Login

russian armor

Cruzz's Fantasy Patch Thread 2: WTFWFA Edition

PAGES (8)down
8 Aug 2014, 07:48 AM
#81
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

I think the soviet mini at gun needs some love.
8 Aug 2014, 07:53 AM
#82
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

A mix of suggestions..but no fuckin way maxim gets a buff..been waiting for the well deserved nerf of this shit unit.I can die in peace once maxim and panther are fixed.
8 Aug 2014, 07:57 AM
#83
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

A mix of suggestions..but no fuckin way maxim gets a buff..been waiting for the well deserved nerf of this shit unit.I can die in peace once maxim and panther are fixed.

+1 thats all i really care about as well. make cons better and nerf maxim even. something. for the rest of us that aren't top 50 elite blah blah blah its a fucking issue.
8 Aug 2014, 08:16 AM
#84
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

Pretty solid. Nice one, I don't think anyone can disagree. Once again apart from perhaps swapping T-70 with SU-76 tiers and giving the SU-85 some sort of frontal armour buff perhaps.
8 Aug 2014, 08:24 AM
#85
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

Pretty solid. Nice one, I don't think anyone can disagree. Once again apart from perhaps swapping T-70 with SU-76 tiers and giving the SU-85 some sort of frontal armour buff perhaps.


Never say 'anyone can't disagree'.I see u only found some additional soviet buffs to think of.
8 Aug 2014, 08:53 AM
#86
avatar of Kothre

Posts: 431

Damn, man, you really thought this patch out. I'd love to play this version of CoH 2. I can honestly say it depresses me that this will probably never happen, because your fantasy patch is seriously that well-thought out.

I especially like your suggestions regarding Wehr T4, conscript upgrades (I've been wanting that exact system since release), maxim changes (that are both simultaneously a nerf and a buff), and rear echelons getting mines. Also, PaK 40's vet 3 camo got removed several patches ago for some inexplicable reason in case you didn't know.
8 Aug 2014, 10:57 AM
#87
avatar of Le Wish
Patrion 14

Posts: 813 | Subs: 1

Cleaned up the thread some. Please try to keep civil. If you just want to tell another forum user that you dont like him/her, do it somewhere else. Thx.
8 Aug 2014, 12:42 PM
#88
avatar of TopBadger

Posts: 35

Although some good ideas shine through in this post, I find myself in general agreeing with MilkaCow's view on the matter:

I can only agree with a small portion of those changes and in general think it's a bad idea. It's a too big list to with a certain confidence state the outcome of it. To not just make 'bland' statements let me try to elaborate a bit.

Call-In system - See my suggestion on the other thread. Yours would kill Call-In strategies completely and Relic stated they want to keep those. You gotta learn to work inside the limitations :p

USF:
First 3-4 suggestions could be possible, though the M7 is still buggy/problematic so I'd rather refrain from that. M8 direct fire is far too strong in my opinion and I'd put it in only arcing fire mode to make it hit moving squads less. Right now it's a far too powerful vehicle and giving it a toggle would only cause it to overperform even more. Sherman smoke is probably harder to fix than you suggest. I'd keep Major probably at 3 seconds, 2 is really damn fast as the flares only drop after 1 second, so anyone not in NA has close to no time to react. 57mm is good enough in my opinion as well as the priest, so I wouldn't touch those. Rest is meh, i don't mind changing it. I feel it doesn't tackle a few really important issues which is the overperforming BARs on range, the dual M1919A6 upgrade for Paratroopers and the long build times. I personally do not see the last one as a giant problem, but still testing it differently is fine.

Soviet:
Dunno about the Maxim. I think that would just make it more extreme and take one of the biggest factors for the MG42, the area suppression. SU-76 sounds problematic, but in the end it's just a general design idea - might be a bit too potent, but could be interesting and give it a role as it's a non barrage artillery. Conscripts - Well you know my stance on upgrades. They are ugly to balance and introducing more to balance out others is a bad way. Rest sounds okayish (though some of them not needed IMO).

