Login

russian armor

Infantry combat

8 Jun 2021, 16:55 PM
#41
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


Well... in terms of suppression been given to small indirect fire, it was already tested and extremely disliked by the whole community and deems as one of the biggest mistakes done by Relic balance team.

It was applied to both the ISG and the Pack Howie and the game revolve around spamming 2/3 of them and just seeing how they would suppress and pinned everything from distance.


Imo it was realisation problem not the mechanic problem. Starting with the fact that ISG and Pack howis were OP (with Pack Howi being just as OP untill previous patch), it all comes to the stat ajustement. We could have had suppresion value, AOE of suppresion ajusted + on top of that auto-fire model ajusted.

AOE supperion radius could have been set to 0.1, meaning that only direct hit in the model face would give suppresion or it could be set to 1, meaning that even if AOE touches the model by 1 inch squad instanly get suppresion. Not to mention that I think its possible to set such value, that it will give a suppresion only if 2 or more models are hit at the same time.

There are ways, all what is needed - determination to make it properly and relic sadly didnt have it back it the day and balance team just those whole different aproach to achieve balance.
8 Jun 2021, 19:11 PM
#42
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Suppression on BARRAGES would be OK. But on 120 range auto fire units and in the case of the ISG, being defended by a free 37mm flak was oppressive as hell.... On BARRAGE it would be localized and actually require player input and also have to counter play of moving....
8 Jun 2021, 19:14 PM
#43
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jun 2021, 16:42 PMJilet


However, both ISG and Pack Howie was notoriously OP with their autofire model/squad wiping capabilities compared to mortars on top of having the suppression. Less damage on mortars with added suppression would be 10/10 better even this day since mortars can still get lucky wipes today yet being mildly effective against blobs.


ISG was never wipe friendly and Pack Howie was only OP (compared to the average performance of mortars) once it manage to get vet.

Mortars with suppression means you are no longer using infantry to fight from min 7 onwards.



Imo it was realisation problem not the mechanic problem. Starting with the fact that ISG and Pack howis were OP (with Pack Howi being just as OP untill previous patch), it all comes to the stat ajustement. We could have had suppresion value, AOE of suppresion ajusted + on top of that auto-fire model ajusted.

AOE supperion radius could have been set to 0.1, meaning that only direct hit in the model face would give suppresion or it could be set to 1, meaning that even if AOE touches the model by 1 inch squad instanly get suppresion. Not to mention that I think its possible to set such value, that it will give a suppresion only if 2 or more models are hit at the same time.

There are ways, all what is needed - determination to make it properly and relic sadly didnt have it back it the day and balance team just those whole different aproach to achieve balance.


You'll have a problem with how suppression as a mechanic work, rather than the delivery platform been mortar type of units. See how mine suppression is implemented atm and how it can't achieve that desired result.

Incremental values unfortunately seems to only work based on number of models and not number of squads nearby. Which is stupid how 2 squads of 7 man conscripts can be close to be equivalent to 4 Obers squads.


Every time someone mentions that something that is not already in the game is possible to implement, i want to see anyone mod it into the game.
I wouldn't mind seeing mortars with their AoE radius doubled but maintaining their current damage model and the extended range damage been something as basic as 5, and ONLY IF they hit 3 squads (not based on number of models) it should provide light suppression.
8 Jun 2021, 20:26 PM
#44
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


Every time someone mentions that something that is not already in the game is possible to implement, i want to see anyone mod it into the game.

I mean sure, if I did have time and desire to do so. I've tried to make a concept of sandbags which makes them take cheap damage from small arms, meaning after every fire fight, if not repaired, sandbag will be damaged and eventually be destoyed. But I was unable to, because I have no idea how to work in mod tools, but I know for the fact that it is possible to do this.
For instance, US fighting possition takes damage from small arms, while Ost bunker dont. They are almost identical, I've tried changing and matching all the values and still was unable to make bunker take small arms damage.
Is it possible? Yes it is. Do I want to spend hell of a lot of time to understand how to do it. Not really. Especially if I only need it for a forum discussion and not my mod.

Not to mention you can look at famos all units mod, where there are a lot of things implemented that are not in the base game. And as a lastest example, there is a thread of a guy who managed to make unused models work, and let me remind you, they were in the files since the release and deemed unusable.

As I was saying all what is needed is determination and desire to make concept work. vCoH and CoH2 arent that different value vise, if concept was working in vCoH it can be make into CoH2, with proper stat ajustments to represent differences in gameplay.
8 Jun 2021, 20:42 PM
#45
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

...


I think you don't understand what i'm implying. I could care less about un-implemented units, i'm talking about a new different mechanic to be created from nothing.

You are describing a mechanic which not only obliterates "blobs" but single squads. The same problem we had with things like demos or old damage profile of mortars.
For it to work, someone needs to figure out a different way to apply it.

if concept was working in vCoH it can be make into CoH2, with proper stat ajustments to represent differences in gameplay.


We don't have the luxury to "hope" for something to work or be created by "SOMEONE". Which is why i said: unless someone provides already a implementable concept in the form of a mod, the only thing we can do is change stats.

Because even when we had mods, most of the time they are done in a "hack" way that is not applicable into the base game (see USF new redesign base).
8 Jun 2021, 21:28 PM
#46
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2021, 15:29 PMVipper

Exactly.

the lethality of units is being increased while more powerful unit become available earlier resulting in continues power creep.


Blame the balance team for that. Also this is the consequence of having the COH 2 system based on around accuracy/dodging instead of armor like COH 1. You had consistent damage output in COH 1 where as in COH 2 sometimes you do no damage and other times the stars align and things get melted instantly before you can react.












Because even when we had mods, most of the time they are done in a "hack" way that is not applicable into the base game (see USF new redesign base).



Relic has too much pride. Even if the entire community wants something like the USF redesign they rather keep the game bad than admit they messed up and fix their mistakes even at the cost of sales.
8 Jun 2021, 22:46 PM
#47
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



Blame the balance team for that. Also this is the consequence of having the COH 2 system based on around accuracy/dodging instead of armor like COH 1. You had consistent damage output in COH 1 where as in COH 2 sometimes you do no damage and other times the stars align and things get melted instantly before you can react.


Outside of the fact that we still don't really know exactly how suppression behaves, Armor and RA behaves equally for infantry. Shocktroops don't behave differently from other infantry because little to no amount small arm fire has pen higher than 1.
8 Jun 2021, 23:42 PM
#48
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1379

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2021, 17:50 PMVipper

On the contrary TTK has everything to do with timing.

An LMG-42 or BAR available from at minute 0 would completely changes small arm fights and TTK.

It like saying that TTK for 5 minute Sherman facing 222 and minute 15 Sherman facing PzIV is the same...


You're listing matchups between two different units and using that as an example that TTK has been decreased. No. That's an example of timings being made quicker. Just because a Sherman comes out faster does not mean that it performs better against a 222 than if it had come out later. That's not changing the TTK, that's changing the timing. Your argument is that timing is too much faster, not that TTK has been decreased.
8 Jun 2021, 23:45 PM
#49
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279


9 Jun 2021, 01:33 AM
#50
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

The current TTK vs infantry is actually ok, especially behind cover engagements.

But the hmg are too vulnerable while unpacking and repositioning.

it is a condurum, this make vickers and mg34/43, feel asymmetric to 50c and maxim and dshk.

but the first 3 are setup good first or retreat.

the vehicles on the other hand, TTK is clearly lowered than coh1 and makes them more reaction based arcadey. the target size and armor are mostly useless on tanks now. that is down to decreasing the RNG for 1v1 competition. I dont like that imo.

9 Jun 2021, 08:14 AM
#51
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



You're listing matchups between two different units and using that as an example that TTK has been decreased. No. That's an example of timings being made quicker. Just because a Sherman comes out faster does not mean that it performs better against a 222 than if it had come out later. That's not changing the TTK, that's changing the timing. Your argument is that timing is too much faster, not that TTK has been decreased.

You where probably not around when Relic made Shock and Guards CP 1 and completely broke infatry combat since these powerful unit walked over ostheer infatry that did not have weapon upgrades or vet.

If you are talking about TTK as theoretical value that it is actually quite pointless in the debate as a stat.
9 Jun 2021, 11:59 AM
#52
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


I think you don't understand what i'm implying. I could care less about un-implemented units, i'm talking about a new different mechanic to be created from nothing.

You are describing a mechanic which not only obliterates "blobs" but single squads. The same problem we had with things like demos or old damage profile of mortars.
For it to work, someone needs to figure out a different way to apply it.

We are just arguing. You think it wont work based on the past experiences, I say it will work if done right. Both points are valid. There is no reason to continue this one, because its just speculation anyway, we wont see untill its done.


We don't have the luxury to "hope" for something to work or be created by "SOMEONE". Which is why i said: unless someone provides already a implementable concept in the form of a mod, the only thing we can do is change stats.
Because even when we had mods, most of the time they are done in a "hack" way that is not applicable into the base game (see USF new redesign base).


While it somewhat true, its unfair to put it this way.

All calls are done by dev team. We dont know how and based on what they do their changes. While some of them are oblivious ajustments of OP\UP units, we also have another examples.

For instance. Arty spam in team games. Some ppl are preaching that the game is balanced around 1v1, its fine. In 1v1 you arent gonna build more then 1 B4\LeFH\ML20 or SPGs at least in reasonable 1v1 game. Why not limit them to 1 then, solving the problem of arty spam in teamgames? In my eyes its a pefectly resonable changes, which allow you to not only solve the problem of arty spam in teamgames, but also buff and ajust thouse units without breaking any gamemmode. But dev team dont think its nessesery, they find it to be fine. Same with Friendly Fire.

Or we have Raid Section. Someone in balance team liked it so much, that he\they tried to push them into the game during 2 pathes now, spending time ajusting them during multiple builds and we still dont know if they will be bat shit OP when patch goes live. At least they moved them away from the top meta commander, which was buffed by adding mortar to it at the same time. I'm sure it was genuine mistake putting them in it, for sure.

Or we can speak about how it was almost a month between last beta build and live build. With 0 feedback, 0 information and on live build we have patch with changes that were never discussed or even brought to disccussion. At this point I am pretty sure dev team just have to make a beta builds to test changes. They dont nessesery want to, they have to. This time because of the bug, last patch iteration hasnt been released and dev team was fine with it as it seems, didnt even post the pre-patch changes before failed release. And these were final ones, I'm not sure that when the patch rolls out anything would be changed.

I remember there was a screenshot, of someone showing the poll in discord regarding one of the changes. And this poll collected more votes against the change. But it was still implemented with a respond "we take polls into a considiration, but they are not a decisive factor".

And it was like this for ages. No wonder no-one (aside from ppl who do it for themselfs) will do a working concept, just for the sake of it proving that it can be implemented. No wonder best we can have is forum discussions, which btw rarely even have a disscussions in them, since the fanboy\rant threads tend to be much more popular and collect 100+ messages, while constructive threads do not.

Imo, from personal feeling, dev team do tend to make better changes then Relic back in the days. Their changes are for sure closer to the reality, then Relic ones, but overall aproach is still the same. And if anything goes wrong its "scope, not a full time job, relic forbits". Maybe its not like this and I'm completly wrong, but it sure looks like it.
9 Jun 2021, 12:54 PM
#53
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1379

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2021, 08:14 AMVipper

You where probably not around when Relic made Shock and Guards CP 1 and completely broke infatry combat since these powerful unit walked over ostheer infatry that did not have weapon upgrades or vet.

If you are talking about TTK as theoretical value that it is actually quite pointless in the debate as a stat.


Look, you can't just redefine terms like TTK and then imply that I'm the one who doesn't understand. Even with your example, you're once again complaining about timing, not TTK. If those units had their DPS buffed, *then* it would be a TTK change. And by the way, you're the one treating TTK as a "theoretical value", applying it to two different unit matchups (Sherman VS. 222 compared to Sherman VS. Pz4) instead of a single unit matchup like it should be.

TTK is a measure of how long ONE UNIT takes to kill ANOTHER UNIT. It is that simple. Changing the TTK of one unit means buffing/ nerfing that unit.

The Sherman always has had a better matchup against the 222 VS a panzer 4. It did not have a TTK buff in your example, only a timing buff.
9 Jun 2021, 15:21 PM
#55
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Look, you can't just redefine terms like TTK and then imply that I'm the one who doesn't understand. Even with your example, you're once again complaining about timing, not TTK. If those units had their DPS buffed, *then* it would be a TTK change. And by the way, you're the one treating TTK as a "theoretical value", applying it to two different unit matchups (Sherman VS. 222 compared to Sherman VS. Pz4) instead of a single unit matchup like it should be.

TTK is a measure of how long ONE UNIT takes to kill ANOTHER UNIT. It is that simple. Changing the TTK of one unit means buffing/ nerfing that unit.

The Sherman always has had a better matchup against the 222 VS a panzer 4. It did not have a TTK buff in your example, only a timing buff.

And my point is that Ober will kill an conscript faster than Vg thus reducing the time of an infatry fight.

Rest is not really relevant.
9 Jun 2021, 16:16 PM
#56
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1379

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2021, 15:21 PMVipper

And my point is that Ober will kill an conscript faster than Vg thus reducing the time of an infatry fight.

Rest is not really relevant.


Sure. That said, don't use the term TTK when you're really talking about timing and people won't have to correct you.
9 Jun 2021, 16:17 PM
#57
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Sure. That said, don't use the term TTK when you're really talking about timing and people won't have to correct you.

I did not bring TTK sander did. Point is there is power creep in the game and it as simple as that.
9 Jun 2021, 18:04 PM
#58
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Snip


1- It's not unfair to put it that way, because there's a difference between a "re-skin" of a unit or trying to use, rework stats and implement unused abilities/units which are already in the game versus trying to invent a new mechanic or inherently fix something which hasn't been done in 8 years.
Things get done when at least some proof of concept and execution is already in the game.

Howis


2- In YOUR eyes it's fair. Probable on many other eyes and maybe Relic (we can only speculate here) limiting units is not necessary or desirable, specially for niche units. You are not solving artillery spam on teamgames by just limiting Howitzers to 1. Rocket artillery exist. Static Howitzers can also be easily decrewed and bypass any 1 time limit.

3- Raid section see response 1

Recent last call changes


4- Which was a bad call in their part, as it looks like a band aid at most.

5- In regards to that voting discord pic, this is my opinion.
If anything, that shows that team game "casual" perspective can take precedent over mostly 1v1/2v2 opinions.

Imo, from personal feeling, dev team do tend to make better changes then Relic back in the days. Their changes are for sure closer to the reality, then Relic ones, but overall aproach is still the same. And if anything goes wrong its "scope, not a full time job, relic forbits". Maybe its not like this and I'm completly wrong, but it sure looks like it.


I feel like people on this community throughout the last years have been privileged in how much their input can be heard and implement to the point people feel way too much entitled and arrogant as far as when things don't go their way or feel like they aren't heard or responded to. At points, it feels like they don't play any other PvP game which requires fine tuning balance at all. Good luck having this kind of interactions at all. Or even an explanation as to why X or Y was done at all (at least my xp from other games which big enough that bureaucracy is a thing)

We are entitled to our own opinions, enjoyment or disappointment in regarding to the patch or game. Anything else is extra.

No wonder best we can have is forum discussions, which btw rarely even have a disscussions in them, since the fanboy\rant threads tend to be much more popular and collect 100+ messages, while constructive threads do not.


It's simple. The admins/owner philosophy is that anyone should had a voice therefore the balance section was nicknamed the "Latrine". You can't give everyone a voice and expect to have a constructive thread when there's so much gap in game knowledge between users.
Which in turn lead to the creation of either private steam groups or in this days Discord. Which, yes, this is counter productive to been transparent but from a pragmatic point of view more effective. And it's not like it's such a selective "exclusive" group. The invitation hand has been extended throughout the years to those who have help or willing to help, open minded and don't have a crystal ego that will make them mald at their first clash of opinions.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

424 users are online: 424 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49158
Welcome our newest member, arianaeburnett
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM