[Winter Balance Update] General Discussion

I don't think buffing them directly is a good idea. Mainline inf spam is already too prominent. Why not just remove sandbags from all mainlines. This would be a massive indirect buff for grens (particularly LMG grens) and it would make the early mid game a million times more interesting.

Always hated sandbag spam (and mainline spam). I never understood why the strongest and most offensive mainlines from WFA are able to construct them in the first place. In COH2 infantry feels too strong compared to vehicles. Power creep is a factor I suppose.

Its not inaccurate, its just strange to say that Bars Rifles cant fight LMG grens on distance when nor bar or rifles are ment for distance fighting. Thats the whole point of M1919 to make rifles distance figthing squad.

Perfect, next patch LMG Grens are getting short distance DPS nerfed, 5man Grens are getting long and mid range DPS nerfed, Volks are getting their mid and long range DPS nerfed and Pgrens are getting their mid and long range DPS nerfed.

Since BARs HAVE to only be able to fight in any short of way in one range and be absolutely massacred in the others, every other unit should be the same.

Axis heavy tanks like Tiger, Elephant, JT, Panther and many allied vehicles had their rear armored lowered a long time ago. Certain allied vehicles did not. This is simply a consistency change.

My comment is focused on the Elephant and JT. In my opinion, both can sit behind a wall of AI/AT defences and pluck away at allied armour with little risk. Is this not the same thought going into the proposed ISU152 changes?

My comment is focused on the Elephant and JT. In my opinion, both can sit behind a wall of AI/AT defences and pluck away at allied armour with little risk. Is this not the same thought going into the proposed ISU152 changes?

Are talking about the rear armor or the skill shot or the HE range reduction?

Because the AP round would still have the current range.

My comment is focused on the Elephant and JT. In my opinion, both can sit behind a wall of AI/AT defences and pluck away at allied armour with little risk. Is this not the same thought going into the proposed ISU152 changes?

The ISU-152 can do the same but destroy infantry as well. It's the anti-infantry ammo that has slightly reduced range with the preview patch.

The ISU-152 can do the same but destroy infantry as well. It's the anti-infantry ammo that has slightly reduced range with the preview patch.

Except, AT performance of ISU is on the level of SU-76.
Supplemental at very best.

JT and Ele will shred effortelessly all and every armored unit allies have, ISU will bounce off of OKW P4.

Except, AT performance of ISU is on the level of SU-76.
Supplemental at very best.

JT and Ele will shred effortelessly all and every armored unit allies have, ISU will bounce off of OKW P4.

Incorrect. I just tested it.


EDIT: Right, there's a 15% chance it will not penetrate at max range. It is my fault for getting caught up with the above wording.

Hardly "supplemental at very best" and it does "pluck away" at armor as Napalm suggested.

Incorrect. I just tested it.

ISU 152 has 260-240-200 penetration on the AP rounds. So it will bounce on max range (which is the way ISU needs to be played because of it's agility) OKW P4 (234 armour, 85% chance of pen). It's on the level of SU76 mainly because it has a really slow rate of fire (9-11 sec) but more dmg and more penetration (SU76 does 120 per shot, while the tank standard is 160).
Still, with this nerf to ISU152, one no longer needs to change rear armour because the main use of ISU152, which is to snipe units is in range of JP4 and heavy tank destroyers. Even a panther can take it on with a bit of closing in (50 range vs 60 HE mode).

Elefant and Jagdtiger are the best anti tank units in the team games, 2v2+ they completely shut down any sort of tank play, especially if supported well, but they are not OP. With the exception of the nuke ability on Jagd, elefant is weak to infantry and can be flanked if out of position.

Incorrect. I just tested it.

ISU has deflection damage so it cause damage even it does not penetrate, of coarse the comparison with the SU-76 means obsolete nothing since the Stug has better TTK vs a allied medium than the Elefant. It is simple rant.

I don't think buffing them directly is a good idea. Mainline inf spam is already too prominent. Why not just remove sandbags from all mainlines. This would be a massive indirect buff for grens (particularly LMG grens) and it would make the early mid game a million times more interesting.

