Winter Balance Preview Changelog
Posts: 368
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
I wanted this for so long.
also, is there a "fix" for units cloaking on retreat? does not seem like one. or is that how it is intended? i guess the new re cloaking policy kinda deals with that.
also is there a reason why not all vehicle can have hold fire?
Posts: 149
Posts: 1664
"Given a handbrake ability to prevent unwanted movement"
I wanted this for so long.
also, is there a "fix" for units cloaking on retreat? does not seem like one. or is that how it is intended? i guess the new re cloaking policy kinda deals with that.
p.s. did you guys look into the disparity between Axis command tanks and Brit command tank ability? Axis ones affect teammates which is a huge problem in team games. i think it should be like the brit one where it only affects yourself.
also is there a reason why not all vehicle can have hold fire?
Please invis your own post here for being off topic.
"Light Tanks/Vehicles, Squad Formations & Clumping, USF Mortar, Penals & Guards, and Wehrmacht Infantry Scaling. So please leave feedback to specifically those changes and not about all the other priority issues that need changing too."
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
"Given a handbrake ability to prevent unwanted movement"
I wanted this for so long.
also, is there a "fix" for units cloaking on retreat? does not seem like one. or is that how it is intended? i guess the new re cloaking policy kinda deals with that.
If I am not mistaken, this was addressed in the previous patch. Thus, there should be no infantry benefiting from camo when retreating.
p.s. did you guys look into the disparity between Axis command tanks and Brit command tank ability? Axis ones affect teammates which is a huge problem in team games. i think it should be like the brit one where it only affects yourself.
also is there a reason why not all vehicle can have hold fire?
Regarding hold fire, I am totally up for it. However to create place for it, we would have to get rid of one ability (I'd say prioritise vehicles for TDs and AT guns, which should have no interest wasting theor shots against infantry anyway).
However, given that this is the first balance patch we did, I wanted to push as many of the non-controversial QoL changes as I could. That way, in a future patch, players will have a smaller set of changes they can scrutinise.
Posts: 31
However, given that this is the first balance patch we did, I wanted to push as many of the non-controversial QoL changes as I could. That way, in a future patch, players will have a smaller set of changes they can scrutinise.
Are you suggesting that the community might overreact to the changes in this upcoming patch?
Posts: 1664
Posts: 168
1. Puma/AEC. Without the aim shot/treadbreeker freezing tanks, they lose a lot of scaling. They also did not do so much inf damage that it deserved to be nerfed.
2. Penals. Without flamers, it loses a little too much scaling. I think reduced recieved acc bonuses would probably be a better change. That would make them more of a glass cannon.
3. Medkits aren't fixable. They need to be removed with something that is actually useful, or should be completely free.
4. AAHT damage nerf seems excessive. Maybe 20% reduction would be more reasonable. It already is not used enough.
5. The 10 second recloak for snipers seems excessive. 4 or 5 would be more reasonable.
6. 222 changes seem alright but the fuel cost is excessive. 20 would be more reasonable.
Otherwise, I really appreciate this patch and changes ya'll made. I hope this feedback is helpful.
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Are you suggesting that the community might overreact to the changes in this upcoming patch?
Fixed that for ya.
Though I think he means more that by splitting up the balance changes in total and fixing the plain wrong bugs for this patch, it'll make the next one easier to criticize.
Posts: 2742
Quite frankly I don't understand a vast majority of the changes when there's also being a change to squad spacing.
So many problems have persisted from the issues related to squad spacing that there's really no way to gauge how much those changes will impact the game.
Balancing units around a problem that is being fixed doesn't seem like there is much foresight being taken.
Posts: 31
Just like the last patch, the general changes are welcome and long overdue. The unit and faction specific ones don't seem as well thought out, or a little narrow minded in their focus.
Quite frankly I don't understand a vast majority of the changes when there's also being a change to squad spacing.
So many problems have persisted from the issues related to squad spacing that there's really no way to gauge how much those changes will impact the game.
Balancing units around a problem that is being fixed doesn't seem like there is much foresight being taken.
I would agree except that the changes are actually tested in games by a number of players listed earlier in in the thread. I'm sure that the prepatch will be available soon for player testing if you lack faith in it.
Posts: 1024 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
So many problems have persisted from the issues related to squad spacing that there's really no way to gauge how much those changes will impact the game.
Balancing units around a problem that is being fixed doesn't seem like there is much foresight being taken.
While I see your point, I do think it's worth making sure early vehicle squad wipes are D-E-D such that if anything turns out underpowered, they can buff them back by anything that will not in any way go back toward wiping squads in like three shots. Price reductions, speed, acceleration, vet requirements, MG DPS, target size, etc. I personally doubt any vehicles had their main guns nerfed so much such that they deserve a buff to improve their AI, but certainly MG buffs would do it fine for any that turn out to need better AI.
Posts: 2742
Honestly, I think I'm going to be partially salty about any patch that doesn't result in tiered resource points for the WorldBuilder. You know so maps aren't doomed to suck or be clones of each other.
Posts: 168
What an ingenious idea to remove flamethrowers from penals, now they are just riflemen without any weapons. Also what a brilliant idea to increase the price of guards.
Now what am I supposed to do? My penals can't do anti-infantry work and my guards are extremely expensive and yet no match for obersoldaten.
Thanks lelic.
Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3
P. S. I like most of the other changes keep the good work up
Posts: 808
Penals over nerfed
Pz4 needs a little bit more pen
Pz2 ai nerf? dont understand this one, its not like it was a squad wiping machine and is poor in the AT department
Double brens need to be addressed because of the insane damage output and RA with vet.( i can also see brit blobs with brens and piats incoming)
One thing i would like to suggest is to deny brits players being able to build bofors in the VP to prevent VP camping (like the panzer shwerer headquarters for OKW)
Posts: 239
Posts: 9
of course we need changes but not just buf a faction and nerf another one
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently BannedLivestreams
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1098613.642+2
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM