Winter Balance Preview Changelog

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 01:11 AMMedster

Right, 2-3 months of potentially broken balance and worse yet, what if the second patch never comes? I don't understand limiting the scope to certain factions. If you have to take more time on the patch to look at all the factions, I'm sure the game would be better off for it.

Jump back to quoted post27 Nov 2016, 17:39 PMZombiFrancis

Light Tanks/Vehicles

Squad Formations & Clumping

Functionally unaddressed.

USF Mortar

Less range is one way of handling things I guess. Thing is just as lethal and now is a bit more mobile. If the mortar has trouble invalidating MGs so rifles can't freeroam onto any and all PAK positions then I'd consider it fixed.

Penals & Guards

Removing flamethrowers is not a bad move, but it kinda leaves a void. I like that it opens up conscript molotovs more for anti-garrisons, but I feel that Penals need some kind of upgrade to put them into either into a long range (DP-28) role or short range (PPsh) role. Of all the changes this seemed the most appropriate, if not the most negligible.

Wehrmacht Infantry Scaling

... Accomplished by making medkits heal for longer?

Jump back to quoted post25 Nov 2016, 20:36 PMAustralian Magic

Wait, no more double 1919 from racks, but still double bren?

Jump back to quoted post25 Nov 2016, 20:36 PMAustralian Magic

Wait, no more double 1919 from racks, but still double bren?

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 06:40 AMIA3 - HH

is Good question

Right, 2-3 months of potentially broken balance and worse yet, what if the second patch never comes? I don't understand limiting the scope to certain factions. If you have to take more time on the patch to look at all the factions, I'm sure the game would be better off for it.

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 06:50 AMTheMachine

The scope was limited by Relic, not us. We did the best we can given the circumstances. But the way I see it, even if we are creating some more issues, we are fixing a vastly larger amount of issues. So either way, it's a big net positive.

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 05:20 AMTheMachine

DP's would probably make penals even stronger, and would overlap with Guards.

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:00 AMSiphon X.

US mortar: I thought the original idea behind the addition of the mortar was to give USF some early smoke and a way to deal with garrisons, but ended up with a lethal uber mortar. Now, with this change you made the mortar more tricky to use but otherwise kept the lethality on the OH level. Why not instead, dunno, slash the damage in half (while keeping the damage vs. garrisons), potentially while also decreasing the price?

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:04 AMMr.Smith

The lethality of the USF mortar on the live version is above and beyond the OST version. It is completely out of this universe.

Although this is not listed explicitly in the patch notes, the USF mortar has been brought down into line with the OST version.

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:09 AMSiphon X.

Yeah, well, my lines of thought were more like the original intention was not to give the USF an effective mortar but rather a mobile smoke dispenser, right? So, why not decrease the lethality vs. units outside of garrisons significantly below the OST mortar (while obviously making it cheaper)?

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 07:29 AMTickTack

Why does the T70 need such nerfs (justified as its too strong against clumped units) when there are already changes made to unit clumping? That's a double nerf. The nerf to scatter is way too harsh guys, what the F are you smoking

The T70 is the most brutal light tank currently in the game. It may keep that spot, but when you are retreating it can still hit you hyper accurace, Mostly of the time I lose the squad, even when I retreat them with 3/4/5 members in it. The T-70 is the one unit in this game where I let my infantry retreat from in a quick way.

AssGren
'Veterancy 1 now Grants -10% received accuracy'
This is too much defensive power too early; rather split it between Vet1 and Vet3

AssGrens are in my own opinion crap and only effective on short range. I think the -10% received accuracy let them be more viable in the game in the longer run.

Pgren
You say they are strong but then A) make them more durable AND B) Buff their long range DPS. Rather just pick A or B - dont do both, it'll make them the new meta
Since it's the only elite infantry that the Ostheer has in this game I think it's well deserved. Charging in with this unit on others is a bad and stupid idea, since you'll drop models fast and lose your dps. They're really delicate to handle.

M5 could do with an acceleration buff because it can't escape from any attack whatsoever and now units can more easily close on it
Agree on this one

Guards: this is not a 'infantry scaling' problem, as you tried to make it. Making them cost more and take more damage won't make people choose Guard Motor any less. The real problem is inflexible soviet tiering - all you're doing here is reducing the options the faction has.
The better solution would be to halve the time to research conscript AT nade, or add small AT gun to T1 - and THEN nerf guards as above.
Although I agree with your inflexible soviet tiering, I do think the guards got a deserved nerf. Perhaps the incresed mp is a bit too much, but surely it's survivability was insane. Yesterday I had 2 retreating squads of guards with both 2/6 members in it running through 2x volks with STG, 1 sturm and even when my infantry was standing still I didn't killed them. Also it's really hard to deal with them just because they scale so damn well.

'Prioritise Vehicle now only affects the main gun of the affected tank, but not the MGs. Thus, vehicles with the Prioritise Vehicles ability active will continue to engage infantry with their MGs.'
Best change in the patch, well done

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 07:27 AMBob Pontes

Can you share anything on why the scope was limited, or what exactly the scope was?

EDIT: and just to be clear, +1 million for all of you who are working on this. Thanks a ton for working hard to keep this game alive.

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:00 AMSiphon X.

Looks good, guys.

I have few questions, though:

M15AA: Well, there was a time when the Stuart was generally considered not worthwhile. But even then the AAHT wasn't built much if at all. It was mostly M20 => Sherman. Why do you fear it would become the meta now if kept in it's current state?

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:13 AMMr.Smith

We tried some fancy variations, like higher speed, lower range for less damage, etc.

In the end, we decided that since the USF mortar has been causing issues for so long, we should go for a super-conservative design. Thus, we mirrored a mortar design that works and nerfed it down from there.

We did try some fancy variations (e.g., lower damage, lower range, but higher reload). In the end, we decided that this wouldn't stop the community from seeing ghosts and pointing the finger, as they have already been doing with Miragefla all those months. Stuff like "Oh, the USF mortar is still OP/better than the OST mortar", or "Now the USF mortar is crap. Back to 3-rifles, guys".

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:13 AMMr.Smith

We did try some fancy variations (e.g., lower damage, lower range, but higher reload). In the end, we decided that this wouldn't stop the community from seeing ghosts and pointing the finger, as they have already been doing with Miragefla all those months. Stuff like "Oh, the USF mortar is still OP/better than the OST mortar", or "Now the USF mortar is crap. Back to 3-rifles, guys".

Jump back to quoted post28 Nov 2016, 09:31 AMTheMachine

The M15's damage nerf was only against infantry. Not only does it still have incredible suppression it still shreds the 222 and OKW Flak Half Track just as fast, regardless of the 222 now costing 250mp and 30 fuel, as well as the M15 costing less manpower.