Login

russian armor

State of Balance - August - ID

23 Aug 2014, 20:11 PM
#61
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395

Americans on top?? Are you mad?

Soviets > OKW > USF > Ostheer
23 Aug 2014, 20:32 PM
#62
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 19:46 PMKatitof


Well, got to admit that Wehr panther could have its stats(or rather should) mirrored to OKW panther, but other two perform fine.
I do like to do some hipster stuff from time to time and believe me, Brummbar lacks nothing(yes, its a tough decision to go for it, but try it sometimes, its really good unit, follow it with 2 PaKs and maybe a shreck PGs and it'll shine) and pwerfer isn't much different from katiusha.

Jesus man. Thats a fine illustration of just what I meant.
I like to go Wehr T4 against beginners or poor players every now and then, because I am curious and I reckon I can afford it. Without fail it puts me in jeopardy. As someone else already mentioned, Wehr T4 is wholly absent from competitive play. There is a reason for that.

The Panther is hilariously cost ineffective vis a vis both the PIV and especially the Tiger. Compare tech/opportunity cost, its no contest. The unit itsef is virtually useless against infantry, cant decrew an At gun for the life of it, performs unspectacularly against the medium tanks it is supposed to dominate (shitty ROF/accuracy) and the IS2 eats it for breakfast.
The Brummbär. It shines, are you serious? I'll admit, I haven't used it much. Whenever I did, I saw no incentive to change that. It doesnt do much to infantry, mostly because it seems to rarely hit them, and has a slow ROF to boot. Considering the extreme pricetag and its vulnerability to hostile tanks, its another unit on the brink of extinction. To rely on it as any sort of heavy-duty AI is beyond questionable. The Pwerfer... recently I had a dude in 2v2 using one against me in a drawn out game. He could not even do much to my support weapons ffs. I reckon he had all of 10 kills in 20 minutes...It is a great deal inferior to the Stuka, and a good deal inferior to the Katyushah even after the recent nerf.
23 Aug 2014, 20:40 PM
#63
avatar of butterfingers158

Posts: 239


Risky proposition...at 9CP E8 might hit the field, and even if it does not outright chase down your Command PIV (which is totally defenceless against it), you will be down one fuel intensive unit against the most spammable and most cost-effective tank in the game. Its not like the regular PIV fares much better tho.


You should be well aware of your opponent's commander choice by CP 8. In the case of Rifle Company you probably knew before CP 1. Also remember that USF will be behind you in CPs,as they don't get the ~.5 CP for constructing a base building.
23 Aug 2014, 21:22 PM
#64
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

I don't like to say that, but Dane is biased. Sorry, but giving Volks more scalability, when they already have crazy good vet and belong in the faction with the best elite infantry in the game, is ridiculous. Volks blobs are enough of a problem without making one of the toughest infantry in the game (at 235 mp) able to DPS down any allied infantry. And did he seriously say OKW is the weakest when top player stats puts them in first place?

Soviets are spammy? How so? Conscript spam only ever works in the hands of Von Ivan because they scale so badly. Maxim spam is countered easily by Ost and is manageable by OKW if they don't get pushed back. T-34 spam gets laughed at by heavy armor or dedicated tank destroyers. Comparatively, grenspam is a thing, volkspam works against vehicles, and riflespam is basically mandatory for US. So I'm really unconvinced by this argument.

He has some good points. But I'll listen to a Ciez or Cruzz or VindicareX before I'll listen to Dane.
23 Aug 2014, 22:02 PM
#65
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 18:49 PMKatitof


Sov: 6.2 games out of 10 won.

USF: 5.9

Ost: 5.9

OKW: 6.5

What you have proven here?
That OKW needs to be nerfed as its clearly on the high edge here.
And the difference is still less then one game won per every 10 games played.
All of that "oh so uncounterable soviet units" and still Soviets win almost as much games as ostheer while loosing more then OKW.


Was that your aim or you're still learning to read % based tables?


As somebody who has to do something with numbers in order to pay his bills I have to remind of one small detail you hopefully just forgot to mention in the referring post.


The most played faction was OKW.
The most played game mode was 1v1.

The least played faction was Ostheer.


Therefore such tables would be never, I repeat never used to prove something when you really need solid ground.
Since most players played OKW, we can assume it has the highest player base. That means in order to reach a high rank, you need to be a better player than with ostheer e.g.(a better player is defined by a higher winning rate)
And oh wonder, OKW 6.5 / Ost 5.9

For your statements there must be furthermore made requirements which are impossible to full-fill.
Those 200 players must have the exact same skill (which cannot be, because the playerbase differs).
Or the 4 factions share the same 200 hundred players (also bs, since there are players that play exclusively one faction).


My statement towards balance:

1on1 is balanced concerning the chance to achieve a win.
However the variety of strategies in order to win is too low in my opinion. There are a few strategies for every faction that seem to work out in order to achieve a win. But that doesn't mean it's a fun way to play because there are too many units or tiers not worthy to use because it's results in a loss.
Samewise I find another balance issue is that call ins are not tied to teching, thus giving strategies involving call ins much more efficent than to tech to a ost panther or to use fule to get t34/76 instead of the 85's.
23 Aug 2014, 22:05 PM
#66
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

On the other hand Acht, if top players (who know their CoH2) play OKW the most, it might send a message either way. Pros often play several factions, but they also play to win.

Not saying it invalidates your argument. Just food for thought.

I do feel that, when played optimally, OKW is probably the best faction. They have such amazing units and few glaring weaknesses.
23 Aug 2014, 22:30 PM
#67
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

On the other hand Acht, if top players (who know their CoH2) play OKW the most, it might send a message either way. Pros often play several factions, but they also play to win.

Not saying it invalidates your argument. Just food for thought.

I do feel that, when played optimally, OKW is probably the best faction. They have such amazing units and few glaring weaknesses.


Just a way to show you how to manipulate statistics:

In my opinion the first top 10 players are showing the best state of balance, since

- small playerbase
- a rather homogenous pool with players sharing same ranks on every faction !!!
- high activity of games on this level, because if you don't play you automatically lose your ranks quick in the top 10


So then we come to this numbers:

US .841
OKW .799
SOV .773
OST .747

But those numbers, although they are more solid than this 200 ranks, are never, never solid enough to make a statement based upon those, because you have still players that either play exclusively a faction (like PanzergrenadierAngreifen) or People which numbers you can't use because they are statistical outliers (like Zorro OKW 7. with 13/0 )

Another important thing you have to consider that players play in different time zones. If a really skilled player lives in e.g. New Zealand, he faces usually less players and thus a lower chance to get a skilled opponent.
By this he will accumulate a high numbers of wins, yet if he'd be living in Europe or the USA, his winning rate would be lower, thus resulting in a manipulation if you want to use these numbers to state a valid argument about balance.

That means, unless we have all the numbers (which relic won't give), all we can do is speculate and bullshit around. Everybody has a different view and character about what balance is when he faces a loss.
23 Aug 2014, 22:39 PM
#68
avatar of Kothre

Posts: 431

I'm less concerned about balance and more concerned about the lack of strategy variety for most factions, though I suppose that's balance in and of itself. Soviets basically have to maxim spam or sniper spam into T34/85's or ISU-152, Ostheer have to gren spam into PIV into Tiger, Americans have to rifle spam into Jacksons or Easy 8's most of the time. OKW have the most variety of any faction, which is a step in the right direction for the game.

I think the other factions could stand to have their extinct units buffed into non-suckiness. Soviets are only competitive because of doctrines; without them, they'd arguably be the worst faction come mid-late game due to underwhelming stock tanks and prohibitively expensive tech-switching, though US late game is pretty bad as well unless you controlled 90% of the map for most of the match. Wehrmacht tier 4 is overpriced and panzergrenadiers are but shadows of their former selves. Americans need earlier access to something other than rifles because they're a rather boring faction because of it.
23 Aug 2014, 23:08 PM
#69
avatar of ASneakyFox

Posts: 365

it seems a lot of people agree a lot of doctines need to be reworked for all factions, and some doctrine only abilities need to be a part of the core faction..

but are any of these suggestions really even practical for possibly being implemented? Im not sure relic may very willingly alter doctrines since they seem to want you to BUY commanders.
23 Aug 2014, 23:10 PM
#70
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

I know all statistics can be manipulated. That's why you corroborate the stats with what the pros actually have to say about balance (those who post at least). I've seen none state that USF is overpowered, to date at least. Some parts of it, yes, but it's never stated as the overall best faction that I recall.

