Login

russian armor

Reverting basic faction ideas to its former state

1 Feb 2015, 21:38 PM
#1
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670

I'd like to say I'm an average/below average player, who can't really have a proper opinion about balance. I see many 4v4 players talking about it, though. I thought I might also say a thing or two - I play 1v1s for competetive play and 4v4s for achievements (yes, I'm an achievement bitch). I will be talking solely about 1v1s in this post.

As most of CoH2 players believe, many units from eastern front theater are underpowered, imbalanced or not useful at all. While some clearly need a buff, some were just thrown away from its initial idea for an unit.

Let's take SU-76M as an example. Soviets are quite unique, as their tier progression is one of the first tiers -> long, long nothing -> on of the later tiers. If we completely forget about doctrines at this moment (what is a really big mistake, but is necessary), building T-70 or SU-76M has little sense, unless map control through entire game (T-70 is still a considerable choice, of course). This is because after 30/60 additonal fuel, a better/best vehicle of that tier could be optained (let's skip Katyusha, as it fires rather not anti-tank rockets).

At the first glance, the problem could be solved by
a) decreasing tier cost, what would allow light vehicles come earlier BUT would also allow medium vehicles come earlier unless their cost increase;
b) decreasing cost of units that are meant to appear faster on the battlefield AND nerfing them if needed.

Let's look back. SU-76M costs 70 fuel. If we assume tier 1 is built (as tier 4 nicely compliments it) 40+120+70=230 fuel is needed to field first SU-76M. If we tried to decrease tier cost and increase other units' cost, it would arrive sooner, but it would also forced a cost increase for Katty and Big Suchka. That way, they wouldn't be able to be spammed, and without doctrinal vehicles, Soviets would always lose late-game.

But, if we nerf Small Suchka even more and give it its game release price (45 fuel, I think) it could arrive earlier. It would not be so game changing, as it has been nerfed, but would allow the Soviets for a more diversive early-to-mid gameplay. The Suchka is only an example, but all underused units from the eastern front could be looked upon that way.

I am aware that this idea surely appeared earlier, but I haven't belonged to the playerbase then. I would also like to sorry for my not so good english.

What are your comments on this topic?

TL;DR decreasing Soviet and some Ostheer fuel price would allow to solve balance problems and give them a clear role without that balancing mess.
1 Feb 2015, 22:08 PM
#2
avatar of Stafkeh
Patrion 14

Posts: 1006


TL;DR decreasing Soviet and some Ostheer fuel price would allow to solve balance problems and give them a clear role without that balancing mess.


This is a horrible idea (I think). Don't forget about this awesome commander called Soviet Industry!
1 Feb 2015, 22:12 PM
#3
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670



This is a horrible idea (I think). Don't forget about this awesome commander called Soviet Industry!


I hope you read the whole post, as I mentioned decreasing price and nerfing the units at the same time. Would it still be a bad idea then? Propably. But Ostheer has its 221, which comes fast, and is fragile (I won't mention it is considered rather situational)
1 Feb 2015, 22:53 PM
#4
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Lets turn a steaming pile of shit into a little worthless crap!

Best idea ever!
3 Feb 2015, 00:05 AM
#5
avatar of pussyking
Donator 11

Posts: 551

There is a simple solution to the balance problem: buff allies!

Its just as simple as that: aliies need a buff.

US tanks need thicker armor and soviet stock units need a buff.
3 Feb 2015, 00:08 AM
#6
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

There is a simple solution to the balance problem: buff allies!

Its just as simple as that: aliies need a buff.

US tanks need thicker armor and soviet stock units need a buff.


-_-

Dont forget to buff volks and grenadiers to allow them to beat M1919 paras. That'll definitely fix OP LMG paras.

All the complicated balance fixing going on over here.
3 Feb 2015, 00:16 AM
#7
avatar of pussyking
Donator 11

Posts: 551



-_-

Dont forget to buff volks and grenadiers to allow them to beat M1919 paras. That'll definitely fix OP LMG paras.

All the complicated balance fixing going on over here.


I have not seen em been OP. I have not seen much of paras anyways. Its not like they are breaking the game.

Maybe you just play the axis and dont realise paras cost huge amounts of MP and that upgrade is the most expensive lmg upgrade in the game.

They are expensive as hell. You can simply overrun em with volks blob since US player will be drained of MP pretty fast if investing too much in paras.

Wipe em with luchs and watch USF player throw in a towel.
3 Feb 2015, 03:55 AM
#8
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2

I'd like to say I'm an average/below average player, who can't really have a proper opinion about balance.


Yes you can
3 Feb 2015, 05:09 AM
#9
avatar of Storm267

Posts: 128



I have not seen em been OP. I have not seen much of paras anyways. Its not like they are breaking the game.

Maybe you just play the axis and dont realise paras cost huge amounts of MP and that upgrade is the most expensive lmg upgrade in the game.

They are expensive as hell. You can simply overrun em with volks blob since US player will be drained of MP pretty fast if investing too much in paras.

Wipe em with luchs and watch USF player throw in a towel.


I think what he was trying to get at was the balance fix isn't as simple as that. TBH its a mix of buffs and nerfs on Axis and Allies.
3 Feb 2015, 07:19 AM
#10
avatar of GuyFromTheSky

Posts: 229


What are your comments on this topic?


I think you are on to something. Currently the 76 is an expensive pile of scrap. If you'd make it an inexpensive pile of crap it might become somewhat viable. Decreasing the T70 price will probably not end well though unless it gets an incredible nerf and then it will probably not be good for anything.
4 Feb 2015, 00:29 AM
#11
avatar of pussyking
Donator 11

Posts: 551



I think you are on to something. Currently the 76 is an expensive pile of scrap. If you'd make it an inexpensive pile of crap it might become somewhat viable. Decreasing the T70 price will probably not end well though unless it gets an incredible nerf and then it will probably not be good for anything.


Su76 represents COH2. It has a cool barrage feature that looks cool and thats it.
4 Feb 2015, 00:51 AM
#12
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9

I am disappointed to note that once again, I have noted unnecessary hostile Reports by one poster against another. This will not continue.

If the false reporting continues, which is subjective, I accept, there will be invising, and maybe, early baths...
4 Feb 2015, 01:11 AM
#13
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1664

Or just make the SU-76 worth building at its current cost.

Increase base damage/penetration or give it stronger vet of them.

Give a toggle function to an HE style round that has WFA trajectory like the Sherman Bulldozer or the Brummbar now.
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

937 users are online: 937 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49070
Welcome our newest member, Blesofsk
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM