Reducing the mp cost for Volks back to 250 would be a start.
I don't know if fiddling with their pricing does much to solve any issues, not by itself, anyway.
Posts: 1594
Reducing the mp cost for Volks back to 250 would be a start.
Posts: 177
Posts: 1660
About your sturmipio suggestion: Easiest way to deal with sturmpio would be to just replace the starting sturmpio with volksgrenadier. If the map would favor sturmpio being the starting unit it still most likely would favor sturmpio being the as first built unit as much. But if the map does not allow OKW to take advantage of early ambush then most of the players would rather just have volk instead as starting unit.
Posts: 177
This doesn't work for the simple reason that regardless, you will always need at least one sturmpioneer unit, and unless you want to build a 300 MP unit just for repairs, sturmpios need get in the combat ASAP to get a chance to vet and scale decently in combat
Posts: 783
This doesn't work for the simple reason that regardless, you will always need at least one sturmpioneer unit, and unless you want to build a 300 MP unit just for repairs, sturmpios need get in the combat ASAP to get a chance to vet and scale decently in combat or at the very least pull their weight early before being actually relegated to overglorified pioneers without non doc flamethrower and good mines
Posts: 1289
Posts: 1660
I see your point but this would not take away from those players who want to have their early sturm pio.
Posts: 1660
Brits start with infantry section instead of RE. For the cost, just add the difference in mp cost to OKW starting resources.
Posts: 1660
I am not that big on okw. But if okw volks scale so poorly because off obers, why not let obers come out lmg34 and all or a bit earlier or both. This way you dont "have" buff volks and raise their cost and thus have no need for obers.
Posts: 658
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Personally I feel like Volks and Sturmpios are fine and the real weakness is the Vet 5 Veterancy.
Take the Kubelwagon for example. The Kubelwagon requires 3525 Experience to hit Vet 5 while the Universal Carrier only needs 2160 to hit Vet 3. Both units arrive at the same time and have similar costs.
Essentially this causes casualties/losses to be significantly more punishing as you need significantly more experience to reach top peak performance (maxed out Vet) vs any other allied units. While the idea of Vet 5 vet is nice and cool in practice it ends up counter productive as Company of Heroes is supposed to allow someone to come back/Catch up from a mistake and one faction is punished way more than others.
This is especially so for support weapons. The MG 34 at Vet 5 is hands the best MG in the game but at Vet 0 it is easily one of the worst. Even if you do manage to get the MG-34 Veterancy, all it takes is one lucky grenade or mortar shell and all of that hard experience is lost leaving you with overall weaker support weapons and forcing you to crutch harder on your infantry. I would gladly trade Vet 5 for Vet 3 for a less punishing Vet system.
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
Personally I feel like Volks and Sturmpios are fine and the real weakness is the Vet 5 Veterancy.
Take the Kubelwagon for example. The Kubelwagon requires 3525 Experience to hit Vet 5 while the Universal Carrier only needs 2160 to hit Vet 3. Both units arrive at the same time and have similar costs.
Essentially this causes casualties/losses to be significantly more punishing as you need significantly more experience to reach top peak performance (maxed out Vet) vs any other allied units. While the idea of Vet 5 vet is nice and cool in practice it ends up counter productive as Company of Heroes is supposed to allow someone to come back/Catch up from a mistake and one faction is punished way more than others.
This is especially so for support weapons. The MG 34 at Vet 5 is hands the best MG in the game but at Vet 0 it is easily one of the worst. Even if you do manage to get the MG-34 Veterancy, all it takes is one lucky grenade or mortar shell and all of that hard experience is lost leaving you with overall weaker support weapons and forcing you to crutch harder on your infantry. I would gladly trade Vet 5 for Vet 3 for a less punishing Vet system.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
The majority of OKW's veterancy 1-3 line up with the veterancy 1-3 with the other factions. 4 and 5 are bonuses that are often not combat related or are new abilities. That was changed awhile ago.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Did you guys also changed the xp worth of units once they get vet4 and vet5?
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Isn't it flat modifier of +20% base exp per vet start? It was worded in a way that didn't really left much doubt, but now you've made everyone unsure.
(also, regarding kubel, it get shared vet, UC does not).
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Did you guys also changed the xp worth of units once they get vet4 and vet5?
Posts: 789
A problem with T2 timing imo has more to do with the delayed faust if one chooses T2 than anything else.
Mechanized HQ: Kind of an odd request, but I would like to see the repair pioneers made cheaper or even free. With how absurdly expensive and overworked Spios are, they're a necessity.
Posts: 789
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
IDK what to do about OKW's infantry
OKW has a very unique infantry game, with your units having poor veterancy scaling but you getting better new infantry squads later in the game.
Volks combat power comes from their sandbags and their flame nades ability to deny cover from the enemy.
Obers have to be strong to make up for volks weak scaling.
Sturms problem is their map dependancy. they are fine for close range maps but on more open maps they die super quick. They are way too expensive to buy late game if you need more repairs thoug, which is really annoying
IDK how to fix volks/obers, but for sturms, I say they should get a cost reduction but a big build time increase, with the build time increase preventing double sturm openings from being too good but the lowered cost allowing for a second stum squad lae game for repairs
Posts: 5279