It will make the first 4/5 mins more interesting but then it would lead to people blobbing harder and this is no deterrent to main line infantry spam which has been a thing since 7 years ago.

The only times you would see a heavier combined arms approach, is when mortars were utterly bonkers as afk units.


I'm opening a thread to discuss the relationship between MG, main line, mortars and late game.

My comment is focused on the Elephant and JT. In my opinion, both can sit behind a wall of AI/AT defences and pluck away at allied armour with little risk. Is this not the same thought going into the proposed ISU152 changes?

ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.

And while I'm not responding too much, be assured we're keeping an eye on the posts passing through the threads.

ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.

And while I'm not responding too much, be assured we're keeping an eye on the posts passing through the threads.

On the other hand a wall of AT + ISU152 in 1v1 would be catastrophically non agile and prone to easy flanks since it would take a big chunk of population. In 2v2 (most maps favor laney-ness where such units excel), you're counting on your mate to patch some flanks. And generally, axis players should always seek to stuka or werfer the AT wall before pushing (same as how USF smokes in teamgames). I mean, the HE range is not a bad change. It's a thought out nerf. The Penal reworks are quasi-reworks at best. I don't know how one could use penals in anything past late game except for the nuke close range snare.

ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.

And while I'm not responding too much, be assured we're keeping an eye on the posts passing through the threads.

I appreciate the response. Some additional thoughts for you and the team:

• Soviets rely on armor late game to counter vetted axis infantry. Having an Elephant or JT on the field sitting behind a defense shield negates their ability to operate, especially the ones that are good at AI, such as the T70 or T34. As such, I'd say that the Axis player could equally lockout territory by sitting and sniping with the Elephant or JT and using other armor or vetted infantry to hold points. Please consider applying a similar treatment to the Elephant or JT. Alternatively, perhaps something could be done to Axis infantry spacing?
  
• What role, if any, does the KV2 have in the game?
  
  

My perspective is from 3v3 and up.

I don't think buffing them directly is a good idea. Mainline inf spam is already too prominent. Why not just remove sandbags from all mainlines. This would be a massive indirect buff for grens (particularly LMG grens) and it would make the early mid game a million times more interesting.

While that would be the ideal choice, I see a very small chance that the balance team would move in that direction. It's one of those things you'd think they'd have done already otherwise.

I rather choose more durable, maybe we modify the vet system a bit? Rather then having -20% damage at vet 3, how about we modify it like this?

Vet 1: Unlock healing kit (only 10muni) & -10% damage
Vet 2: Increase accuracy 40% (the same as before)
Vet 3: further -10% damage

Or do you mean they are not even durable enough before vet 1 like the new system I suggest?

Because I play mainly 2vs2, My Grenadier at the start of the game usually clump up as a group of 2 - 3 together but I understand that you 1vs1 players have to spear them out around the map so durable is need.

P/S: I know my suggestion is flaw, I'm happy to hear your critic, thanks (also sorry about my English, it is not my native language)

I could see something like that working, where you get the same benefits piecemeal and earlier. But any and all gren changes would have to be played out first before any real judgement can be thrown out on whether its a viable change or not.

What I said in the Soviet thread fits here as well, since we are now talking about the Elefant and the ISU-152 and their respective positions in each Army.

The Elefant and Jagdtiger are heavy casemate tank destroyers with 110 Rear Armor and 1040HP, the SU-85 cannot challenge them because it is woefully outranged and outgunned, so they must flank it with T-34-76 but this is not successful either because the immense HP and occasional bouncing mean that you could leave it idle and alone and it'll take a pair of T-34-76's twenty seconds to kill it.

Unlike facing the ISU-152, the Soviets don't have a Panther they can send forth to poke holes in the front or front sides without risking swift annihilation. An Elefant does 300 damage, so a shot to an SU-85 that dare challenge it will put it down to 340HP in a single counter-hit. An ISU does 240 damage, so if a Panther steps up to challenge it, a successful counter-hit will only put it down to 720.

It is very difficult for stock Soviet to deal with an Elefant that is completely unsupported, add in the fact that it absolutely will be supported and you've got something that is incredibly difficult or even outright impossible to remove. On the other hand, Ostheer and OKW both have a tank that can not only take a few hits to the face, but dish some out.

Let's pretend Axis can only field Panzer IV's and have to deal with an ISU-152. You still have a much easier time than the T-34-76 v Elefant: Panzer IV's higher penetration allows them to punch through the ISU's weaker rear armor 100% of the time from max range, while a T-34-76 is required to close in to medium-close range for a 100% chance to penetrate an Elefant from the back. Now factor in that the Panzer IV has blitz, and it is extremely easy to rush around the side of an ISU even if it starts reversing. But Ostheer/OKW doesn't even have to do this, because they have the Panther.

Soviets do not get that choice, and they still have it considerable harder. Had the Soviet's medium tank been the T-34-85 I would understand, but it's not. Lowering the ISU-152's rear armor to Elefant's does not level the playing field, it unbalances it. Here is statistical proof:

Panzer IV vs ISU-152 (Live)
125/115/110 Pen vs 155 Armor = 80%/74%/70% chance to penetrate.

T-34-76 vs Elefant/Jagdtiger
120/100/80 Pen vs 110 Armor = 109%/90%/72% chance to penetrate.

Panzer IV vs ISU-152 (Preview)
125/115/110 Pen vs 110 Armor = 113%/104%/100% chance to penetrate.

Now consider Axis also have access to Panzerschrecks which they could support their Panther or Panzer IV rush with, and you're dealing damage to the ISU at a rate far exceeding what a T-34-76 rush could do to an Elefant or Jagdtiger.

I find it weird that the ISU is getting (extremely rightfully) nerfed, yet the overpowered Elefant which trashes Allies in teamgames is allowed to be overpowered.

That thing was a meme irl and couldn’t climb a light slope. Reduce its mobility hard.

Sandbags
We are increasing the time it takes to build sandbags for a select number of units. This will make it more of a strategic choice to build sandbags, because building them in the early game will hinder the pace at which the map can be captured. This should encourage players to build sandbags only in vital locations, rather than putting them everywhere their line infantry goes to capture points.
- Sandbag build time increased from 12 to 18 seconds for Infantry Sections, Riflemen and Volks

How about mainline infatry also requiring vet 1 to build sandbags. That would delay the use of them a bit.

Sandbags
We are increasing the time it takes to build sandbags for a select number of units. This will make it more of a strategic choice to build sandbags, because building them in the early game will hinder the pace at which the map can be captured. This should encourage players to build sandbags only in vital locations, rather than putting them everywhere their line infantry goes to capture points.
- Sandbag build time increased from 12 to 18 seconds for Infantry Sections, Riflemen and Volks

How about mainline infatry also requiring vet 1 to build sandbags. That would delay the use of them a bit.

I think 18 seconds is already good enough, no need for vet 1

I find it weird that the ISU is getting (extremely rightfully) nerfed, yet the overpowered Elefant which trashes Allies in teamgames is allowed to be overpowered.

That thing was a meme irl and couldn’t climb a light slope. Reduce its mobility hard.

+1.
I'm also of opinion that if ISU HE shell is losing range, ALL the other AT shells should follow the suit.
These vehicles are nothing but problems from day 1 and the origin is always the same - unreasonably high frontal durability, range and guaranteed penetration on everything.

ISU-152's ability to snipe infantry from behind a wall of AT I would say is more impactful as you stop all ability to capture territory and also can deny VPs for infantry daring to step on that. The JT and Elefant are more devastating to vehicles, but they can't lock out a VP or territory from infantry on their own and bleed the opponent of infantry.

And while I'm not responding too much, be assured we're keeping an eye on the posts passing through the threads.

That logic applies for Brumbar and Sitting next to an elefant. Try to cap or decap vs it. I'm not necesarily against nerfing late game units but I really wonder how Soviet are going maintain sustain fire on late game if only Axis faction have access to all the good stuff.

If nerf has to be done to super heavies then it should be for all the units accross the board at the same time, as it has been done for heavy generalists.