Login

russian armor

Balance Preview Update 09/04/2015

PAGES (13)down
5 Sep 2015, 07:54 AM
#61
avatar of Jaedrik

Posts: 446 | Subs: 2



countering counters is bad when it happens on one unit. you have a rock/paper unit against scissors.

Fortunately, AT vs Tiger is not a 100:0 matchup. It wasn't even so before. The world of RPS, whose hard counters are absolute, binary, and do not depend on complex mechanical interactions and micro, is not an appropriate analogy.

The two guys below you for starters.

If the intention was to make it better vs the IS-2 the penetration would have been just fine. The range buff made it better vs everything else which is completely unnecessary.

Please note, I didn't mean those quoted words literally.
I was using them as a rhetorical device to hopefully point out the silliness of blandly stating something and expecting people to accept what is likely an emotionally charged statement.
Instead, one ought to give well-reasoned responses as to why a thing is bad or good.
5 Sep 2015, 08:25 AM
#62
avatar of slother

Posts: 145

Relic team those changes are ...



5 Sep 2015, 08:37 AM
#63
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Aaaaand sherman is weak again


Agree, they should do the opposite. Remove the buffed Pen and re-add the +20 Armour. That extra armour is the difference between Panzerschrecks having a 100% penetration chance on every hit, or an 88% chance at range. They need the durability more than the penetration, they have the Jackson for that.
5 Sep 2015, 08:47 AM
#64
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

The two guys below you for starters.

If the intention was to make it better vs the IS-2 the penetration would have been just fine. The range buff made it better vs everything else which is completely unnecessary.
I disagree. The Tiger buff is great. It´s going down within seconds to AT and especially the British. Now there´s a reason again to go for Tigers and instead of mirroring an IS-2, they gave it range. That opens up for some great new playstyles.

Also a Tiger that needs to be used at range is quite realistic. I also like that. Improves the immersion of the game. Or to put it into game terms: Having a Tiger firing from far range is more fun and less silly than it always rushing a position to catch targets. TDs still have a range advantage over it, you just have to use them smartly now.

Can´t wait to kick some ass with it on veterancy 2 with 20% increased range.
5 Sep 2015, 08:49 AM
#65
avatar of UberHanz
Donator 11

Posts: 247 | Subs: 2

Hello all,

I do not post in the forums very often and I am not going to raise a balance point per se.

However I just thought I would like to thank RELIC for their real engagement with the community for the last 6 months.

They will never please everyone - and balance will always be difficult in a game like this where poor players tend to blame balance rather than their own abilities!!

My real point is that RELIC seem to be listening and more importantly engaging - twitch, new factions, new units, updates and talking to us.

I can only assume someone in finance spotted a direct correlation between income and community activities.

Keep up the good work!!

PS. I am not a RELIC fanboy - I am a COH2 fanboy and my favourite game (am 44 now) seems to really have life in it.

good job.

I feel the same. Love this new dedication to improve every detail of the gameplay. If relic keeps the pace up we could have a masterpiece of balance in a couple of weeks/months. For an RTS with 5 completely different factions, that's big. RTS-balance on such a complex level has only been achieved by Blizzard so far.

<444>3
5 Sep 2015, 08:51 AM
#66
avatar of UberHanz
Donator 11

Posts: 247 | Subs: 2

I disagree. The Tiger buff is great. It´s going down within seconds to AT and especially the British. Now there´s a reason again to go for Tigers and instead of mirroring an IS-2, they gave it range. That opens up for some great new playstyles.

Also a Tiger that needs to be used at range is quite realistic. I also like that. Improves the immersion of the game.

Can´t wait to kick some ass with it on veterancy 2 with 20% increased range.

Yes. Tiger was out of the meta. With those changes its back in. Such an iconic WW2 tank just needs to be a valuable choice.
5 Sep 2015, 08:54 AM
#67
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Go go quadra nerf relic, we have learned nothing in the past from quadra nerfs! :foreveralone:

Good thing is I never considered bofors a valid unit since its alpha performance was terrible and AEC was mandatory anyway.
5 Sep 2015, 08:55 AM
#68
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

I disagree. The Tiger buff is great. It´s going down within seconds to AT and especially the British. Now there´s a reason again to go for Tigers and instead of mirroring an IS-2, they gave it range. That opens up for some great new playstyles.

Also a Tiger that needs to be used at range is quite realistic. I also like that. Improves the immersion of the game. Or to put it into game terms: Having a Tiger firing from far range is more fun and less silly than it always rushing a position to catch targets. TDs still have a range advantage over it, you just have to use them smartly now.

Can´t wait to kick some ass with it on veterancy 2 with 20% increased range.



Ah yes, tiger having more penetration than IS-2 and more range than king tiger so realistic, much wow. All heavies should have the same range. I foresee the IS-2/KT also getting the range buff since the pershing is going to have 50 range.
5 Sep 2015, 09:00 AM
#69
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 08:55 AMBurts



Ah yes, tiger having more penetration than IS-2 and more range than king tiger so realistic, much wow. All heavies should have the same range.
Don´t act dumb here. That´s a problem of those units.

The Tiger as a whole was a liability since it was limited to one unit at a time. It´s no secret it went down way faster than an IS-2.

The range increase changes how the unit is going to be used. And that way of usage that´s encouraged is infact realistic and a new strategy.

I like some asymmetric balance for the heavies. Tigers could have the range advantage, the IS-2 could have a lower cost and higher damage, Pershing could be something in between.
5 Sep 2015, 09:01 AM
#70
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

Don´t act dumb here. That´s a problem of those units.

The Tiger as a whole was a liability since it was limited to one unit at a time. It´s no secret it went down way faster than an IS-2.

The range increase changes how the unit is going to be used. And that way of usage that´s encouraged is infact realistic and a new strategy.



Well, either buff the IS-2 or revert the tiger changes. Theres absolutely no reason the tiger should be once again superior to the IS-2 in pretty much every way.


The heavy balance was completely fine pre patch, i have no idea why they decided to start fiddling around with it.
5 Sep 2015, 09:23 AM
#71
avatar of Whoa

Posts: 64

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 06:19 AMBurts
Well the tiger buff was completely random and unnesecarry. Now it has more range than the king tiger or is2 and outclasses the is2 in pretty much every way. Has better armor pen faster RoF. and more range and is way better againts inf. Only thing is2 has now is more durability but that's. Hardly an advantage when you have better axis at..


Looks like you don't play with Tiger, don't know the stats for them either. IS2 has better stats, and after Tiger test change IS2 still much better.
5 Sep 2015, 09:26 AM
#72
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 09:23 AMWhoa


Looks like you don't play with Tiger, don't know the stats for them either. IS2 has better stats, and after Tiger test change IS2 still much better.



No it doesn't.


IS-2 has significantly worse performance againts infantry, and now has less penetration , less RoF and less range. Only thing it has is slightly better speed and more armor.


But because zis-3 shoots slower than pak-40 the time to kill tiger/IS-2 for the factions respective AT gun is essentially the same.
5 Sep 2015, 09:35 AM
#73
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 09:26 AMBurts


IS-2 has significantly worse performance againts infantry


It has only slightly worse scatter but better AoE

and now has less penetration


IS2 Pen Profile:

250.0/220.0/190.0

New Tiger I Pen Profile:

240/220/200

more armor.


Which has a decent amount more of, 375 on the IS2 to the Tiger I's 300.

Honestly the only real problematic thing will be the Tiger have 55 range at Vet 2, should just replace that with a survability buff instead IMO.
5 Sep 2015, 09:36 AM
#74
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702



It has only slightly worse scatter but better AoE



IS2 Pen Profile:

250.0/220.0/190.0

New Tiger I Pen Profile:

240/220/200



Which has a decent amount more of, 375 on the IS2 to the Tiger I's 300.

Honestly the only real problematic thing will be the Tiger have 55 range at Vet 2, should just replace that with a survability buff instead IMO.




Well, okay it has comparable penetration. But that doesn't change the fact that the tiger has faster RoF than the is-2, and 5.7 scatter vs 4.3 scatter IS NOT slightly worse scatter. IS-2 has slightly better AOE with alot worse scatter.

Anyways, this isint a major issue, since the IS-2 is still a very good unit, but it still doesn't change the fact that the tiger is now better than the IS-2 in pretty much every way.
5 Sep 2015, 09:49 AM
#75
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 09:36 AMBurts




Well, okay it has comparable penetration. But that doesn't change the fact that the tiger has faster RoF than the is-2, and 5.7 scatter vs 4.3 scatter IS NOT slightly worse scatter. IS-2 has slightly better AOE with alot worse scatter.

Anyways, this isint a major issue, since the IS-2 is still a very good unit, but it still doesn't change the fact that the tiger is now better than the IS-2 in pretty much every way.


Is2 has much better survivability due higher armour and speed. The Tiger became a bad choice due changes with balance patches. I hope the buff can put it back in meta now. It was stupid that such an iconic tank became a niche unit.
5 Sep 2015, 09:54 AM
#76
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702



Is2 has much better survivability due higher armour and speed. The Tiger became a bad choice due changes with balance patches. I hope the buff can put it back in meta now. It was stupid that such an iconic tank became a niche unit.


IS-2 isint really more durable because of stronger ostheer AT guns. The time it takes for a zis-3 to kill a tiger is exactly the same as a pak-40 takes time to kill an is-2.
5 Sep 2015, 09:57 AM
#77
avatar of Kothre

Posts: 431

First off, I just want to thank Relic for being so engaged with the community in their patches lately. It's been great to have feedback before the real patch goes live. :)

One request: can you make a way to decommission emplacements and get a partial refund for them? A lot of times they just sit back and suck up my population. That would be great!

Tiger Penetration increased from 180/200/220 to 200/220/240
Tiger range increased from 45 to 50

I agree that the Tiger needed a little extra oomph. Can you make the IS-2 slightly more accurate to compensate? I'm not asking for satellite-guided accuracy, but that thing can't hit the broad side of a barn, especially while moving. I just think it should be increased slightly to compete with what sounds like a vastly superior Tiger.


Added bonus damage against emplacment for walking stuka

Good change. Currently, the Stuka really wasn't performing very well against emplacements. However, I think it may require lowering the 90 second brace recharge time to around ~60 seconds. I think going from 15 to 90 is a huge jump. As silly as it is to have Stukas be useless against emplacements, I'd hate to see all British emplacements completely invalidated by multiple artillery pieces on the field in larger games.

I'd be more okay with this if going for the AEC armored car upgrade gave a mobile mortar while the Bofors upgrade unlocked the mortar pit, because having to rely on an emplacement for any arty at all (besides the base howitzers) is really limiting.


Bofors Accuracy reduced from 0.875/0.818/0.76 to 0.775/0.46/0.36
Bofors Damage reduced from 40 to 30
Bofors Vs building garrison cover dmg multiplier changed from 0.5 to 0.2
Bofors Distance_scatter_max changed from 2.15 to 5.15

*cough*

Four nerfs. Four. And they're all by pretty huge margins. Do you think it might be a little better to nerf it, you know, incrementally to see what works instead of going all out on the Bofors like this?
5 Sep 2015, 09:58 AM
#78
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 09:54 AMBurts


IS-2 isint really more durable because of stronger ostheer AT guns. The time it takes for a zis-3 to kill a tiger is exactly the same as a pak-40 takes time to kill an is-2.
But the Tiger has to face British. I guess we have to live with that. Soviets and their heavy tank aren´t the center of the universe. And currently the Tiger loses more than half its health to a FF with rockets in about 5 seconds. Those are the consequences.

I just think they should enable multiple IS-2s to balance it.
5 Sep 2015, 09:59 AM
#79
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

But the Tiger has to face British. I guess we have to live with that. Soviets and their heavy tank aren´t the center of the universe. And currently the Tiger loses more than half its health to a FF with rockets in about 5 seconds. Those are the consequences.



Well, then lets buff the tiger and also buff the is-2? Or nerf the british tanks.
5 Sep 2015, 10:01 AM
#80
avatar of Kothre

Posts: 431

I'd really rather not see multiple IS-2s again, because that just encourages making nothing but them and ignoring tech tanks. I would, as I said, like to see an IS-2 accuracy increase.
PAGES (13)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Germany 370
unknown 2

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

739 users are online: 739 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49110
Welcome our newest member, jhonnycena0400
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM