Commander Update Beta 2021 - OKW Feedback
1 Apr 2021, 19:16 PM
#41
Posts: 449
I don't think we should touch Pfusis, at least not until we can get a Volks adjustment.
1 Apr 2021, 19:47 PM
#42
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I don't think we should touch Pfusis, at least not until we can get a Volks adjustment.
What makes you think volks need any adjustments?
There is a reason they haven't received a single change for such a long time now, unless you want to adjust MP40 upgrade.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
1 Apr 2021, 19:58 PM
#43
Posts: 449
What makes you think volks need any adjustments?
There is a reason they haven't received a single change for such a long time now, unless you want to adjust MP40 upgrade.
Their veterancy and scaling should be adjusted. If anything, the MP40 upgrade is the only thing that doesn't need to be adjusted since it gives Volks a niche that they are good at.
1 Apr 2021, 20:02 PM
#44
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Not that unanimous decision making isn't good, but this looks like you're implying other people basically pushed the fusi change through, regardless of whether or not other people were telling them (which doesn't appear to be you) it was a bad change
It's only natural that there are some changes that some people are sceptical of or even against. I don't agree with certain changes in this preview either. But anyone can be wrong. That's why we publish these previews, so we can experiment and see what sticks, and gather feedback from a wider audience.
In regards to the Pfussie changes, they're meant to make them more viable in 1v1 because their opening is just too weak there. Without really changing too much in teamgames where you can already get away with using only/mostly Pfussies over Volks. I personally thought that was worth trying out. If it doesn't work out we can just revert it later.
1 Apr 2021, 20:03 PM
#45
Posts: 359
because decisions dont have to be unanimous in the team
Very interesting. So the followup question is, who asked for this change to be in there and what was the reasoning used? Or does balance team just throw shit against a wall theyre thinking about and see what sticks? Honest question, trying to understand how balance team scopes themselves and why they come to the decisions they do.
Panzer tactician is no different than a skill shot. Hardly a "Free" get out of jail card.
1 Apr 2021, 20:36 PM
#46
Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3
Very interesting. So the followup question is, who asked for this change to be in there and what was the reasoning used?
Sorry but obviously I wont answer that question. I will always say my opinion if I dont like a change but I wont call out specific names
1 Apr 2021, 20:37 PM
#47
Posts: 359
Sorry but obviously I wont answer that question. I will always say my opinion if I dont like a change but I wont call out specific names
Smh
Panzer tactician is no different than a skill shot. Hardly a "Free" get out of jail card.
1 Apr 2021, 21:18 PM
#48
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
Actually looking at the change graphs (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_TMlRFPMRDfrzM2CixLwMhd6x3y3svx34AqwA_8l22I)
I realized, why not merge the Pak 43 and Lefh 18 into one ability as well and add Hull Down to the doctrine?
Makes sense theme wise and For the Fatherland gets the stay as well.
I realized, why not merge the Pak 43 and Lefh 18 into one ability as well and add Hull Down to the doctrine?
Makes sense theme wise and For the Fatherland gets the stay as well.
1 Apr 2021, 21:24 PM
#49
Posts: 240
I realized, why not merge the Pak 43 and Lefh 18 into one ability as well and add Hull Down to the doctrine?
Makes sense theme wise and For the Fatherland gets the stay as well.
While I love the idea, I'm not sure how hard it is to add the hull down animations to the OKW tanks.
The Ruleset is only a guideline, and are not actually the Rules. This is .org
1 Apr 2021, 21:29 PM
#50
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
While I love the idea, I'm not sure how hard it is to add the hull down animations to the OKW tanks.
What do you mean?
Hulldown is already in the game for OKW tanks and you can even try it out in the All Units mod.
It's just a hidden feature that wasn't ever used, at least in the vanilla game that is until now.
1 Apr 2021, 21:34 PM
#51
Posts: 570 | Subs: 1
Honestly I wouldn't mind an OKW commander (Be it an existing one, or a newly minted one) revolving around Beutewaffen and even Beutepanzer.
Would giving Sturms rifles actually be useful, or is this just an April Fools post? I assume the latter, given that you mention giving them Mosins.
It appears to be a buff in the early game, but I think it's arguably a (Minor?) nerf in the lategame (Except for AT Fusies, who have simply had their performance improved).
I say it's a minor nerf as less of the Fusies' DPS is localised in their G43 now, which makes model drops a little more impactful. I'm not sure how much it actually changes their performance though, I haven't done the maths here.
Not a joke, sturmpios are garbage. They need rifles, don't care whichever it is, i just want some ranged firepower so im not stuck twiddling my thumbs everytime i want to advance. (Have to escort sturms constnatly)
1 Apr 2021, 23:12 PM
#52
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Their veterancy and scaling should be adjusted. If anything, the MP40 upgrade is the only thing that doesn't need to be adjusted since it gives Volks a niche that they are good at.
But why?
They aren't supposed to be stand alone in late game(this is why obers exist and even became easier to get) and do perfectly fine up until that point.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
2 Apr 2021, 01:35 AM
#53
Posts: 999 | Subs: 1
Also another idea from Widerstreit for the LeIG18 this time around:
Direct fire mode that could make it into a makeshift sort of AT gun giving the medical HQ more practical choice as well as a high angle indirect fire ability.
Maybe something that can be added to Firestorm as part of some sort of package along with the napalm shells?
i remember this used to be in one of the official balance previews a couple of years ago and it worked quite well as a supplementary source of AT (think it did 80 dmg per shot).
not sure why it was dropped in the end but i'd also like to see this return in some way, either doctrinally or even as a stock vet1 ability.
||| ScatterThis! - Tank AI calculation made easy ||| CoH2 Pen Calc - Tank vs tank... who wins against who and by what margin? |||
2 Apr 2021, 02:09 AM
#54
Posts: 449
But why?
They aren't supposed to be stand alone in late game(this is why obers exist and even became easier to get) and do perfectly fine up until that point.
Because Obers can't do everything for them. Volks have to be able to trade efficiently late game which they don't.
2 Apr 2021, 03:48 AM
#55
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
It's only natural that there are some changes that some people are sceptical of or even against. I don't agree with certain changes in this preview either. But anyone can be wrong. That's why we publish these previews, so we can experiment and see what sticks, and gather feedback from a wider audience.
In regards to the Pfussie changes, they're meant to make them more viable in 1v1 because their opening is just too weak there. Without really changing too much in teamgames where you can already get away with using only/mostly Pfussies over Volks. I personally thought that was worth trying out. If it doesn't work out we can just revert it later.
I think that while the idea is good to help 1v1, I think teamgames need help more than trying to make another 2 commanders viable when OKWs commander roster is overall solid. Even if the change is minor, in teamgames this just enables the pfusi blob to come online quicker and in a better position than normal, and people will always pick breakthrough so long as the JT isn't a smoldering pile of kubels. The only thing that probably keeps people from picking breakthrough every game was the uncounterable flares and the fact that overwatch has the best air support in the game and OP LeFHs. Not to mention JLI which are insane in their own right.
I'm not trying to list off every commander from OKW and their OP attributes, but breakthrough was one of those doctrines that was already really good, and doesn't really need any push farther up the balance ladder. Grand offensive after those monster Tiger buffs would also become top tier.
2 Apr 2021, 05:17 AM
#56
Posts: 87
A team weapon Grabbed by Pathfinders sight will be 45? Then Grabbed OKW's Jaeger Light Infantry must be 45 too. Both are Sneakable-High sight Recon Squad.
Frankly JLI is Stronger than Pathfinders. I hope no Sniper-Shooting Bonus to JLI, but should have penaltied sight Range(45) to Team Weapon Grabbed by JLI
Frankly JLI is Stronger than Pathfinders. I hope no Sniper-Shooting Bonus to JLI, but should have penaltied sight Range(45) to Team Weapon Grabbed by JLI
2 Apr 2021, 05:52 AM
#57
Posts: 1289
Because Obers can't do everything for them. Volks have to be able to trade efficiently late game which they don't.
Volks have to draw fire/tie down enemy inf as they where designed to do. Then let obers or whatever elite callin inf is out their deals the damage. Although the only thing that i would change on volks is their self heal to vet 3 and buff recc acc a bit at vet 5.
Accualy beating/bleeding inf isent the job for volks late game. Its obers wich should be made viable for this.
If we buff volks to section rifle level obers become irrelevant and faction play more simaler across the board. Wich imo isent good.
2 Apr 2021, 07:35 AM
#58
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Because Obers can't do everything for them. Volks have to be able to trade efficiently late game which they don't.
They were never meant to trade efficiently late game, hence they don't. Obers or one of multiple different doctrinal infantry were always supposed to be supplement to volks. Only times when volks were self reliant were when they were op.
I think that while the idea is good to help 1v1, I think teamgames need help more than trying to make another 2 commanders viable when OKWs commander roster is overall solid. Even if the change is minor, in teamgames this just enables the pfusi blob to come online quicker and in a better position than normal, and people will always pick breakthrough so long as the JT isn't a smoldering pile of kubels. The only thing that probably keeps people from picking breakthrough every game was the uncounterable flares and the fact that overwatch has the best air support in the game and OP LeFHs. Not to mention JLI which are insane in their own right.
I'm not trying to list off every commander from OKW and their OP attributes, but breakthrough was one of those doctrines that was already really good, and doesn't really need any push farther up the balance ladder. Grand offensive after those monster Tiger buffs would also become top tier.
I'm going to +1 here as well. PFs might not be optimal 1v1 opening, but in 2v2 already they become oppressing very quickly and scale rapidly due to better muni control and less constant resource swapping contrary to 1v1, where it is a common thing that delays their upgrades further.
I don't see the need to buff already very popular commanders just for the sake of 1v1 alone.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
2 Apr 2021, 07:59 AM
#59
Posts: 240
About the change to the Cmd.Tiger specifically, I dont feel like that the -10% scatter buff is necessary. At least if the command ability gets changed the way it does.
The ability is usually hardly worth it because it demands that you have plenty of firepower around your tiger, while giving up a large chunk of your Tiger's firepower.
The ability is usually hardly worth it because it demands that you have plenty of firepower around your tiger, while giving up a large chunk of your Tiger's firepower.
The Ruleset is only a guideline, and are not actually the Rules. This is .org
2 Apr 2021, 08:01 AM
#60
Posts: 857 | Subs: 2
I don't see the need to buff already very popular commanders just for the sake of 1v1 alone.
Agreed. Granted, the Pfussis should not be that weak in the early game and lose against Cons, but I just dont think it's a good strategy to buff the meta commanders and don't do anything about the 2nd tier commanders for this faction.
The mod team just successfully nerfed the meta commanders for Soviets and Wehrmacht and it should continue this for the other factions as well. If Pfussies would be in a weaker commander without JT / TigerI than a buff would be a alot easier to stomach.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
22 | ||
 |
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
318 | ||
 |
|
|
190 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
531 users are online:
531 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM