Login

russian armor

The More I Play Soviets the More I Like It

31 Mar 2014, 14:21 PM
#21
avatar of buckers

Posts: 230

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Mar 2014, 14:13 PMBudwise

Solution? Buff con rifles a bit making them win more handily short range and maybe bring the PPSH damage up a little bit for medium range. I'd say also make PPSH a global upgrade but we've beaten that horse quite dead i think.


relic doesn't listen to anyone, i love your suggestions tho

also, budwise, how are you going to go against the grain if the factions are balanced?
31 Mar 2014, 14:40 PM
#22
avatar of Budwise
Admin Red  Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2075 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Mar 2014, 14:21 PMbuckers


relic doesn't listen to anyone, i love your suggestions tho

also, budwise, how are you going to go against the grain if the factions are balanced?


Its more of a philosophy to not use whatever the OP canned strat of the month is and do something more creative and fun instead.
31 Mar 2014, 14:52 PM
#23
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

You're a good man budwise.
31 Mar 2014, 14:58 PM
#24
avatar of buckers

Posts: 230

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Mar 2014, 14:52 PMNapalm
You're a good man budwise.


he always had some of my favourite vCOH replays.

ily budwise
31 Mar 2014, 15:24 PM
#25
avatar of 5trategos

Posts: 449

One thing that always bothered me was the philosophy of all weapons having higher DPS at close range (See table below). I think it would be interesting, from a gameplay perspective at least, if some weapons had more of a bell curve DPS.

31 Mar 2014, 15:29 PM
#26
avatar of coffee111

Posts: 49

The Soviets are like if PE and US crashed into each other. They're highly mobile with little static defense, but while they have MG's and Tanks, they're not as solid as Ostheer's.

Half my problems with Soviet are that the faction design is severely flawed, imo. They have no vehicular mid-game, so they must hold off with AT Grenades and ZiS guns until they can get Tanks.

And thanks to their faction design, you simply can not give them said vehicles, because their buildings are literally separated by early-game and late-game, there is no middle tier to which you could add a BA-64 or something.


There is a recurring suggested fix for the Soviets that would greatly help with their mid game problems. It is to swap the SU76 to T3 and the T34 to T4, greatly reduce the fuel costs for T3 and increase the fuel costs of T4 (might also need a slight increase to T1 and T2 to slow down T3, without overpricing T4 tho). This way, T3 comes a little earlier, Soviets have a halftrack to reinforce from a little sooner, the T70 and SU75 come earlier to deal with the light and medium vehicles of the germans, and give them some breakthrough capabilities vs turtling germans a little earlier as well. While the T4 then has a synergy between the T34 and SU85. It's the perfect fix, which after some balancing, will provide the soviets with a healthy mid to late game and also improve their combined arms tactics.

EDIT: such a change would also allow for better call-in oriented tactics, like stalling at T3 for your call in tanks; or for a more infantry oriented commander, skip T3 and stall for T4 vehicles. The key here is that both T3 and T4 would provide a mix of units which compliment one another at different stages of the game, instead of the current all "offense" of T3 or all "defense" of T4.

Here is a Reddit thread detailing the suggested changes:
http://www.reddit.com/r/CompanyOfHeroes/comments/21jmvg/so_regardless_of_the_early_game_which_has_reach_a/
31 Mar 2014, 15:56 PM
#27
avatar of S73v0

Posts: 522

I agree with Budwise and coffee111. But like was pointed out, these changes were suggested more than 6 months ago... I wouldn't be surprised if nothing changed. It sucks that such simple fixes haven't been implemented by now.
31 Mar 2014, 16:21 PM
#28
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

One thing that always bothered me was the philosophy of all weapons having higher DPS at close range (See table below). I think it would be interesting, from a gameplay perspective at least, if some weapons had more of a bell curve DPS.



Dang. The LMG42 and MP44 are amazing at pretty much every engagement range except for greater than 35.
31 Mar 2014, 16:25 PM
#29
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

But the 59.2 DPS of the Pgrens thats not Pwnsauce.....thats what a model dead every 1.35 seconds if at full health o.O

64.8 for STs BUT ONLY at Close. Wonder who is usually gonna win that matchup..................................dot dot dot
31 Mar 2014, 16:56 PM
#30
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2



There is a recurring suggested fix for the Soviets that would greatly help with their mid game problems. It is to swap the SU76 to T3 and the T34 to T4, greatly reduce the fuel costs for T3 and increase the fuel costs of T4 (might also need a slight increase to T1 and T2 to slow down T3, without overpricing T4 tho). This way, T3 comes a little earlier, Soviets have a halftrack to reinforce from a little sooner, the T70 and SU75 come earlier to deal with the light and medium vehicles of the germans, and give them some breakthrough capabilities vs turtling germans a little earlier as well. While the T4 then has a synergy between the T34 and SU85. It's the perfect fix, which after some balancing, will provide the soviets with a healthy mid to late game and also improve their combined arms tactics.

EDIT: such a change would also allow for better call-in oriented tactics, like stalling at T3 for your call in tanks; or for a more infantry oriented commander, skip T3 and stall for T4 vehicles. The key here is that both T3 and T4 would provide a mix of units which compliment one another at different stages of the game, instead of the current all "offense" of T3 or all "defense" of T4.

Here is a Reddit thread detailing the suggested changes:
http://www.reddit.com/r/CompanyOfHeroes/comments/21jmvg/so_regardless_of_the_early_game_which_has_reach_a/


that would be actually really interesting; making t3 mid game tier and t4 late game tier. i think that would be more interesting than right now where you are just waiting for 50 more fuel while pumping out two-three more units to feel the gap as soviet.
31 Mar 2014, 17:11 PM
#31
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

But the 59.2 DPS of the Pgrens thats not Pwnsauce.....thats what a model dead every 1.35 seconds if at full health o.O

64.8 for STs BUT ONLY at Close. Wonder who is usually gonna win that matchup..................................dot dot dot


yea lets completely ignore the extra amor and entities that shocks have. it makes the germans sound better that way.
31 Mar 2014, 17:14 PM
#32
avatar of Aurgelwulf

Posts: 184

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Mar 2014, 17:11 PMwooof


yea lets completely ignore the extra amor and entities that shocks have. it makes the germans sound better that way.


And the smoke grenades that let them get in close as well.
31 Mar 2014, 17:34 PM
#33
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1



And the smoke grenades that let them get in close as well.


Smoke grenades dont work against a half decent opponent, he will just reposition his stuff. Which means that your Shocks didnt gain anything and are still molested by LMG Grens at mid to long range.
31 Mar 2014, 17:44 PM
#34
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1



There is a recurring suggested fix for the Soviets that would greatly help with their mid game problems. It is to swap the SU76 to T3 and the T34 to T4, greatly reduce the fuel costs for T3 and increase the fuel costs of T4 (might also need a slight increase to T1 and T2 to slow down T3, without overpricing T4 tho). This way, T3 comes a little earlier, Soviets have a halftrack to reinforce from a little sooner, the T70 and SU75 come earlier to deal with the light and medium vehicles of the germans, and give them some breakthrough capabilities vs turtling germans a little earlier as well. While the T4 then has a synergy between the T34 and SU85. It's the perfect fix, which after some balancing, will provide the soviets with a healthy mid to late game and also improve their combined arms tactics.

EDIT: such a change would also allow for better call-in oriented tactics, like stalling at T3 for your call in tanks; or for a more infantry oriented commander, skip T3 and stall for T4 vehicles. The key here is that both T3 and T4 would provide a mix of units which compliment one another at different stages of the game, instead of the current all "offense" of T3 or all "defense" of T4.

Here is a Reddit thread detailing the suggested changes:
http://www.reddit.com/r/CompanyOfHeroes/comments/21jmvg/so_regardless_of_the_early_game_which_has_reach_a/


I really don't like this idea, it has been posted many times before. Giving Soviets T3 and T4 is too much. Also the synergy you talk about is just ram + lots of range/damage. That combo is extremely lethal, too lethal to given to any player who makes it to the late game.

If you want to do this Panther would need to have the same range as the SU85.
31 Mar 2014, 18:17 PM
#35
avatar of sluzbenik

Posts: 879

You know what would be cool? Global SVT upgrade for conscripts, and let penals upgrade to bazookas. Not my idea but BananainPajamas is too lazy to post so I'm just going to mention I like it.



31 Mar 2014, 18:20 PM
#36
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

You know what would be cool? Global SVT upgrade for conscripts, and let penals upgrade to bazookas. Not my idea but BananainPajamas is too lazy to post so I'm just going to mention I like it.





Very cool idea.

And @Woof and Argul yes armor and smoke. .25 armor is huge. Much huger than the benefit of excellent medium range DPS of the Pgrens not to mention their cheaper cost, non doctrine and upgrade ability to Shreks.

Edit: Lets also not forget smoke isnt free last time i checked. Makes sense a more expensive close range ONLY unit should need this to close in on a much more flexible close and medium range unit. They also both have nades lets not forget that as well. Perhaps a nade from the STs should also be taken into account. After all they could close in and lose several models and come out on top by spending even more muni.
31 Mar 2014, 18:22 PM
#37
avatar of Z3r07
Donator 11

Posts: 1006

Not my idea but BananainPajamas is too lazy to post so I'm just going to mention I like it.


that's because he's always in Pajamas
31 Mar 2014, 18:25 PM
#38
avatar of Aurgelwulf

Posts: 184



Very cool idea.

And @Woof and Argul yes armor and smoke. .25 armor is huge. Much huger than the benefit of excellent medium range DPS of the Pgrens not to mention their cheaper cost, non doctrine and upgrade ability to Shreks.


What we're saying is the strongest anti-infantry unit in the game remains the strongest anti-infantry unit in the game. Take this pent up rage and funnel it into balance problems that actually exist instead of making problems up and then defending them with terminal intensity.
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

338 users are online: 338 guests
0 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48943
Welcome our newest member, marinova
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM