Sander's personal balance changes

I've really come to respect miragefla a lot over the past few months. He really tries to get a lot of testing done asking a lot of people for help and a lot of trial and error and refinements with so many mod games played.

Hope his changes make the live version.

V2

I've finally had the time to make some adjustments based on the feedback here. I've tried to incorporate most of it though I might've missed some things. I've incorporated some additional changes from Miragefla's mod and some of the QoL improvement ideas from Bao's mod, and scrapped some of the more experimental ideas.


Global Changes
Show Spoiler

OKW
Show Spoiler

OST
Show Spoiler

SOV
Show Spoiler

UKF
Show Spoiler

USF
Show Spoiler

Welp this is gonna go into my cringe compilations

Rocket Artillery
In order to make rocket artillery more of a strategic weapon, to be used in conjunction with an active assault or defence rather than just bombarding the enemy as much as possible, all veterancy cooldown bonuses will be reduced.
Show Spoiler

If aim is to make rocket arty a "strategic weapon" I would follow a different path.

Change could include:
Replacing normal barrage with DOT barrage (incendiary or WP) so that these weapons work better in stopping blobs or forcing to move defense lines.

Turn HE barrages into abilities costing MU so that they can not be spammed.



Panzerschreck
In order to make Panzerschrecks a more viable option against light vehicles, its far accuracy is being increased. As compensation, its damage is being reduced. This will make the alpha strike potential against vehicles slightly worse (decreasing the effectiveness of “Schreck blobs”), while the higher accuracy should keep the total damage per minute roughly similar.

Show Spoiler

That would simply make RE/Ro.E far most cost efficient AT units than axis AT units.

One should tone down light vehicles while also increasing available counter effectiveness.
For instance:
221 reintroduced designed to counter micro light and sniper
222 more AT oriented more expensive with access to AP rounds
Ostwind hard counter to lights
AAHT to fire modes suppression and AP rounds no suppression
Removal of vehicles penalty on luch

That would simply make RE/Ro.E far most cost efficient AT units than axis AT units.

This change does not make Panzerschrecks worse. Their effectiveness against medium and heavy vehicles should stay roughly the same (damage per minute is balanced out with decreased damage but increased accuracy). With the enemy kiting and reacting, I expect most shots to take place around maximum range. For example:

Against a medium tank (20 TS) they currently need (640/120=) 6 hits, and at long range with a 56% chance to hit that will take roughly 10.7 shots or 5-6 volleys.

With these changes the shots to kill would go to (640/100=) 7 hits, but with 72% accuracy now, it would take roughly 9.7 shots, or 5 volleys.

There would be a small difference in synergy with other AT weapons (for example a tank that took two hits from an ATG would require 4 PS shots to finish rather than 3) but again, the higher accuracy should generally compensate this.


Obviously numbers can be tweaked further to finetune the changes. If tests would conclude they'd effectively become a bit worse at mid range then accuracy there could go up too, although the better max range performance would likely be a better trade for slightly worse mid range. But the point (goal) is that this change wouldn't really make them worse against mediums and heavies in sustained combat while 1) decreasing the alpha strike of Schreck blobs and 2) making them more reliable against light vehicles. I don't really see how this would make them any less cost efficient.

This change does not make Panzerschrecks worse. Their effectiveness against medium and heavy vehicles should stay roughly the same (damage per minute is balanced out with decreased damage but increased accuracy). With the enemy kiting and reacting, I expect most shots to take place around maximum range. For example:

Against a medium tank (20 TS) they currently need (640/120=) 6 hits, and at long range with a 56% chance to hit that will take roughly 10.7 shots or 5-6 volleys.

With these changes the shots to kill would go to (640/100=) 7 hits, but with 72% accuracy now, it would take roughly 9.7 shots, or 5 volleys.

There would be a small difference in synergy with other AT weapons (for example a tank that took two hits from an ATG would require 4 PS shots to finish rather than 3) but again, the higher accuracy should generally compensate this.


Obviously numbers can be tweaked further to finetune the changes. If tests would conclude they'd effectively become a bit worse at mid range then accuracy there could go up too, although the better max range performance would likely be a better trade for slightly worse mid range. But the point (goal) is that this change wouldn't really make them worse against mediums and heavies in sustained combat while 1) decreasing the alpha strike of Schreck blobs and 2) making them more reliable against light vehicles. I don't really see how this would make them any less cost efficient.

i thought one of the main positives for shreks is the alpha strike, which is why it has the longest reload. For me, the reason it sucks vs LV's is due to the long reload. But overall i think its a positive change anyway gj.

Whats your opinion on volks? honestly at 260mp i really struggle with them until i get an mg34 or LV's out. Similar to USF, i was under the impression volks need to be very cost effective like riflemen, but they are not and i really think they are the main reason why OKW is hard to play with.

Now when pesky axis fanboy cries about shit grens have been silenced via formation pseudobuff and the 5men grens are nerfed you still are left with ostruppen as a competent option for mainline infantry in 1v1. I suggest removing the faust from ostruppen in order to achieve the wanted death of this faction in this mode.

PS. Love the 10mp increase for infantry sections. You seem to have pinpointed the exact balance issue when it comes to this mainline.

This change does not make Panzerschrecks worse...

Comparison of suggest Shrecks

Shcrecks
accuracy 0.069/0.052/0.036
damage 100
Reload 8.5

Piats
Accuracy 0.063/0.042170.025
damage 100
Reload 6.5

Bazooka
Accuracy 0.063/0.048/0.034
damage 80
Reload 6.5

Super bazooka
Accuracy 0.063/0.048/0.034
damage 100
Reload 6.5

That would make piats/bazookas allot more efficient by comparison while the accuracy "advantage" can be less important due to collision hits.

In sort R.E (with vet 1 accuracy bonus) and Ro.E (snare) will be more cost efficient that Axis AT infatry (being cheaper and able to have 5 men) while USF Elite infatry would simply be superior.

If one want shreck score hits more light vehicles one can increase the target size or create a separate hand held AT weapons better suited vs light with lower Penetration and better accuracy.

I like most of the proposed changes except for the schreck change. Sure, greater chance of getting hits, but what's the point if they can always get away with a bit of health left? The more random, but guaranteed kill on hit is more rewarding, and especially in urban areas schrecks might meet tanks at super close range, where the only thing that matters is damage.
Another thing I don't like is the G43 changes on grenadier squads, it's a straight nerf. A squad with two models left would perform worse. Why is it necessary?
I'm a bit unsure about giving stock field healing option to soviets, seems like a core change to the faction. It would be like giving at least one doctrinal forward retreat point to ostheer.


Anyway, here is list of suggestions for additional changes:

OKW

• Lefh18 and Pak43 vet 4 and 5 bonuses replaced with self reinforcement and heal, moved to vet 1 and 3.
  
• Flak emplacement can no longer be decrewed.
  

OST

• Pioneer squad reduced veterancy requirement replaced with shared veterancy.
  
• Increase Relief infantry active time from 60s to 120s, cost increased by 50%.
  
• Fix 250 halftrack lmg grenadiers' vet 3 bonus (still uses RA bonus instead of reduced damage).
  

SOV

• Combat engineers receive shared veterancy, requirements increased by 15%.
  
• M3 scout car receives shared veterancy, requirements increased by 15%.
  
• Increase Rapid conscription active time from 60s to 120s, cost increased by 50%.
  

UKF

• Lend Lease M5 halftrack can also drop a single med crate for 15 muni.
  
• Resupply halftrack's vickers lmg drop no longer requires weapon rack unlock (similar to USF M1919).
  

Some units that imo also warrantee a thought:

-50 cal being very efficient with setup, packup and suppression. I remember there was a comment for a 1sec delay, but dropped on this version.

-Zis being very efficient. Very decent at and barrage make its field presence very efficient for what you pay for. I know that sov lineup is a but weaker than ost, but with guards and shocks in almost every commander they are very hard to deal with. I thought making it 5 man or decrewable at 2 men would justify the current performance.

- There was a talk about Stug3G vet rework. Remove twp with accuracy. Or move part of vet3 reload to vet2.

- Make BAR less likely to drop on rangers to see some diversity over thompson.

Comparison of suggest Shrecks

[…]

That would make piats/bazookas allot more efficient by comparison while the accuracy "advantage" can be less important due to collision hits.

You've left out penetration in your comparison, which is decisively in favour of the Panzerschreck at 160 vs 110 at max range for Bazookas and PIATs. Guaranteed penetration against any Allied medium vs a 61-47% chance to pen a Panzer IV.

Scatter/collision hits are almost non existent on handheld AT with the huge scatter values on Bazookas and Schrecks (16/18 scatter angle and 15/14 distance max) while PIATs have very slow projectiles (when they don't track on a hit-roll they will likely miss if the vehicle is moving).

In terms of cost efficiency, Panzergrenadiers and Panzerfusiliers also have better veterancy bonuses with +40% accuracy compared to +20% for RET, +25% for Rangers/Paras and +0% for REs. The latter do get -50% reload in cover but that's not of too much use when chasing tanks.

So still with these changes I would not consider Panzerschrecks to become any less cost efficient than they currently are.

the G43 changes on grenadier squads, it's a straight nerf. A squad with two models left would perform worse. Why is it necessary?

[…]

UKF

• Lend Lease M5 halftrack can also drop a single med crate for 15 muni.
  
• Resupply halftrack's vickers lmg drop no longer requires weapon rack unlock (similar to USF M1919).
  

A slight decrease to moving DPS of two surviving squad members would be a small sacrifice to receive a third G43 which would increase the firepower of a full and 3/4 model squad quite significantly. 3 Gren G43s (and one Kar 98K) would put their total DPS more in line with other semi-upgraded mainline infantry. IIRC it would give them DPS somewhere around a non upgraded to 1 BAR upgraded Riflemen squad.

Good call on the Lend Lease M5, I will add that. I'm not sure about allowing the Special Weapons halftrack to drop weapons without weapon racks tech; I thought that was a specific nerf to the unit some time ago and I assume it was for a good reason. I must admit I'm not very familiar with this unit/commander so I'm not sure what the gameplay implications of such a change would be.

You've left out penetration in your comparison, which is decisively in favour of the Panzerschreck at 160 vs 110 at max range for Bazookas and PIATs. Guaranteed penetration against any Allied medium vs a 61-47% chance to pen a Panzer IV.

Ones pays more fuel for the extra armor and hand held AT weapon do deflection damage regardless.

Given the cost difference between PG and RE/Ro.E imo the later are quite more cost efficient.
When compared with Ranger/Paras with a similar cost they could far less effective.

Scatter/collision hits are almost non existent on handheld AT with the huge scatter values on Bazookas and Schrecks (16 scatter angle and 15 distance max) while PIATs have very slow projectiles (when they don't track on a hit-roll they will likely miss if the vehicle is moving).

I am not sure the claim is accurate.

1) Scatter distance max is the upper and thus it is not very informative.In addition high scatter distance max is not necessarily a bad thing, combined with distance offset make the projectile travel further way and thus actually increase the chance of collision hits on retreating vehicle.

2) Max values might be higher but on the other hand ratio is lower than other AT weapon which means that the weapon scatters less with distance.

3) The problem has more to do with scatter angle but even then its more 50/50 if the vehicle is moving perpendicular

In terms of cost efficiency, Panzergrenadiers and Panzerfusiliers also have better veterancy bonuses with +40% accuracy compared to +20% for RET, +25% for Rangers/Paras and +0% for REs. The latter do get -50% reload in cover but that's not of too much use when chasing tanks.

So still with these changes I would not consider Panzerschrecks to become any less cost efficient than they currently are.

They also have higher vet requirement while accuracy bonus for RET comes at vet 1.

As For USF elites they can stay on the battlefield much longer.

I'd implement all the changes asap

Plus:
1. the recrew with 2 men for ost.
2. ZiS barrage moved to vet one.
3. Panther main gun gets a tad better ai performance.

HI Sander,

happy to see the 2nd version of your personal balance changes. As I already wrote before I really like most of your ideas (OKW tech changes are my favourite!) thats why I will focus on "bad" changes imo / things that should be adjusted in v3.

Global changes:

• Sandbag building time:
  I understand why you want to increase the build up time but this would be a big nerf for factions that rely on this cover. Not afraid about Brits but Volks would be even worse than now. And OKW really dont need further nerfs to their main line.
  If Volks need more time to build sandbags than you should adjust costs to 250 MP imo.
  
  OKW:
  Artillery Flares
  Honestly, I understand why people want this ability changed but I doubt that the ability would be useful if it does not provide vision of itw own. It would be better to replace it with the "Mobile observation post" or a simple recon plane.
  
  OST:
  G43 upgrade:
  Should be available at 1CP not at 2CP. You can upgrade to MG42 very often before the G43 is available.
  
  StugE:
  AI buff needed in addition to the smoke ability, no explanation needed (you saw HAns game...)
  
  Lackluster OST commander:
  Chose at least one lackluster commander and replace 1 ability. Ost hasnt got any love in the last patches for his lackluster commanders while all other factions got improvements.
  Buddy, you posted great ideas in this thread:
  https://www.coh2.org/topic/101020/6-changes-to-improve-wehrmacht-commanders-thematically/post/790046
  Just be bold and choose of the commanders there!
  
  SOV:
  Penals:
  Penals absolutly dont need ANY buff, they are not as attractive as conscripts because cons are too good not because Penals have too much building time. Its always a rat race between these 2 units: If one is superior then the other units get a buff and the same happens again.
  
  I hope my comments help, looking forward to v3!
  
  

Why change the Spec Ops flares? I get that they're uncounterable, but so are the British border flares. Does Spec Ops really need to lose the flares?

Why change the Spec Ops flares? I get that they're uncounterable, but so are the British border flares. Does Spec Ops really need to lose the flares?

Brit ones are less flexible, more expensive and more Likley to be noticed (because they cover more area so higher chance of a flare catching your eye). Unconterable anything is bad, but at least the Brit one has more drawbacks. Okw one costs the exact same as a recon plane with all the flexibility and none of the drawbacks. That's why it gets more heat.

As for my opinion on the new notes, over all it looks great BUT perhaps EFA pios could get a flamer and sweeper as they would be the only ones that a sweeper is definitive since ukf and usf can sweeper and get rack upgrades.

Also with the lowered cost of BGHQ.... that a whole lot of okw power spike coming alpt sooner than anyone else.... The abilities gated by having a truck at that point should just be intrinsic to their place and be balanced according instead of such a low bar.


Also the delay in usf snare seems unnecessary. I get its ALSO an accessibility buff at the same time, but I feel it should be combined. Perhaps--when building is met snares unlocked OR vet 1 unlocks snares but when both are met - 5mu or something?

snip

But one also needs to keep in mind that OKW has currently not a lot of recon options. It has recon on 3 Commanders of which one is basically never seen. So nerfing Specs OPs would bring the recon options down to 2 ( realistically 1 )

Meanwhile UKF have lots of recon options and even have things such as non doc flares on the 17 pounder.

Also I don't get the "Brit ones just lighten up the front" argument. While it makes this ofc impossible to know what the enemy is doing in front of his base you got the whole front illuminated. This is something which should also not be underestimated. ( also there are some abilities which can lighten up behind the front too, although they are bundled in with unit call ins )

But one also needs to keep in mind that OKW has currently not a lot of recon options. It has recon on 3 Commanders of which one is basically never seen. So nerfing Specs OPs would bring the recon options down to 2 ( realistically 1 )

Meanwhile UKF have lots of recon options and even have things such as non doc flares on the 17 pounder.

Also I don't get the "Brit ones just lighten up the front" argument. While it makes this ofc impossible to know what the enemy is doing in front of his base you got the whole front illuminated. This is something which should also not be underestimated. ( also there are some abilities which can lighten up behind the front too, although they are bundled in with unit call ins )

Then give okw more recon! Don't have a broken mechanic that's extremely abusable in team games. Also sanders new proposal is bloody good recon but like the Brit flares (which BTW I also think needs changed) is limited in flexibility.

Then give okw more recon! Don't have a broken mechanic that's extremely abusable in team games. Also sanders new proposal is bloody good recon but like the Brit flares (which BTW I also think needs changed) is limited in flexibility.

Is it not possible to just make the Spec Ops flares the same textures as the British flares so it's easy to see, and then increase the price?

Is it not possible to just make the Spec Ops flares the same textures as the British flares so it's easy to see, and then increase the price?

Flare is something we should move away from, not creat more.

Flamethrowers (and incendiary grenades)
Currently flamethrowers and incendiary grenades take so long to set fire to (stone) garrisons that it is simply not a viable option. Reducing the time/amount it takes should encourage more active counter-play to infiltration units or against key garrisons.
Show Spoiler
Does not affect other flame weapons like the 251, ISG/mortar incendiary barrages and Wasp
I can see the point on flamer but not incendiary grenades, mainline infantry should not be able to destroy garrison these is a job of other units.

Even so 50% seem a bit too much although I do not have the numbers.

I would personally try adding an ability to burn building similar to the one in campaign.


Sandbags build time for mainline infantry
Sandbags are a pretty big part of the power level of mainline infantry which is why outright removing them would be too big of a change. Increasing build time however should give players a more tactical choice where and when to build them, rather than just spamming them everywhere their mainline infantry goes.
Show Spoiler
I would rather see it removed from mainline infatry with exception of ostruppen and possibly conscripts. In addition I would have tank traps have longer built time and provide yellow cover.

The change would actually be an indirect buff to grenadiers and that is a good thing.


Heavy Machine Gun Teams crew spacing
Show Spoiler

The change in formation is a good thing (have I seen some HMG already do that?)



Quality of Life changes (inspired by Bao's mod)

ATGs now spawn at their production building

Snipers will no longer target vehicles automatically

Vehicle Priority toggle added for all infantry equipped with anti-tank weapons. Garrisoned units (including a Raketen in a garrison) should remember their priority settings (I believe this was possible).

All units capable of anti-air will have an ability added that forces them to target airplanes

Ground deformation caused by Demolition Charges reduced

Changes seem in a good direction.

The AA mode as I have suggested should be mandatory in order to fire on planes so that it add some micro in countering them and avoid unintentional targeting.

It will also allow USF AAHT to better truck planes.