Plus, the top ten only is a pretty small sample size. At least the top 100-200 cover more people.

And I agree with Kothre, the game's biggest issue at the moment is that all factions (some more than others) have very cookie cutter builds, deviating from which is often a bad idea against a good opponent. Many of said builds incorporate call-ins that are too easily accessible. As well, the bevy of powerful long-ranged infantry has led to an increase of blobbing, because your LMG grens/1919 rifles/any elite OKW infantry can simply wipe away from existence anything that's less ''leet'' than them just by a-moving.

Soviets and Ostheer also have prohibitive late-game teching costs for relatively lackluster units. Just an example: Soviets pay 120 fuel to the the M5 HT (barely used), the T-70 (overshadowed by...) and the T-34 (decent but not very good late game). USF pays 90 fuel to get the Sherman (more flexible, has smoke), the M8 (very good at its niche) and the Jackson (very valuable tank destroyer). OKW can access rocket artillery after a 40 fuel investment that they start with; Ostheer gets it at the very end of its tech tree, after investing 145 fuel to get there not counting the cost of any unit or building.
23 Aug 2014, 23:12 PM
#71
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


Since most players played OKW, we can assume it has the highest player base. That means in order to reach a high rank, you need to be a better player than with ostheer e.g.(a better player is defined by a higher winning rate)


Getting a high rank with WFA is far easier than with EFA. Just check the rankings of some people who are between top 200-100 and their correlative rank with vCoh2 factions.

If anything, the numbers taking into account should be for those who are top50. I´m playing 1/2 games a week on 1v1 and still mantaining top100 rank.

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 22:39 PMKothre
I'm less concerned about balance and more concerned about the lack of strategy variety for most factions, though I suppose that's balance in and of itself.


And i´m pretty sad this applies to 2v2 also. I was gonna make a thread (laziness was stronger) about this, while i consider the game is improving, it´s killing any viable strats besides the usual ones. While Soviet haven´t suffer as much, OST is really dull. T4 and static support weapons allowed for a bit more of variety, same with tier skipping timings.

24 Aug 2014, 00:34 AM
#72
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1

Why does everybody keep saying panzergrenadiere are extinct, dead, worthless etc. i use them and they seem to be important to be in the field as I tend to lose if they're not in the field.
24 Aug 2014, 01:00 AM
#73
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2014, 00:34 AMsteel
Why does everybody keep saying panzergrenadiere are extinct, dead, worthless etc. i use them and they seem to be important to be in the field as I tend to lose if they're not in the field.


They could use slightly more survivability in the WFA meta. Anything that's not a concript can stand up to them, I've beaten PGrens with vanilla rifles which seems a bit wrong. I say give them received accuracy modifier and put them at 360 MP, so long as Ostheer has LMGs of doom they don't really need a fragile 320 MP squad.

I've used them well, too, but you really need to treat them with kid gloves because they can die very fast, unlike say Shocks. They're basically Sturmpioneers, except Sturms are given to the OKW player and get better veterancy.
24 Aug 2014, 01:08 AM
#74
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1



They could use slightly more survivability in the WFA meta. Anything that's not a concript can stand up to them, I've beaten PGrens with vanilla rifles which seems a bit wrong. I say give them received accuracy modifier and put them at 360 MP, so long as Ostheer has LMGs of doom they don't really need a fragile 320 MP squad.

I've used them well, too, but you really need to treat them with kid gloves because they can die very fast, unlike say Shocks. They're basically Sturmpioneers, except Sturms are given to the OKW player and get better veterancy.
Not sure about survivalbility though. It could just be RNG saving me since nobody can hit my panzergrenadiere reliably. Reduced accuracy to 0.8 or 1.1/1.2 armour? I believe 0.8 is better(more realistic and not so punishing towards the Germans to stop micro them a bit.)
24 Aug 2014, 01:30 AM
#75
avatar of Warthrone

Posts: 205

Permanently Banned
Katitof definitely seems to be immune to moderation anywhere and everywhere he goes, so you might as well accept it and move on.

PGs need a some serious buffs and maybe a cost increase to 400MP, but as it stands Ostheer has no real elite infantry unit and it is in dire need of one.


+1
24 Aug 2014, 03:42 AM
#76
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2014, 00:34 AMsteel
Why does everybody keep saying panzergrenadiere are extinct, dead, worthless etc. i use them and they seem to be important to be in the field as I tend to lose if they're not in the field.


Because for 50 MP less than shocks u get 1/5 or 20% the survivability in terms of armor/recieved accuracy.On top of that he gets smoke and 2 additional members.
How is this justified?By fear of shreck blobs.
Well that is just crappy design philosophy isn't it?
You gave ostheer 1 late game infantry unit other than upg grens,unlike other factions-and then won't fix them coz u tied them with shrecks.This is why they should have seperated ai and at pzgrens and balanced them seperately.This way they will never buff its survivability,and keep the unit dead forever because they tied its AI role with shreck carrier role.Ostheer will forever be 1 infantry unit faction,while it may be tolerable for 6 months..give it another 6 months of this same 1 infantry,1 tank and thats enough ,just plz delete this faction.
24 Aug 2014, 03:43 AM
#77
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2014, 01:08 AMsteel
Not sure about survivalbility though. It could just be RNG saving me since nobody can hit my panzergrenadiere reliably. Reduced accuracy to 0.8 or 1.1/1.2 armour? I believe 0.8 is better(more realistic and not so punishing towards the Germans to stop micro them a bit.)


Nobody can hit u?U get hit less by 13%..thats 1 in 10 shots avoided approx.Compared to shocks 1 in 2 shots absorbed.Show me last time anyone used pzgrens in tourney matches in numbers.''Its fine''-lol.
24 Aug 2014, 05:43 AM
#78
avatar of wehrwolfzug

Posts: 126

The ost strength is armor and line infantry. Panzer Grenadiers are grenadiers with assault rifles and bundle nades. They also upgrade into the best anti tank infantry in the game.

Pg's are used for flanking and ambush tactics. The extra cost is for the ability to upgrade into the best at infantry in the game. You also get the bundle nade ability. The high upkeep is to prevent spamming.

Pg's with the cloak ability are absolutely devastating with the ambush bonus. You can literally sit beside a stone wall with a tank on the otherside of the wall and still be cloaked.

Kill one at gun with a pg bundle nade and you have paid for the squad. Also try not to forget that PG come in doctrines with armored transport. You buff pg's you change balance on other units too!

There are also doctrines that make massing pg's more economical. Any doctrine that returns ostruppen with lost soldiers ect. Pg's with the speed boost doctrine ability absolutely rape the battlefield as well with multiple sqauds.

The real problem is that grenadiers over perform therefore spamming grens is the most chosen option. Reduce the effectiveness of grens and you will soon see alot more PG's.
24 Aug 2014, 05:54 AM
#79
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070



The real problem is that grenadiers over perform therefore spamming grens is the most chosen option. Reduce the effectiveness of grens and you will soon see alot more PG's.


Haha watch what you say about grenadiers overperforming. You are gonna get some serious flak.


But I do agree though about grenadiers. Not sure if they are overperforming but they are very very annoying when they are blobbed and all equipped with an lmg. A lone grenadier squad or one without upgrades is fine but when they are en massed, it is crazy good
24 Aug 2014, 06:40 AM
#80
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

would both you play a single game as germans before describing the balance of their units? better yet, play without upgrading lmg grens. unupgraded grens and pgrens only. i would be very eager to see a replay of that.
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

426 users are online: 426 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM