Should OKW get a heavy artillery piece?

Umm, OKW wasn't fundamentally changed even once since release.
Resource rates were readjusted and balance was done, not even a single fundamental change occurred for OKW.

You want to know what fundamental change is? Remind yourself alpha week 2.
You're talking shit out of your ass as usual and even the top players you love to lean on so much are pointing this to you, yet you still fight against them.

You argue for the sake of arguing as you literally have no idea what you're talking about.
Ciez is right here.

Umm, OKW wasn't fundamentally changed even once since release.
Resource rates were readjusted and balance was done, not even a single fundamental change occurred for OKW.

You want to know what fundamental change is? Remind yourself alpha week 2.
You're talking shit out of your ass as usual and even the top players you love to lean on so much are pointing this to you, yet you still fight against them.

You argue for the sake of arguing as you literally have no idea what you're talking about.
Ciez is right here.

The resource income (of which the entire faction is based around) has been messed with multiple times which represents a significant change. Core units have had significant changes done to them. The OKW of now is nowhere near comparable to the OKW of WFA release.

All factions have seen fundamental changes that have messed with the way they normally operate; denying this is impossible.

I tried to advise ciez to ignore Alex...

Okw has good enough blob counters, they shouldn't get arty. unless, a better reason besides blobbing is brought up.

I tried to advise ciez to ignore Alex...

Okw has good enough blob counters, they shouldn't get arty. unless, a better reason besides blobbing is brought up.

Here's a few:

1. New OKW commanders would need something

2. Would allow OKW to counter enemy artillery, which they are really weak to

3. Enable OKW to deny territory

4. Help get rid of OKW MP float

5. Encourage more combined arms

OKW is good at countering blobs since the go to counter to blobbing is just blobbing harder, which OKW is really good at.

Here's a few:

1. New OKW commanders would need something

2. Would allow OKW to counter enemy artillery, which they are really weak to

3. Enable OKW to deny territory

4. Help get rid of OKW MP float

5. Encourage more combined arms

OKW is good at countering blobs since the go to counter to blobbing is just blobbing harder, which OKW is really good at.

as long as usf gets

pershing

hellcat

rangers

Sherman cali

since we are in the mood of asking for stuff

The resource income (of which the entire faction is based around) has been messed with multiple times which represents a significant change.

That is a balance change.
Significant change would be removing it or making it 1/3 and giving trucks deployed on points increased resource.

So you are wrong.

Core units have had significant changes done to them. The OKW of now is nowhere near comparable to the OKW of WFA release.

These are balance changes.

Significant changes would be complete unit role overhaul or switching the units within tiers.
Only JLI got that treatment and they aren't even a stock unit.

So you are wrong.

All factions have seen fundamental changes that have messed with the way they normally operate; denying this is impossible.

Like what?
Were stock units moved to different tiers?
Were units roles completely changed?
Were economy completely overhauled?
Was teching changed in any significant way?

You can't even tell balance changes and adjustments from overhauls and significant changes.

So you are wrong here again.

I find it hilarious that you still argue for your point even after putting yourself as a lost case from the very start.

Here's a few:

1. New OKW commanders would need something

2. Would allow OKW to counter enemy artillery, which they are really weak to

3. Enable OKW to deny territory

4. Help get rid of OKW MP float

5. Encourage more combined arms

OKW is good at countering blobs since the go to counter to blobbing is just blobbing harder, which OKW is really good at.

1. No one gets new commanders for a long time.
Thank community for infinite bitching about relic giving us new content.

2. Did stuka went somewhere?

3. Did shwerer truck went somewhere?

4. Volks aren't bulletproof anymore, its a first step.

5. No one forces you to spam shreckvolks, fusiliers and blob them around blob officer.
But sure, we can nerf shrecks somehow more so puppchens are more appealing and increase volks cost to increase bleed(point 4 fixed again) and discourage spam.

as long as usf gets

pershing

hellcat

rangers

Sherman cali

since we are in the mood of asking for stuff

nobody disagrees, something has to go in the new commanders.

Way to many people think the inclusion of things would be OP when you could put the IS3 or Panther II in the game and balance it because the game doesn't have to actually reflect history or realism at all.

the game doesn't have to actually reflect history or realism at all.

kay

give sov is-4m

and give usf m47 patton

That is a balance change.
Significant change would be removing it or making it 1/3 and giving trucks deployed on points increased resource.

So you are wrong.


These are balance changes.

Significant changes would be complete unit role overhaul or switching the units within tiers.
Only JLI got that treatment and they aren't even a stock unit.

So you are wrong.


Like what?
Were stock units moved to different tiers?
Were units roles completely changed?
Were economy completely overhauled?
Was teching changed in any significant way?

You can't even tell balance changes and adjustments from overhauls and significant changes.

So you are wrong here again.

I find it hilarious that you still argue for your point even after putting yourself as a lost case from the very start.

The munitions income was take to percents between 100, 80, and 66 a few times, which is exactly what you said would constitute a major change forcing a rethinking in meta.

Meta for OKW has shifted a lot, the Obers nerfed forced players to rely on call in infantry which are much more efficient. The Volk's nerfed made OKW players have to rely far more on the Rackten then before, the KT nerf has made the KT less effective when facing smart players encouraging OKW players to simply use different vehicles in combination rather than 1 super tank.

The Jadgtiger got a major change, tons of other OKW units have been messed with in similar ways.

This is coming from OKW fanboy numero uno, I know what my favorite faction is best and worst at.

LELIC!!!!

ALL factions should have artillery in the default tech tree.
Also all factions should have all the call-ins in the default tech tree.
And Merica should have a heavy tank.
And OKW needs flamers.
IMO TBH. But that's just me.

ALL factions should have artillery in the default tech tree.
Also all factions should have all the call-ins in the default tech tree.
And Merica should have a heavy tank.
And OKW needs flamers.
IMO TBH. But that's just me.

Yea, this looks like a list of reasons why you are not RTS designer

Even during Dune 2 era not every faction had everything, that says something.

Alex trying to one up Ciez made my day, with zero evidence or grounds to attempt to do so.

When it comes to design/balance opinions asking Cruzz/Ciez is the way to go.

The munitions income was take to percents between 100, 80, and 66 a few times, which is exactly what you said would constitute a major change forcing a rethinking in meta.

Meta for OKW has shifted a lot, the Obers nerfed forced players to rely on call in infantry which are much more efficient. The Volk's nerfed made OKW players have to rely far more on the Rackten then before, the KT nerf has made the KT less effective when facing smart players encouraging OKW players to simply use different vehicles in combination rather than 1 super tank.

The Jadgtiger got a major change, tons of other OKW units have been messed with in similar ways.

This is coming from OKW fanboy numero uno, I know what my favorite faction is best and worst at.

The only time OKW underwent an actual faction overhaul was during the WFA Alpha, after months of the community begging for it (rightly so) because their initial design was flat out stupid.

Everything you've mentioned and tried to claim as a "drastic faction change" or whatever your exact words have been simple balance adjustments and haven't even come close to changing the core design behind the faction.

Their tech tree is literally exactly the same as it was on release. Volks have schrecks, Kubel still suppresses, KT is still the strongest individual tank in the game. Obers are still the strongest individual infantry in the game. Pretty much all of their units still serve the exact same purpose as they always have. JLI are probably the most changed unit OKW has, but even then they serve the same role that they always did.

Not every faction needs access to everything, and not every faction needs to be strong at everything - if we want that, just design one perfect faction and play mirror matches all day everyday.

As much as I'm hesitant to agree with Katitof (because all you forum warriors are silly to me) he's definitely right in this case. You don't really have a leg to stand on aside from being stubborn and unwilling to admit that you're wrong.

Yea, this looks like a list of reasons why you are not RTS designer

Even during Dune 2 era not every faction had everything, that says something.

WOWWWWW
so mean D:

What, pray tell, does it say, and why does it say that?

It seems to me that the greater ability for factions to enjoy a diverse and versatile unit pool / units while maintaining a strong sense of opportunity cost is the ideal.

WOWWWWW
so mean D:

What, pray tell, does it say, and why does it say that?

It seems to me that the greater ability for factions to enjoy a diverse and versatile unit pool / units while maintaining a strong sense of opportunity cost is the ideal.

I'd say the perfect RTS have multiple armies with multiple different playstyles each, they might be able to do same things, but they shouldn't be able to do it same way, if they were, why have multiple armies in the first place?

I'm sure it would suit your POV on the matter if, imagine this, soviets had stock infantry like Obers, but would it really be balanced or interesting? I don't think so.

Each army have unique flavor, unique units, unique strengths and weaknesses, unique playstyles and tactics.
Each army suits different players for different, visual and gameplay reasons, each army creates different synergies in team games and so on.

That is a healthy design.

You like something more in another faction that is absent with yours? Play that other army.

No one is pledging a vow of loyalty to death to Hitler, Stalin or Roosevelt, if anyone is locked within single army, its only because their own limited mindset.

@CieZ
Hey! I'm not that bad, at least I can admit defeat when proven wrong, even if my own argument was turned against me!

Good luck countering Priests and Katys with Stuka!

@CieZ
Hey! I'm not that bad, at least I can admit defeat when proven wrong, even if my own argument was turned against me!

You're one of the most tolerable forum warriors. I've just never understood only playing one faction/one side, or spending so much time on forums as opposed to playing the game. It's just my opinion though. If you guys have as much fun constantly posting stuff on the forums as I have playing the game - who am I to judge?

At least it seems like the most radical/offensive posters have been weeded out of the community (or at least here on coh2.org) I do have to give respect that you and Alex can at least have discussions with one another without degrading into flame wars.

I'd say the perfect RTS have multiple armies with multiple different playstyles each, they might be able to do same things, but they shouldn't be able to do it same way, if they were, why have multiple armies in the first place?

I'm sure it would suit your POV on the matter if, imagine this, soviets had stock infantry like Obers, but would it really be balanced or interesting? I don't think so.

Each army have unique flavor, unique units, unique strengths and weaknesses, unique playstyles and tactics.
Each army suits different players for different, visual and gameplay reasons, each army creates different synergies in team games and so on.

That is a healthy design.

You like something more in another faction that is absent with yours? Play that other army.

No one is pledging a vow of loyalty to death to Hitler, Stalin or Roosevelt, if anyone is locked within single army, its only because their own limited mindset.

@CieZ
Hey! I'm not that bad, at least I can admit defeat when proven wrong, even if my own argument was turned against me!

A very good RTS, no doubt, but I believe there is something better possible.

Planetary Annihilation took the approach of a single army since they couldn't bid the Total Annihilation IP from a studio which still hasn't used it, and hopefully never will given their track record. I love both of those games to death, though.

Now, the balance arguments there were always between unit types, bots vs tanks, because the developers refused to give an overlapping role with the mainline units (dox vs bolo) after they changed the scale up. It was a good thing, though, since they were essentially the same before. However, the other units in their respective trees were hurt because of this lack of a choice. Eventually, they balanced it in a way where Dox was marginally less effective as a front-line unit, but still valuable to mix into the army (mobility and line of sight making it effective raiding and scouting, but worthy enough to DPS the same while bolos take the shots in main army).

We cannot think of factions like this, since we can't control more than one at once.

A better example, then.
In Total Annihilation, the ARM are, arguably, better than the CORE. From the supremacy of the EMG over lasers in the early game, and the FARK over CORE methods of mass producing their respective advanced air fighters. Regardless, a ton of the roles overlapped, and all their units had a parallel in the other faction. They each had their own flavor and marginally different stats, though many were functionally the same. Funnily enough, the Slasher being superior to its ARM counterpart, the Samson, in that it could shoot over wreckages due to its elevated firing port, blunted the otherwise overwhelming Flash attacks. CORE was on the defensive for the early game, but with proper radar support and micro they could beat back the Flash raids and protect their MEXes. Then there was the heavy tanks. Oh boy. The Goliath, the CORE unit, is second to none, having a decent AoE, a super fast build time (though costing a ton of metal), and a boat load of health, it made the ARM tanks pale in comparison. The CORE AK was vastly weaker to its ARM equivalent as a cheap, mainline infantry Kbot, the Peewee, but, the class was still valuable to purchase because of the superiority of the unguided rocket infantry unit, the CORE's Storm over the ARM Rocko. This meant that you'd still see the Rocko for busting up bases (not AK, AK was WAYYYY too bad for even the reduced opportunity cost of going bots for Storms to pay off its dysfunction). The Samson was still widely used and effective despite the superiority of its equivalent. Now, Planetary Annihilation has reached a state on one faction where the classes are more-or-less balanced and maintained on slight overlap, and Total Annihilation reached a state of somewhat overall inter-faction balance with absolute role overlap.

It's not hard to imagine that which combines the best of both of these worlds. Faction equivalents, in essence, don't need to be fully balanced for access and opportunity to give them their niches. Faction equivalents in the core army, additionally, can exist in harmony with maintaining aesthetic flavor, and playstyle flavor. Without intentional role overlap in the core armies, there will be no niche for similar units to fill, as the opportunity cost will not justify the slightly differing functions of the unit behind a commander. Such is the same with buildings--blunt the failure of one units by bundling the cost with another, better unit one is more likely to get, such is like the commanders, yet available to all armies. We just might see an LeHF, since it adds a delicious flavor and performs a slightly, slightly different role than the rocket artillery, IF the opportunity cost for accessing it wasn't so high.
Commanders / doctrines cannot maintain this sort of beautiful possibility, because they are a sort of mutually exclusive balance overlap which must be a bad choice in one circumstance over another.

But all these examples are brushed aside by Starcraft. Brood War did not have equivalents for each faction, it had wildly different flavors and playstyles for them, and it is a monstrously beautiful and balanced game.
The key difference here is that there is no given plausible equivalent for certain units, and, frankly, no desire for them. CoH2 is different in that it's united by real life's plausible equivalents, and more importantly, its commander-only units which, while present in multiplayer, are often times not truly present at all. The possibility of said equivalents is so near, our desire speaks out to them: if only... if only.

That was... too long winded for so simple a response, so, TL;DR:

It is entirely possible to maintain distinct flavor, overall balance, faction strengths and weaknesses, and a myriad of playstyles, with factions that have access to a rough equivalent of all units from other factions, while maintaining intra-faction unit and tier/building balance.