Action Items: Balance Feedback Required!
Posts: 1571
I noted that they are 20 MP and 3 pop cap more expensive now.
I find the strength of this ability its spammability rather than veterancy. The rifles can constantly be spammed to provide reinforcements and maintain field presence.
6 man weapon team: don't change: Maybe increase a bit in cost.
Long range: Nope, no complaints here.
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
maxim has more range than mg42?
No. I have no idea what that guy is talking about.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
1- I would rather see them being added to the main building (T0). They can be priced as normal Riflemen but would take more time to field.
Or passive increase of XP gained.
Or leave them as they are now.
2- Support weapons: 1v1 and 2v2 i´ve never had a problem against maxims (mortars and zis guns are fine).
I´ve been voicing this for a while: make the crew reman and aim faster after getting the gunner killed. If we can have a manual option to reload this would be heaven.
If you want to make it less assymetrical, give maxims 5men, spread them out just like MG42, give them also their retreat teleportation, increase a bit width range and increase setup time.
3-
While just reducing long range damage somewhat is an option, I do think it could be interesting if the LMG damage was made to spread damage on the entire enemy squad instead of focused on a single model. Right now a big part of the power of LMGs is that they will very quickly snipe off members from the enemy squad, forcing shorter range troops to just run away because having half a squad in melee doesn't really help them. Spread the damage out and you'll instead have a much larger though lower health squad coming into melee instead, which could actually do something. It would also make MGs a bit more efficient against LMG blobbing, because right now the gunner just gets instakilled in a row because all the fire is focused on him due to him being the most forward member of the MG squad.
Posts: 183
Hey Guys,
Design Team is currently reviewing a few key balance complaints in the game and we would like your feedback
Disclaimer: Everything you read below is work in progress and not guaranteed to go into the game.
Elite Rifleman:
At the moment this ability provides no real downfall to its usage except for its long recharge time. We implemented slight cost increase as well as starting it on a cool down. However we are currently exploring possible redesigns of the ability such as increasing the rate in which rifleman will accumulate Veterancy.
Soviet Weapon Team:
This has been a hot topic for a while but we are experimenting with 4 men Soviet Weapon Teams. Issue being they are too durable. If a 4 men team loses 2 men, chances of losing that whole squad would go up exponentially. When a 6 men squad loses 2 men the chances of losing that squad still remain fairly low. If overall performances needs to be compensated for reduced durability that is something we could also explore.
Long Range Combat:
With our change to lethality in a previous update to make cover more important. A side effect of that change was that it made long range weapons extremely effective, especially LMGs. The combination of cover, lethality, and long range has resulted in medium to short range units being overall less effective. In most situation, units that require closer range will lose too many men on approach resulting in a significant drop in offensive performance.
Feedback would be greatly appreciated and thank you!
If u reduce the Soviet Weapon teams u can reverse some Changes. For example: Mortar can again fire faster.
And Soviet AT Gun needs to fire faster
Posts: 25
On Elite Rifles: I dont think its that big of an issue if you remove the possible outcomes in which the rifle is instantly vet 2 or very near to it. Vet 1 Rifles are pretty much alright in the first engagement and really nice as a fallback if you loose many units later. If you pair this with a slight fuel cost (5-10) and the "gain Vet faster" Idea it would be nice. Another Option I can think of is to put them at 360-400 MP but giving them a random Weapon upon spawn. But this would probably break early engagements horribly (though high cost would mean the enemy has more squads).
On Weapon Teams: If you take two men from the soviet weapon squads performance should be buffed immensly (should be obvious why...). But I'd rather see them have their price increased (the Maxim that is, I think all other are fair). Price increase would lead to Maxims being less spammable and it might add nice gameplay, due to both players having to somewhat play around/with (interact with) them, whereas now you just put some maxims somewhere and go drink a tea [slightly exagerrated]).
On Long Range Combat: I think nerfing LMG's long range dps is not an optimal solution since it inevitably will lead to close/mid Range Weapons being somewhat OP (they can close the gap easily --> dead long ranger). I think it would be nice if the long range weapon could still be the way theyre now, but the squad will be slowed while moving with them. Vice versa it would be nice if we could increase the damage dealt while on the move by Close range weapons. If both suggested thing get put in, it would lead to (atleast I think so) the player with lmgs needing to play cautious (getting surprised --> retreat) while close range squads would have a realistic chance since they'd do some damage while closing in on the target.
TLDR: My suggestions:
Elite Rifles -- Either gain vet faster and not starting vet 2 with fuel cost or hefty price increase and starting with a random weapon.
Wepon Teams -- Make them more expensive.
Long Range -- LMG's come with movement slow while close range weapons gain increased damage on the move.
Posts: 1705
Elite rifles -
I can think of 3 ways-
One is mentioned passive xp requirement reduced.
Other way i can think of is increase the reinforce cost..that way if u spam them it will hit u a tad more in the MP belt.say 35.U get free vet 2 right away,but reinforcing will be costlier.
Or add a small fuel cost-meaning u can spam them early..but it will delay ur truck.So u can't push them off with these vet 2 rifles then gg with truck immediately.
Soviet weapon teams -
I've been a core hater of the maxim for quite some time..but reducing number i believe is a bad idea,unless soviet penals get a buff.Main problem with the maxim is not the unit in itself which has a small arc and can really target one unit at once.Maxim is not a problem in 1 vs 1 except against OKW.Its a nightmare in teamgames because ur mate can complement u.So some people saying remove its ability to cap is not an optimal solution a sthat won't fix the team game problem.I believe better option is increase its build time by quite a bit.So u can't quickly build 3-4 and lock down.U will need to build conscripts for support to maintain early optimal field presence.This imo is best solution,keeps unit intact..but reduces spammability of this unit.
On mg 42 and maxim issue ,yes mg 42 loses to maxim head on,and being a german player i absolutely hate it when ur mg in cover loses to the damn thing.However i must say mg 42 has become very useful with the introduction of the americans.Its basically the redeeming unit for ostheer earlygame vs usa if supported.Main problem is its uselessness in buildings,in which all should have same turning rate,since arc disadvanatge of maxim is removed.Many team games are on urban maps and here maxims are much complained about because they just spam and stick them in buildings and germans can't effectively respond in kind due to hapless performance in buildings.
Zis and mortar are fine.
LMG - Its obvious they are overperforming,and this from a regular LMG blob user.I liked the earlier suggestion that their accuracy on the move be halved.
Other solution is reduce the long range DPS a bit.However the impact this will have on ostheer which only really has 1 type of unit is unforeseen.Also if obers also get their DPS reduced they should get a slight price decrease.Rifles can get 2 so will be less affected and also have 1 more member.
Posts: 2561
Posts: 7
No. I have no idea what that guy is talking about.
Are you kidding me? The Maxim has a longer range then the MG42. You can either see this in action by playing the game or watching countless replays of this happening. Go into a game and set them and and test it for yourself. The maxim will range the MG42 and fire on it while the MG42 will just sit there being pummelled with the crew just outside the edge of its arc.
The MG42 currently is just not as feared as it needs to be. That unit should be scary as fuck. Just listen to it fire! Currently, use maybe 1 MG42 early game, that has to have gren support and maybe a second later, hidden in a flank to hopefully catch any small flanking enemies off guard. Thats about the use of the MG42. If the MG42 was equally as good as the Maxim, why don't you ever ever ever see an MG42 spam opening from the Wehrmacht? Because it will lose to the maxim every time.
We could even set up a game just to shut the naysayers up. Russians Vs Wehrmacht, and only allowed to build MG's. Then you'll see hard and fast that the maxim is OP when it comes to MG vs MG.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Are you kidding me? The Maxim has a longer range then the MG42. You can either see this in action by playing the game or watching countless replays of this happening. Go into a game and set them and and test it for yourself. The maxim will range the MG42 and fire on it while the MG42 will just sit there being pummelled with the crew just outside the edge of its arc.
MG42 have a range of 45.
Maxim have a range of 45.
MG34 have a range of 45.
.50cal have a range of 45.
DSHK have a range of 45.
Only kubel have 35.
If you want to talk about units balance at least KNOW the basic units stats.
Posts: 85
Are you kidding me? The Maxim has a longer range then the MG42. You can either see this in action by playing the game or watching countless replays of this happening. Go into a game and set them and and test it for yourself. The maxim will range the MG42 and fire on it while the MG42 will just sit there being pummelled with the crew just outside the edge of its arc.
I think they have the same range but the maxim can stroll into the MG42 arc, set up and suppress the MG42 before it gets suppressed itself.
Posts: 220
Red Army weapon teams (Maxim): No just no. It's unnecessary to reduce the squads from 6 to 4, unless Relic plans to redesign the whole Red Army faction around 4 men weapon teams. Maxims are not over performing, as many have said it's a L2P issue. It's only a hot-topic due to german fanboys failing to adapt and counter it and no the maxim range is the same as the MG42 and has a much narrower arc of fire on top of that.
It's quite manageable in 1v1 as maxim spam leaves an opponent open for a hard counter; and in 2v2 and up, just ignore the maxim spammer, cap the side of the map where he is not present. Then later get a stuka zu fuss or LE18 ISG and punish him, there problem solved. Only fools go bang their heads over & over against a maxim wall... the maxim wall can't be everywhere. I've never had much of a headache against this spam tactic.
If you reduce them to 4 men, they better get some impressive buffs as the whole concept of the soviet faction seems to be reliant on weapon support teams glued together by puny conscripts for merging or serving as damage sponges/spotters for said support weapons. The Red Army's infantry just can't compete against axis infantry, it's up to the support weapons or vehicles to do it.
Long Range Weapon Combat: What Cruzz stated
While there are some minor performance issues with short range firearms, the fundamental issue is just ease of use. With how the system is setup right now, you get very good performance just by selecting all your LMG armed long-range infantry, and amoving towards the enemy. By contrast trying to use short range troops generally involves much more roundabout maneuvering to setup flanks, use of smoke, and so on, yet the cost performance of these short range units is generally not THAT much better than the LMG blob.
While just reducing long range damage somewhat is an option, I do think it could be interesting if the LMG damage was made to spread damage on the entire enemy squad instead of focused on a single model. Right now a big part of the power of LMGs is that they will very quickly snipe off members from the enemy squad, forcing shorter range troops to just run away because having half a squad in melee doesn't really help them. Spread the damage out and you'll instead have a much larger though lower health squad coming into melee instead, which could actually do something. It would also make MGs a bit more efficient against LMG blobbing, because right now the gunner just gets instakilled in a row because all the fire is focused on him due to him being the most forward member of the MG squad.
Lastly I agree with the observations provided by Somenbjorn/Napalm regarding the faction specific long combat ranged DPS issues with the Red Army. They are lacklustre when it comes to effective ranged DPS, even Guards get outclassed by riflemen with BAR/LMGs or upgraded axis infantry, hence the reliance on maxims and mortars to deal damage at range.
Posts: 665
maxim has more range than mg42?
No, they are both 45 range. This guy is just wrong.
Posts: 1210 | Subs: 1
Posts: 889 | Subs: 1
Let's keep it that way!
Posts: 1571
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE change soviet weapon crews to 4 men. This is something everyone has been begging for since launch.
not me
The americans don't rely on their support weapons as much as soviets do. Americans actually have infantry that can go head-to-head with axis infantry. On top of that they get extra squads for free with their teching system. The best non-doctrinal soviet infantry are penal troops, who are worse than vanilla rifle men. You can upgrade your rifle men with light machine guns and bazookas to make them stronger and able to tackle tougher axis units like LMG grens or a variaty of OKW elite troops. With soviets you can't. Half the doctrines don't have guards or shocks and using these doctrines puts a big emphesis on support weapons to do the job where non-scaling conscripts and penals can't.
solid point
Posts: 164
I do not feel that all Soviet weapons teams need a crew member decrease; IMHO only maxims require this. Should this change occur to the maxim, I would hope to see a some adjustments to the crew to ensure that there isn't a greater probability of the a full health unit being wiped by single events (grenades, mines, indirect fire).
In addition, I would hope to see the retreat-dropthegun-recrew thing sorted. I feel that this would be too great of an issue with a 4 man squad.
I disagree with those that suggest that the maxim requires a performance buff "in trade" for a squad member decrease. I feel their current in game damage output is appropriate; it's their durability that is the issue.
Posts: 1439
Hard to tell as I didn't experience this commander to the extend I can give you my opinion that being said however I think that German Elite doctrine was good implemented because you had to pay for your veteran level with fuel.
Soviet Weapon Team:
My understanding was that Soviet weapon teams were bigger because their performance was much worse. I don't think this is the case anymore so with all fairness bring it them back in terms of survivability seems rather logical. My biggest issue is ZiS gun and its ability to survive direct flank. It seems unfair especially when you compare this with PaK.
Long Range Combat:
I liked and still like the lethality changes and I would be sad to see them gone. Maybe a s mentioned before spreading DPS across all members of a squad would work.
Posts: 1384
I would remove the idea of boosted veterancy and give them 2 thompsons and make them 320 mp or somewhere thereabouts.
Soviet Weapon Teams:
In my opinion, the tactical advantage of removing a weapons team from the field is all that matters.
Wiping teams should be difficult. If people are complaining that wiping soviet weapons teams in an asymmetric game is an issue they should whine their way back to vCoH. The teams themselves are less effective units than the german counterparts and by investing heavily in weapons teams you're putting a lot of eggs in one basket in terms of tech, while as Germans your weapons teams simply complement a more well-rounded army. The factions use weapons teams completely differently, homogenizing them is a lazy idea and the only reason people want that is because they're sad they can't wipe soviet teams by throwing a grenade on them.
Long Range Combat:
It's fine. There's plenty of ways to get units into close range without them being focus fired. Suppression, smoke, truesight, flanking etc. You should absolutely be punished for charging in out of cover at an enemy unit that is focusing you from cover.
Posts: 65
The original move to make cover more important is correct and should not be reverted. Short range infantry should be used on flanks and preferably not on frontal assault. If you do attack head on in an attempt to close the distance over open terrain then you deserve to take losses as a penalty. If you have to make some changes to the LMG then so be it but cover is an essential part of this game and it's role should not be decreased.
In an effort to discourage blobbing, I'm an advocate for penalizing infantry with negative cover when moving in groups of 3 or more squads over open ground.
Livestreams
20 | |||||
898 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, sunwinctcom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM