[Winter Balance Update] OST Feedback

In 5.0 the 25 second build time is the same as the call-in cooldown for Osstruppen in live(also same as Grenadier build time I believe). If you reduce it any then you undermine the whole point of moving them to T1. Even a slight reduction in build time would cancel out the build time of T1 and the 80 MP delay to the next Ostruppen built.

Sandbags might be okay with the build time increase since they get them eventually and wouldn't affect late game scaling. They would need tested and maybe have build time longer than other sandbags at Vet 0 if needed. Molotovs would be hell playing as Brits as Ostruppen are already hyper MP efficient vs Tommies and constantly denying cover in a commander that typically floats munitions is a non-starter. You can't buff their combat much since their performance currently isn't an issue and you can't really have Ostruppen scaling too well or they become a no-brainer over Grens again.

You are missing the point Ostruppen.

At first the commander become popular because it allowed player to cap the map fast. So the MOD team had them start on CD and increased their CD and the commander was forgotten.

The commander become popular again when rushing T2 become more viable. Moving them to T1 removed that bonus and will make commanders not viable again.

Glad to see that you agree about the sandbags.

Think you are over reacting about molotovs since without ourah or the long range of incendiary grenades range with terrible RA modifier and with horribly out of cover DPS they will not be that great offensively.

Claiming that Ostheer is floating munition is not very accurate.

I have not suggested to improve their combat efficiency, my suggestions aim at increasing their utility. In preview there is very little reason to build them over grenadier even more so since the rest of the commander abilities are nothing special and even more so larger modes.

Claiming that Ostheer is floating munition is not very accurate.

They don't have constant mandatory expenditudes to make their units viable, unlike soviets.
They don't have 110+ muni dumps per squad to upgrade their units.
Their pintles are cheapest in game.
They don't need to pump muni into timed abilities constantly to make their units perform on the level opposing units do(hi, maxim and 57mm).

They might not be too floaty, but compared to all other factions, even OKW, their muni expenditure is absolutely lowest in game with a spike at T2 due to 251 flamer.

Claiming that Ostheer is floating munition is not very accurate.

He was referring to Osttruppen commanders. Those float early munitions due to the lack of MG42 upgrade.

They don't have constant mandatory expenditudes to make their units viable, unlike soviets.
They don't have 110+ muni dumps per squad to upgrade their units.
Their pintles are cheapest in game.
They don't need to pump muni into timed abilities constantly to make their units perform on the level opposing units do(hi, maxim and 57mm).

They might not be too floaty, but compared to all other factions, even OKW, their muni expenditure is absolutely lowest in game with a spike at T2 due to 251 flamer.

I am not quite sure which game you are describing, but it sure as hell ain't CoH2.

Point to begine with wasnt to adress osttroopen timing. Otherwise there would be no reason to move them to T1, instead of just increasing cooldown could have been just increased. They were moved to T1 in order to adress ostts into T2 skip.

Patch notes say otherwise:

Osttruppen
Osttruppen are being adjusted to arrive onto the battlefield slower than they did previously.

If anything it was always the fast T2 that made Ostruppen so strong. Fast field presence with cheap call-in infantry made it super easy to get a fast 222 or Flamer HT and keep the pressure on. Moving them to T1 adds build time and cost to fielding Ostruppen which delays both their timing and the timing of T2. I do realize that you can T2 skip with the PAK supply drop but from my experience that's the exception to the rule at least in 1v1.

They don't have constant mandatory expenditudes to make their units viable, unlike soviets.
They don't have 110+ muni dumps per squad to upgrade their units.
Their pintles are cheapest in game.
They don't need to pump muni into timed abilities constantly to make their units perform on the level opposing units do(hi, maxim and 57mm).

They might not be too floaty, but compared to all other factions, even OKW, their muni expenditure is absolutely lowest in game with a spike at T2 due to 251 flamer.

Which constant mandatory expenditures do Soviet units have? Oorah? I really don't think that's "Mandatory" any more than Rifle Grenade is. It's a valuable tool for Conscripts, but it isnt "Mandatory" for it to be used "constantly"

Ostheer do have 60 munition LMG upgrades needed for their Grenadiers to be effective, which they start to require fairly early, Mobilise reserves is a cheaper upgrade (In terms of Muni) and comes much later.

Their Pintles might be the cheapest, but Soviet simply don't HAVE pintles to upgrade, other than through the IS-2 docs (I dont think there are any others). Pintles are great, but it clearly isnt a good think to point to when you're trying to argue how OSTheer has less Muni expenditure than Soviet.

OSTheer mines are also significantly more expensive than their Soviet counterparts (Individual patches of S-mines I would argue to be comparable to Tripwire flares).

OST also require Munitions for their healing solution, as opposed to Soviet who instead use fuel.

The maxim I'll agree, though it isnt commonly built, and the 57mm doesn't perform "on the level" of opposing AT guns when muni is pumped into it, it performs above and beyond them.


Soviets are considered one of the less munitions-heavy factions, to my knowledge, not one of the most, and Ostheer are absolutely not the "lowest". OKW are absolutely not the lowest, either, with mandatory STGs and (arguably) mandatory throwing of Flame Grenades to help swing fights in their favour. Up until the coming patch they also have a constant (practically) mandatory expenditure of Munitions for healing, as Mechanised builds are both popular, and don't have access to "free" healing. The latter can be such a sink that it often delays some of the STGs for Mechanised-build volksgrenadiers.

Which constant mandatory expenditures do Soviet units have? Oorah? I really don't think that's "Mandatory" any more than Rifle Grenade is. It's a valuable tool for Conscripts, but it isnt "Mandatory" for it to be used "constantly"

Ostheer do have 60 munition LMG upgrades needed for their Grenadiers to be effective, which they start to require fairly early, Mobilise reserves is a cheaper upgrade (In terms of Muni) and comes much later.

Their Pintles might be the cheapest, but Soviet simply don't HAVE pintles to upgrade, other than through the IS-2 docs (I dont think there are any others). Pintles are great, but it clearly isnt a good think to point to when you're trying to argue how OSTheer has less Muni expenditure than Soviet.

OSTheer mines are also significantly more expensive than their Soviet counterparts (Individual patches of S-mines I would argue to be comparable to Tripwire flares).

OST also require Munitions for their healing solution, as opposed to Soviet who instead use fuel.

The maxim I'll agree, though it isnt commonly built, and the 57mm doesn't perform "on the level" of opposing AT guns when muni is pumped into it, it performs above and beyond them.


Soviets are considered one of the less munitions-heavy factions, to my knowledge, not one of the most, and Ostheer are absolutely not the "lowest". OKW are absolutely not the lowest, either, with mandatory STGs and (arguably) mandatory throwing of Flame Grenades to help swing fights in their favour. Up until the coming patch they also have a constant (practically) mandatory expenditure of Munitions for healing, as Mechanised builds are both popular, and don't have access to "free" healing. The latter can be such a sink that it often delays some of the STGs for Mechanised-build volksgrenadiers.

ISU also has pintles.

But soviet is drastically more soviet thirsty than it used to be. T2 units all have muni abilities that are frequently used, cons have had their dependancy on muni cranked up over the patches, penals will need PTRS if T1 is taken, 7 man is a thing now...
Quad is still the only AA and requires muni...
Su76 barrage now has a cost
Not to say they are more expensive than any other faction, but they are probably on par now. Certainly not able to simply lay mines like they used to.

To be fair, German tank's MGs are worse in comparison, you need to upgrade pintle to be better than most soviet tanks. KV1 and T34 hull-MGs are beasts. They may do less DPS, but they have focus on one model instead of multible, so they kill faster. Doing that versus smaller squads... good balance xD

I tested it multible times.

To be fair, German tank's MGs are worse in comparison, you need to upgrade pintle to be better than most soviet tanks. KV1 and T34 hull-MGs are beasts. They may do less DPS, but they have focus on one model instead of multible, so they kill faster. Doing that versus smaller squads... good balance xD

I tested it multible times.

That doesn't really sound as though it makes sense, if the KV1/T34 hull + coaxial MG DPS is lower than that of the PIV/Panther/Whichever German tanks, then the former are strictly worse than the latter. To my knowledge neither the T34 nor the KV1 hull/coaxial MGs have Focus Fire enabled either, so Im not sure why you believe they "Focus on one model instead of multible(sic)"

I'm not sure of the exact breakdown of the various hull and coaxial MGs in terms of damage, burst length, accuracy, etcetera, however, I dont know precisely how they all compare.

...

It depends on the situation. It is also common for soviet tanks to kill the AT-grenade entity (e.g. person using the Faust) before they can use it, so it interrupts.

I don't often saw that on German tanks.

Play some test-games, you will be shocked. ^^ T34 even does damage without shooting-animation.

Edit:


I made a video 1/2 year ago. And yes, also German turret-MG will not auto-fire.

Snip

Well, the tests seem to imply that the T-34s hull and coaxial MGs are better than the PIV's, though it doesn't support the assertion that they differ in the "Focus Fire" property". Perhaps that isnt what you meant, though. (More than just one test would be nice, incidentally)

I have heard before that the T34/76 and t34/85 do have abnormally strong hull/coaxial machine guns, though knowing the exact statistics would be nice. I'm not certain, but haven't the T34s MGs been tweaked in a patch in the last half-year?

Well, the tests seem to imply that the T-34s hull and coaxial MGs are better than the PIV's, though it doesn't support the assertion that they differ in the "Focus Fire" property". Perhaps that isnt what you meant, though. (More than just one test would be nice, incidentally)

I have heard before that the T34/76 and t34/85 do have abnormally strong hull/coaxial machine guns, though knowing the exact statistics would be nice. I'm not certain, but haven't the T34s MGs been tweaked in a patch in the last half-year?

T-34/76 2 mgs have around the total DPS of 3 of PzIV, you can find the DPS in https://coh2.serealia.ca/#126

T-34/76 was given better mgs than other tanks to make up for the fact that it was delayed when it was moved to T4 in the 3 building soviet design around 5 year ago.

T-34/85 got the same buff by accident because it was using the same weapon but it was changed making the T-34/85 a very cost efficient tank.

KV-1 had it HMG buffed also a couple of years ago.
(probably because people used in T-34/76 performance where wondering why KV-1 mg are worse)

T-34/76 was given better mgs than other tanks to make up for the fact that it was delayed when it was moved to T4 in the 3 building soviet design around 5 year ago.

This is false.
The tank was simply underpowered regardless of timing.
Show Spoiler

(probably because people used in T-34/76 performance where wondering why KV-1 mg are worse)

This is false, misleading assumption again.

KV-1 having same gun as 76 suffered the same problems dealing with infantry.
MGs were brought up to 76 level to discourage infantry getting near it.

Show Spoiler

This is false.
The tank was simply underpowered regardless of timing.
Show Spoiler

Yes, but when was that developer comment made? Was it (soon) after the T-34 being moved to tier four, or was it before then?

I think the assertion that it was buffed because it " was simply underpowered regardless of timing." is about as misleading as Vipper's comment, given the limited context of your quote there. It just states that they felt that the unit was underperforming, but not the reason why they felt it was underperforming.

Yes, but when was that developer comment made? Was it (soon) after the T-34 being moved to tier four, or was it before then?

It is irrelevant.
No one ever went for T34 with old tech either.

I think the assertion that it was buffed because it " was simply underpowered regardless of timing." is about as misleading as Vipper's comment, given the limited context of your quote there. It just states that they felt that the unit was underperforming, but not the reason why they felt it was underperforming.

The unit was underperforming vs infantry regardless of timing, because it had and still has a shitty main gun.
Its main gun performs exactly the same way now as it did for last 6 years.
It was never fine regardless of timing.
Why do you think call-in meta existed?
34-76 started seeing any real use only after that MG buff.

If you are interested in more, make appropriate thread.

It is irrelevant.
The unit was underperforming vs infantry regardless of timing, because it had and still has a shitty main gun.
Its main gun performs exactly the same way now as it did for last 6 years.

Show Spoiler

T34 received AI gun nerf, in return of AT buff, later it recieved AI buff in terms of MG buffs, because its AT perfomance was (and still is) kinda questinable considering its timing and price. Before that it recieved buffs in price\pop-cap.

No-one used T34 outside of combining it with windustry, because against armor targets SU-85 still was the main chose and T70 filled the role of AI tank, while even after AT buff T34 still was infior option to both T70 and SU-85 in AT\AI departement.

It is irrelevant.
No one ever went for T34 with old tech either.


The unit was underperforming vs infantry regardless of timing, because it had and still has a shitty main gun.
Its main gun performs exactly the same way now as it did for last 6 years.
It was never fine regardless of timing.
Why do you think call-in meta existed?
34-76 started seeing any real use only after that MG buff.

If you are interested in more, make appropriate thread.

Yes we know, according to you all Soviet units are UP and yet miraculously they are the one of strongest in preview tournament.

But I am curious since the T-34/76's gun is so "shitty" why is that MMX tests have the T-34/76 having only 6% less AI than PzIV with even with pintle upgrade?

And why are you once more ranting about Soviets units being UP in a ostheer feedback thread?

It is irrelevant.
No one ever went for T34 with old tech either.

Difficult to comment on without having been there/experienced this. The game was quite different at the time as far as balance goes

The unit was underperforming vs infantry regardless of timing, because it had and still has a shitty main gun.
Its main gun performs exactly the same way now as it did for last 6 years.
It was never fine regardless of timing.
Why do you think call-in meta existed?
34-76 started seeing any real use only after that MG buff.

If you are interested in more, make appropriate thread.

Hey man, you were bringing up the Soviets in #802, this has all been relevant to your statement regarding OST pintles.

Callin metas have existed for myriad reasons, I presume you wouldnt call LMG grenadiers underpowered at the moment, despite the fact they have been left unused for quite a long time by most players in favour of VSL, and AssGren & Ostruppen callins?

The way it seems to me is this: The t-34 has been unpopular because its theoretical role as a "shock" tank was taken up by the t-70, and the superior AT performance of the t-34 relative to the T-70 wasn't enough to justify waiting for that instead, as you would prefer an SU-85 + ZIS.

The various callin t-34 alternatives (KV1, t34/85) provide something you'd actually want, whereas generally the t34 (has been, previously) fairly obsolete.

Analysis within spoiler

Show Spoiler

It is irrelevant.
No one ever went for T34 with old tech either.


The unit was underperforming vs infantry regardless of timing, because it had and still has a shitty main gun.
Its main gun performs exactly the same way now as it did for last 6 years.
It was never fine regardless of timing.
Why do you think call-in meta existed?
34-76 started seeing any real use only after that MG buff.

If you are interested in more, make appropriate thread.

Is the T34 being shitty also the reason why it got its price increased?

And if you argue that the T34 being bad was the reason for the existance of the call in meta, the only thing it proves is that you do not understand why the call in meta existed in the first place.