Login

russian armor

Croc price increase too much?

28 Nov 2015, 19:52 PM
#41
avatar of TehPowahOfWub

Posts: 100

at the end of the day, i think with these changes you wont be able to magically pull a victory out of your ass when you call in a croc (like i have done many times in 1v1s), and instead the better player will win a match.


I'm sorry but with all due respect, what 1v1s? I see on your playercard you have about 20 games played with Brits in random 2v2, but unless the playercard is glitched out I see no games as Brits in 1v1s...

Still, I don't think the Croc was an "I win" unit like you're making it out to be, that you're automatically guarenteed you to lulzpwn your opponent. It certainly was OP earlier when it had 280 armour, 1600hp and 16 damage flamethrower, but now I think, while strong, it's a fairly situational unit and investing in one over say, a couple of Cromwells or a Comet could be a grave mistake that can definitely lose you games. Now with the outrageous price increase it will definitely not be worth getting since it is so specialized and cannot effectively deal with the late game units which it will be competing against.
28 Nov 2015, 20:00 PM
#42
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

at the end of the day, i think with these changes you wont be able to magically pull a victory out of your ass when you call in a croc (like i have done many times in 1v1s), and instead the better player will win a match.

You'll pay 230fu for exclusively AI vehicle, while your opponent will be able to get general purpose one for the same cost or two meds or AT and AI vehicles.

You're paying 230 fuel for highly specialized vehicle that comes at 13cp, have barely any range or armor, is slower then scrub adapting to new patch, now will take ages to vet up and you'll have to rely on AT guns exclusively for AT, because PIATs are useless against players who have more then air in their head.

Getting a croc will completely expose you to armor while giving you limited AI performance because of speed and range.

I'm talking about preview here, not life version.

Relic should decrease range OR increase cost, not do both, ending up with classic lelic penta overnerf.
Thing is, no one will get croc after the patch, because it will arrive too late, cost too much and perform to poorly.
28 Nov 2015, 20:06 PM
#43
avatar of Rollo

Posts: 738

Don't respond to bait, lemon is a teamgame hero
28 Nov 2015, 20:43 PM
#44
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7



I'm sorry but with all due respect, what 1v1s? I see on your playercard you have about 20 games played with Brits in random 2v2, but unless the playercard is glitched out I see no games as Brits in 1v1s...

Still, I don't think the Croc was an "I win" unit like you're making it out to be, that you're automatically guarenteed you to lulzpwn your opponent. It certainly was OP earlier when it had 280 armour, 1600hp and 16 damage flamethrower, but now I think, while strong, it's a fairly situational unit and investing in one over say, a couple of Cromwells or a Comet could be a grave mistake that can definitely lose you games. Now with the outrageous price increase it will definitely not be worth getting since it is so specialized and cannot effectively deal with the late game units which it will be competing against.


custom games/inhouses. like 60% of the time automatch is a waste of time.

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Nov 2015, 20:00 PMKatitof

You'll pay 230fu for exclusively AI vehicle, while your opponent will be able to get general purpose one for the same cost or two meds or AT and AI vehicles.

You're paying 230 fuel for highly specialized vehicle that comes at 13cp, have barely any range or armor, is slower then scrub adapting to new patch, now will take ages to vet up and you'll have to rely on AT guns exclusively for AT, because PIATs are useless against players who have more then air in their head.

Getting a croc will completely expose you to armor while giving you limited AI performance because of speed and range.

I'm talking about preview here, not life version.

Relic should decrease range OR increase cost, not do both, ending up with classic lelic penta overnerf.
Thing is, no one will get croc after the patch, because it will arrive too late, cost too much and perform to poorly.


then dont use it if you want/need a general purpose tank. if you have no AT in your army, why the fuck would you get a croc? makes no sense at all. if you want a tank that can take a shitton of damage, and negates enemy infantry/at guns, then get the croc.
28 Nov 2015, 21:22 PM
#45
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

Goodbye Vanguard commander, it's nice knowing you.


Goodbye, Brits, your voice acting will be missed. But continuous nerfing is more important than fixing problems.
28 Nov 2015, 21:27 PM
#46
avatar of SpaceHamster
Patrion 14

Posts: 474

Remember when people said RIP brits after emplacement and first croc nerf since they had nothing to compete against axis at that time :snfPeter: ?

Croc got overnerfed, but whatever stops people from choosing vangaurd all the time seems better since that meta is almost uncounterable as prostheer(save for prostruppen).
28 Nov 2015, 21:52 PM
#47
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

OK guys, everybody talking here that it should perform like a Tiger etc. The game impact a croc delivers is from my experience higher than a Tiger/IS2. I won games, which I clearly would've lost simply by calling in a Croc, roasting the complete infantry, all the AT guns, allowing me to get map back and finally winning the game. 1 Croc + 2 At Guns are a higher threat than one Tiger backed up by 2 at guns.
It's mobility especially on vet 2 is incredible together with the high health pool.

However I still believe it's priced too high, 210 fuel seems fine in my eyes, to underline that it would lose against its counterparts in vacuum matches.
28 Nov 2015, 21:55 PM
#48
avatar of TehPowahOfWub

Posts: 100


custom games/inhouses. like 60% of the time automatch is a waste of time.


Lulz. Got it. I'll have to remember to ignore anyone who plays automatch as they clearly don't know what they're talking about since it's a such a waste of time, despite being you know...a core feature of the game.



then dont use it if you want/need a general purpose tank. if you have no AT in your army, why the fuck would you get a croc? makes no sense at all. if you want a tank that can take a shitton of damage, and negates enemy infantry/at guns, then get the croc.


And that's exactly the argument - it's WAY too expensive for a "specialized tank." If it was general purpose like the Tiger or IS2, then the cost would be fine. But with it's huge price tag and lack of any utility besides harassing Shreck and Gren blobs and clearing unsupported team weapons, it is completely worthless to get, which is why I think the thread was started in the first place.

And as I said before, I'm fine with a cost increase to something like 200FU or so, if you bring the range back up. But this huge cost increase combine with the range nerf, veterancy nerf, and increase in CPs makes it way overnerfed.
28 Nov 2015, 21:55 PM
#49
avatar of Aladdin

Posts: 959

OK guys, everybody talking here that it should perform like a Tiger etc. The game impact a croc delivers is from my experience higher than a Tiger/IS2. I won games, which I clearly would've lost simply by calling in a Croc, roasting the complete infantry, all the AT guns, allowing me to get map back and finally winning the game. 1 Croc + 2 At Guns are a higher threat than one Tiger backed up by 2 at guns.
It's mobility especially on vet 2 is incredible together with the high health pool.

However I still believe it's priced too high, 210 fuel seems fine in my eyes, to underline that it would lose against its counterparts in vacuum matches.


I would have believed you only if you were not an axis fanboy Strategist
28 Nov 2015, 21:56 PM
#50
avatar of Der schöne Bob

Posts: 46

Even though I hate playing against the croc since it soaks up all my infantry based AT (3 Raketen and 1 stolen UKF-PAK in one game), I do believe the price increase is too much. Above all in combination with the range and damage nerf (which are suited in my opinion).
28 Nov 2015, 21:58 PM
#51
avatar of Aladdin

Posts: 959



like 60% of the time automatch is a waste of time.



what?!!!
28 Nov 2015, 22:01 PM
#52
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5



Lulz. Got it. I'll have to remember to ignore anyone who plays automatch as they clearly don't know what they're talking about since it's a such a waste of time, despite being you know...a core feature of the game.





Lemon and I have been top 10 AT in the past for both 2v2 factions, culminating in a +70 streak as Allies. Hes also won multiple 2v2 tournaments.

You really shouldn't try to pull that card on people that are clearly much more experienced than you. Hes completely right, automatch is a waste of time if you want to do meaningful testing of the game. People like him test the balance mod and strats with top 10 players, rather than leaving it to the randomness of automatch.
28 Nov 2015, 22:05 PM
#53
avatar of SpaceHamster
Patrion 14

Posts: 474

Can confirm. 2v2+ random automatch is a complete waste of time to discuss balance issues about. Since games are decided by what kind of players are on each team; rather than actual balance issues.
28 Nov 2015, 22:09 PM
#54
avatar of TehPowahOfWub

Posts: 100



Lemon and I have been top 10 AT in the past for both 2v2 factions, culminating in a +70 streak as Allies. Hes also won multiple 2v2 tournaments.

You really shouldn't try to pull that card on people that are clearly much more experienced than you. Hes completely right, automatch is a waste of time if you want to do meaningful testing of the game. People like him test the balance mod and strats with top 10 players, rather than leaving it to the randomness of automatch.


I wasn't questioning his skill at all - I was just pointing out that saying automatch is a more often than not a waste of time is not something I don't particularly agree with. I also was pointing out that since he failed to provide a replay where a Croc has turned around the game for him in a high ranked 1v1 custom game makes me a bit weary of the validity of his opinion on this subject. This is especially the case since most top 10 players have been absent from this game for quite some time now, so I don't really know when and where this testing could have occurred.

Of course any random team game mode is definitely not an ideal way to test balance, which is why I am speaking from a 1v1 perspective, but to say such a wide margin of lower player amount automatch games are "worthless" in testing balance just strikes me as asinine.
28 Nov 2015, 22:33 PM
#55
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7

its a waste of time because you get matched with a player that can be totally new to the game, or a veteran of it. why not just cut out the matchmaking process and play with people you know for a fact are good?
28 Nov 2015, 22:34 PM
#56
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

It needed a fuel increase, but the double whammy with the range nerf is a bit much. If they revert the range nerf I think it will be fine, but I'm talking out my ass and haven't played the most recent preview.
28 Nov 2015, 23:06 PM
#57
avatar of TehPowahOfWub

Posts: 100

its a waste of time because you get matched with a player that can be totally new to the game, or a veteran of it. why not just cut out the matchmaking process and play with people you know for a fact are good?


Because a lot of people play matchmaking as it is the most convenient way to get a game going fast. Sure it's a waste of time when you get matched with a rank 1000+ player but that's not the entirety of match making (especially not 60% of it). I wasn't disagreeing with you completely, and I don't disagree that playing custom games with players you know are good - but I think both ways of playing are good for testing the balance, and I lean more towards matchmaking because you will not only get more games in, but you will go against against players of varying skill level, (it's better to play against top players, but still I think it's valuable to play against medium players as well) and you won't be playing the same 2 people over and over again so you'll be exposed to a more wide variety of strategies.
28 Nov 2015, 23:23 PM
#58
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7



Because a lot of people play matchmaking as it is the most convenient way to get a game going fast. Sure it's a waste of time when you get matched with a rank 1000+ player but that's not the entirety of match making (especially not 60% of it). I wasn't disagreeing with you completely, and I don't disagree that playing custom games with players you know are good - but I think both ways of playing are good for testing the balance, and I lean more towards matchmaking because you will not only get more games in, but you will go against against players of varying skill level, (it's better to play against top players, but still I think it's valuable to play against medium players as well) and you won't be playing the same 2 people over and over again so you'll be exposed to a more wide variety of strategies.


id say easily over half my games have been stomps, and maybe 3/4 games in 2v2s are stomps
28 Nov 2015, 23:53 PM
#59
avatar of TehPowahOfWub

Posts: 100



id say easily over half my games have been stomps, and maybe 3/4 games in 2v2s are stomps


Ok...? I don't really know what to tell you. Maybe you're playing at times when people of your skill level are absent. Not sure, mate. Hopefully we'll be able to address this problem eventually. I don't really know how you can get "half my games have been stomps" for 1v1 though since you barely have any games in 1v1 ranked. 22-1 for Ostheer is all well and good, but I would personally wait until I have 100+ games for a faction before I make such statements, especially since your first few games with a new faction are typically stomps for everyone if you have any previous experience with RTS.

Regardless, I don't really see how W/L status has any integrity in speculating about balance through 1v1 matchmaking. If I win I don't automatically assume that my opponent is bad or I'm playing a really OP army, and if I lose I don't automatically assume the reverse for my opponent. Some people are just more experience RTS players, some players just perform badly that day, sometimes you perform at your best that day, it's all a bunch of variables and it'd be incorrect in my opinion to judge the value of automatch based on how much you win.

I really don't want to derail the thread anymore though - I don't want to distract from the issue at hand and I encourage everyone to keep offering opinions and suggestions on the recent change to the Croc. If you'd like to continue this discussion you can always PM me though, and I'd be more than happy to debate the issue with you. But for now to make it easier on everyone I'd like to revert back to talking about the thread's subject.
29 Nov 2015, 00:49 AM
#60
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Nov 2015, 21:55 PMAladdin


I would have believed you only if you were not an axis fanboy Strategist


Good way to derail you own thread and what are you British fanboy?



snip


Bashing Lemon for being inexperienced, although he is one the most competent players around here :rofl: Also not showing your own playercard just takes your complete credibility.
3 users are browsing this thread: 3 guests

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

875 users are online: 875 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM