Login

russian armor

is it too late to revert the bad tech changes?

26 Jul 2015, 22:19 PM
#21
avatar of Theodosios
Admin Red  Badge

Posts: 1554 | Subs: 7



That'll never happen unless Light Vehicles are changed so that they can kill Medium Tanks, like 2 T-70's being able to kill a Panzer IV, or 3 swarming a Panther. As-is though, Light Vehicle have no use outside early-mid, they're too expensive, fragile, and weak compared to Medium Tanks.


Of course light vehicles are useful in late game: Quad/251 as reinforcement platform, T70 as spotter and flank harassment unit/punisher for lonely capping infantry squads, SU-76 (2+ in number) in late game being able to beat mediums/heavy non tank destroyers and barrage, Flak HT securing position vs infantry flanks and giving anti air, Stuart being able to stun mediums/heavies and more stuff I cannot think of right know.

Why do you think light vehicles are only useful in late game if they are able to destroy mediums/heavies by themselves?
26 Jul 2015, 22:25 PM
#22
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



That'll never happen unless Light Vehicles are changed so that they can kill Medium Tanks, like 2 T-70's being able to kill a Panzer IV, or 3 swarming a Panther. As-is though, Light Vehicle have no use outside early-mid, they're too expensive, fragile, and weak compared to Medium Tanks.


the quad m5 is already a mobile reinforcement point and the soviet's primary mean of anti-air.

The su-76 is already a decent unit late game, with its flexibility of free barrage and decent anti-tank unit.

The t-70 only needed a health boost as it's already a very good infantry muncher.

The very reason why sov t3 is OP currently is because the Quad m5 and the su-76 are already very good light armor with good scalability. "Fixing" the soviet t3 is going to require nerfing the quad m5 and the su-76, therefore breaking the scalability they currently have.

Bad tech changes? These teching changes (+ call in fix) finally broke the boring meta and made many other doctrines (doctrines you could NEVER use before the current patch competetively) as well as build orders viable. I would never ever replace the current teching system with the former one.

I agree that USF needs some love. Adjust the Major fuel costs for example or implement NDA changes. We shall hopefully see more on the next patch concerning USF. :romeoHairDay:


The breaking up of old meta would have happened with any tech tree changes, good or bad. It's only going to be a matter of time before another meta settle.

you want tech tree change to introduce new strategy, not merely breaking the old strategy only to replace it with another one. The USF is already suffering from the bad effects as their Lt become useless and people go for Capt entirely.

This type of meta replacement is unsustainable. It's a matter of inevitability that patching will cease and we are going to be stuck with a single meta if all we are doing is replacing old meta with a new meta.
26 Jul 2015, 23:21 PM
#23
avatar of Theodosios
Admin Red  Badge

Posts: 1554 | Subs: 7


The breaking up of old meta would have happened with any tech tree changes, good or bad. It's only going to be a matter of time before another meta settle.

you want tech tree change to introduce new strategy, not merely breaking the old strategy only to replace it with another one. The USF is already suffering from the bad effects as their Lt become useless and people go for Capt entirely.

This type of meta replacement is unsustainable. It's a matter of inevitability that patching will cease and we are going to be stuck with a single meta if all we are doing is replacing old meta with a new meta.


Basically the teching changes plus call in fixes destroyed the old meta and there is no real new meta. I have seen more than one viable strategy for Soviets and Ostheer. Strategies that looked like meta can be easier countered than the old broken meta and do not necessarily require a certain OP commander to choose in order to be able to beat them. We will see how the process of finding viable strategies will go on in the next weeks but as far as I can tell I have not seen a broken strategy which can only be countered by one or two commanders.

I do not know about the WFA factions though since I have not played them yet.
26 Jul 2015, 23:27 PM
#24
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

i don't understand where's your problem, ost now gets T2 faster and i think at lower price, battle phases unlocks are cheaper while Tiers are more expensive which is good because before patch, ostheer could deploy t3 tanks much faster, now it focuses on earlier infantry battles.

Soviet tech changes are good IMO, T3 is now viable because it has AI unit, AT unit and halftrack, cost is not high so they can be deployed quickly, some strats now focuses on fast fuel harrass so like M5 can be build at 7 min which is OP.

I dont get why USA changes are bad, major is 30 fuel more expensive which is usually less than 2 minutes to get that, that change was necessary because USA could get Sherman at 10-12 mins
26 Jul 2015, 23:57 PM
#25
avatar of Jaedrik

Posts: 446 | Subs: 2



That'll never happen unless Light Vehicles are changed so that they can kill Medium Tanks, like 2 T-70's being able to kill a Panzer IV, or 3 swarming a Panther. As-is though, Light Vehicle have no use outside early-mid, they're too expensive, fragile, and weak compared to Medium Tanks.
SIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDE
AAAAAAAAAAAARMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOR
RELIC PLS
FORTRESS EUROPE IS SIMULATING LITERALLY EVERY PLATE AND ANGLE OF ARMOR
STOP BEING LAZY EXCUSE MAKING FFS I NEED SIDE ARMOR IN MY LIFE
27 Jul 2015, 05:13 AM
#26
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



Basically the teching changes plus call in fixes destroyed the old meta and there is no real new meta. I have seen more than one viable strategy for Soviets and Ostheer. Strategies that looked like meta can be easier countered than the old broken meta and do not necessarily require a certain OP commander to choose in order to be able to beat them. We will see how the process of finding viable strategies will go on in the next weeks but as far as I can tell I have not seen a broken strategy which can only be countered by one or two commanders.

I do not know about the WFA factions though since I have not played them yet.


what actually fixed the call in was making them an unlock. The e8 could have easily be made an unlock without having to change the cost of major and captain. (weapon rack change is fine.)

i don't understand where's your problem, ost now gets T2 faster and i think at lower price, battle phases unlocks are cheaper while Tiers are more expensive which is good because before patch, ostheer could deploy t3 tanks much faster, now it focuses on earlier infantry battles.

Soviet tech changes are good IMO, T3 is now viable because it has AI unit, AT unit and halftrack, cost is not high so they can be deployed quickly, some strats now focuses on fast fuel harrass so like M5 can be build at 7 min which is OP.

I dont get why USA changes are bad, major is 30 fuel more expensive which is usually less than 2 minutes to get that, that change was necessary because USA could get Sherman at 10-12 mins


the ost t2 building is merely 20 mp earlier, unless you decided to skip t1 building. It's hardly a focus on infantry battle since the stated intent was to expand the light vehicle phrase. What end up happening is the Soviet light armor now arrive way earlier than they should.

the SOV t3 is going to end up nerfed. At its current strength it's too powerful for its arrival time. Which is a shame since we've just buff the su-76 to be viable late game and now we have to nerf it.

the USF lt -> major route is 30 fuel more expensive. The USF capt -> major route is only 10 fuel more expensive. Incidentally the Capt-> major is also the new meta.
27 Jul 2015, 09:25 AM
#27
avatar of Bad_Vader

Posts: 88 | Subs: 1



in a 2v2 a player might get away from bunkering down on a portion of the map, but in a 1v1 the ost is going to lose map control badly if their army is tied to the pak.

It's simple logic that a sov army with support weapons and light armor is going to win over an ost army with just support weapons. It's a fact that the ost is fighting at a significant disadvantage. It is a structural fault of the new tech tree that the ost are forced to fight a uphill battle against an armored soviet with no armor of their own.

I'm not talking 2v2 btw because of the presence of a possible OKW ally giving them access to puma which hard counters the m5 and also if both are Ost they can each get 1 pak denying the effectiveness of the M5 which is to attack where there's no pak present.

Of course Ost will lose some level of map control. That's the entire point of a 'shock unit" like the M5, to swing map control to the soviets until Axis armor comes in. Another thing to point out is that Soviets don't have the luxury of your "fact". The fact is Soviets are forced to choose either T1 or T2 so that's either cons+support weapons or penals+snipers+cons, Soviets have to sacrifice either an effective infantry(penals) or support weapons to begin with. No one is going for both T1 and T2 unless they really need to or its already late in the game and is also contrary to the point of a fast M5 since T1 and T2 consts fuel thus it would delay T3 and ultimately the M5 if both were gotten.

Is Ost fighting an uphill battle when it comes to light vehicle? No one quite knows yet since the patch is still a week old and the meta has not yet stabilized, so until the meta has stabilized and majority of the top players think that T3 sov tech timing is broken it is assumed to be fine as is the opinion of the majority at the moment.
27 Jul 2015, 10:04 AM
#28
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611


I'm not talking 2v2 btw because of the presence of a possible OKW ally giving them access to puma which hard counters the m5 and also if both are Ost they can each get 1 pak denying the effectiveness of the M5 which is to attack where there's no pak present.

Of course Ost will lose some level of map control. That's the entire point of a 'shock unit" like the M5, to swing map control to the soviets until Axis armor comes in. Another thing to point out is that Soviets don't have the luxury of your "fact". The fact is Soviets are forced to choose either T1 or T2 so that's either cons+support weapons or penals+snipers+cons, Soviets have to sacrifice either an effective infantry(penals) or support weapons to begin with. No one is going for both T1 and T2 unless they really need to or its already late in the game and is also contrary to the point of a fast M5 since T1 and T2 consts fuel thus it would delay T3 and ultimately the M5 if both were gotten.

Is Ost fighting an uphill battle when it comes to light vehicle? No one quite knows yet since the patch is still a week old and the meta has not yet stabilized, so until the meta has stabilized and majority of the top players think that T3 sov tech timing is broken it is assumed to be fine as is the opinion of the majority at the moment.


It is not the opinion of the majority ( except die hard sov only players ) that the timing of the M5 is fine.



27 Jul 2015, 10:10 AM
#29
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930


I'm not talking 2v2 btw because of the presence of a possible OKW ally giving them access to puma which hard counters the m5 and also if both are Ost they can each get 1 pak denying the effectiveness of the M5 which is to attack where there's no pak present.

Of course Ost will lose some level of map control. That's the entire point of a 'shock unit" like the M5, to swing map control to the soviets until Axis armor comes in. Another thing to point out is that Soviets don't have the luxury of your "fact". The fact is Soviets are forced to choose either T1 or T2 so that's either cons+support weapons or penals+snipers+cons, Soviets have to sacrifice either an effective infantry(penals) or support weapons to begin with. No one is going for both T1 and T2 unless they really need to or its already late in the game and is also contrary to the point of a fast M5 since T1 and T2 consts fuel thus it would delay T3 and ultimately the M5 if both were gotten.

Is Ost fighting an uphill battle when it comes to light vehicle? No one quite knows yet since the patch is still a week old and the meta has not yet stabilized, so until the meta has stabilized and majority of the top players think that T3 sov tech timing is broken it is assumed to be fine as is the opinion of the majority at the moment.


the only unit the sov will really miss is the sniper. Penal is replaceable by your choice of guard or shock, and the penal is hardly an "effective infantry" to begin with. The penal have worst dps than the conscript >15 range.

soviet t2+t3 is hardly risky. There's almost no risk to using the quad m5 since it allow on field reinforcement as well. The only blind spot is the wehr sniper.

I am quite confident that t3 arrives too early, but the soviet is going to be put in a no win situation.

So good as the sov t3 is, it's still going to be at a disadvantage against the wehr t4.

There's no good way to properly time this new soviet t3. The ost just doesn't have the unit selection to present a good match for it. ost t2 is too weak for it but the ost t3 is too strong for it.

If the t3 timing get delayed, it's going to force the soviet player into situation where they are forced to fight panzer4 with su-76 with their t4 far ways away. The t34-76 and the su-85 are not exactly amazing units to begin with and having it early later than the pziv puts the soviet at a disadvantage. (guard motor is another thing entirely)

The new soviet tech tree make the t3 arrives too early and at the same time make the t4 arrives too late. Since any cost increase to t3 is going to inevitably delay t4 it's going to screw over the soviet. Unless they offset the increase to t3 with a cheaper t4 or make t3 entirely skippable.

Btw, Guard motor is still the best doctrine for the soviet, even if it's not as cheese after the nerf to guards and call in mechanic.
27 Jul 2015, 11:12 AM
#30
avatar of Bad_Vader

Posts: 88 | Subs: 1

-snip-

For clarification, all assumptions I'm making are under the impression that each side has control of 1/2 of the map before light vehicles enter.

Penals is replacable with Shock or guards at the cost of limiting possible commander choice. With penals vs cons scaling is a much more important factor so while cons may have better dps <15 range the fact that they are a mp bleed and don't get any better the longer the game goes as opposed to other infantry further diminishes their usefulness.

T2 opening will always be weak against Ost mortar and seeing as how it is superior dps wise to sov mortar means that should a stalemate occur Ost mp bleed will be less than Sov mp bleed.

Confident as you may, no changes will come to till the next patch AFTER Relic has collected weeks to months worth of data and not just the first impression of a few members of the community.

And as I'ved said before Ost already has the counter in the form of the pak and while you might say otherwise many will agree that it does. You won't at all times have a PG blob at the right spot, same with the pak it's not always in the right spot but when it is, it can shut down any M5 play.
27 Jul 2015, 11:18 AM
#31
avatar of HighFive
Donator 22

Posts: 66

Best patch Relic has created by a long shot.
nee
28 Jul 2015, 06:32 AM
#32
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

It was too late when they threw it into the Alpha.
1 Aug 2015, 13:23 PM
#33
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611



Basically the teching changes plus call in fixes destroyed the old meta and there is no real new meta. I have seen more than one viable strategy for Soviets and Ostheer. Strategies that looked like meta can be easier countered than the old broken meta and do not necessarily require a certain OP commander to choose in order to be able to beat them. We will see how the process of finding viable strategies will go on in the next weeks but as far as I can tell I have not seen a broken strategy which can only be countered by one or two commanders.

I do not know about the WFA factions though since I have not played them yet.


There was variety for about 72 hours, then Ost realized you need a puma commander or your screwed. You also need a commander with dive bomb or your going to feel the hurt from artillery. That leaves one commander. Either a tiger or Elephant, depending on how you choose to deal with sov heavy callin.

Sov vs Ost matchup brought variety for a few days, but build orders are now becoming fairly predictable. Almost every game is cons>maxims>m5 or T70> Heavy tank or Artillery. Its fucking nauseating.

Teching is a welcome change but most games are literally the same. I haven't seen conspam, or m3 or penals or T34/76 or Su85. Every game just turns into T2 campfest. The unfortunate thing is midgame is extended so the support weapons play a bigger role.

Ost vs USF can be a little more interesting but early mgs tend to make early game a bit of a dull affair. Most usf now go 4 rifle into captain, then pack howie. Ost has more flexibility vs usf but almost always need to build a pack/mg wall which gets boring.

Relic stated they wanted to extend light vehicle play and in some respects that is true but the thing I have noticed the most is the reappearance of mg spam, indirect fire and camp play.

I am optimistic fine tuning can improve the game further, but atm a lot of players are choosing the path that will lead to victory, not diversity.

Perspective : 1v1 Ost vs Sov, Ost vs USF.


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

653 users are online: 653 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49152
Welcome our newest member, Cummings
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM