How the original factions could be redesigned,,,

...To promote more balanced gameplay without requiring crazy new mechanics!

This is more or less a wishlist, but also a bit of a critique on CoH2's balance. I've always felt that the original factions have never been fully fleshed out or balanced. With the addition of the US and Oberkommando armies, these issues have only been obscured.

But my ideas leave issues with commanders to be addressed, and that I feel is another issue altogether. IMO they need to be consolidated for one thing, but I'll leave that to another thread.

That aside, in many ways I feel that Company of Heroes 2 has all the pieces of the puzzle, but they are either in funny places or just simply not connected. A lot of issues with game balance can be resolved by some reorganization of the tiers by providing different access routes to upgraded/improved units and adjusting the timing of how units hit the field. Just pulling a few doctrine units into the core armies would make all the difference.

First off: the Soviets!

t0:
Conscripts and Penal Battalions.
This provides close/mid range and mid/long range infantry respectively, and the initial ability to handle Axis basic infantry. Neither unit scales effectively into the endgame on their own, but they synergize well. Both lack solid anti-tank options (AT nades are awesome in disabling, but not in dealing damage.) which necessitates other options for mid-late game. Stealing dropped weapons I feel is where both of these units (have always) become fun and dynamic for Soviets. However, they are ultimately manpower drains if massed.

t1:
Guards, Mortar, Sniper, Scout Car.

Guards! Not as a doctrine unit, and perhaps with the PTRS as a muni upgrade, allowing for the option of a more AI focused squad.

t2:
Maxims, ZiS ATG, Halftrack

t3:
T70, SU-76, katyusha

t4:
The T34s, SU-85/100, IS-2 or KV1, Shock troopers (Remember KCH?)

T34/76s need to be upgradeable to t34/85s via munitions. Either by doctrine or preferably via upgrade in T4 should t34/85s be able to be built straight out (at a higher fuel cost). This dynamic would be intended to provide an option to conserve fuel and use muni to field better AT tanks. The SU-85 could share the same dynamic, accessing the not-appearing-in-this-game SU-100. The SU-100 is entirely hypothetical as an upgun option. Nonetheless, the idea of individually or globally upgrading the tanks guns is not exactly new, and IIRC exists in game code already. (I don't remember if it was an option in a beta build or not.)


All that said, the major shift would be that Tier 4 would require either tier 2 OR tier 3, making teching go t1-> t2/3-> t4, instead of the t1/t2>t3/t4.

T1 contains a real, core infantry unit with light anti vehicle capabilities and actual hand grenades. Mortars and snipers offer the option for clearing mgs and matching enemy snipers: the direct advantages of ostheer t1, in this case. The delay of the ZiS is offset by the PTRS, which will allow for the Axis light vehicles to have a slight window of time where they aren't completely hard countered, which would be nice for the game as a whole. (Soviet players should think of it as a chance for Axis to sink fuel on something other than heavy tanks.)

The choice between t2 and t3 come down to fuel income and whether or not the player feels they are on the offensive or the backfoot. T2's Maxims and ZiS require no fuel and are effective in their roles, especially defensively. The halftrack allows for frontline reinforcing as well as the option to carry out a flanking offensive. T2 would put soviets more or less on par with countering anything the ostheer can field with their first two tiers.

The T3 set up is more fuel intensive, but fields light armor that can put Soviets in a dominate position against sub t3 ostheer. The katyusha helps soviets bust turtling axis, and can be a crucial component to lategame play. The katyusha option in this context drives down the value of the PAK as a natural option to counter Soviet armor, driving up the incentive for Ostheer to field vehicles before dumping everything into heavy tanks. At the same time, the fuel costs of the katyusha itself slows Soviet teching, making the option less than a no-brainer. I am also implying that the SU-76 handle more like the kubelwagen with an ATG instead of whatever the nine hells it is trying to be now.

Once either t2 or t3 is up, the soviets are more or less obligated to go to their ultimate tier 4. Here is where soviets are able to answer both axis t3 and t4. Upgunning their weaker tanks allows a soviet player that is massing medium tanks to remain competitive as German armor techs up. Otherwise, there's the option for a solid heavy tank to turn superior numbers of the lighter german armor into experience points, forcing the opponent into investing their resources in panthers or Paks instead. (Depending on fuel.) The heavy tank option would be what would force ostheer to finally go t4, by default giving the unit a window of time to dominate the field.

Shock Troopers reside in t4 for a reason. They are extremely powerful units, and in the late stages of the game, especially once everyone's attentions are on their fuel economy and vehicle micro, throwing down some Shock Troopers to bust down some PAKs or a german army used to fighting unarmored infantry. They'd actually have shock value if timed at t4, rather than the predictable moment the second CP has come in. It would also give conscript PPSH upgrades a more viable option for early-mid game.

Now for the Ostheer!

Ze Germans are well equipped in their army, but a slight adjustment to t3 and t4 would make all the difference:

t3:
StuG 3, Panzer 4, (Ostwind/Puma/Luchs/Wirbelwind?.)

t4:
StuG 4, Panther, Walking Stuka, (Ostwind.)

StuG 3. This is the unit that should signal the transition into the midgame. The StuG 3 is an honest piece of armor, requiring more than just PTRS fire to efficiently eliminate without a decent flanking maneuver. A t70 should be able to circle strafe it to death, but a t70 wouldn't be able to take more than a few shells from a stug 3. This keeps positioning and map design important and creates a matchup where player micro pays off. On the other hand an SU-76 and a Stug 3, both being unturreted, should be rather evenly matched. I imagine a range and damage advantage to the SU, and a health and armor advantage to the Stug 3 makes the most sense. (Whoever is supported better wins or else a slugfest, a good thing in this case, at this stage.) If those pieces of armor could be brought into balance, CoH2's midgame would be much more interesting and would necessitate more varied gameplay strategies. T70s AND SU-76s versus a StuG wall for example. An Ostheer player skipping t2 and rushing a StuG 3 could reap the rewards, or be hurting for a PAK if/when the StuG 3 dies and there'suddenly a soviet with superior armored forces and another StuG 3 won't suffice. Shock, then support with StuG 3s.

StuG 4. Armored assault gun with extensive armor and health for its low fuel cost (compared to panthers or P4s). With correct facing, they should be capable of hurting and killing all light and medium tanks while absorbing their frontal shots to a degree. The lack of a turret makes unsupported or flanked StuGs exceptionally vulnerable. (Their critical weakness.) Essentially this unit just needs more health and armor. The reason this tank appears in t4 instead of t3 is specifically for the ability to absorb enemy tank shells while being capable of dealing a reasonable amount of damage itself. Neither of the t3 tanks have the armor (p4 has the health) to withstand frontal shots from dedicated Soviet anti-tank weaponry. This is the key unit adjustment for the Ostheer.

Panzer 4. Like the Stug 4, except exchanging frontal armor for a turret. All around tank, requires little alteration, so long as it is effective against all enemy armor up to heavy tanks. I think this unit functions rather well as it currently stands, with more issues lying in the Soviet AT department than anything. They are unable to withstand dedicated anti-tank fire, but capable of taking a hit and dealing a solid amount of damage in return. This unit resides in T3 as the ultimate unit for Axis to produce until T4. An ostheer player with the fuel should have no real reason to build StuG 3s over a P4. However, with this set up, it can be a trap, where investing too early or too much into P4s could leave an axis player quite vulnerable to the impending Soviet t4. Delaying t4 for more P4s should be a gamble.

Panther. The only core piece of armor that should be capable of damaging all Soviet tanks effectively. Resources should be the only reason PZ4s are built instead of Panthers once available. (Except for AI perhaps, but that is also the role of doctrinal Tigers, etc.) The Panther is what should give the Ostheer the edge against superior forces of t34s, and the ability to deal with Soviet heavy tanks. Their heavy price is appropriate to reward correct/conservative fuel usage.

The Ostheer really does require a fast, mobile unit for chasing down infantry, or at the very least defending flanks/back capping squads. The Ostwind is probably the straightforward option, but it is an altogether strong unit for T3. An Ostwind and P4 option would overshadow StuG3s too much. Pumas, without upguns (at least until t4) fills this role well. (But it being in t3 is probably too vCoH to be an option.) The Puma and the upgunned version may prove to be too versatile a stock option, leaving them to their place in commander doctrines. So perhaps an ostheer version of the luchs would suffice as the option to deal with straggling squads as a mobile piece of anti infantry armor. Another option would be the Wirbelwind, the Ostwinds predecessor, or even its predecessor the Flakpanzer I. But this is getting rather fantastical. Regardless, an anti infantry vehicle with no direct ability to withstand an enemy tank or anti tank weaponry is the key here. The flame halftrack and scout car just doesn't quite cut it, being so flimsy. (Alternatively if the Ostheer Scout Car, by t3, could be upgraded with armor, or only once upgunned, enough to slow/stop PTRS rounds, this would be a moot point.)

Anyways, this version of T3 provides ostheer with strong armor options that can dominate armorless soviet field presence. In addition, effective t3 play can either force a t3 soviet into t2 (for ZiS), or simply delay/deny soviet t4. For Ostheer, T4 provides the staying power (stug4) and the killing power (panther) to remain in the game against allied tank production and the onslaught of soviet t4 and its T-34s.

Personally, I miss vCoH's walking stuka being an upgrade for the halftrack unlocked at t4, but that was back in the context for the nebelwerfer from t3. Nonetheless t4 is where ostheer acquires the ability to indirectly clear enemy ATGs. The Ostwind could find it's place here as well, should T3 contain something like the Luchs. Thus it's suitable role as more damaging, less mobile anti infantry armor unit.

Drop the Brummbar.

If anything, you can consider this entire post to be a build up for that final point.

That's my ramble about balance, and the ideas I had while I had time to kill before leaving for work. At the very least if modding were supported this is something I'd probably implement on my own time.

Thanks for reading. If anything, hopefully I can spark a few debates or get some conversations moving out towards more than just the same ol OP rants and game-quitting threats.

This is a very interesting idea with a lot of potential. I like it.

No offense, but ugh. It's this thread again.

Nice work, I'd play that game) If only it could happen

Nope, i dont want to take a step back! I like the way the factions are build, and these 2 worked shortly before WFA release! We just need to focus more on the balance now, than rebuilding whole factions and starting the balance from scrap. No thank you!

These are good ideas! Ideas that hopefully will move SEGA to a Major redesign which is needed. As COH2 Gameplay has more potential

Forum members that halt such drastic changes fail to see that COH2 has a small audience and will become smaller and smaller.

For more ideas I urge people to read my first post

Nope, i dont want to take a step back! I like the way the factions are build, and these 2 worked shortly before WFA release! We just need to focus more on the balance now, than rebuilding whole factions and starting the balance from scrap. No thank you!

+1

Nope, i dont want to take a step back! I like the way the factions are build, and these 2 worked shortly before WFA release! We just need to focus more on the balance now, than rebuilding whole factions and starting the balance from scrap. No thank you!

You know, I kind of agree with you to a point. The Soviets and Ostheer worked rather well before WFA. Balancing two factions is a feasible task. But now the Ostheer and the Soviets have to deal with the Americans and Nazi Brits no matter how we look at it.

And right now, they're not well integrated. The Ostheer needs to be able to handle both allied factions, and the soviets, both axis. The balance pretty much was scrapped with WFA already. Whatever worked before WFA is irrevocable now that there's four factions, and the original factions need to reflect that. The entire game is different.

I had to scrap three of the maps I was working on because the whole dynamics of Nazi Brits completely turns the map control on its head. Hell, many of the maps prior to WFA are completely broken now and need to be scrapped and redesigned for that reason. If OKW could only play v USF, and the Soviets only Ostheer, there'd still be room for simply 'focusing more on balance.' But that's not the case.

Incidentally, these are more the collective ideas I had about CoH2 prior to WFA that have been kicking inside my head since. But at the very least, the severe issues with allied team synergy and available strategies would be addressed. A staggering of units with strategic shock value throughout the game would give many games more depth than 'basic infantry to biggest, heaviest, most expensive call in tank.' Quite frankly, it would virtually necessitate more dynamic play.

I really like the changes, especially for the Soviets. If there are any changes to allow more viable core units, then i am all up for it! Less reliance on commanders that have units NECESSARY for victory is always good!

+1

Nope, i dont want to take a step back! I like the way the factions are build, and these 2 worked shortly before WFA release! We just need to focus more on the balance now, than rebuilding whole factions and starting the balance from scrap. No thank you!

+1

Asking to swap only 1 unit is already drastic, trying to change the whole faction is not gonna happen.

What i can see happening:

SU:
-Penals needs to fulfill the role of "Elite" core mid-long range infantry for soviets. I also thought that a zeal like ability (vet) which increases performance when there is less models would suit the unit.
-They need to drop the concept of T3 AI and T4 AT/Artillery. Swap T70 and Su76. They also need to bring it in lines with WFA units performance/cost.
-PTRS: you may reduce the amount of them being given to doctrinal units, but make it worthy to have. It can't be the only upgrade weapon that NO ONE wants to pick up.

OH:
-Teching cost (fuel/mp) and timing needs to be look up. T2 needs to arrive a bit earlier and needs to cost a little less mp while trying to get to T4 shouldn't be as drastic. Soviets have seen their teching cost redudce, i don't see why OH shouldn't follow the same route.
-Panzerwerfer: i think a little buff on cooldown (10-15s) wouldn't be bad in combination with a little increase on barrage to fall down (2-3s)