Login

russian armor

Updates on BALANCE PREVIEW MOD

PAGES (21)down
22 Apr 2016, 14:24 PM
#142
avatar of Hans G. Schultz

Posts: 875 | Subs: 2



It's basically "Dude makes a whine post and suggest changes to the game" comprehensive list. I can't count the amount of times I've seen people suggest panzerschrecks for volks being changed and them being given a pfaust or the MG34 becoming a regular unit. (Even back when kubelwagon was a suppression unit) It's always been opposed because it would homogenize the game.


I think people are also rightfully concerned that OKW lacking handheld AT is going to push them into Puma tech. Raketen is fine defensively, but how are you supposed to chase down a stuart with just a raketen or two? People say "Well Ostheer does it" but they're forgetting Ostheer has the super buff 222 which can take on most light vehicles easily and chase down vehicles like the stuart or AEC that are damaged.

+1 :clap:
22 Apr 2016, 15:07 PM
#143
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned


Er... I don't get it about "can't build mainline infantry from T0".

But anyway, moving Pfaust from T1 building to T2 upgrade would make using M3, WC51 and such light allies cars more reasonable.



Lets add soviet at guns to t3 coz its will be make using of 222/luchs more reasonable :sibHyena:.
22 Apr 2016, 15:14 PM
#144
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned


Miragefla didn't forget either of those units. In fact, he pretty much went ahead and rebalanced every single out-of-meta unit to make it interesting.

However, for the purpose of such a massive patch, it might be better to have players focus a bit more on the core-tree / in-meta doctrines (which will impact balance the most).

Naturally, most players that will bother with the balance mod will flock towards the new shiny toys (I know I did, in Miragefla's mod). Having too many shiny things will detract attention from nascent balance issues (which is what the mod should be testing!), to just fooling around with the new things. For instance, we know that Miragefla's mod is fun to play. But we don't know if it is balanced; and we don't know how many strategies for each faction are viable (perhaps the current meta ones will become unviable).

Thus, I think it was a very smart decision by Relic to only include part of the Miragefla patch into the balance-mod. As long as the subset is coherent (e.g., "Trade Schrecks away, but don't forget to add Smoke and Raketen buffs"), testing the mod will not be a disaster :)

Once the big patch hits (or what's left of it), Relic can start integrating doctrinal non-meta units into the meta, little by little in subsequent patches. But now, it's just better to draw everyone's focus to the core army abilities.


I hope it too. +
22 Apr 2016, 15:21 PM
#145
avatar of KovuTalli

Posts: 332

Disagree on the OKW Truck nerfs, if they are to be tech upgrades, make it MP and Muni, OKW is already fuel starved (their tanks cost a lot more even if they do not have a reduced income rate anymore due to the cost adjustments).

Or, let OKW build fuel/muni caches, there is literally no reason to not let them build them anymore. Every other faction in the game can, and since trucks are no longer connected to income (been a long time I don't even remember if that made it to live) and there is no more reduced resource income, let them build.
22 Apr 2016, 15:44 PM
#146
avatar of Hitman5

Posts: 467

Why don't more people realise the reason that OKW have so many panzerschreks is because the other AT options aside from medium and heavy tanks are terrible? Removing panzerschreks doesn't fix anything. It just smacks of allied fanboyism and/or poor planning.
22 Apr 2016, 15:46 PM
#147
avatar of pugzii

Posts: 513

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:44 PMHitman5
Why don't more people realise the reason that OKW have so many panzerschreks because the other AT options aside from medium and up tanks are terrible? Removing panzerschreks doesn't fix anything. It just smacks of allied fanboyism and/or poor planning.


Shrecks were cancer, just use Raks since now you have Faust which will be amazing vs lights (bait them since raks are camo then pwn it).

Seriously people are going so overboard about shrecks being removed. Even at top 10 2v2 AT as Axis, it wont be that bad (might affect 1v1 more).
22 Apr 2016, 15:47 PM
#148
avatar of Hitman5

Posts: 467

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:46 PMpugzii


Shrecks were cancer, just use Raks since now you have Faust which will be amazing vs lights (bait them since raks are camo then pwn it).

Seriously people are going so overboard about shrecks being removed.


You mean slow, easily wiped, poor accuracy, poor range AT gun? Sure, sounds like an excellent idea.
22 Apr 2016, 15:48 PM
#149
avatar of pugzii

Posts: 513

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:47 PMHitman5


You mean slow, easily wiped, poor accuracy, poor range AT gun? Sure, sounds like an excellent idea.


Stuart getting double Fausted you have to hit it like once with a Rak, are you seriously not capable of that? If you are really that shit then just go T2 to get a puma if you are that worried.

Rak could deffo do with a range and wider horizontal traverse buff though, but its not the end of the world.
22 Apr 2016, 15:49 PM
#150
avatar of Fluffi

Posts: 211



It's basically "Dude makes a whine post and suggest changes to the game" comprehensive list. I can't count the amount of times I've seen people suggest panzerschrecks for volks being changed and them being given a pfaust or the MG34 becoming a regular unit. (Even back when kubelwagon was a suppression unit) It's always been opposed because it would homogenize the game.



I'm no expert, but I think team weapons make the entire idea of combined arms interesting and thus should be accessible for all factions and should not be locked out in the name of "avoiding homogenization". Just my opinion.

I mean, both vanilla coh 1 factions had mgs and mortars that were kind of similar. Noone compalined. Yet the factions that tried to be sooo very different (PE and especially coh 1 brits) were a lot less popular. They had no conventional team weapons at all.

Team weapons are interesting and should be accessible IMO. There's other ways to differentiate them than to lock them in doctrines (MG34) or not integrating them (US Mortar). For example, in CoH 1 the allied AT gun had piercing rounds while the axis AT gun could cloak. The allied mg had piercing rounds but the axis one didn't. Stuff like that... but each role was filled. It didn't feel like sth was missing. I strongly opposse locking out what feels like it should be a basic part of a well designed faction just so it feels "less homogenized".

I was wondering why it sometimes would seem like the wfa armies are more prone to blobbing and not using combined arms? I think the inaccessability of team weapons could be part of the problem...
22 Apr 2016, 15:53 PM
#151
avatar of SlaYoU

Posts: 400

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:49 PMFluffi


I'm no expert, but I think team weapons make the entire idea of combined arms interesting and thus should be accessible for all factions and should not be locked out in the name of "avoiding homogenization". Just my opinion.

I mean, both vanilla coh 1 factions had mgs and mortars that were kind of similar. Noone compalined. Yet the factions that tried to be sooo very different (PE and especially coh 1 brits) were a lot less popular. They had no conventional team weapons at all.

Team weapons are interesting and should be accessible IMO. There's other ways to differentiate them than to lock them in doctrines (MG34) or not integrating them (US Mortar). For example, in CoH 1 the allied AT gun had piercing rounds while the axis AT gun could cloak. The allied mg had piercing rounds but the axis one didn't. Stuff like that... but each role was filled. It didn't feel like sth was missing. I strongly opposse locking out what feels like it should be a basic part of a well designed faction just so it feels "less homogenized".

I was wondering why it sometimes would seem like the wfa armies are more prone to blobbing and not using combined arms? I think the inaccessability of team weapons could be part of the problem...


So yeah basically, OKW will be the only faction without handheld AT. I fail to see how your point adresses that issue. It went from having no non doctrinal suppression to no infantry AT at all. Fail design at its best.
22 Apr 2016, 15:53 PM
#152
avatar of Hitman5

Posts: 467

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:48 PMpugzii


Stuart getting double Fausted you have to hit it like once with a Rak, are you seriously not capable of that? If you are really that shit then just go T2 to get a puma if you are that worried.

Rak could deffo do with a range and wider horizontal traverse buff though, but its not the end of the world.


One stuart is going to be the least of OKW worries.
22 Apr 2016, 15:54 PM
#153
avatar of spajn
Donator 11

Posts: 927

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:49 PMFluffi


I'm no expert, but I think team weapons make the entire idea of combined arms interesting and thus should be accessible for all factions and should not be locked out in the name of "avoiding homogenization". Just my opinion.

I mean, both vanilla coh 1 factions had mgs and mortars that were kind of similar. Noone compalined. Yet the factions that tried to be sooo very different (PE and especially coh 1 brits) were a lot less popular. They had no conventional team weapons at all.

Team weapons are interesting and should be accessible IMO. There's other ways to differentiate them than to lock them in doctrines (MG34) or not integrating them (US Mortar). For example, in CoH 1 the allied AT gun had piercing rounds while the axis AT gun could cloak. The allied mg had piercing rounds but the axis one didn't. Stuff like that... but each role was filled. It didn't feel like sth was missing. I strongly opposse locking out what feels like it should be a basic part of a well designed faction just so it feels "less homogenized".

I was wondering why it sometimes would seem like the wfa armies are more prone to blobbing and not using combined arms? I think the inaccessability of team weapons could be part of the problem...


+100

these hordes of 4vs4 players rather have bad gameplay all in the name of diversity.
22 Apr 2016, 15:55 PM
#154
avatar of pugzii

Posts: 513

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:53 PMHitman5


One stuart is going to be the least of OKW worries.


What gamemode do you usually play? Can I see your playercard?

Remember that volks have Fausts now, so you can still punish aggressive vehicle play (even better than before) since tank pushing will be alot harder now coz you can snare them.. Just make sure by the mid game you have 2x Raks.
22 Apr 2016, 15:58 PM
#155
avatar of Hitman5

Posts: 467

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 15:55 PMpugzii


What gamemode do you usually play? Can I see your playercard?

Remember that volks have Fausts now, so you can still punish aggressive vehicle play (even better than before) since tank pushing will be alot harder now coz you can snare them.. Just make sure by the mid game you have 2x Raks.


All of them. You can find it easily.

So you can't get flanked by vehicles as easily as OKW now, but what does it mean for offensive play? OKW is supposed to be offensive but raketen is worst when used as aggressive AT. This is why OKW is just inferior version of Wehr now.
22 Apr 2016, 15:59 PM
#156
avatar of SlaYoU

Posts: 400

I think it is fair to point that Raketen are maybe fine defensively speaking, but they are not fulfilling the role of infantry AT (mobile and offensive AT). So basically OKW will be the same sitting duck that Ostheer is, playing reactively against the hordes of allies blobbing (with Penals joining the party now as well as untouched OP riflemen). But whatever, this patch will change until it goes live.
22 Apr 2016, 15:59 PM
#157
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

So much whining and vitriol about changes that haven't been tested by 90% of the people posting, and are likely to be changed after beta testing.

Getting rid of schrecks on volks is fantastic, they were a cancer to gameplay. It will need some adjustments to bring the faction in line, but this is a great start.
22 Apr 2016, 16:01 PM
#158
avatar of Livingdead

Posts: 15

Aww come on the Tiger doesn't need anymore nerfs :(
leave the Tiger alone.

and those OKW changes to make the auto repair and auto heal as upgrades are just straight up nerfs and I really feel they are unnecessary.
22 Apr 2016, 16:07 PM
#159
avatar of Cultist_kun

Posts: 295 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2016, 12:41 PMKatitof


*GASP!*

You mean like you'll have to actually put down mines and maybe actually consider what opponent does and go for Puma, just like ost goes for 222, USF for stuart, UKF for AEC and sov for SU-76/T-70 to deal with early vehicle from opponent instead of spamming most op handheld AT weapon on most basic infantry that doesn't even require any side costs!?

SUCH INJUSTICE!


Am I talking about light armor? Early light armor is painfull to fight with Raketen, but its possible at least some how. Also your smart ideas about going for puma or something like that is not excaptable what so ever, simply because:

You sacrifice part of your tech, which is responsable for IGs, which means you will be left without any kind of iderect fire abilities, which pretty much means that brit simply will blow your shit up with mortars destoying all your inf into pieces.

If you go for IGs to counter it, then AEC will have almost free harassment every where on the field.

Not to mention that all stuff from T2 comes when 1001 counter is already on the field, which means one wrong move and you will lose your Luchs\Puma and will be left without anything.


And specially for you kitkat, i'm not saying that schrecks should stay on volks. I say that StG suck ass, even in competitive eddition mod, because it provide such DPS increase which is force you to stay defensive and passive if you want to kill something.

x2 Panzerbuche is the only and single replacement for schrecks, or major raketen buffs, so it would be at least close to other AT guns. All this mine there, go for puma and T2 is not goona work against competitive player.

And before you say "Use faust and raketen", lets remind you how hard for Ostheer to kill properly microved light amor, even with supperior pak and supperior AI.
22 Apr 2016, 16:09 PM
#160
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

Aww come on the Tiger doesn't need anymore nerfs :(
leave the Tiger alone.


You know whats funny?

Only the tiger got nerfs...Is-2 is fine. WTF?!

No allied bias, sure :foreveralone:
PAGES (21)down
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

867 users are online: 867 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49188
Welcome our newest member, Dreufritt
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM