What Imagelessbean is describing is the reality in 3v3 and up. Since these modes are more heavy on the armour department, JT scales much better in those modes. Since units should be balanced according to the modes they are the most potent in, I fail to observe an error in Imagelessbean's logic.
JT is both a mobile Pak43 AND an artillery piece (40MU for 125 range). Currently it's just too easy to use. With the addition of MG34 in the faction, this will shut down the currently best avenue of approach to take that unit down; thus it will become even stronger. (The doctrine already has snares, since it contains pfussies).
Wouldn't that in theory mean, that a unit that maybe overperformes in 4vs4 due to extremely higher resource income and team play should be nerfed even if that means that the unit will completely vanish from all other game modes? I don't think that's the right approach.
No offense, but all I read is "nerf OKW".
Although I guess you are writing from a 4v4 point of view. I don´t have that much experience in this mode.
I played a lot of 1v1 in the balance patch preview mod and OKW feels pretty in line with the other factions.
Beside that, do you think a triple nerf for the JT and the Command Panther while keeping their cost the same is balancing? I think thats way over the top. With the nerf to the rear armour a JT should be ok to deal with.
On top of this I totally agree with the post of scratchedpaintjob.
No offense, but all I read is "nerf OKW".
Although I guess you are writing from a 4v4 point of view. I don´t have that much experience in this mode.
I played a lot of 1v1 in the balance patch preview mod and OKW feels pretty in line with the other factions.
Beside that, do you think a triple nerf for the JT and the Command Panther while keeping their cost the same is balancing? I think thats way over the top. With the nerf to the rear armour a JT should be ok to deal with.
On top of this I totally agree with the post of scratchedpaintjob.
All tanks get their rear armor nerfed not only JT.
And the question is, how to get behind a JT in 4vs4 mode, when almost every wher and okw soldier now get a panzerfaust.
It is not impossible to kill JT, but u will loose more fuel and manpower to kill it, than okw player that lost only 1 tank.
All tanks get their rear armor nerfed not only JT.
And the question is, how to get behind a JT in 4vs4 mode, when almost every wher and okw soldier now get a panzerfaust.
It is not impossible to kill JT, but u will loose more fuel and manpower to kill it, than okw player that lost only 1 tank.
Which means that all heavies are now easier to kill, doesn´t it? And you won´t 1v1 a JT with another heavy. So there is already an optimization.
As I said I lack the experience in 4v4 since I don´t like that chaotic way to play. But I guess it´s normal that a JT is supported and it´s still a huge ressource investment. Breaking the lines and trying to chase it down is the essence of combined arms and teamplay then...
No offense, but all I read is "nerf OKW".
Although I guess you are writing from a 4v4 point of view. I don´t have that much experience in this mode.
I played a lot of 1v1 in the balance patch preview mod and OKW feels pretty in line with the other factions.
Beside that, do you think a triple nerf for the JT and the Command Panther while keeping their cost the same is balancing? I think thats way over the top. With the nerf to the rear armour a JT should be ok to deal with.
On top of this I totally agree with the post of scratchedpaintjob.
Then you read this incorrectly. I have attempted to include a few changes that would help bring all factions in line. The JT and the CmdPanther have too large an impact on team games.
The range nerfs to the JT just bring it in line with current units. These stats still reflect pre-Brit deployment of the unit. With the addition of snares on basic infantry units, and as Mr. Smith point out, suppression, I don't see how flanking a JT is even remotely possible in large team games. Right now if I see volks I can try to blow by them to flank, but as soon as the fausts are there I will lose all my tanks just on the approach. Fusilliers give LoS to prevent sneak attacks, and the MG will deal with guards or zook blobs.
The CmdPanther is cost effective at vet 0 right now. It comes with MT, gives LoS to itself and others, and requires no tech. It also buffs Allied units. What I want is to prevent a vet 3 CmdPanther from winning the game. What Allied team can deal with a Tiger Ace or a JT getting buffs from a vet 3 CmdPanther? Fixing the vet issue would be enough.
Tell me again why a 128mm gun should have the same range as a 76mm gun? You mentioned that you're making the JT "a mobile 88" as if that's a good thing - do you realize the JT's round is 50% larger in diameter than an 88 and weighed more than 3x as much as the 88?
I'll agree to this when Relic nerfs the Bofors to be the same as the OKW 20mm flak emplacement.
Tell me again why a 128mm gun should have the same range as a 76mm gun? You mentioned that you're making the JT "a mobile 88" as if that's a good thing - do you realize the JT's round is 50% larger in diameter than an 88 and weighed more than 3x as much as the 88?
I'll agree to this when Relic nerfs the Bofors to be the same as the OKW 20mm flak emplacement.
Engineer vet
(Gameplay) Currently engineer units that upgrade to sweepers have a minimal chance to gain vet, a core concept in COH2. The American and Brit armies can upgrade weapons to relieve this problem, but the Soviets and Wehr cannot. This will bring all engineer units in line with OKW.
-Engineer units can backpack their minesweepers
This could work, but honestly, I'd remove switching on all engies. When you pick minesweeper, it's a trade, not a straight upgrade. However, I'd adjust it so that vet can be gained from sweeping and repairing.
JagdTiger
(Balance) The JT has an unfair effect on team games where it becomes a near impossibility to trade with efficiently. It also nullifies non-turreted assault guns too effectively.
-Range reduced to 80 (to normalize with 17pdr)
-Call-in changed to one time (to encourage good use of TD)
-Engine upgrade removed (to encourage good placement and limit ability to influence multiple areas of the battlefield, also allow a good flanking attack to succeed)
-Barrage range normalized with main gun (have the same range to make it obvious to all players its area of effect)
You can't just straight nerf an insanely expensive TD unit; there needs to be a trade. I agree with most of your changes; currently range is a bit silly, speed upgrade is unnecessary, and barrage over-range is bad for gameplay. However, remember, this unit has one thing no other unit in the game has; Stun-Lock. If it gets flanked (especially now with reduced rear-armor), it's basically lost. If you want all these nerfs, then stun-lock needs to go.
Also, just no to one-time use. Basically no other unit in the game has this, why should the JT?
CmdPanther
(Balance) The CmdPanther is too strong at higher levels of vet. It is still a very attractive tank at vet 0.
-Vet bonuses removed from 3, 4, and 5
-Standard Panther bonuses applied to vet 3, 4 and 5
-MT brought in line with Soviet equivalent (35% increased damage)
I agree with this. Vet 3-5 is kind of excessive; but you need a reason to get to vet 3-5 - normal vet just isn't good enough for a unit titled "command". I'd probably give it a passive sight bonus (rather than vet 5 when static) at vet 3, a "mark target" ability at vet 4, and a smoke-mortar call-in at vet 5 (with abilities costing muni).
This way the unit still gets useful abilities as it vets that actually apply to its "command" status, but all these abilities are support focused.
Bofors
(Gameplay and balance) The Bofors completely denies early Wehr play without a FHT. Even with a FHT the Wehr player is very vulnerable to be out teched and must rely heavily on munitions based abilities to attack the Bofors. From the Brit point of view, the Bofors is central to denying the enemy map area while they tech to tanks. The Bofors however generates extremely boring and static play. The changes attempt to please both players.
-Bofors barrage removed (no longer nullifies mortars)
-Bofors gains suppression on its regular fire to deny infantry simply approaching the gun from the front
Agreed; also needs a received repair speed nerf, so you can't repair it from 10% to 100% in a single barrage cooldown.
Schwer HQ
(Gameplay and balance) Similar to the Bofors the Schwer completely denies interesting flanking from infantry. In teamgames it can be combined with other units too quickly, completely denying whole areas of the map at no additional cost to a team. Indirect fire is far too vulnerable attempting to take it down because of the length of time required.
-Schwer HQ requires upgrade to use gun
No. The Flak is what makes the unit interesting; and also adds a very high risk-reward. You CAN put it somewhere aggressive, where the Flak will do a lot of damage, but it IS your T4 building - lose it and you fall back a LONG way. As is, brits can build their own FHQ (that self repairs) and use a Bofors to defend it (which has brace) for less than the cost of OKW T4. If it needs ANY nerf, just reduce its armor pen. Other than that, there's a ton of counters (AT guns, arty, mortars, etc.) that already work just fine. And yes, it needs to be that high in HP/Armor since it's literally a T4 building - there's a lot of risk there.
On-map static artillery guns
(Balance) Artillery guns are countered in a binary fashion (access to off-map artillery strikes, then on-map static artillery not useful). In team games especially the idea that a team would not have access to off-maps is unthinkable. The solution applied to AT guns would work well here.
-Guns now survive with 5% health when crew is killed.
No.
Part of the game is denying the possibility to re-crew stuff, hence why the AT guns need to be destructible by large arty. You could possible add to their HP (the weapon, not crew) so they don't get insta-wiped, but you can't just have a magic "only the next shot will get it" passive on everything.
At this point, i'm losing the focus between actual game, preview beta and mirage's mod.
If we take into account preview, then i think this list feels short (there's plenty more things to do)
1-Minesweepers: make it so that it passively increases repair speed
2-JT:
-Engine upgrade moved to vet3/4
-Increase range of AT gun emplacement up to 85. Leave JT as it is.
-Leave as it is now barrage and call in limit.
3-Command PV:
-On the contrary, i would leave the vet aura effects and remove the combat performance veterancy. I doubt if removing vet2 is too much but i'll start by removing vet3 without a glance. On it's current CP and resource cost, it's a PV on steroids. Compare the performance of command PIV (although aura has a stronger effect) and a normal PIV and a Command PV and a PV.
-Reduce mark vehicle effect from .5 to .4/.45 Even at .45, this will remove the 2 shot on Jackson and 3 shots on E8 and Bulldozers. Nothing changes against other vehicles (if my fast calculations are not wrong)
4-Bofor: just reduce barrage range
5-Flak HQ: maybe, maybe not.
6-Arty: if this is applied with reducing cost and reducing range so it has to be planted more aggressively i guess it's ok.
Although i'm not sure if this is applicable. The ideal is to remove the "cheap" offmap from 1 shotting and leaving that to heavy hitters (+250muni offmaps).
-edit-
This would mean:
UKF: Concentrated artillery (250mu) - Air suppremacy (325mu)
USF: 240mm Howitzer (250mu)
OKW: 105mm Howitzer (180mu) if enough muni is stored - Zeroing artillery (300mu) - Rocket barrage (200mu)
OH: Railway artillery (250mu) - Close the pocket - *
SU: T_T **
*You'll notice i didn't add Stuka dive bomb. At current cost, it shouldn't (specially after the ninja buffs) If the cost is increased up to 200/220 i wouldn't mind it having 0HK
Agreed; also needs a received repair speed nerf, so you can't repair it from 10% to 100% in a single barrage cooldown.
Actually, one very important aspect of emplacements that makes passive repairs so powerful (Advanced Assembly/Stand fast) is brace.
While the emplacement is braced, it receives reduced damage. However, the received repair rate is the same when the emplacement is both braced and unbraced. This means that bracing an emplacement while it is under stand fast might lead it to regenerating HP faster than it is losing it (e.g., due to an enemy mortar barrage).
Having passive repairs on top of that means that you don't risk losing squads by repairing (no brainer!).
The easiest way to get rid of this effect is:
- Give Bofors gains increased HP
- Remove brace
- Possibly adjust price
- (along with all the changes outlined by Imagelessbean)
Beans arguments about the Jagdtiger is spot on. With the proposed changes in the coming patch, the jag will be nearly impossible to reach even with the armor reduction changes. The reduction in armor is a good start for all heavies but the high health pool of the jag + snares + MG34 + engine upgrade means you are more than likely to never reaching the unit. Its range reduction means you have to move the unit in order for it to be effective and the removal of the engine upgrade means you can't simply back out of engagements as fast. When comparing it to the pak43 and the 17pndr (which cant move) the Jagtiger lacks any of their disadvantages that come along with them. If the Jagtiger is underperforming after these changes than giving it the engine upgrade back might help but in its current state its over performing and as such needs changes.
EDIT: The only thing I don't agree with is the "one time" call in on the unit. I feel like this is to punishing even if you normally can't evenly trade for the unit.
The SwS flak HQ needs an upgrade cost associated with it along with the normal tech price, as such I believe the tier its self could be change respectively to account for the extra tech price.
The CMD Panther's MT needs to be brought in like with soviet. Vet changes seem alright but as elchino7 pointed out we should look into normalizing both unit’s aurora buffs.
The Bofors should have the barrage, the suppression is a fair trade is it’s a solid light vehicle counter as well as an anti-infantry role emplacement. As such the price should come up by 5-10 fuel as it shares similar roles as the Shwer HQ.
Changing Minesweepersis another solid idea. Means you wouldn't have a unit always tied up and useless other than to sweep mines. Allows for a better use for the pop cap you invest.
Beans logic is sound and makes arguments that provide valuable trade offs to each unit.
+1 from me
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