Ostheer:
In general most sound acceptable, but I'd rather introduce such changes slowly as a lot of them have far fetching effects. Don't really like sniper and Osttruppen changes though.

OKW:
Once again, I'm not sure if those changes are necessary. Especially the MG34 one seems to be weird. It's worse than the MG42, doctrinal and should be more expensive? Why? Combined with a buffed Kübelwagen I feel that makes it extremely unattractive.

General ones:
I'd rather have Demos unable to trigger if a sweeper squad is within ~15 range or such. Sometimes you don't want to blow it up. Plane one I'd keep. Such a thing would once again make AA useless. Rest is okayish.
:p


I've noticed you propose a large amount of buffs for Ostheer and nerfs for OKW. In 1v1s it's no secret OKW generally struggle, and changes like increasing Panzerfusilier and MG34 cost and taking away Puma's smoke until vet 2 seem a bit over-the-top, as well as the buffs for ostheer such as the german sniper and 222 armoured car also seem a bit unneccessary.

Also changes like proposed to the SU-76 and kubelwagon seem like they could be a bit problematic.

However there are things mentioned that really should be done, for example limiting rifles/paratroopers to one M1919A6 each, giving tank traps to the vanilla factions and fixing the salvage commander's 105mm barrage.

This post was really just to bump Milka's post because he pretty much sums up what I think about these suggestions. I felt the thread needed some 'critique' :P
8 Aug 2014, 13:38 PM
#89
avatar of Vladislavs89

Posts: 116

Really nice suggestions, agree with almost everything.

I would only add that PAK-43 could use the range increase since currently it is mostly useless.

I wonder if the guys from Relic have read that...
8 Aug 2014, 13:55 PM
#90
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Really nice suggestions, agree with almost everything.

I would only add that PAK-43 could use the range increase since currently it is mostly useless.

I wonder if the guys from Relic have read that...


PaK43 could definitely go even as far as to 90 range. After all it got cost increase to 500 and its not like it was super often usable before that.
8 Aug 2014, 14:31 PM
#91
avatar of Vladislavs89

Posts: 116



PaK43 could definitely go even as far as to 90 range. After all it got cost increase to 500 and its not like it was super often usable before that.

Absolutely. Currently you are paying 500 mp for 1 good hit from a short distance on the enemy tank after which it becomes completely irrelevant.

Prior to the patch there was at least some chance of scaring the opponent off with its range by repairing and recruiting it after barrages.
8 Aug 2014, 14:43 PM
#92
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

Something to keep in mind about the PAK43. Yes, it now is 500 mp opposed to 480 before. But it is also now only 10 supply (1 more than a normal AT gun), as opposed to 21 before the patch. This means that even though it's 20 mp more to build, the upkeep will cost 16.5 mp less per minute than before!

With the change to only 10 supply, it is now actually feasible to build 2 of these things without crippling your army in terms of supply.
8 Aug 2014, 14:58 PM
#93
avatar of Vladislavs89

Posts: 116

Something to keep in mind about the PAK43. Yes, it now is 500 mp opposed to 480 before. But it is also now only 10 supply (1 more than a normal AT gun), as opposed to 21 before the patch. This means that even though it's 20 mp more to build, the upkeep will cost 16.5 mp less per minute than before!

With the change to only 10 supply, it is now actually feasible to build 2 of these things without crippling your army in terms of supply.

Yes, it sounds good and all. But can you really afford to spend 1000mp on the static AT guns with a rather short range in 1v1? Yes, in team games you might be able to spam them, but if it was up to me, I would rather it have a decent range and higher pop cap, than the way it is now.
8 Aug 2014, 19:03 PM
#94
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Regarding the AA HT from the US.

Anyone has the different pen/damage/dps of the different guns. I mean, the gun which uses when static or moving.

IT has been mentioned that removing supression while moving and attaching it to the static gun should be good, but what about the penetration?
Shouldnt be feasible to attack the AA HT with a 222 ? At least when it´s moving or on it´s blind spot.
8 Aug 2014, 19:22 PM
#95
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971


Absolutely. Currently you are paying 500 mp for 1 good hit from a short distance on the enemy tank after which it becomes completely irrelevant.

Prior to the patch there was at least some chance of scaring the opponent off with its range by repairing and recruiting it after barrages.


Is pak43 affected by smoke?

Yes: Then buff the unit.

No: Then let it as it is. Being a laser guided AT weapon against which you can't cover in any way is fine for 500mp.

I never liked the idea of it shooting throught buildings. I find it poor design.

My suggestion would be buff it but being only able to shoot things in its LoS. (Avoiding terrain collision, of course)
8 Aug 2014, 19:26 PM
#96
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Thing about this list, and Cruzz, is that it is a complete package.

You can pick the corn and peanuts out of it all you want, but it doesnt change that this is a "fantasy" patch, as he says. And cos Cruzz really CAN simultaneously figure many balance trajectories, his patch suggestion is more or less "complete", as a full indivisible package.

If you start removing one element, there is a cascade effect of changes on the others.
He has hairline thin adjustments in some entries, because thats how Cruzz thinks, and this guy knows his unit stats, that are there to counterbalance other changes, even if only ever so slightly. As you can see from his replies, most times, he has already considered mentioned concerns into his vision.

Its one mans (who knows his stuff) vision for a better game. Take it as is, and hopefully Relic also takes heed, and hopefullynsome of it matches their vision for the game too.
8 Aug 2014, 19:42 PM
#97
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Aug 2014, 19:22 PMGreeb


Is pak43 affected by smoke?

Yes: Then buff the unit.

No: Then let it as it is. Being a laser guided AT weapon against which you can't cover in any way is fine for 500mp.

I never liked the idea of it shooting throught buildings. I find it poor design.

My suggestion would be buff it but being only able to shoot things in its LoS. (Avoiding terrain collision, of course)


The thing, being immobile, requiring LoS would severely gimp it on many maps. Given how claustrophobic most of CoH2's maps are, this would make it even more unused than it is now. You could build it in Langreskaya, south Kharkov and a few 2v2 maps like Veaux, and that's almost it. Na, I think the shoot through terrain gimmick is nice and not overpowered considering the thing dies very easily to artillery of any kind and is helpless against infantry or flanking vehicles.
8 Aug 2014, 19:49 PM
#98
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

Thing about this list, and Cruzz, is that it is a complete package.

You can pick the corn and peanuts out of it all you want, but it doesnt change that this is a "fantasy" patch, as he says. And cos Cruzz really CAN simultaneously figure many balance trajectories, his patch suggestion is more or less "complete", as a full indivisible package.

If you start removing one element, there is a cascade effect of changes on the others.
He has hairline thin adjustments in some entries, because thats how Cruzz thinks, and this guy knows his unit stats, that are there to counterbalance other changes, even if only ever so slightly. As you can see from his replies, most times, he has already considered mentioned concerns into his vision.

Its one mans (who knows his stuff) vision for a better game. Take it as is, and hopefully Relic also takes heed, and hopefullynsome of it matches their vision for the game too.



I don't really think thats it. I see it as quite the opposite. Cruzz adress most rather obvious imbalances, but he can't know how all the changes at once will change the game. And that's ok, because then you can patch it again, untill its in a good spot.
8 Aug 2014, 19:52 PM
#99
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Well, Cruzz actually can.

You and I look at the game, and we see a tree.

Cruzz looks at the game, and he sees a whole forest and every leaf in it.
8 Aug 2014, 20:03 PM
#100
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

Cruzz! we need an answer :D
Did you go through every unit and looked how it performs + taking some bigger meta problems into account like tech/callins,

or are you the Mastermind Cannonade sees in you? :D
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 19
unknown 13
Canada 2
Germany 1

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

985 users are online: 985 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49081
Welcome our newest member, kavyashide
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM