Login

russian armor

April 20th Update

PAGES (11)down
18 Apr 2016, 22:30 PM
#81
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 236

Ostruppen just became more juicey to play with against soviets :snfPeter:
WHO
18 Apr 2016, 22:32 PM
#82
avatar of WHO

Posts: 97




I was waiting for you to reply with these. T34-76s aren't THAT bad. Especially when you can mass them.
18 Apr 2016, 23:06 PM
#83
avatar of IronFist

Posts: 43

Dullahan has consistently provided proof in this thread, countering everyone's assertion that the T34/76 is useless and the original posters are ignoring it. That's what cracks me up about this community. Proof staring you in your face but since it doesn't support your position act like it doesn't exist. It's a different way to approach the unit.

Nice job Dullahan.
19 Apr 2016, 00:01 AM
#84
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

Could relic give us the note for balancing mods?
19 Apr 2016, 00:16 AM
#85
avatar of HelpingHans
Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 1838 | Subs: 17

Good patch, but sadly not much content. This new war spoils system better be worth the wait. It's taken way too long to get implemented. Also still no word on optimisation? I thought that was on the road map.

Anyway gz to the moders who got their skins into the game. This will be a nice change.
19 Apr 2016, 00:24 AM
#86
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656



Comparing your rank vs that of your opponent's you outrank everyone you've beaten with T34/76s.

Dullahan: 124

FinalSolution: 414
[HAN]Victor: 358
Dike815: 243
Sawik: 277
~TAB~Mackie: 162

Are you certain you weren't better than the other players despite the T34/76s instead of because of them? Comparing your ranking to that of your competitors the only player within 100 ranking of you is Mackie. It's possible to get away with sub-optimal builds/units if your micro and macro play are better than your opponent's but much harder, as evidenced by the trouble Mackie gave you in the replay, when player skill is closer to equal. There might be a bit of unintentional selection bias if you're only beating lower rank players with the T34/76.
19 Apr 2016, 01:13 AM
#87
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

The setup was increased by .5 seconds and the cost raised by 20 mp. No big deal. Although I don't like the Emplacement changes. This seems like a hotfix more than an actual patch.
19 Apr 2016, 01:53 AM
#88
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Apr 2016, 00:24 AMCabreza


Are you certain you weren't better than the other players despite the T34/76s instead of because of them? Comparing your ranking to that of your competitors the only player within 100 ranking of you is Mackie. It's possible to get away with sub-optimal builds/units if your micro and macro play are better than your opponent's but much harder, as evidenced by the trouble Mackie gave you in the replay, when player skill is closer to equal. There might be a bit of unintentional selection bias if you're only beating lower rank players with the T34/76.



I mean to a point, but I'm mainly just trying to show the unit being effective. There's a lot of games I didn't save against more evenly matched players because they were extremely one sided.

I'll play some Soviet tonight and see if I can't get some more replays to demonstrate my point.





aaa
19 Apr 2016, 02:31 AM
#89
avatar of aaa

Posts: 1487

At least it will be possible to abuse 120mm mortar vs axis mortars/sniper abuse. A lot of micro there from both sides.
Overall another low quality patch. -20 starting mp for soviets who(brits too) play vs oponents with extra squad.
No real issues adressed. Tigers are still in half of the docs while it should be in a 1 or 2
19 Apr 2016, 03:53 AM
#90
avatar of poop

Posts: 174

once again giving into the axis cryhards..

gg lelic
19 Apr 2016, 03:53 AM
#91
avatar of RitaBrush
Lead Artist Badge

Posts: 810 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2016, 19:34 PMnigo
Congrats Rita for the OKW skin:
OKW – Ardennes Improvised Ambush Pattern Bundle by Rita Rush

Thank you, nigo! :wub:
19 Apr 2016, 04:46 AM
#92
avatar of Hikuran

Posts: 194

Good Job Dullahan

Good to see someone has proved Soviet Stronk with some real proofs

Despite those who constantly crying Soviet need buff, it's still has good 1on1 win ratio among top players
19 Apr 2016, 05:37 AM
#93
avatar of KurtWilde
Donator 11

Posts: 440

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Apr 2016, 00:24 AMCabreza


Comparing your rank vs that of your opponent's you outrank everyone you've beaten with T34/76s.

Dullahan: 124

FinalSolution: 414
[HAN]Victor: 358
Dike815: 243
Sawik: 277
~TAB~Mackie: 162

Are you certain you weren't better than the other players despite the T34/76s instead of because of them? Comparing your ranking to that of your competitors the only player within 100 ranking of you is Mackie. It's possible to get away with sub-optimal builds/units if your micro and macro play are better than your opponent's but much harder, as evidenced by the trouble Mackie gave you in the replay, when player skill is closer to equal. There might be a bit of unintentional selection bias if you're only beating lower rank players with the T34/76.


+1
19 Apr 2016, 06:07 AM
#94
avatar of Maschinengewehr

Posts: 334

Removal of Volks schrek, replace with fausts and an AI upgrade package (and sidegrade costs) or there's going to be a riot.
19 Apr 2016, 06:07 AM
#95
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

Relic you nerf Maxim but don't buff penal and/or conscripts - good fucking job
19 Apr 2016, 06:10 AM
#96
avatar of Gramses

Posts: 37

I like it, really. Make Maxim cost 260 MP and set-up longer. Without buffing arc of fire or suppression...

I just don't understand, they last time buffed 222 scout car without increasing cost or something like that, but Maxim they nerfing without any buffs in back...

Is that some kind of joke - we will buff axis without balancing and nerf soviets without compensation...

Just don't understand... want to cry.


You see,

When something is UNDER-PERFORMING,(i.e. old 222) you BUFF it, either by INCREASING its potency or DECREASING its cost.

When something is OVER-PERFORMING,(i.e. current maxim) you NERF it, either by DECREASING its potency or INCREASING its cost.

If you were to increase its cost but at the same time buff its fire arc or suppression it would defeat the purpose of making the change, which is to balance.

Capisci?

Given you username, however, I can understand your dismay.
19 Apr 2016, 06:15 AM
#97
avatar of MoerserKarL
Donator 22

Posts: 1108

oh is my 5+ maxim opening still worth? :P

I thought they are changing the maxim, by buffing cons/penals a bit. Hmmm....
Anyway.I am glad to see a patch :D Now we have to wait another month :/
19 Apr 2016, 06:15 AM
#98
avatar of Maschinengewehr

Posts: 334

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Apr 2016, 06:10 AMGramses


You see,

When something is UNDER-PERFORMING,(i.e. old 222) you BUFF it, either by INCREASING its potency or DECREASING its cost.

When something is OVER-PERFORMING,(i.e. current maxim) you NERF it, either by DECREASING its potency or INCREASING its cost.

If you were to increase its cost but at the same time buff its fire arc or suppression it would defeat the purpose of making the change, which is to balance.

Capisci?

Given you username, however, I can understand your dismay.


I completely disagree.

If you buff something enough, it warrants a price increase also. Case in point, the 222. It's far too cheap for the utility it provides.

Likewise, if you nerf something enough, then it also warrants a price decrease. It fails in cases like this because Relic follows logic such as yours, which upsets quite a few people and doesn't make any sense at all.
19 Apr 2016, 06:45 AM
#99
avatar of Gramses

Posts: 37



I completely disagree.

If you buff something enough, it warrants a price increase also. Case in point, the 222. It's far too cheap for the utility it provides.

Likewise, if you nerf something enough, then it also warrants a price decrease. It fails in cases like this because Relic follows logic such as yours, which upsets quite a few people and doesn't make any sense at all.


Your approach basically assumes that they make arbitrary nerfs or buffs in the first place as if they were in a vacuum. Everything has to be done relative to other units, you don't make something more powerful just for the sake of making it more powerful.

You could, however, argue that the changes to, for example, the 222, were too significant or not warranted at all, but you would need evidence for that, which I assume relic had in order to convince them the changes were needed in the first place. (I'm not saying that I always agree with relic or anything) I don't think anyone would argue that the 222 wasn't underperforming before the changes. Maybe they went a bit overboard and it could use some further adjustment, I'm not sure.

The entire idea of "balancing" is based on making slight changes to that very delicate ratio of cost/performance until the unit fits well relative to other units. There's a reason skilled players will consider spamming maxims but not mg42s.
19 Apr 2016, 06:46 AM
#100
avatar of aomtniome

Posts: 27

Please make mod tool can make skin soldier . I am waitting foe it .
PAGES (11)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 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

930 users are online: 1 member and 929 guests
berkeley
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50007
Welcome our newest member, Helzer96
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM