Action Items: Balance Feedback Required!

Dear Relic. Can you please give me an answer on this one.

Do you have any plans for nerfing/changing the ISU152 in the near future ?

nerf, nerf nerf,

weak player. always crying for a nerf.... u make game kaputt!!!

Nah, Id keep it stickied till the issues questioned in it are addressed.
Its a great thread with good discussion, and its rare that Relic asks the public board here for feedback.

Great to keep up for referencing.

they unstickied it over two weeks ago on their forum. it went completely to shit after the first 5 pages or so though.

Vet Rifle - I saw the best idea was add a fuel cost to insta vet units. 10 might be a bit too much, if it is a 0 CP call-in. 5 would be more fitting for early game.

Soviet Support - A possible pop-cap increase for maxims would be better to help prevent spam.

Long Range - Weapon damage spread across units is good, and a slight armor buff to PG's would make them more viable. Right now, 4 grens is better than 3 grens and 1 pg.

Long Range LMGs:
Currently, to take the LMG42 as an example:
http://www.coh2-stats.com/small_arms/grenadier_mg42lmg_mp
Rof multi far:
1.25
Rof multi near:
1.0
Duration multi far:
1.5
Duration multi near:
0.75

This means it has a long burst with increased rate of fire when firing at enemies that are far away and it has a shorter burst with normal rate of fire when fighting close enemies.
This is completely counter-intuitive. One would expect the LMG-gunner to do short bursts of only a few bullets when aiming at targets far away, pausing to aim the gun again and compensating the recoil whereas at short range he could do a little more spray&pray.

Long Range LMGs:
Currently, to take the LMG42 as an example:
http://www.coh2-stats.com/small_arms/grenadier_mg42lmg_mp
Rof multi far:
1.25
Rof multi near:
1.0
Duration multi far:
1.5
Duration multi near:
0.75

This means it has a long burst with increased rate of fire when firing at enemies that are far away and it has a shorter burst with normal rate of fire when fighting close enemies.
This is completely counter-intuitive. One would expect the LMG-gunner to do short bursts of only a few bullets when aiming at targets far away, pausing to aim the gun again and compensating the recoil whereas at short range he could do a little more spray&pray.

this is probably due to relic's previous effort to make lmg perform better at long range than at shorter ranges.

I'd like to see upgrades like BAR and LGM's to have more of a downside.
Riflemen with BAR's will still rek at close range, while the upgrade is to get more lethal at long range.

Make upgrades things to really think about, instead of nobraining equipping all your riflemen with BAR's and Zookes. Want to upgrade your rifleman with BAR's? Well they will now suck at close range. Upgrade with bazooka's? Your units will now become more slow and bad against other infantry.

That would make the game interesting because you must think about certain choices. Now upgrades like Bars, zooka's, shrecks on volks and LMG's on grens are pure nobrainers, talking about teamgames.

I'd like to see upgrades like BAR and LGM's to have more of a downside.
Riflemen with BAR's will still rek at close range, while the upgrade is to get more lethal at long range.

Make upgrades things to really think about, instead of nobraining equipping all your riflemen with BAR's and Zookes. Want to upgrade your rifleman with BAR's? Well they will now suck at close range. Upgrade with bazooka's? Your units will now become more slow and bad against other infantry.

That would make the game interesting because you must think about certain choices. Now upgrades like Bars, zooka's, shrecks on volks and LMG's on grens are pure nobrainers, talking about teamgames.

Are u saying that u want to make things more balanced? On balance feedback section? U crazy?
Yeap, back in the day using a BAR for rifles had a huge downside, fast m3 or medium armor. U saw BAR u skipped t3 to go for puma or two, because upgrading to bar cost alot of fuel to upgrade. Coh2 became a blob versus blob.

Weapons teams should be smaller team. You want to promote their strenghts through their gun (wether it be suppression or damage), not having a thousand men on their squad:

Units should fill a unique role and purpose which they are good at. And they also should have defining weaknesses:

Counterplay to MG: Flank around the arc. But when the squad has 6 guys, it's not very easy to flank.

Anyways those are just my theories around gamedesign. And i'm talking about gamedesign purely, not balance.

If they are to change elite rifles. i would like them to actually be ELITE. make then cost 320mp and give then Thomson and bars. and make them unlock at 2-cp like guards and shocks.

Either that. or keep them the same.

I think soviet team weapons should get nurfed. But not a team size decrease Keep the 6men RELIC

how about 320MP and give them an M1919 and a Zook (@ 2CP)

I'd like to see upgrades like BAR and LGM's to have more of a downside.
Riflemen with BAR's will still rek at close range, while the upgrade is to get more lethal at long range.

Make upgrades things to really think about, instead of nobraining equipping all your riflemen with BAR's and Zookes. Want to upgrade your rifleman with BAR's? Well they will now suck at close range. Upgrade with bazooka's? Your units will now become more slow and bad against other infantry.

That would make the game interesting because you must think about certain choices. Now upgrades like Bars, zooka's, shrecks on volks and LMG's on grens are pure nobrainers, talking about teamgames.

+1!

An option which gives you a strength should set you back somewhere else.

It would lead to more complex tech choices and counters and counter-counters.

Ahhh man I miss vCoH D:

Hi.
about soviet:
rebalance teams. all infantry weekers. we need 4 (for elite)- 5(for con) man squad. get back shooktroops coast and armor. guar need more health. maxim/zis3/mortat - 4 man (germans sniper nerf speed shooting if u do it). soviet enginer need more coast (get bak again) and more helth with some updates (ppsh41 or pps).
peanls so bad that i didnt see it in big games. why svt-40 profile so week that g43 ? its wrong. if germans have g43 they kill soviet sniper easly. distanse wrong. soviet need gun bunkers or some else. we need infantry balance with new faction or soviett cant play without maxim spam.

if soviet havent mass strong weapons (isu-152 with IS-2) - lose game. if u up front armor. nerf side armor and rear. If u up panters front armor - get up health or armor for t34-85.
t34/76 need base upgrade for t34-85 (for ammo or fuel) it be nice in late game.
t70/su-76 - not in game. so many coast.
molotov need more speed drop
m42 gun need some love. If it doctrial - replace more powefull gun = antiaircraft 37 mm soviet gun or zis 2. and made m42 in t2 ot t-1
DSHK so nerf. its need more helth.
partizan coast so many. need buuf health or low coast


OKW:
ober so strong - nerf coast and dps.
jagtiger need nerf shoot distance.

germans werchmaht need 5 man squad (if soviet have 5 mans). pak-40 need nerf walking speed. thay move fast. its not infantry.

all this about big maps playing. if u cant do that - all times big maps not be balanced.

And what about designations for tanks? http://wio.ru/tank/oz/oz-en.htm

With the best regards

If they are to change elite rifles. i would like them to actually be ELITE. make then cost 320mp and give then Thomson and bars. and make them unlock at 2-cp like guards and shocks.

Either that. or keep them the same.

how about 320MP and give them an M1919 and a Zook (@ 2CP)

Yeah sure, let's make US pay 40 MP for stuff that costs more than 100 MUN. Or/and introduce a hidden 6th ability AKA "weapon, that was previously only available to another commander".

And BTW, flamers and M1919 for riflemen in one doc?! That won't happen in this doc (and probably in no other)

I'd like to see upgrades like BAR and LGM's to have more of a downside.
Riflemen with BAR's will still rek at close range, while the upgrade is to get more lethal at long range.

Make upgrades things to really think about, instead of nobraining equipping all your riflemen with BAR's and Zookes. Want to upgrade your rifleman with BAR's? Well they will now suck at close range. Upgrade with bazooka's? Your units will now become more slow and bad against other infantry.

That would make the game interesting because you must think about certain choices. Now upgrades like Bars, zooka's, shrecks on volks and LMG's on grens are pure nobrainers, talking about teamgames.

i don't think BAR and Bazookas are no brainer. if it were like gren lmg, it'll be no brainer but having 125mp and 25fu EDITED: 15fu requirement to first unlock the ability to buy BARs or Bazookas really makes me think: faster tech or more initiative right now. it's not like rifles are as bad as conscript that you have to unlock bar or bazookas to make them effective.

i don't think BAR and Bazookas are no brainer. if it were like gren lmg, it'll be no brainer but having 125mp and 25fu requirement to first unlock the ability to buy BARs or Bazookas really makes me think: faster tech or more initiative right now. it's not like rifles are as bad as conscript that you have to unlock bar or bazookas to make them effective.

It's actually 150/15 to unlock them. In 1v1 I find myself unlocking BARs about 10-12 minutes in, once my first Sherman is in production.

If any unit needs to have a reduced squad size its USF riflemen. A major problem with the game as a whole is that the basic infantry units are too varied in performance early game. Without including weapon upgrades, Grenadiers and Riflemen (both well trained) should perform the same and Volksgrenadier and Conscipts should perform the same with their unit abilities being the only difference between them. Soviet support squads are very durable but going from 6 man teams straight to 4 may be too far, 5 man squads may be part of the answer. A major problem is maxim spam being so effective early game. A good way to prevent this would be to increase the maxims build time. That way it would make maxim spam less effective early game without the unit suffering from reduced performance later on.

Reducing Sov MG/Mortar crews to 4man, and removing the accuracy received penalty would result in similar small arms durability to other support teams, I think, as well as vs latergame AoE ordnance.

RNade however presents a problem there, because though it could be nerfed to coincide with 4man Sov support teams, it would then also be far less effective vs other large infantry units. Perhaps thats not so bad though, considering RNades inherent range advantage vs Molotovs.

Both are actually sort of primarily setup team/garrison counters anyways, more than they are base infantry counters.

Infact the more I think of it, the more I think a significant RNade nerf would be alright, if Sov Support teams where infact 4man instead of 6.

Weird that, but somehow a Sov support crew size nerf actually opens an opportunity to nerf RNade substantially too with much less counterindicators against it. Know what I mean? Sort of shifts the paradigm for what RNades and Molotovs actually really should be back into the role of anti-setup team and garrison, which if you think about it, is what they actually really are.

I think its undisputed, that TTK on setup teams should be more or less identical by baseline small arms AND explosive AoE, across all factions.
I think if Sov MG/Mortars are reduced to 4man, and the accuracy received penatly is removed, it should roughly equate to still surviving as long vs small arms as they do now as a 6man (considering the better DPS of non-Sov baseline infantry, the small arms of which are designed vs 6man units asymetrically).

This also means they are as vulnerable as other 4man setup teams to later game explosive aoe.

Furthermore, Sov support teams being 6man has had two other rather odd effects:
1) It makes Merge and combined arms with Cons lackluster. At 6man, they frankly dont need to be merged much, whereas at 4man Merge becomes pretty serious as a means to keep Supoirt Teams at fighting strength.
2) Sov Support Teams, as 6man, are unduly apt as weapon scavengers. Whereas the Support Teams od other factions are decimated to 1 model in the parent unit when capturing, and required to be at full strength to even attempt it withthout losing the parent, Sov Support Teams can much more readily capture weapons.

It could be argued that the twonoddities above are flavorful and characteristic, but they also are concrete advantages unique to Sov that need to be considered as "value added".

TLDR:
-Reduce to 4man
-Remove accuracy received penalty
-Nerf RNade

Result:
-Sov MG/Mortars survive as roughly equivalent to other Support Teams, vs both small arms AND explosive AoE.
-Merge becomes more prominent.
-Sov Weapon team scavenger potential made equivalent to other Support teams.
-RNade re-aligned back to primary role as anti-setup/garrison counter, rather than generalised long range grenade.
(RNade has always been problematic.
1) It synchs too well with Grens inherent long range advantage, especially with LMG added, vs ALL soft targets.
2) Because of its range, its difficult to predict, as it doesnt telegraph itself by a unit moving close as with other grenades, as well as being able to delpoy from out of enemy LoS.
3) Its been frankly too powerful in terms of damage, becsuse its been required to operate with effect vs 6man Support Teams, and therefore carrying that same power, with all the above advantages, vs combat infantry too.
4) Its garrison destruction has also been too high, again, because its designed against 6man units. Molotov is an absolute garrison denier, but justified due to range constraints. RNade however is overperforming in comparison, because of the necessities of operating vs a 6man setup team, and the inherent advantages of range and lack oftelegraphing as above.)

PS: Ive deliberately left out ATGs. I think thats a discussion for another time, and because ATGs are fundamentally different in their roles. Though they also strictly speaking are Support Teams, they regularly face armor in order to fulfill their roles, and armor carries MGs and Mainguns which sre a whole different ballgame compared to infantry small arms combat.

The only things I would like to see in the next patch is the allies not needing to rely so heavily on their doctrines, and an improvement to soviet infantry.

I've played both German and soviets (significantly less German). I know people are constantly complaining about the soviets maxim and have experienced its mobility from both sides. But to speak quite frankly to all those that want it nerfed; until the soviets get infantry that can compete with German infantry, the maxim should not be changed in any way.

tiger ace need fuel coast
get back il-2 sturmovik damage before patching. its so uslles for new OKW blobs. need rebalanced this for all commanders.

nerf, nerf nerf,

weak player. always crying for a nerf.... u make game kaputt!!!

hahah +1