Login

russian armor

Teching analysis and faction comparison re July 21 patch

17 Jul 2015, 12:57 PM
#1
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

So I read this thread (http://www.coh2.org/topic/36670/new-incoming-teching-costs.) and thought up my response but it sort of took a life of its own so I thought it merited its own thread:

Below I've assembled a list of the fuel amounts required to tech up to a particular tech tier.

NB: I've made some underlying assumptions which are asterisked below. This whole thing also implicitly relies on a teching order which I'm assuming is the one the devs intended.

GREEN is threshold for accessing light armor. Here when I say light armor Im referring to early game vehicles which are able to tangle with AT guns reasonably well 1 on 1 as well as fend off infantry in the early-mid game i.e. a true light tank.

RED is threshold for accessing medium armor. Clarification: This refers exclusively to medium tanks.

PURPLE is threshold needed for fully teching.

Comments on values: These values represent the cumulative amount of fuel invested into teching to access particular tech thresholds. They do not take into account any units built, and purely represent the fuel gates which bar access to advanced vehicles/infantry which need to be invested to access them. Rush strats are not accounted for. As such, they are useful as a tech pace guide. Negative values indicate a surplus and the negative mp values are best used to compare faction early game potential. Currently MP costs are not (yet) accounted for. (Am typing from my phone, makes things painful and slow)

Wehrmacht
Intended: T1>T2>T3 or T4
Starting resources: 420 mp, 20 fu
T1: 80 mp, 10 fu (Cumulative required = -340 mp, -10 fu)
BP1: 100 mp, 40 fu
T2: 200 mp, 20 fu (Cumulative required = -40 mp, 50 fu)
BP2: 100 mp, 45 fu
T3: 260 mp, 75 fu (Cumulative required = 320 mp, 170 fu)
BP3: 100 mp, 45 fu
T4: 260 mp, 75 fu (Cumulative required= 580 mp, 290 fu; 420 mp, 215 fu if t3 skip)

Soviets
Intended: T1 or T2>Nades if required>T3>T4
Starting resources: 390 mp, 50 fu
Grenades: 125 mp, 25 fu
AT grenades: 125 mp, 25 fu
T1: 160 mp, 40 fu (Cumulative required = -230 mp, -10 fu)
T2: 160 mp, 50 fu (Cumulative required = -230 mp, 0 fu)
T3: 240 mp, 80 fu (Cumulative required = 260 mp, 130 fu*; 420mp, 180 fu if both T1+T2)
T4: 240 mp, 90 fu (Cumulative required = 500 mp, 220 fu*; 660 mp, 260 fu if all tiers)

USF
Intended: Ndes+racks> T1 or T2>T3**
Starting resources: 400 mp, 15 fu
Racks: 150 mp, 15 fu
Grenades: 150 mp, 25 fu
T1: 200 mp, 50 fu (Cumulative required = -180 mp*** 75 fu**)
T2: 200 mp, 60 fu (Cumulative required = -180 mp*** 85 fu**)
T3: 240 mp, 120 fu (Cumulative required = 60 mp*** 205 fu**, T2 assumed; -20 mp*** 255 fu for all)

OKW
Intended: T1 or T2>T3
Starting resources: 240 mp, 40 fu
T1: 200 mp, 40 fu (Cumulative required = -40 mp, 0 fu)
T2: 200 mp, 40 fu (Cumulative required = -40 mp, 0 fu)
T3: 200 mp, 120 fu*** (Cumulative required = 160 mp, 160 fu****, 360 mp, 220 fu**** for all tiers)

*Assuming sov T2; -10 for T1. Nade costs not added to sov t1 or t2 as I'm thinking sov player will build building before nade.
**Assuming nades and racks. These costs added to LT/Capt cost as I'm assuming that usf player will tech at least nades before LT/Capt.
***Subtracted 280 mp from these costs as USF gets a combat capable squad equivalent to rifles + bar (LT) or rifles + zooks. Major mp cost not subtracted as he is not combat capable. For all tier version, subtracted 560 mp (LT & Capt). To adjust, add 280 mp (560 mp for all tier option)
****Adjusted due to OKW fuel penalty. Starting tier not affected due to starting 40 fuel.

Source of values:http://community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/company-of-heroes-2-general-discussion/67-coh-2-changelog/page6
17 Jul 2015, 12:58 PM
#2
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

General Observations:
Regarding total tech costs:
All factions have relatively similar full tech fuel unlock costs except ostheer (290 ostheer vs 240 sov, 255 USF and 220 OKW). This pretty clearly shows that ostheer has to choose either t3 or t4, not competitive to choose both. All other factions have similar total teching costs that all can afford to fully tech in the course of a match. Mp wise, Sovs have extremely heavy mp costs, much greater than ostheer which I'd say is unfair. USF costs are a bit hard to directly compare, but if we take the LT/Capt as a rifle squad with bars/zooks and adjust the cost accordingly then USF mp teching cost is negligible, even pushing into surplus territory if both the combat officers are bought!

Regarding medium armor:
The medium armor thresholds are not so balanced but this is somewhat understandable due to unit differences. (ost 170 or 215, sov 220, usf 205, okw 165).One glaring outlier is ost t3 cost vs sov t4 cost. The differential is 50 fuel! I shall elaborate more below in the specific matchups. Please do keep in mind that while OKW teching is cheaper, their vehicles etc are much more expensive e.g. OKW pz4 costs 135 fuel but due to 66% fuel income they have to wait for the time required to save 202.5 fuel i.e. assuming equal territory control, their allied opponent will have saved up 202.5 fuel by the time they have saved 135 fuel.

Regarding artillery:
Ostheer requires a min. 215 fuel investment to access arty but excludes t3. Conversely, going t3 makes arty prohibitively expensive, requiring a further investment of 120 fuel! Other factions get access to their arty more-or-less by normal teching. USF suffers from not having any core arty apart from the major himself (NOT referring to HMC here) which is severely underwhelming. Access-wise though, the other 3 factions have their access, such as it is, at competitive prices.

Regarding allied vs axis:
The allied factions can benefit tremendously by skipping out on grenades/racks, as they form a significant portion of the teching cost (50 sov, 35 USF); particularly in quickly accessing medium armor. However, the tradeoff for sov is increased mp tech costs. Which is more valuable? 250 mp or 50 fuel? Its harder to compare for USF as their 'free' officers drastically cut their mp costs for teching but add to their popcap, so its hard to compare. They keyword here is CAN. Not saying its a definite cause of imbalance, just pointing out a disparity.

Ost vs Sov
Ost has two advantages, one quite big: in being able to outproduce sovs in super-early game (340 mp vs 230 mp leftover after building first building) AND (this is the big one) ost can access P4 before sovs can access equivalents (170 fuel ost vs 220 fuel sov which translates to 2+ mins).

That said, there are two particular areas where soviets can achieve a huge advantage. First: Ost going this route (T3) makes it prohibitively expensive to access artillery effectively leaving them with the mortar only. Second, sov T2 counters everything in Ost T2 at equal skill and sov T3 is very easily accessible compared to Ost T3 (170 vs 130). With the recent buffs to M5 and Su76, this places at sov players disposal 2 units very capable of countering infantry based AT gun and shrecks, which are the t70 and su76 (barrage) and have no vehicle counter of their own, which synergizes extremely well with M5 quad. If sov player is skilled enough to forgoe nades, the gap widens more. The matchup favours sov in mid game, but IF both players kept income levels similar, then favours ost late game.

Ost going T4 against soviets is also unviable as there is a 45 fuel difference plus panthers themselves cost 175 fuel. Again, leaving sov with a huge advantage (i.e. no opposing AT vehicle) midgame (unless he forgoes any units from T3). Definite exploit potential.

Ost vs USF
In this matchup USF has early game advantage by being able to access stuarts early whereas ost has no comparable light armor. However, ost retains its mid-late and late game advantage. Particularly problematic is that Ost has access to medium armor much earlier than USF (170 fu vs 205 fu), which gap grows wider if USF gets a light vehicle, as osts light vehicles are (a) not critical to ost mid-game unlike USF and (b) cheaper than USF light vehicles. Id say USF has the disadvantage here, somewhat. Perhaps greater still if ost player is able to lockdown USF rifles in super-early game but as I don't have win-rates and the meta hasn't stabilized yet for MOST players I'd say its pointless to speculate.

OKW vs Soviet
OKW has super-cheap teching compared to sov, particularly in accessing medium tanks (160 fu vs 220 fu). However, as the price of the units fuel wise (on account of OKW fuel penalty) is much higher, the matchup seems structured so that, with equal skill and equal incomes, both factions can access their first medium tank at around about the same time. E.g. OKW going p4 = 160 + 135*1.5 = 362.5; for Sov going t34/85 = 220 + 130 = 350 so the matchup revolves more on skill. OKW has puma to counter sov t3 and both have similar (adjusted) costs e.g. 75 fu for sov su76, 50*1.5 = 75 fu for OKW.

OKW vs USF
Again, similar matchup with regards to tech prices due to OKW unit costs, see above. USF has slight advantage in that it has a cheaper medium armor threshold compared to Sov (205 fu vs 220 fu for Sov). I am concerned with how USF can counter an okw p4 as their stock sherman can neither outfight it nor outnumber it.
17 Jul 2015, 13:00 PM
#3
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Jagdpanzer 4 is a medium class vehicle.
Just saying.

40+40+120 is not 220. Noticed your adnotation.

USF have light armor in T1 and T2.
17 Jul 2015, 13:20 PM
#4
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

Hang on let me get to post 2. Damn this phone makes it tough.
17 Jul 2015, 13:47 PM
#5
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

Molotovs and AT nades teching cost 15 fuel in new patch?
17 Jul 2015, 13:54 PM
#6
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Molotovs and AT nades teching cost 15 fuel in new patch?

Why would you think that?
17 Jul 2015, 14:15 PM
#7
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

Molotovs and AT nades teching cost 15 fuel in new patch?


IIRC each costs 15. Ive put them both separately. correct me if im wrong ill update. (Im on holiday now so no access to my computer)
17 Jul 2015, 15:22 PM
#8
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2015, 14:15 PMJunaid


IIRC each costs 15. Ive put them both separately. correct me if im wrong ill update. (Im on holiday now so no access to my computer)

Each costs 125 MP 25 Fuel.
17 Jul 2015, 19:16 PM
#9
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Doesn't USF starts with a bit of fuel ?
17 Jul 2015, 20:31 PM
#10
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

15 i believe
18 Jul 2015, 13:30 PM
#11
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

ty for the correctioms guys will update. Need to add more anyway. Damn but this cell phone is tough
18 Jul 2015, 14:06 PM
#12
avatar of Jiisharo

Posts: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2015, 12:57 PMJunaid

OKW
Intended: T1 or T2>T3


From a 1v1 (and ~2v2) perspective I've the impression that the OKW intended build is T1 > T2 or T3. First because T1 ISG and IR Halftrack does not require fuel and also because T2 into T3 is so fuel consuming. If you get just one FlakHT, one puma and one stuka out from T2 it's already 215 fuel. Unless you're sitting on 2 fuel points / don't need T1 to secure 1 fuel point (in which case you're probably winning already) it seems you won't get anything out of T3 before a long time..

If you were not going to get units out of T2 to use fuel for T3 then why not get T1 in the first place?

I'm even more convinced of this with the upcoming decrease cost of Ie.IG 18 ISG and previous decrease on the IR halftrack. Decreased reinforced cost for Sturmpios will let you get more than 1 squad (2 maybe 3 total) so can skip T2 and still repair efficiently. Relic seems to promote for more use of T1.
18 Jul 2015, 14:25 PM
#13
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509



From a 1v1 (and ~2v2) perspective I've the impression that the OKW intended build is T1 > T2 or T3. First because T1 ISG and IR Halftrack does not require fuel and also because T2 into T3 is so fuel consuming. If you get just one FlakHT, one puma and one stuka out from T2 it's already 215 fuel. Unless you're sitting on 2 fuel points / don't need T1 to secure 1 fuel point (in which case you're probably winning already) it seems you won't get anything out of T3 before a long time..

If you were not going to get units out of T2 to use fuel for T3 then why not get T1 in the first place?

I'm even more convinced of this with the upcoming decrease cost of Ie.IG 18 ISG and previous decrease on the IR halftrack. Decreased reinforced cost for Sturmpios will let you get more than 1 squad (2 maybe 3 total) so can skip T2 and still repair efficiently. Relic seems to promote for more use of T1.


The devs have intended that okw needs any 2 tiers to get a well rounded army so T1+T2 is ok too so you are absolutelycorrect on that count. T1+T2 does have the disadvantage of no tanks of any kind only jpiv which is not a tank.

Plus i deliberately didnt write it down because (a) from what ive seen almost every okw players goes T3 (b) keep the reference above simple and easy to understand and ward off misunderstandings from guys saying OKW 'merely' needs 60 fuel for accessing medium armor. Infact imma edit the main post now that this has occurred to me
19 Jul 2015, 09:00 AM
#14
avatar of Jiisharo

Posts: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jul 2015, 14:25 PMJunaid


The devs have intended that okw needs any 2 tiers to get a well rounded army so T1+T2 is ok too so you are absolutelycorrect on that count. T1+T2 does have the disadvantage of no tanks of any kind only jpiv which is not a tank.

Plus i deliberately didnt write it down because (a) from what ive seen almost every okw players goes T3 (b) keep the reference above simple and easy to understand and ward off misunderstandings from guys saying OKW 'merely' needs 60 fuel for accessing medium armor. Infact imma edit the main post now that this has occurred to me


True that T3 is built after T1 or T2 in the vast majority of OKW games I've seen. I often build the 3 tiers, somehow my 1v1s as OKW tends to last 40min+ as I'm just fighting to get a hold on a fuel point most of the time. :blush:

I guess we'll see how it plays out. I do like the possibility for allies to make early light vehicles rush. It was common in vCOH to see a very early Stuart racking up kills, denying areas with mines, being annoying as hell, etc. I still build early AT as axis because of those memories.
19 Jul 2015, 09:48 AM
#15
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

Relic seriously needs to change the cost of Ostheer T3 and T4. It's way too expensive now. Yesterday I had a inhouse 2v2 and the M5 was there in 7 minutes in the game with a quad upgrade. At 9 minutes my opponent already had 1 SU-76. At 12 minutes my Stug III came on the field. MVGame. Or make the T3 of the soviets more expensive. 7 minutes M5 quads are just bullshit and gives a Ostplayer no fucking counter to it. With paks it just lays back and if you try to flank something it suppresses immediatly. Relic please!
19 Jul 2015, 10:40 AM
#16
avatar of atouba

Posts: 482

Relic seriously needs to change the cost of Ostheer T3 and T4. It's way too expensive now. Yesterday I had a inhouse 2v2 and the M5 was there in 7 minutes in the game with a quad upgrade. At 9 minutes my opponent already had 1 SU-76. At 12 minutes my Stug III came on the field. MVGame. Or make the T3 of the soviets more expensive. 7 minutes M5 quads are just bullshit and gives a Ostplayer no fucking counter to it. With paks it just lays back and if you try to flank something it suppresses immediatly. Relic please!


The M5 is way too OP now. It has high DPS and infantry die too fast. Pg with schrecks can be pinned down so quickly and then the M5 goes back and runs out of the range. Also a 222 can be killed in 3 seconds.
19 Jul 2015, 10:41 AM
#17
avatar of Jiisharo

Posts: 5



Sounds like Axis will be even more on the defensive and Allies offensive?
19 Jul 2015, 10:44 AM
#18
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2015, 12:57 PMJunaid

USF
Intended: T1 or T2>T3
Starting fuel: 15
Racks: 15
Grenades: 25
T1: 50
T2: 60
T3: 80 (Cumulative required = 170**, T2 assumed; 210 for all)

*Assuming sov T2; -10 for T1.
**Assuming nades and racks.
***Adjusted due to OKW fuel penalty. Starting tier not affected due to starting 40 fuel.

Source of values:http://community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/company-of-heroes-2-general-discussion/67-coh-2-changelog/page6


Just a small correction here. The major for USF is 120 not 80 fuel. Before the change in the mod patch it was 90 not 80, you might have confused it with the captain. :)



19 Jul 2015, 10:47 AM
#19
avatar of atouba

Posts: 482

I can be pretty sure that the ost will be the weakest faction in the new patch. The faction is the only one which has no light tanks. Allies light tanks come out earlier than ever, then the only tactic ost can choose is defending. And they will lose due to bad map controling.
19 Jul 2015, 10:51 AM
#20
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

That's true indeed Atouba. Offensive is almost a no-go anymore
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

680 users are online: 2 members and 678 guests
LCarlos, 188bet88design
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49145
Welcome our newest member, 188bet88design
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM