Elite Mod COH - Download and Changelog

Yes it sucks you had the odds in your advantage, but got behind. But that can happen a lot over the course in the game. Arty barrages, lucky mortars, 5%, dat one crucial zook that misses. (I remember a game Seb vs Aimstrong(?), where Aimstrongs rangers ate pumas for breakfast, but Seb his Zooks missed a low health Puma.)

The last example you gave have already had dicerolls prior to them.
Well what I said would look more like this: a reversing full health StuG could be killed with 37.5% chance by an at gun. This is what more resembles the situation I aim to address.

Was fun reading the old balance thread

Tommy, this is not the first time this has been done. We put 100% CS way back then and even had a tournament held with it. It was dominated by recon + snipers. In the end most people decided they didnt like the 100% despite it sounding good in theory.

In the end we ran out of time and just put it back to where it was but it wasnt where we would have liked to leave it.

As I see it there are a few options.

1) If we went 100% CS, we'd have to nerf recon reveal of snipers. Remove it vs snipers or just 1/2 the time that it reveals the sniper so its nearly impossible to countersnipe that way.

2) Go to the 50/75/100 scale as I suggested years ago in that thread. 50% chance on retreat, 75% chance vs moving sniper, 100% chance vs non moving sniper. Simple and elegant imo.

I think going with either option above, adding the negative zeal is a good idea as well just to encourage people to stop blobbing them. Watching the Drink team go MG Bike triple or quadruple vet 3 snipers through an entire tournament was just sad to watch, and nerfing recon would be dangerous if you dont nerf the blobbing of snipers as well. The Jeep needs to be able to wreck shop if the wehr player is blobbing snipers and with a negative zeal the jeep should easily be able to take out 2 with a good rush.

That said I'd also like to see the Jeep go down to 200MP. 220 is too much imo for a unit that you're typically suiciding.

I think a good compromise is to have an accuracy modifier for sniper revealing himself vs sniper revealed by opponent. That way revealing him with a bike/jeep or recon isn't a guaranteed kill but a well timed return fire countersnipe isn't a dice roll (also 100% accuracy against sniper running around uncloaked). Backteching for a CS and missing your first shot against someone that is in sniper yolo mode is just silly.

Interesting; Received accuracy +100 procent on sniper after every shot for lets say 1.5 seconds?

Is recon run that bad though? Sure it allows for an off map, almost unkillable scout to reveal the battlefield and that sniper, which with 100% CS pretty much guarantees a kill.

The problem is not that recon run is too powerful. Hell, if you manage to force a player into a doctrine just because of a sniper, I'd consider that good. Axis don't have anything remotely comparable though...

This looks like a huge improvement. I really want to give this a try, but I just can't play without my Inverse grid keys. Is there a way to get that mod to work along side this one?

This looks like a huge improvement. I really want to give this a try, but I just can't play without my Inverse grid keys. Is there a way to get that mod to work along side this one?

1) Copy EliteMod and GridKeys mods files as usual
1) Open file EliteMod.module with notepad (file is located in CoH main folder).
2) Replace this entry:
Show Spoiler

With that entry:
Show Spoiler

3. Enjoy

As I see it there are a few options.

1) If we went 100% CS, we'd have to nerf recon reveal of snipers. Remove it vs snipers or just 1/2 the time that it reveals the sniper so its nearly impossible to countersnipe that way.

2) Go to the 50/75/100 scale as I suggested years ago in that thread. 50% chance on retreat, 75% chance vs moving sniper, 100% chance vs non moving sniper. Simple and elegant imo.

I think going with either option above, adding the negative zeal is a good idea as well just to encourage people to stop blobbing them(...)

That said I'd also like to see the Jeep go down to 200MP. 220 is too much imo for a unit that you're typically suiciding.

Both options sound reasonable. If I were to decide I would go with nr 1, making Recon Run not reval snipers (by the way, this idea was implemented in balance mod made by Kiraye, I would suggest looking/discussing/using his ideas; maybe join the forces guys?).

I just realy don't like luck factor included in sniper wars. I think this unit should be hight risk high reward option. I just can't see how missed coutersnipe bring more into tactical dimension. I think high skill player can manage his snipers in a way he will get his investment back. Still, I'm avarage at most at CoH so maybe I'm missing something here (lvl 14 US/13 Wehr max back in the glory of non-Steam CoH).

As for a Jeep, it already got buffed so I don't think it realy needs MP decrease at it's current state.

Thanks!

I think this unit should be high risk high reward option.

Hah that's funny because you take away the risk when building a countersniper.

Is recon run that bad though? Sure it allows for an off map, almost unkillable scout to reveal the battlefield and that sniper, which with 100% CS pretty much guarantees a kill.

With 100% sniper accuracy it's a free pass for USA to spam snipers.

Going BARs when you know the WM player had some fuel is a risk. Nades are a risk. Pursuing a low hp AC into prime Teller spots is a risk. T1 > T4 is a risk.

A 50% CS chance is not fucking risk.

So first it's "US are fucked by 100% CS against Grenspam + 1 Sniper" and now it's "US are OP with 100% CS and Sniper Spam"?

In the end, I feel you (Kolaris and Tommy) and I just have differing opinions; some things you consider skill that I don't, risks that I don't etc.

I can see the reasoning behind your change but I feel it will have some ramifications that will change the game for the worse. It seems you feel the same changes are for the better. But in the end, it's your mod

Would I like for there to be reduced luck with regards to the countersnipes? Yes. But I feel that 50% is the best for 1v1 sniping duels. Anything else and I predict it will change the gameplay. Multiple snipers is the only thing that needs adressing imo, and it has been. If a person loses due to a countersnipe - when there are only 2 snipers in total on the field and one is on each side - then it is my opinion that he, most of the time, has already screwed up.

You say he deserves the countersnipe because it is skilled for him to get in position. I say he is unskilled for having played himself into a corner where he needs that 50% chance to win (he should have teched/capped/used his units differently etc. to make the situation less impactful on his chance to win).

So Aimstrong, pretend SNF Season 5 was vcoh and you were in the finals vs DevM. You are both top of the game and sometimes it is THAT CLOSE that a luck roll can change the game. DevM went double sniper opening as Wehr and you go WSC to counter. You line up the perfect CS and your sniper misses his and his 2nd one in turn snipes yours. OK, so you just sacrificed time, MP, and fuel for the WSC and the one sniper which is now for nothing and most likely you just lost 5K+ in prize winnings. Sounds good?

Was fun reading the old balance thread

Tommy, this is not the first time this has been done. We put 100% CS way back then and even had a tournament held with it. It was dominated by recon + snipers. In the end most people decided they didnt like the 100% despite it sounding good in theory.

In the end we ran out of time and just put it back to where it was but it wasnt where we would have liked to leave it.

As I see it there are a few options.

1) If we went 100% CS, we'd have to nerf recon reveal of snipers. Remove it vs snipers or just 1/2 the time that it reveals the sniper so its nearly impossible to countersnipe that way.

2) Go to the 50/75/100 scale as I suggested years ago in that thread. 50% chance on retreat, 75% chance vs moving sniper, 100% chance vs non moving sniper. Simple and elegant imo.

I'm not sure though; was the tournament dominated by recon because people _assumed_ that recon became significantly more powerful and therefore everyone spammed it, or because it was actually the best choice? I would be interested to see whether given more time it might cause a meta shift- for example, if everyone and their mother is going airborne, then Wher players might start putting down more med bunkers and going defensive, or building lots of pumas to counter AB, etc etc. I think the same effect would have been seen if, say, everyone decided that strafe was amazing. If everyone was strafe spamming in every single game, it wouldn't take long for people to say it was broken either.

So although I don't flat out refute that recon can become more powerful with 100%CS, I'm not totally sold on the idea that for this reason, US players would start going AB 99% of the time. We need a bigger sample size, and a longer test period, and as this is a mod and not a patch (so no time constraints), it seems to perfect time to do such a test.

As for your alternative options, #1 could be viable but then people might equally not bother with AB at all- at the very least, there would probably have to be some other buff to the doctrine (like to AB themselves) to keep it viable.

The second option isn't a good solution imo. It actually makes it more random because now you can still miss your CS attempt, even though the odds suggested that you probably shouldn't. At least with a 50/50 it's just a straight up coin flip. It doesn't really solve anything.

Can you give received accuracy regarding the cover kind and orientation ?

snipers in green cover have 25% chance of getting countered, yello : 50% and red 75% ??

you could give recloak timing regarding cover too.
Green : instant
yello : 1.5
red : 3

you can give sniper accuracy to other units regarding cover too.
green : 100%
yello : 75%
red : 50%

you could give reload time regarding it too.
green : 3sec
yello : 2sec
red : 1sec


all my numbers are screwed but you got the idea.

So Aimstrong, pretend SNF Season 5 was vcoh and you were in the finals vs DevM. You are both top of the game and sometimes it is THAT CLOSE that a luck roll can change the game. DevM went double sniper opening as Wehr and you go WSC to counter. You line up the perfect CS and your sniper misses his and his 2nd one in turn snipes yours. OK, so you just sacrificed time, MP, and fuel for the WSC and the one sniper which is now for nothing and most likely you just lost 5K+ in prize winnings. Sounds good?

It's a painful situation of course, but I feel that it is better than the alternative proposed here. I think the sniper doesn't fit well with the rest of the game and therefore can't be balanced properly, and that the 50% is the "least bad" option. Snipers, like mines, are necessary for game balance, but both of them are a bit out of place which makes them extremely hard to balance properly.

In the situation you mentioned there will be downsides for him to go those two snipers, allowing me to utilize my troops differently according to his unit composition. Negative zeal would help solve the problem, either by helping with my CS chance or by forcing him to spread his snipers, which gives me an advantage in not being countersniped back. Alternatively, with 100% hit, I would shoot his, he would shoot mine and he would still be one sniper ahead. Also, I can't speak for all, but I personally always made a point out of always trying to make sure my opponent wouldn't be able to shoot back after a countersnipe, by waiting till he had fired.

Would this be better? Being guaranteed to kill but also be killed? The US player would lose more due to the cost of the WSC building. At the same time, he should maybe not even rebuild his sniper, seeing as the WM player might rush vehicles for that occasion, forcing the US player to spend resources into AT weaponry after the botched countersnipe attempt. That way the WM player would still have sniper superiority. In the end, it's hard to say what would happen, as its almost impossible to factor map control into theoretical questions like these. A lot of other factors will influence the game at the same time. 50% chance to be hit is a boon as well as a curse.

I feel there would be many factors in the game that would change the dynamic other than the moment of countersnipe itself; lack of cap power, having stored a lot of his army value in two squishy units, the amount of shots being fired on regular infantry, two early snipers giving him a weak early army core etc.

With negative zeal only, in the situation you mentioned, his snipers could be covering the same area from two different positions, be placed at different parts of the map or on top of each other. If they are on different sides, the countersnipe will in effect be a 1v1 sniper situation. If they are on top of each other, I will be favored by having a higher chance to hit him while his 2nd countersniper only has a 50% to hit mine. If he covers the same area from different positions, then he has the advantage by having access to a countersnipe, and rightfully so, due to having invested more resources (2 snipers vs 1) into that aspect of the matchup.

Can you give received accuracy regarding the cover kind and orientation ?

snipers in green cover have 25% chance of getting countered, yello : 50% and red 75% ??

you could give recloak timing regarding cover too.
Green : instant
yello : 1.5
red : 3

you can give sniper accuracy to other units regarding cover too.
green : 100%
yello : 75%
red : 50%

you could give reload time regarding it too.
green : 3sec
yello : 2sec
red : 1sec


all my numbers are screwed but you got the idea.

This would be an almost ideal solution (lets the player calculate the risk of the shot, ie if the enemy sniper is in green cover then he accepts the risk of a miss rather than having that risk taken for him regardless) HOWEVER it can't be done on a unit-to-unit basis. So although you could make the snipers have 100% accuracy against red cover, 75% against yellow cover and 50% against green cover, it would affect ALL targets, including regular infantry, and I'm not sure that's a good fix.

Please divert sniper discussion here: http://www.coh2.org/topic/11802/elite-mod--snipers

I just played vs HelloBananaphone, the cover system was kind of fidly since my units didn't properly take dover behind one of the green cover shacks, the other thing was the jeep damage does seem a bit too much, properly microed he got a 12kill vet 2 jeep, and since volks can't straight off kill them unless the other player is an idiot, it was really hard to kill it until I got fausts.

I just played vs HelloBananaphone

Replay is here. Also there should probably be a thread in here where we can post links to EliteMod replays as they come in, to keep them all in one place for easy access/aggregation.

Another two games v. Minimap here and here (and yes, I know I'm playing super derpy). The second game has a double jeep rush experiment, which on a more open map could potentially cause problems (with a better player than myself at the wheel).

If you are saying that the jeep is better now, it makes me smile. It was only the top players who used jeep and got it to vet2, but that was a rare but beautiful thing. Right now i have a feeling that if the jeep is stronger, it might get used more and i don't have anything against that I still remember, when i started using jeep combined with rifles, i got my micro alot better and also i broke my barrier in becoming a decent player.