How to further improve coh2

Can we remove engine criticals from front hits by a tank on a tank other than when they are at 5%?

@Cruzz
Not sure how 2 posts from different relic staff is "flocking" but the issues with molotov's is a fair point. He is complaining that they are automatic upgrades and hard to balance. He said nothing about micro issues.

@Cruzz
Not sure how 2 posts from different relic staff is "flocking" but the issues with molotov's is a fair point. He is complaining that they are automatic upgrades and hard to balance. He said nothing about micro issues.

99% of threads here get 0 people from Relic commenting on them. Getting 2 comments from them is pretty damn irregular.

its just a I win button for any inf engagement.

cons throw these and retreat doing more damage and making a mg team reteat even though the cons over extended and "lost" the fight

upgrade that costs next to nothing which almost always wins the fight for them

He didn't say anything about micro, but what he actually said sure sounds like the complaining of someone who never tries to get out of the way of one. Also they're definitely not an automatic upgrade if you're not playing conscript heavy, it's just that not conspamming in this patch is often an exercise in frustration so most people don't even try.

The devs are usually more likely to respond to threads about more general problems. They often won't respond to threads about spacific units because they don't want to give any information. In this perticular case I believe they responded because the variable pen values which has been discussed and commented on by devs in other threads and less because of the molotov changes he proposed.

That and they can get a lot of good suggestions by incouraging this thread.

People are crazy, there are so many issues with balance and you PEOPLE want the molos nerfed.It is the one(of the two, the other is AT granades)thing that makes them worth building (besides the doctrinal PPSHes) I dont know what to say.
Oh, yes, please cut down two of the man because 6 are to many and they take to much space on the map (redicules point, i know, exactly like the nerfing the molos).
Ok, i got another one!
Please nerf the Rifle granade. The one who throws it is like a quaterback in NFL. He can trow it like 300 yards. So please nerf them.


Some people dont get it.
Every faction has something better then the other one. Example: Russians have Sqadwipe-units and Germans have Tanks made out of "Superman" (They "fly-Blitzkrieg" very fast and are impenetradble).
You want anotherone? Russians have the molos which can deny buldings and stuff and the Germans have riflegranades which can be thrown from a distance and get 4 man of the sqad.
So i rest my case.

I will go throw up now because i read to much crap in the Forums.

People are crazy, there are so many issues with balance and you PEOPLE want the molos nerfed.It is the one(of the two, the other is AT granades)thing that makes them worth building (besides the doctrinal PPSHes) I dont know what to say.
Oh, yes, please cut down two of the man because 6 are to many and they take to much space on the map (redicules point, i know, exactly like the nerfing the molos).
Ok, i got another one!
Please nerf the Rifle granade. The one who throws it is like a quaterback in NFL. He can trow it like 300 yards. So please nerf them.
Now i am going to throw up because i read o much crap in the Forum.

Bluiach.........

You do realise that a rifle grenade is meant to go further than a hand thrown molotov right? Hell I'm even suprised by the relative short range they have.

- One more thing: The 1v1/2v2 maps are optimized for MP, but relic should consider revising maps for 3v3/4v4 MP.

Well, Relic also knows what the statistics are, hopefully they look at the skill levels of players and their win/loss and maybe even what causes damage in games the most. I certainly can't play Ostheer for crap now. Every time I lose I ask my opponent what they think and everyone basically says the same thing - it's a ton harder now, and no one really has good solutions for the squad gibbing and inability to stay in an engagement for more than 10 seconds given the possibility of squad losses on retreat.

I don't really have an issue with Molotovs, but I not only play a lot but watch a ton of replays, and honestly, they are a significant advantage for conscripts every time they throw one because of the cover denial.

And even if you dodge, the AOE is so big you still lose a guy. To really avoid one you must dance around constantly or pause long enough to bait one, which isn't great for your squad's accuracy. I think you can successfully dodge if you see the fist being made while the hand is behind the conscript's back, any later than that and you probably take some damage from it. Even if you do see it it's not like your squad will jump to that location, the last guy usually is still moving just as the molotov hits.

Anyway, I wish they had more expensive normal nades, I think dodging Molotovs is just an annoying micro-task that makes Ostheer much less fun to play.

I'd just like pgrens to shine a little more than they do. Grens and lmgs or g43s may be good the whole game, but pgrens being so expensive to reinforce, have a rougher time of it, even by mid-game. I don't think there's a problem with how they interact with shock troops, but against upgraded cons, their value is questionable.

so, given that we got that massive upfront manpower boost a couple patches ago, I would still advocate that rather than changing unit stats, cons and grens just get increased in cost by 20 manpower a piece. It will slightly slow their build time, make them slightly more expensive than more niche units, and make some other openings slightly more practical---including(though its probably not enough to make this viable) the good old fashioned ostheer t2 start(sans assault grens).

OMG. As a osteer-player i can easy move my mgs if I see a molotovcoming. As a soviet-player its really hard do dodge a riflegrende (which unlocks without any cost) with my supportunits. And to hear that relic is looking in to this despite their lack of time. OMG. This seems to be a nerfmolotovstread more than anything else. What was wrong with this tread in the first place?
http://www.coh2.org/topic/14437/finally-some-balance-what-to-do-now

You do realise that a rifle grenade is meant to go further than a hand thrown molotov right? Hell I'm even suprised by the relative short range they have.

Yes, of course!I don't complain about them, that's my point. It's meant to do that, and molos meant to do what they do. To complain about them so much... i don't get it.

dear lord do not nerf molotovs what is wrong with you people.

dear lord do not nerf molotovs what is wrong with you people.

But they kill immortal ubermensch! Everyone knows ubermensch can not be killed but molotovs do it anyway! Its obvious they need to be nerfed! They should spray fire on soviets and healing poweder on ubermensch only then they can truly be balanced!

To the OP, I think you have presented some great suggestions. We are looking into a number of these items already, the only challenge is time and resources. Our goal over the next 6 months is to really step up the tactical and strategic depth of the game.

Keep the great feedback coming.

So I have to wait 6 months again! ;( Pity!

None of this is about nerfing molotov's. This is about making the game more fair. What we all want is a better game. Molotov's as they stand are very wonky. Sometimes squad wipe because of crits, sometimes literally, not one member dies! Also cons hurrahing into mg and throwing a molotov is very stupid.

Rifle nades are another piece of the pie. I don't like how inconsistent they are. I don't like how they have such a large range. I think the stick grenade with short timer and shorter range would be better. I would like to see that as well.

Instead of derailing the conversation when you see something you don't like, why not address the issue, then add your own piece. I am sure we all have something we would like to see addressed. Having many voices (right and wrong) in a well thought out thread is useful for Relic. Just using a thread to bash players, who are probably wrong from a balance perspective, is foolish and prevents good ideas from being heard by diluting the pool with crap.

Does anyone know if rifle shots cause crits? Or is the damage applied per model and continuous?

The true issue is that there is no set methodology for balancing nor proactive communication. Folks of these forums like to nit-pick specific issues without looking at the whole picture. What lessons were learned from the Elite Troops and Soviet Industry? What is Relic's new approach (if any?)?

It's a complicated issue and it really comes down to defining clear roles for each commander and unit. A great example of when things go wrong is the Soviet's Defensive tactics. The commander was clearly a early game dominance commander with no real late game abilities. Pre-nerfs it did this role very well, but after no less than 5 unit adjustments the commander has become redundant. On the flip side, when done correctly, you end up with commanders like the German's Air Superiority. Clearly defined and balanced for its role.

This community noted awhile back that unit over lap was a serious problem yet didn't associate it with a commanders role within the game. Technically, commander role overlap is more serious of a problem than unit over lap. Design commanders with clear roles in mind and associate the units/abilities the commander gets with those roles.

Coles notes: Define commander and units roles within the game. Balance based on role and ignore stupidity which results in a 120MM mortar or DHSK.

Do not know if will be put in the post but I think it would be essential as a ladder system had, for example, Age of empires on Zone.com.

That is, each player starts with one particular punctuation and depending on win or lose, up or down your punctuation.

So is the level of each and increases the incentive to play.

Do not know if will be put in the post but I think it would be essential as a ladder system had, for example, Age of empires on Zone.com.

That is, each player starts with one particular punctuation and depending on win or lose, up or down your punctuation.

So is the level of each and increases the incentive to play.

Its called ELO and we have it in game already, this is how ranks are determined.

The only thing we don't know(or rather we can't tell) if the ELO difference between 2 players of 2 ranks next to each other is 1 or 100(you get the idea?).

Let's see if I can explain xD.

When you are looking for appears only starting player name and not their level then you do not know what type of opponent you'll face. We must find another way to see the level of players when the game is random.

I don't really understand why the Relic staffers are flocking here or praising his suggestions. Not only is his grasp of how the game works really bad judging by how many factual errors his post has, he's effectively just complaining about how he can't micro out of molotovs and thinks cons should be nerfed.

Perhaps you missed the point? Just cos you can avoid something doesnt always mean it should be part of the game - any game iv seen that does not include molatov spam is much more interesting IMO.Im not asking to nerf anying just proposing some interesting changes that I think improve the game. Whats the point of cons even having rifles if 90% of the time they inflict casualties with molatov?
Any way Its just a suggestion and a few people agree.. you dont have to