OH hulldown / Vet1 KV-1 hulldown

Pls check who I quoted and replied to because it was not you.

Fair, but he didn't state that KV-1 "needed a buff" either.

This is just not economic use of your force, considering that this digging in might need to wait another minute for the enemy to push until it pays off. Or it might not happen at all.

Again I don't disagree with your statements in a 1v1 setting. But for teamgames, VP camping is king, and you don't have to wait long for Allied tanks to try to attack if you set up by a VP or fuel point. Being able to spank Allied tanks at Allied TD range is pretty sexy. I played a round or two with hulldown, to put my money where my mouth is, and in a campy, laney map, the allies didn't have much options to deal with my panther.

I got outnumbered 2:1 by T34:85s a few times, but I was able to break out and back up pretty quickly, panzer tac if it was really close. Other than that, it was just a world of pain for the allies, constantly taking damage at a range they couldn't retaliate at. And don't even get me started on the Elephant. A few times I set it up and watched as Fireflies got bullied away from my friend's lane. Of course that's only going to be one commander though.

I suppose that the price of the ability is that one of them is in a kinda mediocre commander (though still useful in 4v4 for the artillery-destroying offmap) but for the other one, I think the commander is just really good period.

Fair, but he didn't state that KV-1 "needed a buff" either.

I am not sure why we are focusing on what he did say or did not say. The line of arguing is simply not constructive.

It is my opinion that changing

+15% reload speed
-20% received damage

for

+25% weapon range
-25% received damage

would be a buff to the KV-1 (it seems that general_gawain also thinks it would be a buff but I can not be sure, he can clarify his own opinion on matter if he wishes.)

Asking for buff on KV-1 (balance change) for "quality of live and transparency" reason simply does not make sense to me. If the issue is "quality of live and transparency" changing the name of one of the abilities is a better/safer solution.

I am not sure why we are focusing on what he did say or did not say.

It is my opinion that changing

+15% reload speed
-20% received damage

for

+25% weapon range
-25% received damage

would be a buff to the KV-1 (it seems that general_gawain also thinks it would be a buff also but I am sure he can clarify his own opinion on matter.)

Asking for buff on KV-1 (balance change) for "quality of live and transparency" reason simply does not make sense to me. If the issue is "quality of live and transparency" changing the name of one of the abilities is a better/safer solution.

To be clear: I never said soviet hulldown should be buffed to Ostheer hulldown level. I only said I want to have them the same. So transforming Ostheer one in soviet one would do the trick too. You were the one who first assumed that I meant it that way at post #9.

To be clear: I never said soviet hulldown should be buffed to Ostheer hulldown level. I only said I want to have them the same. So transforming Ostheer one in soviet one would do the trick too. You were the one who first assumed that I meant it that way at post #9.

So why don't you simply say what are actually suggesting?

In you opinion should both abilities provide +15% reload speed -20% received damage or that abilities should provide +25% weapon range -25% received damage.

Either way you are suggesting balance change (either a buff to KV-1 or nerf to Ostheer hulldown) and you main argument is "quality of live and transparency" and that simply does not make sense. A simple name change of the abilities would solve the issue without upsetting balance.

So why don't you simply say what are actually suggesting?

In you opinion should both abilities provide +15% reload speed -20% received damage or that abilities should provide +25% weapon range -25% received damage.

Either way you are suggesting balance change (either a buff to KV-1 or nerf to Ostheer hulldown) and you main argument is "quality of live and transparency" and that simply does not make sense. A simple name change of the abilities would solve the issue without upsetting balance.

So lets break it down to balance if that is your argument:

I do think KV-1 in general is more impactful on 1vs1, because it can hit the field quite a bit before a Panther shows up. If your opponent went for a PZIV you are safe a long time before a Panther shows up. In this situation I do think KV-1 is way better off with the faster RoF. Backed up by double ZIS it doesn't need 50 range, faster ROF will do better at killing infantry and fighting advancing medium tanks.
But I do think more range instead of RoF is better at 3vs3/4vs4, there you will quickly see the first Panther after you got a KV-1 and the extra 10 range help more than some faster RoF in that situation.

I would give all tanks that are hulled down something about a fixed +10 range instead of +20% (partly fixes the elephant problem) and a -20% damage modification.

On the bright side of this change KV-1 would be better in multiplayer and worse in 1vs1. If I look at current winrates in 1vs1 and 3vs3/4vs4 that is excactly how it should be.

Having trouble destroying immobile objects?

that imobile object had more armor, HP and 60 range, can get out huldown mode without pios. good luck trade shot with your alies TD. Indirect fire can hit 1 or 2 hit but it can redeloy to better location too

So lets break it down to balance if that is your argument:

I do think KV-1 in general is more impactful on 1vs1, because it can hit the field quite a bit before a Panther shows up. If your opponent went for a PZIV you are safe a long time before a Panther shows up. In this situation I do think KV-1 is way better off with the faster RoF. Backed up by double ZIS it doesn't need 50 range, faster ROF will do better at killing infantry and fighting advancing medium tanks.
But I do think more range instead of RoF is better at 3vs3/4vs4, there you will quickly see the first Panther after you got a KV-1 and the extra 10 range help more than some faster RoF in that situation.

I would give all tanks that are hulled down something about a fixed +10 range instead of +20% (partly fixes the elephant problem) and a -20% damage modification.

On the bright side of this change KV-1 would be better in multiplayer and worse in 1vs1. If I look at current winrates in 1vs1 and 3vs3/4vs4 that is excactly how it should be.

So are suggesting that KV-1 should trade 10 more range for relaod. Glad that we got that out of the way.

It seem that you are also suggesting to nerf the Ostheer ability.

In this case since this now balance issue imo the two issue are separate and should not linked is any way.

Imo the extra range for KV-1 would be a straight buff buff for both 1vs1 and 4vs4 and a buff the unit that simply does not need.

As for Ostheer hull down I would rather have it rename to "defensive stance" redesign it so that it provides different bonuses to different units. For instance in the case of Stugg it could simply provide camo/extra sight/rotation speed buff.

Again I don't disagree with your statements in a 1v1 setting. But for teamgames, VP camping is king, and you don't have to wait long for Allied tanks to try to attack if you set up by a VP or fuel point. Being able to spank Allied tanks at Allied TD range is pretty sexy. I played a round or two with hulldown, to put my money where my mouth is, and in a campy, laney map, the allies didn't have much options to deal with my panther.

I got outnumbered 2:1 by T34:85s a few times, but I was able to break out and back up pretty quickly, panzer tac if it was really close. Other than that, it was just a world of pain for the allies, constantly taking damage at a range they couldn't retaliate at. And don't even get me started on the Elephant. A few times I set it up and watched as Fireflies got bullied away from my friend's lane. Of course that's only going to be one commander though.

I suppose that the price of the ability is that one of them is in a kinda mediocre commander (though still useful in 4v4 for the artillery-destroying offmap) but for the other one, I think the commander is just really good period.

The issue is that we're basically talking almost exclusively about the Panther here, and on laney maps like Angermunde the Elephant, too. The ability does little in 1v1 in general since mobility is worth much more in this mode. Even in larger modes, it is rather useless for mediums and other tanks (although I could imagine the Brummbar on certain maps, but have not tried to abuse this myself).

The ability can be very strong on some maps and useless on others. One question though: If you'd want to steamline them to the same ability, what would your solution be? The OST one, the KV1 one, or something different?

Again, talking only about the Panther and assuming it did not get any range benefit: I think the hulldown were pretty trash if you make your expensive tank a sitting duck that is being outranged by basically all Allied TD. Why immobilize your high end AT specialist Panther if all it achieves is taking damage without retaliating, albeit taking the damage at a slower rate. This would force you to get an ATG close by, which already binds a quarter of your army, all being AT specialists, to this single position. Which in turn is vulnerable to infantry pushes.

The KV1 situation is different. The KV1 is shit at AT anyway. Hulling down a KV1 and supporting it by an ATG already gives a more or less "complete" package.

So are suggesting that KV-1 should trade 10 more range for relaod. Glad that we got that out of the way.

I'm suggesting one possible outcome because you repeatingly asked for it. My first post only was about making the abilities the same, which way ever. There would be many other options too.

It seem that you are also suggesting to nerf the Ostheer ability.

Regarding damage reduction: If you have a problem with reducing incoming damage from 25% to 20%, go with 25%. I really don't care about that. KV-1 would need 9 penetrating hits either way so there is no real change.

Regarding range: Panther and StuG go from 62,5 to 60 range (still enough), all other lower ranged tanks tanks stay the same. Its only a real nerf for Elephant, but it would still have 80 range and could kill 7pdr emplacement with attacking ground (which it shouldn't do). Are you okay with an Elephant with 87,5 range? You would cry out pretty loudly if you could hull down the ISU-152 that way. If I remember correctly 80 range was already too much. So again, i'm asking you directly: Do you think a Super Heavy TD with 87,5 range should exist in this game?

Imo the extra range for KV-1 would be a straight buff buff for both 1vs1 and 4vs4 and a buff the unit that simply does not need.

I explained with examples already why I do think RoF is better in 1vs1 and it is a nerf for 1vs1. In 4vs4 it would be a needed buff if I look at allied winratio in that game mode.

The KV1 situation is different. The KV1 is shit at AT anyway. Hulling down a KV1 and supporting it by an ATG already gives a more or less "complete" package.

I do think you only get this complete package at 1vs1 with a KV-1 and double Zis. Very hard to dislodge if there is a point that is worth defending. Higher RoF will make sure that KV-1 will kill or chase off infantry and deal damage to advancing mediums.

In 4vs4 this is different. The high count of Panthers in this game mode makes hull down for KV-1 obsolete. You will always be picked off by Panthers which vet themselves at your hulled down KV-1. It is similar to a hulled down Panther without range bonus vs allied TDs. The high number of indirect firing units in this game mode leads to more vulnerable AT-Guns in addition. 50 range would be a lot more useful here for KV-1 to deal some damage versus Panthers and support other AT weaponary that wasn't decrewed by indirect fire.

I'm suggesting one possible outcome because you repeatingly asked for it. My first post only was about making the abilities the same, which way ever. There would be many other options too.


Regarding damage reduction: If you have a problem with reducing incoming damage from 25% to 20%, go with 25%. I really don't care about that. KV-1 would need 9 penetrating hits either way so there is no real change.

Regarding range: Panther and StuG go from 62,5 to 60 range (still enough), all other lower ranged tanks tanks stay the same. Its only a real nerf for Elephant, but it would still have 80 range and could kill 7pdr emplacement with attacking ground (which it shouldn't do). Are you okay with an Elephant with 87,5 range? You would cry out pretty loudly if you could hull down the ISU-152 that way. If I remember correctly 80 range was already too much. So again, i'm asking you directly: Do you think a Super Heavy TD with 87,5 range should exist in this game?

This is the first time you have asked this question so I am not sure why you claim that you are asking again.

I have clearly posted that imo the Ostheer version should provide different bonuses to different units and that included the Elephant.

On the other hand I do have to point out (since you have not) that casemate hull-down units have a very small area they can fire and thus are only viable in certain lane maps.

If in your opinion the main problem comes from the Elephant maybe you should be suggesting that is should not be available in the same commander. Although I do have to point out that Fortified doctrine seem to be less popular than Jaeger armor doctrine.

I also have to point that asking to change the bonus to +10 range would result to buffing the hull down Brumbar.

PLS avoid imagining my reaction if ISU-152 could hull down, it is non constructive line of arguing. PLS try to stick to what I have actually posted.

I explained with examples already why I do think RoF is better in 1vs1 and it is a nerf for 1vs1. In 4vs4 it would be a needed buff if I look at allied winratio in that game mode.

And I simply not agree with your examples. I personally would rather have a KV-1 with 50 range instead of 15% reload bonus regardless of mode.

I don't really play 4v4 anymore but the Elefant being able to hulldown is dumb. Really high armor, high health + health reduction on top of range bonus is asking for rage quits. Just make the ability not apply to elefant and solves a lot. Panther being able to do it makes the ability worth while despite it being a pain to deal with.

I do think you only get this complete package at 1vs1 with a KV-1 and double Zis. Very hard to dislodge if there is a point that is worth defending. Higher RoF will make sure that KV-1 will kill or chase off infantry and deal damage to advancing mediums.

In 4vs4 this is different. The high count of Panthers in this game mode makes hull down for KV-1 obsolete. You will always be picked off by Panthers which vet themselves at your hulled down KV-1. It is similar to a hulled down Panther without range bonus vs allied TDs. The high number of indirect firing units in this game mode leads to more vulnerable AT-Guns in addition.

I agree to this. The point I was trying to make was the effect of immobilizing your tank between Panther (assuming it did not get a range bonus) and the KV1:
An immobilized Panther is being outranged by Allied TDs and ATGs. ATGs can be countered by indirect or retreating from the position, but there is nothing really stopping an Allied TD from pot shotting a hulled down 50 range Panther. Therefore you need to park a PaK next to your Panther, which already ties up 25 population while you are still vulnerable to infantry pushes.
A hulled down KV-1 is currently also being outranged by enemy ATGs and Axis TDs. As above, if the enemy comes with ATGs, you either retreat or have to use indirect fire. Against TDs, you need to use a ZiS yourself. In contrast to the hulled down Panther, the ZiS will fully counter Axis TDs, you "only" use up 21 population and the KV1 gives some protection vs infantry pushes.

I am not saying the KV1+ZiS counter is stronger in all situations, but it needs less preparation and effort to get something out of it.

50 range would be a lot more useful here for KV-1 to deal some damage versus Panthers and support other AT weaponary that wasn't decrewed by indirect fire.

The KV1 has a far penetration of 80. It would not be very useful to let it shoot at a Panther (30% pen chance and probably 70-80% hit chance including scatter hits), probably not even a StuG (57% and 65-75%). It would help more against infantry, that is true. But so does the reload bonus, while keeping the combo a bit more vulnerable for longer ranged units.

An immobilized Panther is being outranged by Allied TDs and ATGs. ATGs can be countered by indirect or retreating from the position, but there is nothing really stopping an Allied TD from pot shotting a hulled down 50 range Panther.

Ostheer hull down gives a firing range bonus, giving the Panther 62.5 range, allowing it to fire back at Allied TDs at their max range.

Which can be useful, especially because with the added durability it can out-DPM up to two Allied TDs with a bit of luck, but it's not that practical because a stationary Panther usually just attracts a bunch of ATGs or artillery and is then forced to move.

Panther hull down can come in handy sometimes, in scenarios like having to defend a victory point to stall out the last few VPs, but most of the time mobility is more valuable than being stationary with a bunch of bonuses. It's definitely not a no brainer ability, which is good.

Ostheer hull down gives a firing range bonus, giving the Panther 62.5 range, allowing it to fire back at Allied TDs at their max range.

Which can be useful, especially because with the added durability it can out-DPM up to two Allied TDs with a bit of luck, but it's not that practical because a stationary Panther usually just attracts a bunch of ATGs or artillery and is then forced to move.

Panther hull down can come in handy sometimes, in scenarios like having to defend a victory point to stall out the last few VPs, but most of the time mobility is more valuable than being stationary with a bunch of bonuses. It's definitely not a no brainer ability, which is good.

The post you quoted was under the assumption that both hull down abilities are made the same, since this was the suggestion of this thread.
The first part described making both like the KV1 ability, therefore removing the range buff for Ostheer with the example of the Panther.
Second part shortly touches on giving the KV1 the Ostheer hull down and thereby increasing its range.

As I stated earlier, I am fine with both abilities being different. Giving them different names would help signalizing to more casual players that those abilities are not the same, because both name and visuals suggest they are.

Ostheer hull down gives a firing range bonus, giving the Panther 62.5 range, allowing it to fire back at Allied TDs at their max range.

Which can be useful, especially because with the added durability it can out-DPM up to two Allied TDs with a bit of luck, but it's not that practical because a stationary Panther usually just attracts a bunch of ATGs or artillery and is then forced to move.

Panther hull down can come in handy sometimes, in scenarios like having to defend a victory point to stall out the last few VPs, but most of the time mobility is more valuable than being stationary with a bunch of bonuses. It's definitely not a no brainer ability, which is good.

On teamgame maps, "attracting" a bunch of ATGs usually attracts a bunch of werfers and stukas right back at you. It's definetely not a no brainer ability but there should have been some sort of delay when going OUT OF hulldown (a couple of seconds). The biggest downside is maybe forgetting that your tank is in hulldown and then getting it killed when you think that you moved it. On all hulldowns (allied and axis) there should have been a delay for going out of hulldown. Hulldown bonuses should be about reinforcing weaknesses (range on axis and armour or something on allies) but you shouldn't be able to immediately exit hulldown

On teamgame maps, "attracting" a bunch of ATGs usually attracts a bunch of werfers and stukas right back at you. It's definetely not a no brainer ability but there should have been some sort of delay when going OUT OF hulldown (a couple of seconds). The biggest downside is maybe forgetting that your tank is in hulldown and then getting it killed when you think that you moved it. On all hulldowns (allied and axis) there should have been a delay for going out of hulldown. Hulldown bonuses should be about reinforcing weaknesses (range on axis and armour or something on allies) but you shouldn't be able to immediately exit hulldown

i second this. there should be a delay when exiting hulldowns as trade-off. certainly not overly long as that of the kv-2's alt fire mode, but at least 0.5 - 1 sec would imho be justified

I also think it is sometimes a bit odd how all those sand backs just fall off and everything is back to normal, but that's more a visual thing.

Gameplay wise, I think a tiny nerf after getting out of hull down would be beneficial. It is just strange that this tank can instantly pounce on you once your tank got hit once or twice. However, I don't like those delays very much that prohibit your unit from movement. Maybe those can be implemented in different ways, but for example the USF ambulance has a small window of time where it won't accept orders. I have often forgotten to move it because I ordered the move command too quickly after ending the AoE heal ability.
My suggestion for hull down would be an accerelation nerf for the first 1-3 seconds. This would also simulate that these tanks have been dug in below ground level (not sure about the visuals in CoH2 apart from sandbags, but at least in reality this was the case) so they have to move slightly uphill when getting out of their position.

I also think it is sometimes a bit odd how all those sand backs just fall off and everything is back to normal, but that's more a visual thing.

Gameplay wise, I think a tiny nerf after getting out of hull down would be beneficial. It is just strange that this tank can instantly pounce on you once your tank got hit once or twice. However, I don't like those delays very much that prohibit your unit from movement. Maybe those can be implemented in different ways, but for example the USF ambulance has a small window of time where it won't accept orders. I have often forgotten to move it because I ordered the move command too quickly after ending the AoE heal ability.
My suggestion for hull down would be an accerelation nerf for the first 1-3 seconds. This would also simulate that these tanks have been dug in below ground level (not sure about the visuals in CoH2 apart from sandbags, but at least in reality this was the case) so they have to move slightly uphill when getting out of their position.

That is a very tidy and neat solution. Reduce acceleration for a couple of seconds. You can still issue orders to it, so you won't be f***** by the latency of a multiplayer match (eg, pressing retreat on one unit and disembark on a tank and then having the tank crew disembark and retreat).
Something that should def. be included if there is every a small hotfix/patch in the future.