking the right engagements; Falling back and not giving many options for sniping, while preparing a counter .

Espepecially in larger team games snipers are less of a "problem" to deal with.

In higher matchup (rank 300 upwards), even randoms can communicate and deal with problems together. Calling teamgames focused 1 on 1 indicates, that your skill on this level seems not to be very high. Focusing down enemy lines with teammates is way more reliable.

Btw. i hunt snipers with kubels, since they deal quit an amount of damage.

Waiting wiith your sniepr is the fun part, since you hbave to sneak him into a forward postion. Good players tend to keep themway behind own lines, therefor you have to outsmart him.

A light jäger squad would be nothing more than grens jli a.s.o and would rly remove one layer of the game thanks to a l2p issue without granting extra content to the game.

As for sniper I would try:

A) Remove critical have damage around
B) Add critical vs support weapon
C) Possibly turn them into a team with one spotter providing the LOS and other having a nontransferable sniper rifle.
D) Lower HP to 80

On the other hand one improve counter sniper vehicles by making 221 available for ostheer and reducing DPS for armor.

who cares bout teamgames

Playing passive means picking the right engagements; Falling back and not giving many options for sniping, while preparing a counter .

Espepecially in larger team games snipers are less of a "problem" to deal with.

In higher matchup (rank 300 upwards), even randoms can communicate and deal with problems together. Calling teamgames focused 1 on 1 indicates, that your skill on this level seems not to be very high. Focusing down enemy lines with teammates is way more reliable.

Btw. i hunt snipers with kubels, since they deal quit an amount of damage.

Waiting wiith your sniepr is the fun part, since you hbave to sneak him into a forward postion. Good players tend to keep themway behind own lines, therefor you have to outsmart him.

A light jäger squad would be nothing more than grens jli a.s.o and would rly remove one layer of the game thanks to a l2p issue without granting extra content to the game.

As I said, it is far from a learn to play issue.

I don't mind the sniper changes, and I'm leaning towards Aegion's idea of shifting them to the side for now. Sniper versus sniper is an issue since CoH1, where players just cloak until one person messes up, which isn't all that much fun to watch or use in a game.

I'd also take a grain of salt at how well a Kubel hunts snipers, as that tends to end with the Kubel being dead before the sniper is. And passively playing against a sniper is generally an invitation to be slowly bled in manpower. The risk in sniper is letting it live long to vet up, not dodging its initial presence. If anything, it's pressuring its initial presence that matters.

So, I did a few AI games and then did testing in controlled environments with the Partisan commander. I am particularly invested in them for very obvious reasons, and I immediately noticed two odd things.

1) For some reason, I get a free partisan squad at the start of the match. Is this intended? I thought we were supposed to get a conscript squad as soviets.

2. The current itereation of partisans in your mod is very powerful. While they are now 260 manpower, they can hold their own against greens even without the upgrade. At CP1, I think a unit like that comes very darn early for so much impact. I'll add points below in regards to what other effects that give it so much impact.

2a. They have a lot of utility now, and the upped performance I would even wager they could end up replacing cons. Grenade, Molotov, AT made, landmines, camouflage, AT/Assault Package. It's a unit that can take up a lot of different roles. The only thing I noticed as a balancer at the moment is how expensive the upgrade packages are, and partisans tactics is already fairly ammo heavy without that purchase.

2b. Those triple AT rifles are very deadly against light armor (two volleys for a scout car). And since they pop up at CP1, that means players will have to kiss light vehicle rush goodbye. They could try, but you'd be going against camoed AT units that can plant mines, snare and have high damage output on light armor. Yes, the package is expensive, but the fact it's there is nonetheless a lot of freedom.

All in all, I am biased and therefore glad the partisans are strong, but at the same time my conscious would say you should probably either up the CP, make reinforcing them most costly or reduce their survivability in order to balance their happy kids meal of utility.

As for Ostheer, I tested mostly with Storm and Encirclement doctrine.

1) I felt that the Ostheer start would be somewhat feeble as without the investment into a T1 right away, the lack of MG will mean you will have to rely on your mix of pioneers and grens.

1a) Those pios are pretty great though, it feels like base game anti-infantry partisans in terms of damage. I feel like maybe pioneer spam is back on the menu!

1b) The pioneers vet up super fast because of their new lethality. May want to change their veterancy requirements as I was getting vet 2 pios before light vehicles were even out.

2) With the fluidity in teching, I felt so much more liberated in options! It's quite refreshing compared to the current form of Ostheer. That said, I am somewhat worried about how easy it is to get double pumas out with the current economy of the patch. 2 pumas still outdo a medium tank given their advantage in range and speed, plus the vet bonus is nothing to laugh at.

2b) Maybe nerf the puma MG? That way it will be fine if there's two of them on the field at the same time since they can't threaten infantry in any feasible way.

3) Panzergrens with their five man squads are noticeably more survivable, which is great! No real complaints here, since they perform the same otherwise as far as 3 matches with AI have shown me.

4) There's a problem with the camo upgrade atm. Storm troopers for example don't get hold fire, so even if I buy them camo it doesn't help if they can't properly ambush.

1) For some reason, I get a free partisan squad at the start of the match. Is this intended? I thought we were supposed to get a conscript squad as soviets.

Bulletin can change starting units. Looks like you had a partisan bulletin equiped.

Penals
Combat engineers
Partisans
Stormtroopers
Pioneers
Osttruppen
Assault Engines
Rear Echelon
LT
Royal Engineers
UKF officers

Stormtroopers may be a bit too much, but this can help make other bulletins more attractive and to allow more customization starts.

2. The current itereation of partisans in your mod is very powerful. While they are now 260 manpower, they can hold their own against greens even without the upgrade. At CP1, I think a unit like that comes very darn early for so much impact. I'll add points below in regards to what other effects that give it so much impact.

2a. They have a lot of utility now, and the upped performance I would even wager they could end up replacing cons. Grenade, Molotov, AT made, landmines, camouflage, AT/Assault Package. It's a unit that can take up a lot of different roles. The only thing I noticed as a balancer at the moment is how expensive the upgrade packages are, and partisans tactics is already fairly ammo heavy without that purchase.

Their design is suppose to be very adaptable. While they might compete with conscripts, the 7 man squad upgrade is superior than the partisan un-upgrades. Penals are still generally better as well. While they are better vs unupgraded grens, grens with LMG 42s are superior. I think the munitions cost is generally fine right now. The SMGs and AT rifles are suppose to be side-grades rather than upgrades for it changes their role. A stock they do well, the player has a choice when to use the upgrades and unlike the Gren's lmgs, they are not mandatory. The 1CP probably does come out too early and if the cost is too low, 270 seems right.

2b. Those triple AT rifles are very deadly against light armor (two volleys for a scout car). And since they pop up at CP1, that means players will have to kiss light vehicle rush goodbye. They could try, but you'd be going against camoed AT units that can plant mines, snare and have high damage output on light armor. Yes, the package is expensive, but the fact it's there is nonetheless a lot of freedom.

The 221 has a base health of 240, the 222 upgrade and 223 upgrade increases its health to 320. When upgraded it will take three volleys. Three AT rifles are necessary now with the higher tank health in general.

1) I felt that the Ostheer start would be somewhat feeble as without the investment into a T1 right away, the lack of MG will mean you will have to rely on your mix of pioneers and grens.

The MG is slow and cumbersome in comparison with grens. Swapping them helps with then initial map control and improve's their early game. They should be able to keep pace better at this stage.

1a) Those pios are pretty great though, it feels like base game anti-infantry partisans in terms of damage. I feel like maybe pioneer spam is back on the menu!

'Those Americans always complain about pioneer spam.' Additionally, they can not do frontal assaults, which is good.

2) With the fluidity in teching, I felt so much more liberated in options! It's quite refreshing compared to the current form of Ostheer. That said, I am somewhat worried about how easy it is to get double pumas out with the current economy of the patch. 2 pumas still outdo a medium tank given their advantage in range and speed, plus the vet bonus is nothing to laugh at.

Pumas will take 2 addition pens to kill a medium but the armor has been reduced. The interaction maybe the same, just more often. However, tank destroyers will two shot them. They maybe more fragile now.

2b) Maybe nerf the puma MG? That way it will be fine if there's two of them on the field at the same time since they can't threaten infantry in any feasible way.

The puma MG is the same as live and I have always viewed at ok-ish for the unit.

4) There's a problem with the camo upgrade atm. Storm troopers for example don't get hold fire, so even if I buy them camo it doesn't help if they can't properly ambush.

Oops.
And fixed. Now when the squad is upgraded with camo, they have hold fire. The ability was attached to the squad upgrade and not to the player upgrade. Though interestingly enough apparently the ability requires the player not have a 'hull down' doctrinal for some odd reason. Theater of war?

The general changes you propose are okay and some of them could be included in the next patch. However, don't think this game needs anymore big factional (eg.tech tree, sniper,etc) changes since this game is far better in balance than it was couple of years ago.

If I could change something major in this game, it would be the maps. I mostly play 2v2s, 80% of maps are soo bad in regards to path finding, being way too narrow, little room for flanks,etc...

Can't we make these changes the standard game instead of a mod?

most of the changes feel like how I always whished the game would be. Only downside is that the sniper is not the single unit anymore, but its a small exchange for the good changes

Can't we make these changes the standard game instead of a mod?

No, because its a complete overhaul of the game that could have beyond catastrophic effect on the game.
It doesn't take a lot to understand that.

If you like it, sub and play it, but there is a higher chance that your grandkids will live on Mars then this getting in game.