Login

russian armor

Conscripts post 9/9 patch

12 Sep 2014, 08:43 AM
#81
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 07:10 AMGreeb
Too much words to say nothing.

Which is pretty much what you've been doing all thread.
Which was my point, exactly.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 07:10 AMGreeb
Explain us then why the received accuracy increase was needed in conscripts. Were they overperforming before to deserve such a nerf?

Have you even read the notes...?
Grens, Rifles and SturmPios (atleast) also got that.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 07:10 AMGreeb
And any ability or upgrade that conscripts have fits with the new role Relic wants them to play.

LMGs where nerfed and their range optimisations adjusted. Especially Ost.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 07:10 AMGreeb
They all are short range abilities, with the new received accuracy it's suicidal to try to approach to throw a molotov or ATgun.

Short-mid. And no, its not suicidal. Just don't approach over open ground unless you like being retarded.
Molotov is now primarily an area-denier against setup-teams and buildings, as well as pre-emptively blocking assault infantry from approaching you. Use it for that instead of thinking its a grenade.

And as I said, and you've apparently completely overlooked, is that other units also got a received accuracy penalty.

Cons are now even more effective in short, and mid, now than they where before, especially compared to the commensurate nerfs to optimisation at those ranges that other opposing basic infantry took.

I think you haven't even read or comprehended the actual specifics in the patch notes.

I strongly recommend you go back and seriously read every entry in great detail and try to internalise what the patch has actually done to basic infantry small arms balance.
12 Sep 2014, 08:55 AM
#82
avatar of zarok47

Posts: 587

grens and rifles got a received accuracy bonus, as in they are harder to hit.

Actual notes:
Riflemen
Added a received accuracy modifier of 0.97

Grenadiers
Added a received accuracy modifier of 0.91

Sturmpioneers (added them cuz they also got a received accuracy change)
Added a received accuracy modifier of 0.87

cons got the opposite, the received accuracy modifier went up, so they are easier to hit.
Conscripts
Added a received accuracy modifier of 1.087

so far the other unit who got that was the ostruppen
Osttruppen
Added a received accuracy modifier of 1.25

In short, if received accuracy is greater then 1 its easier to get hit, when smaller then 1 its harder.


so your premsie about other untis getting a recieved accuracy penalty is correct, but its not rifles or grens that got it, but osttruppen.
12 Sep 2014, 08:56 AM
#83
avatar of MarcoRossolini

Posts: 1042

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 08:07 AMArclyte
relic has no idea what they want to do with soviets


Yep, not a clue at all...

The whole faction is a disaster now. Now you have to spam maxims or its GG. What a farce.
12 Sep 2014, 09:03 AM
#84
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2



And as I said, and you've apparently completely overlooked, is that other units also got a received accuracy penalty.


only ostruppen, other squads had a modifier that reduces incoming accuracy giving them more durability.
12 Sep 2014, 09:15 AM
#85
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

I see. It seemed to me that any >0.0% modifier is still a penalty.

Well, anyways, seems that's the way Relic wants it then.

L2Adapt to the change, I guess.
12 Sep 2014, 10:24 AM
#86
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

It's not the Cons are terrible it's that majority of allied player from my ELO bracket don't use any for of tactics at all. All they can do is blob, blob, blob and rely on cheesy tactics. No form of any type of combined arms.
It is annoying to that degree so I stopped play random allied team and only play Soviet with my mate.

For some reason Axis players got more common sens and you can get decent player even when random.
12 Sep 2014, 10:53 AM
#87
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971


I think you haven't even read or comprehended the actual specifics in the patch notes.

I strongly recommend you go back and seriously read every entry in great detail and try to internalise what the patch has actually done to basic infantry small arms balance.

Seems that it was you who didn't read or understand the new patch notes.

I assume that you know already that grens, sturmpios and rifles got harder to kill, meanwhile conscripts got easier to kill.
I still dare you to give me a valid reason to support that nerf, knowing that conscripts were crap against these units before, and now are even worse.

But instead, your answer was this:
Well, anyways, seems that's the way Relic wants it then.

L2Adapt to the change, I guess.


Then I don't know why are you here posting in the balance forums, if you think that "Relic wants it" is an answer to set a balance discussion.
Please, stop trying nerfing ISU-152 because Relic wants it like that. L2P.

As I said before, too many words to say nothing at all.

For some reason Axis players got more common sens and you can get decent player even when random.

I strongly agree with you here.
For some reason, perhaps because the single player depicts them and everyone starts playing CoH2 with them, soviet faction is a noob magnet in automatch random.
But that should be discussed in other thread.
12 Sep 2014, 11:06 AM
#88
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 08:07 AMArclyte
relic has no idea what they want to do with soviets


Well, they have pretty much said that on last nights stream when answering my penal question.

PQ said some stuff, but all I heard/understood was "Leave me alone! I DON'T KNOW!"
12 Sep 2014, 11:31 AM
#89
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Greeb:
If Relic saw fit to add a negative modifier to Cons, then perhaps its you who needs to adjust your perspective on what Cons are, or should be.

Arguing for balance changes sort of makes sense BEFORE a change is made, not really thereafter, when its been stamped by Relic. Then its sort of been approved by a higher power, with better resources and understanding, if you know what I mean.

Especially on Cons, some people seem to have unrealistic expectations or a warped perspective of what they should and can be, as opposed to Relics view and steady patching relating to that ever since before launch even. I dont know why that is, but basically the opiniins of these people have manifold been shown to not coincide with Relics opinions.

As Oz points out, though there certai ly have been examples of particular outrageous Axis posters, there seems to be a persistant Allies core of posters who refuse to accept things as they are, and have huge difficulty accepting Relics proven and consistent line when it comes especially to Cons.

For some, it seems a historical accuracy hangup. For others, they basically want Cons to be Gren equivalents, but with Merge/Oorah from start, 6man, cheaper reinforce and a weapon upgrade. Its also been my longtime observation that many of these posters absolutely refuse to play Axis for one reason or another, sometimes to the extreme with zero axis games played, and their card shows it.

As was outlined in the stream by Relic, Cons now have a wider "close" range, and better accuracy at close-mid. I can only speculate, but I figure the accuracy received penalty is a result of optimising ranges and accuracies, without changing native damage (which is set at a multiple for purposes of avoiding overkill and "wasted" shots). Something perhaps related to the number of rifles in a Con unit, and models for soaking.

This is a turning point patch, for sure, when it comes to basic infantry combat.
The range optimisations will take some getting used to, and was an interesting lateral approach, especially to naturalising WFA into the pre-existant Ost/Sov system of balance.

Many of the actual figures seem arbitrary, some even extending to three decimals. I think this is the new metric based evaluation system that Relic talked about sometime ago showing itself. The genie on that is out of the bottle, and those can be adjusted later as an interesting alternative for small arms combat balancing asymmetrically, now that these base changes have been set.

Pwnding a possivle complete Sov overhaul, I understand that people "want" it to come from Cons. But that is fail. Penals are there to fill the gap, for many reasons. Improving Cons is not, and never has been, the answer atleast as Sov is structured now. Penals are.
12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PM
#90
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971


Arguing for balance changes sort of makes sense BEFORE a change is made, not really thereafter, when its been stamped by Relic. Then its sort of been approved by a higher power, with better resources and understanding, if you know what I mean.


Most balance changes are done when developers see the ruckus the community makes after a change (Katyusha recent nerf e.g.). So I think that yes, complaining about a recent change in the official and fan forums is useful and can help to revert stupid nerfs/buffs.

The thing is that Soviets were in a terrible state since WFA was released with so few viable strategies, and everyone (even the very soviet players) complained about the boring metagame the faction had.

Relic's answer has been nerfing conscripts, Guards, T34 and ZiS, and leaving everything else as it was.
I could understand guard's nerf, as button has been always a controversial ability, but Zis, T34 and conscript's nerf are plainly stupid and unnecesary. Nobody in the community asked for such changes. If conscripts are going to be shit, at least let them have a cost proportional to how much they suck. 240 MP for a unit that underperfoms and doesn't scale at all like Grens and Volks is too expensive.

Now soviet faction are even more broken than last month, and no, I don't think the answer to the issue is adapting to it.
The faction is broken as the 80% of their core units and doctrines are plainly useless. And what is worse, is absolutely boring to play with and against them.

Relic should stop their secrecy and tell us in rough lines what future ideas they have for the faction, because pqumsieh's last cast only makes me to lose all hopes in the game.
12 Sep 2014, 13:20 PM
#91
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
Most balance changes are done when developers see the ruckus the community makes after a change

Nope. Categorically false.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
So I think that yes, complaining about a recent change in the official and fan forums is useful and can help to revert stupid nerfs/buffs.

Except for the fact that meta hasn't even adapted yet, let alone the fact you still haven't played as the opposing faction.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
The thing is that Soviets were in a terrible state since WFA was released with so few viable strategies, and everyone (even the very soviet players) complained about the boring metagame the faction had.

Except that's complete hyperbolic, subjective and opinionated bullshit.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
Relic's answer has been nerfing conscripts, Guards, T34 and ZiS, and leaving everything else as it was.

You mad? Maybe your perception on balance was just so completely offbase that you don't give Relics Devs the respect they deserve for making necessary changes?

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
I could understand guard's nerf, as button has been always a controversial ability, but Zis, T34 and conscript's nerf are plainly stupid and unnecesary. Nobody in the community asked for such changes. If conscripts are going to be shit, at least let them have a cost proportional to how much they suck. 240 MP for a unit that underperfoms and doesn't scale at all like Grens and Volks is too expensive.


GJ calling Relic's professionals stupid. Maybe the problem is in you instead?

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
Now soviet faction are even more broken than last month, and no, I don't think the answer to the issue is adapting to it.
The faction is broken as the 80% of their core units and doctrines are plainly useless. And what is worse, is absolutely boring to play with and against them.

Amazing. You really don't have any objectivity at all, do you.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2014, 13:00 PMGreeb
Relic should stop their secrecy and tell us in rough lines what future ideas they have for the faction, because pqumsieh's last cast only makes me to lose all hopes in the game.

Then perhaps you should leave and never come back. Thanks.

Seriously, look at this guys post.
Have you ever seen more biased, subjective and hateful posting?
12 Sep 2014, 13:33 PM
#92
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

Ok, dude, if your only contribution to the thread is attacking me instead of posting any facts about how conscripts are perfect in your magical world, then you can go to troll elsewhere.

It was you who came here at first being hostile and writing a bunch of bullshit whitout having read and understood the patch notes. Talking about biased and hateful people... ;)
12 Sep 2014, 13:39 PM
#93
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

I'm not the one calling Relic Devs idiots.

And don't get angry that I refute your hyperbole, subjective bias and general refusal to accept anything except what you want to hear, exactly as you want it, exactly in the way you want it.
raw
12 Sep 2014, 13:39 PM
#94
avatar of raw

Posts: 644

Their short-mid range damage output is already high enough in most cases that the reduction in damage that was applied will not result in the squad losing the given engagement.


At least you're not trying to hide it.
12 Sep 2014, 13:44 PM
#95
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

Greeb.

Please stop feeding Cannonade/Nullist. He only comes to threads that suggest any Soviet form of buff at all and argues why the Ubermensch should be Ubermensch.

His first post should have been ignored as it outright added nothing to the conversation. Please start thinking of him as a vetlolcake.

FFS he thinks merge is game winning and AT nades are THE BOMB!
12 Sep 2014, 13:48 PM
#96
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

I know, I just stopped feeding him with my last post. I didn't intend to answer him back.

Just waiting for a mod to make invisible all that stupid conversation and returning to the topic.
12 Sep 2014, 13:50 PM
#97
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

I dont even know what the "Ubermensch" crap is supposed to be about.

Look at the sov-fanbois gather into a circle to support each other.

And yet despite constant whining nonstop almost since launch, your skewed perspectives have never been implemented.

Sort of telling, don't you think, that Relic doesn't listen or agree?
Maybe time to take a clue?

Next time use more facts, less hyperbole.
More objectivism, and less ad hominem.
Less QQ, more constructive and concrete suggestions.
raw
12 Sep 2014, 13:53 PM
#98
avatar of raw

Posts: 644


And yet despite constant whining nonstop almost since launch, your skewed perspectives have never been implemented.

Sort of telling,


Yeah, Relic doesn't understand their own game.
12 Sep 2014, 13:54 PM
#99
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

Conscripts are... pretty shit. You need 250mp+50 fuel to make them all-round troops. You need a doctrinal upgrade to make them pretty combat effective on cluttered maps and there is no way to make them combat effective on open maps; which is to say, half of them.

But the problem is not really conscripts. The problem is the Soviet design philosophy of 'you can only build half your tech', combined with 'soviet tech buildings are specialized', combined with 'you need to fill the gaps with doctrines', combined with 'lol joke, only half of the doctrines can actually fill the gaps, half of which play more or less the same with 1 or 2 different abilities'.

For some strange reason. Relic has decided that Soviet Combined arms needs to both be very expensive and be restricted to a few doctrines to be on the same level of combined arms of Wehrmacht forces. It leads to boring, spammy, call-in centered gameplay with the same few commanders being chosen every time and no fix to conscripts is going to change that.
12 Sep 2014, 19:04 PM
#100
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

But the problem is not really conscripts. The problem is the Soviet design philosophy of 'you can only build half your tech', combined with 'soviet tech buildings are specialized', combined with 'you need to fill the gaps with doctrines', combined with 'lol joke, only half of the doctrines can actually fill the gaps, half of which play more or less the same with 1 or 2 different abilities'.


Yeah, but even that "We don't know what to do with soviets" philosophy doesn't explain recent nerfs like the received accuracy increase in conscripts and ZiS.

Those changes are not bad faction design, they're intentionally nerfing units that were underpowered before.
I can't understand soviet's approach in last patch, and it would be great if a relic team member could explain what are the thoughts behind them. What kind of gameplay they want to achieve with those changes, because I only see more and more Maxim/Sniper spam into ISU.

PAGES (7)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

882 users are online: 1 member and 881 guests
Hannibal
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49072
Welcome our newest member, Durddcdy23
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM