Winter Balance Preview Replays
Posts: 515
My logic: I'm thinking about vanilla CoH1 and why they did such a good job designing and balancing light vehicles (please don't call me out for a fanboy, I just compare the games to think how to improve CoH2).
Anyway, in CoH1, Wehrmacht's light vehicle was the Puma, and was either very good at AI (while no AT), or moderate good AT (with poor AI capability). The Americans on the other hand had the M8, which with its 50cal had decent anti-infantry (but less effective than a puma), and decent anti-light vehicle (but less than an upgraded puma).
CoH2 axis design seems similar. Look at the Luchs and Puma. The Luchs excels at AI, and has no AT. The Puma excels at AT, but has poor AI.
Wouldn't it therefore be logical that the AEC fit a role similar to the M8, where it can defeat the Luchs 1 on 1, but lose to the Puma, while boasting greater anti-infantry capability than the Puma so that the vehicle serves greater utility in all situations, while simultaneously not being a huge shock unit that dominate all axis light vehicles outright?
Just my thoughts.
Posts: 2742
Would it help if we reworked AEC timing to make it feel more like a panic-puma thing, rather than a generalist LV?
Depends on what is supposed to trigger this panic.
Stuarts and T70s trigger the panic puma. The Luchs would be the only real thing that would suggest a 'panic AEC'.
If anything I agree with Nosliw's assessment of how the AEC might be balanced best.
Posts: 115
the Puma got nerfed by changing the TWP ability so it can no longer wipe 1 man squads on retreat which is good. so it has lost basicly all its AI power. AEC should behave the same.
It gives the British player a choice between AT gun and more mobile AEC to counter early LV.
With the changes to piats brits now have also a 3rd option to deal with LV (or has that been reverted?).
In the live version Brits go AEC every time to counter the expected Luchs or 2x222 because they also get a pretty good AI unit as well. OKW has to choose between AI or AT only (Luchs/Puma) in comparison.
Posts: 515
Posts: 115
If you make the AEC AT only then I think it's too niche, and removes strategic diversity and micro from the game. You'd simply build it if you saw mechanized headquarters from OKW, otherwise you'd skip it for cromwell. Boring. Inb4 AEC vs Puma every game, or no AEC vs medic truck.
what is wrong with that?
would you rather see AEC every time as it is right now? that's my definition of boring.
this game isn't just about micro it's about teching as well. if you tech the wrong stuff you should be punished.
as you mentioned AEC would be the hard counter to mechanised Luchs or double 222. Where you would build the AEC AFTER the Luchs hit the field to prevent the Puma/AEC duel. AEC vs Puma should not be what the brit player wants. In case of the Puma brits would tech piats or AT gun.
btw AEC would be great against Flack HT as well which got its buffs and might be used more often now!
Posts: 515
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
The reason for this, is that AEC simply comes too early to be great at AI. Unlike other factions, Brits don't have enough tiers/research stuff to pin the timing for an early AEC.
Moreover, Brits don't, exactly, have other great alternatives to applying pressure. M8 worked for US in CoH1 because it belonged to one of two possible tiers, and US could already have the option of applying pressure from its earlier tiers; it was a faction built for aggression.
In short, the reason why AEC can't take the middle ground is due to:
- Early arrival
- Lack of viable alternatives for aggression (except for mortar pit, of course)
If UC changes would have gone through, we would be having a completely different discussion right now.
Since UC changes didn't make it through, it boils down to what Tittendachs said: we don't want to make the AEC a no-brainer option. At the same time, between the alternatives (PIATs/AEC), we should at least make it that the Brit player gets what he pays for.
Posts: 515
Sounds like faction design flaw... putting a light tank so early in the tech tree for a defensive faction. Sigh.
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
If the problem is a timing issue, why not make the AEC like an M8 and increase the upgrade cost for it so that it is delayed? Or would that just make Cromwell the better option always?
Sounds like faction design flaw... putting a light tank so early in the tech tree for a defensive faction. Sigh.
That could work, if we made the AEC/Bofors upgrade a requirement for buying T4 (with cost adjustments as necessary). Otherwise, if the upgrade remains optional, I think that people will generally skip it.
But, even then, it comes down to faction design. For instance, somebody that went Captain will almost always want to get a stuart out, regardless. However, unlike USF, Brits don't have an alternative Lieutenant tier to alternatve their builds.
(Yes, there's also Bofors tech, but do we really want to present that as an alternative?)
Having an auto-build AEC will make so many opposing strategies miserable:
- FlakHT
- 222
- MechHQ
... and at the same time, it will also make UKF miserable, since their strategies will be ultra-predictable.
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
That could work, if we made the AEC/Bofors upgrade a requirement for buying T4 (with cost adjustments as necessary). Otherwise, if the upgrade remains optional, I think that people will generally skip it.
But, even then, it comes down to faction design. For instance, somebody that went Captain will almost always want to get a stuart out, regardless. However, unlike USF, Brits don't have an alternative Lieutenant tier to alternatve their builds.
(Yes, there's also Bofors tech, but do we really want to present that as an alternative?)
Having an auto-build AEC will make so many opposing strategies miserable:
- FlakHT
- 222
- MechHQ
... and at the same time, it will also make UKF miserable, since their strategies will be ultra-predictable.
Also sometimes you do not want to go either AC or bofors mid game and then teching them would be pointless mainly because of strategical diversity thing because maybe lategame you will need AC as cheap stunner/command vehicle/ light vehicle duty unit or you will need bofors to lock down valuable yet hardly defendable VP without some kind of set up defence. If you chose bad mid game, you´re screwed and forced to something you do not want.
Posts: 368
Tank Hunter vs Spearhead
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
2 Replays with Brits vs wehr on close combat and a bit opener map
i liked the new AEC and PGrens especially, also the sniper
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
2 Replays with Brits vs wehr on close combat and a bit opener map
i liked the new AEC and PGrens especially, also the sniper
We did a recheck of all the game-files we modified.
Note that the AEC still has live-version AoE (but massively worse accuracy vs infantry). We are fixing this ninja-bug (along with all other remaining ninja-bugs) in v1.9.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
If the problem is a timing issue, why not make the AEC like an M8 and increase the upgrade cost for it so that it is delayed? Or would that just make Cromwell the better option always?
Sounds like faction design flaw... putting a light tank so early in the tech tree for a defensive faction. Sigh.
Not sure you can compare the M8 with the AEC, the Coh1 M8 came as an alternative to the global BARs upgrade. 60 fuel each if I remember well.
If you went BARs first, you're unlikely to build a M8 to counter Pumas. If you go M8 first, your opponent isn't going to build a Puma without upgrade.
You cannot really compare this situation with the Bofor/AEC.
I'm all for the AEC becoming a Puma like. But if nothing is change for the Bofor (aka nerfing it usage by making it less brainless autofire everything in range) everybody will go Bofor over AEC and we'll be ending in the same meta over and over but this time with the Bofor.
Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
If you wanted to see effectiveness of Assgren spam, soviet snipers, and Dank Hunters you can watch this.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
If you wanted to see Brümmbare and Ez-8's in a good game, you can watch this.
Livestreams
35 | |||||
3 | |||||
147 | |||||
6 | |||||
5 | |||||
4 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.651231.738+11
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.278108.720+29
- 5.1111616.643-1
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.922406.694+1
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.8621.804+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
2 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, qkpcmjwnpfkacm
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM