30muni mine balance
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
Should it be fair for a USF player that fresh rifle squad around the 3-4 minute mark to be completely wiped out because they were simply doing some point harassment? Or for an Ostheer player to completely lose a full gren squad because they ran into a mine at the 15-17 minute mark because they needed to force a conscript squad off a point or take VPs to prevent VP bleed?
It's a 30 munition general-purpose mine whose purpose is to slow infantry assaults and cripple vehicle mobility. Not wipe them off the battlefield because they stood within 5 in-game meters of the mine.
But then again I would not be surprised if people wanted to keep the mines 50% chance to destroy an engine simply because "You should be punished" for not bringing a sweeper. Their idea of punishment seems to be the extremes, not one where there is a middle ground.
If I could I would make mines more consistent where the damage gets distributed so a certain percentage is always taken off, but i don't think that's possible in the AE
Posts: 500
Posts: 1225
Don't the ost mines have signs on them specifically to make them visible so they don't wipe squads, effectively rendering them pretty useless?
Best use for S-mines is to put them sneakily on retreat paths to secure squadwipes, or in the relative lategame on peripheral caps/vips when the going gets hectic and even better players will not sufficiently monitor their squads. But ye, S-mines dont nearly have the utility or impact of OKW/Soviet mines. That is not to say they are useless or don't have their niche tho, but they are not the no-brainer the aforementioned are.
Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2
snip
I don't disagree with your points, those were pretty applicable to COH1 also, where reducing the number of mines you hit made you a better player. Everyone from Joe Schmo to DevM (albeit less often) hits mines, its not an egregious error deserving of losing units. I wrote a guide on mine reduction tactics for COH1 with good paths to take on the main maps to avoid them as much as possible, I'm no stranger to the subject.
The difference was in vcoh hitting mines was bad because they could spoil flanks enabling a counter push, or maybe kill a 120mp pioneer...they weren't catastrophic. You could flank with 4 rifles, all of them hit mines and retreat, and you would still be better off than losing a Obers because you hit one mine.
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
The difference was in vcoh hitting mines was bad because they could spoil flanks enabling a counter push, or maybe kill a 120mp pioneer...they weren't catastrophic. You could flank with 4 rifles, all of them hit mines and retreat, and you would still be better off than losing a Obers because you hit one mine.
Indeed. One squad wipe to a full health squad from this manner is unacceptable, uncommon as it is (though from "when the stars align").
Remember when people expressed they weren't fond of guaranteed squad wipes from demos, which are nearly three times the price? Getting one with luck at a fraction of the cost ain't dissimilar.
Posts: 5279
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
There's any point of having a wide variety of results with extreme opposite outcomes/results?
Take for example ram. While i'll not be pulling the exact value, is there any point of having a 1% chance of immobilize or main gun destroy? Does this improve gameplay at all ? Wouldn't it be better if we normalize the behaviour such as this kind of crits never happen unless the enemy tank is already suffering from other crits or is too low on health ?
Same thing here with mines. RNG/Formations aside, it's good to have mines only killing a single model and next wiping full health squads ? Would a middle point be better? If we reduce damage to 70/75 to avoid full health squad wipes but add suppression to them... wouldn't this makes them even better against blobs than their current iteration?
Posts: 1384
I think what's worth discussing is:
There's any point of having a wide variety of results with extreme opposite outcomes/results?
Take for example ram. While i'll not be pulling the exact value, is there any point of having a 1% chance of immobilize or main gun destroy? Does this improve gameplay at all ? Wouldn't it be better if we normalize the behaviour such as this kind of crits never happen unless the enemy tank is already suffering from other crits or is too low on health ?
Same thing here with mines. RNG/Formations aside, it's good to have mines only killing a single model and next wiping full health squads ? Would a middle point be better? If we reduce damage to 70/75 to avoid full health squad wipes but add suppression to them... wouldn't this makes them even better against blobs than their current iteration?
Answer: Yes, it forces players to play to the situation at hand and consider rare possibilities. Abandon vehicle is a great example. It's exciting to steal an enemy vehicle and use it against them, but it's rare enough that it doesn't happen very often so when it does both players are scrambling to take advantage or deny the advantage from each other. It's one of the best mechanics in the game honestly, as much as the competitive tryhard playerbase whines about it.
Mines are incredibly consistent.
If InfantryinAoE=1 Then blowitthefuckup=true.
The solution is to avoid bunching up your squads and practice Safe Mine Sexploits.
Reducing mine damage marginally won't stop squad wipes. It just means it will be even LESS consistent because units aren't always going to be at full health, just like how their formation isn't always going to be the same either. You'll still have wipes, but mixed in with lots of non wipes. Or situations where half the models die and the other half are left with 10% hp and suppressed. Ironically you're introducing even more possible outcomes.
Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2
They need to copy paste the old system, it was perfect.
Posts: 269
I don't disagree with your points, those were pretty applicable to COH1 also, where reducing the number of mines you hit made you a better player. Everyone from Joe Schmo to DevM (albeit less often) hits mines, its not an egregious error deserving of losing units. I wrote a guide on mine reduction tactics for COH1 with good paths to take on the main maps to avoid them as much as possible, I'm no stranger to the subject.
The difference was in vcoh hitting mines was bad because they could spoil flanks enabling a counter push, or maybe kill a 120mp pioneer...they weren't catastrophic. You could flank with 4 rifles, all of them hit mines and retreat, and you would still be better off than losing a Obers because you hit one mine.
Relic doesn't have a lead game designer on the game that actually even understood what made vCOH so good. Proper mine placement was an advantage you could get that could help preserve map control and guard flanks. They never wiped full health squads in vCOH but instead suppressed and did significant hp damage. This is the appropriate level of cost to reward, especially that early in the game. vCOH had RNG but it was contained with far fewer early and mid-game insta-gib abilities. The better player almost always won in vCOH.
The mine design in COH2 is part of the Magic the Gathering RNG mindset of the moron who was the lead game designer on COH2.
I don't know how it worked in COH1 it seemed a bit random. Sometimes zero men dead squad pinned and low HP. Other times pinned with 1 man dead and the rest with high HP. But I do know this, it consistently DID NOT wipe squads. Typically pinned with 2-3 dead. Only time squads were wiped is if you were already low HP. Fresh squad or close enough, you're in the clear every time.
They need to copy paste the old system, it was perfect.
Yes.
But that won't happen, because all the old team members that made vCOH one of the most beloved and brilliant games ever left and the monkeys that replaced them just cashed their checks and added a bunch of bugs and called them features.
All the stuff they advertise in COH2 is actually introduces as much backwards gameplay as it "advances" the game. I'm pretty sure the calculations from true-sight add to the micro-stutter in the end game that this engine produces. And the particle effects in this game are absolutely horribly optimized.
If you want to add abilities that can wipe squads that early, you better make a game with an engine that is responsive and has 100% predictable unit control. This game just compounds one error on top of another and then another.
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
Infiltration units OP
Possibly. Haven't played enough lately to have much of an opinion on them strength-wise but some maps have a shitload of buildings all over the place and they make it too easy to harass. The answer isn't insta robbing the player that called the unit in though, its increasing the cooldown, or cost, or combat effectiveness, or something of that nature. Two wrongs don't make a right.
The reason why infiltration units (Falls) worked in CoH1 because you had to purchase an upgrade before they got access to their weapons (FG42, incediary nade etc). This delayed the aggressor from making full use of the "free flank". This has been partly replicated on ONE infiltration unit in CoH2 (Stormtroopers).
However, for the outstanding majority of infiltration units in CoH2, when they spawn, they instantly have access to their full capacity. This includes:
- Ultra-high DPS weapons (short-range, long-range or any-range)
- Sniper rifles that kill units below 75% HP
- Tank-snares
- Panzerschrecks
- Mini-nuke grenades
- Stun "free-wipe" grenades
- You-Name-It
This completely nullifies good positional play, and gives the aggressor good, high-capacity flanks for free. It becomes problematic in city maps since there is no cost-effective way to destroy/deny buildings (muni-wise and micro-wise)
- Flamers have been bugged for a few months now (and not every faction has access to them)
- Satchels/etc are on out-of-meta units
- It takes forever to destroy buildings if you try to ram them with tanks/use their weapons
- And, of course, you need to do this on every single house, shed, watchtower, etc in the map to be safe.
Mine-wipes are ridiculous. Door-mines even more-so. However, I would like to see a scalable way for all factions to rein infiltration units in whenever mines get fixed.
Posts: 1384
Mine-wipes are ridiculous. Door-mines even more-so. However, I would like to see a scalable way for all factions to rein infiltration units in whenever mines get fixed.
It's honestly a map design issue more than anything.
On maps where there's only a handful of buildings like kholodny we don't have this bullshit to nearly the same extent. Arnhem checkpoint is an infiltrators wet dream. (Oh and conveniently all the buildings have enough windows for most squads to do their full damage.)
Posts: 262
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Reducing mine damage marginally won't stop squad wipes. It just means it will be even LESS consistent because units aren't always going to be at full health, just like how their formation isn't always going to be the same either. You'll still have wipes, but mixed in with lots of non wipes. Or situations where half the models die and the other half are left with 10% hp and suppressed. Ironically you're introducing even more possible outcomes.
If unit isn't at full health, then THATS your problem.
You are taking the risk while pushing with units which are not healthy. On the other hand, if you have a 4man grenadier/PG at full health, you won't be punished by a random wiped after turning a corner. I fail to see how you are increasing the outcomes, when you are just reducing max damage value compensating with applying suppression.
People most of the time confuse full health n model squad wipes and full model squad wipes.
If the model health is at 90%, nothing changes compared to what happens now. But in the case of 100% health, then that model survives.
Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1
Posts: 680
Nowt to fix here.
Posts: 1225
vcoh gud, coh2 bad. Never seen that one before...
I ain't the one to romanticise vcoh and long for the days of yore, but, gasp, some things in vcoh were actually much better implemented than they were in coh2 (and vice versa of course), and mines are among them.
Posts: 1384
If unit isn't at full health, then THATS your problem.
You are taking the risk while pushing with units which are not healthy. On the other hand, if you have a 4man grenadier/PG at full health, you won't be punished by a random wiped after turning a corner. I fail to see how you are increasing the outcomes, when you are just reducing max damage value compensating with applying suppression.
People most of the time confuse full health n model squad wipes and full model squad wipes.
If the model health is at 90%, nothing changes compared to what happens now. But in the case of 100% health, then that model survives.
Fine, gimme 75 damage mines with pin. Sounds stronger than the current ones anyway.
Posts: 380
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Fine. So if we nerf mines and demos, we would need non doc upgrades for cons. Why? Because mines and demos kinda playing a big role in sov play style. They always have a lot of muni because they don't have any upgrades for their infantry (yeah we have guards and penals. But they are expensive and you wouldn't have more than 2-3 squads). All factions have a choice. For example, OKW can spend muni on volks and grenades or on mines. So if we just nerf mines and demos, on what would spend their muni?
Nerfed mines won't change any factions overall competitiveness. It would just reduce the amount of Free Wins handed out by the RNG gods.
Livestreams
17 | |||||
12 | |||||
971 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.1109614.644+10
- 4.608220.734+2
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.261137.656+2
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Schrick
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM