Login

russian armor

Arguments against possible upcoming OKW/UKF nerfs

[UKF] Would you still choose to play as the Brits if their units lost some of their unique features?
Option Distribution Votes
22%
19%
59%
[UKF] Emplacement a unique and fascinating feature or a flawed implementation of asymmetrical balance?
Option Distribution Votes
46%
54%
[OKW] Will you still play as OKW if their units lose their unique characteristics?
Option Distribution Votes
27%
38%
35%
[OKW] 5 powerful levels of hard earned veterancy vs 3 levels of affordable but average veterancy, your pereference?
Option Distribution Votes
64%
36%
[OKW] 5 veterancy levels a unique and fascinating feature or a flawed implementation of asymmetrical balance?
Option Distribution Votes
67%
33%
Total votes: 340
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
1 Mar 2017, 11:34 AM
#1
avatar of JackDickolson

Posts: 181

Though I have %100 confidence in Mr.Smith and how he handles each subject so professionally, I am a bit worried that there are some clueless folks who are pushing for massive, unreasonable OKW/UKF nerfs, the factions which were supposed to be the epitome of CoH2 design. Hell, I too could have been a believer in some of these arguments at some points.

Now there are some issues which need to be addressed for sure. But making these two factions dull by killing their unique characteristics is not the way to go.

So here are some common ideas and arguments brought up often, which I think are wrong;

The British Forces
  • The Idea that the Mortar Pit should be replaced with a regular one.

The only problem with this light arty pieces is how easily it can use ambient buildings to its advantage and there fore avoid all incoming fire. And the survivability bounus it attains once vet.

In order to fix that, we can increase the free space requirement around the emplacement while its being built. For example it should require a minimum of 6-9 meters of free area for construction, ie you can't just build it right near an ambient building. This way, recon and pak 40 can still threaten it.

TLDR1. Building The Mortar Pit should require a wider distance from ambient buildings, 2. Reduce the survivabilty bonus at higher levels of vet.

  • The Idea that the bofors' DPS and overall lethality should be nerfed.


What makes the bofors (BoreForce!) such a frustrating unit to deal with is its accuracy against retreating squads. God forbid if you end up in the wrong retreat path, you just have to sit down and mourn the loss of your squad, which you were trying to preserve by retreating.

The same problem which makes the mortar pit unbeatable applies to this emplacement as well, the distance requirement threshold when constructing. You can simply build it 2 millimeters from any building and use the ambient building as its shield.

TLDR 1. The gun shouldn't target retreating squads, 2. Building the emplacement should require a greater distance from ambient buildings.

  • The Idea that the vet 1 ability from the Centaur should be removed/nerfed/changed.

The slow tanks is highly vulnerable to AT nades, more so than any other tanks. This ability, which is not that cheap anyway, allows to pose a more serious to massed AT-Nade armed infantry.

TLDRLeave the unit as it is. Brits having a cheap tech research cost is another issue.


  • The Idea that the speed and overall mobility as well as the penetration of the cromwell should be reduced.

When we build a Cromwell, we expect to use a superfast Puma/Panther hybird, a medium tank hunter, if you will. With its crush being its main AI defense. Anything else or less will make it just a boring, perhaps useless clone of the other tanks.

TLDR1. Do not touch the tank and let it preserve its unique characteristics, INSTEAD, we should reduce the cost for the PIV and increase the Cromwell's cost. Brits having a cheap tech cost is another separate issue which is indeed affecting the Cromwell and overall vehicle balance.


The Oberkommando West

  • How come, we peasants have only 3 levels of veterancy, but those blue eyed, tall blonde OKW beasts can attain 5 levels of veterancy!!? OK then, so let's just remove their additional veterancy levels or render them useless, and as compensation, we can reduce the cost of their vehicles!

OKW units are more expensive to maintain and deploy. And acquiring vet is pretty challenging. Those two additional levels are supposed to make up for these. They are designed that way, it is a featuer. It is one of the reasons why people choose to play as OKW, instead of OSTHEER. If we were to remove this feature, what kind of new feature should we add, since they were marketed and sold as a faction with 5 levels of veterancy, and arguably, it is the most important and main attractions.

TLDR5 levles of veterancy is what differentiates OKW from OST. And what makes them so beautifully unique.

  • The King Tiger is too good to be a non-doctrinal superheavy!


TLDRIt is slow, expensive and requires full teching and has the most unrealistic vet requirments. Not to mention the fact that due to numerous buffs to allied AT, it is easily counterable. Also it is a feature, a fundamental one.

  • The Sturmtiger can oneshot too many things at once!


TLDRLeave the stats as they are, a CP increase might be all it needs (along with faster vet rate)


  • The Jaeger Light Infantry are too good for their cost!
They are one of the few affordable long ranged OKW infantry. If you see them spammed way too often, that is because obers are too expensive and arrive too late.

1 Mar 2017, 11:42 AM
#2
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911

This is a poorly constructed poll
1 Mar 2017, 11:45 AM
#3
avatar of JackDickolson

Posts: 181

This is a poorly constructed poll
What would you change about it? are the questions and options too directed? Are the listed options limited?

We can still ask a mod to make adjustments if your criticism is valid.
1 Mar 2017, 11:45 AM
#4
avatar of SUCKmyCLOCK

Posts: 207

Very poorly constructed........
1 Mar 2017, 11:53 AM
#5
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

By the time the other factions are towed in line, including UKF, people will finally realize how OP OKW will be with their 5 levels of vet.
1 Mar 2017, 12:51 PM
#6
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

Bringing things down in line doesn't necessarily mean that units/armies have to lose their uniqueness to be competitive.

For instance, if WBP can be a testament to that, we didn't have to introduce snares to UKF to make their early game varied and viable vs Light Vehicles.

Mortar pit might not have to be removed; 25-pounders could be buffed and brace could be reworked, instead, so as not to reward sim-city play as much as it does.

For OKW, if something has not been touched since OKW resource penalties, or especially since release (Command Panther Vet5, Sturmtiger), it's probably broken as fuck. It just that it doesn't show because in 1v1's Vet5 is unattainable. Just make veterancy more accessible and give units things other than raw stats that promote a-moving.

Anything else is just pushing things under the rug, and pretending it's OK, just because 1v1 games end before that moment.

Crushwell needs a big nerf (especially the Crush ability). However there are ways of doing that without making it into another P4/Sherman clone. Ideally every tank should have an edge over other tanks, which makes the game interesting. However, it's not fair when certain tanks possess that many edges over other, more expensive tanks.

e.g., what would happen if Cromwell remained a highly-mobile tank (not to this level, though), that, however, has crap moving accuracy? That way the player will be forced to make a trade-off between using superior speed to position their tanks and shooting.

Having inferior moving accuracy will also deal with Cromwell blobs. You can't just right-click your tank-blob behind your enemy and still expect them to beat the enemy.
V-T
1 Mar 2017, 12:56 PM
#7
avatar of V-T

Posts: 80

By the time the other factions are towed in line, including UKF, people will finally realize how OP OKW will be with their 5 levels of vet.


When and IF they ever get to vet to 5 stars...
OKW doesn't start with 5 stars, they need to be earned.

Play safe & vet your troops --> lose map presence --> Lose match

Play aggressive, lose troops --> never vet --> lag behind --> get raped by vetted units --> lose map presence --> cry --> lose match
1 Mar 2017, 13:00 PM
#8
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Mar 2017, 12:56 PMV-T


When and IF they ever get to vet to 5 stars...
OKW doesn't start with 5 stars, they need to be earned.

Play safe & vet your troops --> lose map presence --> Lose match

Play aggressive, lose troops --> never vet --> lag behind --> get raped by vetted units --> lose map presence --> cry --> lose match


I have no trouble getting my fussiliers and volks to vet 5. Once my tanks reach vet 2 and 3, they become way more potent, I have gotten my jagdpanzer IV to vet 5 quite regularly, it vets very quickly once it has predator cloak.

Volks with shrecks vet up so fast, it is funny.
1 Mar 2017, 13:07 PM
#9
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1

ukf deserves a nerf overall, cromwell, comet, arty cover are too strong atm

okw is far from being such an offender, vet 5 on an infantry squad means nothing in times of calliope, land mattress, double m1919, some minor readjustments may be needed (12 cp for command panther,...) but touching vet 5 in general is absurd
1 Mar 2017, 13:22 PM
#10
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

where is the axis unit which cost only 30fuel and 300MP ...which can deal with armys?

last time i checked i get a very fragil 55fuel halftrack AA which cant deal with one zook unit. or i can get two 222s which will be often destroyed by one AEC.


where are this overpower units for axis?
Or maybe bring their unit in line with axis units? or maybe add a funktion where u need micro this unit...and not build it..and let them fight alone...brain afk units in my words.

why can have the bofors a 360 angle fats rotation gun? why not an angle like mg (not bigger than maxim!)? so than this unit should need micro
1 Mar 2017, 13:35 PM
#11
avatar of luvnest
Strategist Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 1094 | Subs: 20

I love the argument that some things should stay as they are because they are unique. I think Relic had the same idea when they implemented the Tiger Ace. OKW Vet 5 is incredibly stupid because it rewards a player for being ingame at the 20 minute mark and not for being good at the game. While Allied squads stop receiving vet at that point, OKW still do.

Vet 5 Füsiliers vs vet 3 Cons is a very unique matchup indeed.

OKW is just a huge mess at this point. Originally designed to be a resource starved faction, they now have regular income while still having access to Infiltration grenades for as good as no munition cost. They are the perfect product of a faction with bad initial design and damage control updates and a lack of polish.

My reasonable suggestion is to remove OKW, USF and UKF alltogether, but I can't find that in the poll for some reason:help:.
1 Mar 2017, 13:53 PM
#12
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3

This is very interesting.. because there is something which vCoH and CoH2 have in common:

Both games have perfectly balanced and very skill-based vanilla factions..

But in both cases it seems like THQ/SEGA wanted to jump on the p2w train and ordered Relic to create DLC factions, which caused a complete balance DISASTER in both games.

It is very complicated and close to impossible to balance 5 factions at the same time... because there is always a faction matchup with unfair advantages. And if you try to fix these, you just create another issue (for another faction matchup).

Sticking to 2, max. 3 factions in this game would have been the best sadly
1 Mar 2017, 14:07 PM
#13
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

I love the argument that some things should stay as they are because they are unique. I think Relic had the same idea when they implemented the Tiger Ace. OKW Vet 5 is incredibly stupid because it rewards a player for being ingame at the 20 minute mark and not for being good at the game. While Allied squads stop receiving vet at that point, OKW still do.

Vet 5 Füsiliers vs vet 3 Cons is a very unique matchup indeed.

OKW is just a huge mess at this point. Originally designed to be a resource starved faction, they now have regular income while still having access to Infiltration grenades for as good as no munition cost. They are the perfect product of a faction with bad initial design and damage control updates and a lack of polish.

My reasonable suggestion is to remove OKW, USF and UKF alltogether, but I can't find that in the poll for some reason:help:.


A lot of the following types of issues are statistic outliers and will, hopefully, at some point be addressed:
- Vet5 for certain units giving far too strong raw stats
- Munitions/fuel cost for certain units/abilities not adjusted after resource penalties lifted

The problem with making OKW feel "right" though is because OST already picked up most of the juiciest elements of vCoH Wermacht/PE. By copying too many OST elements, you might as well merge the two factions together.

That leaves OKW as the mishmash faction with expensive tanks, inferior weapon teams and a fuckton of infantry. Somewhere in-between there are 4 elite infantry squads vying for attention. Also, trucks.

PS: Veterancy5 is not as unaffordable as people make it out to be. This is because of how veterancy thresholds are parametrised.

For example, assume it takes 1000 points to go from Vet0 to Vet1. Then, it takes:
- 1000 points to go from Vet1 to Vet2
- 2000 points to go from Vet2 to Vet3
- 1000 points to go from Vet3 to Vet4
- 1500 points to go from Vet4 to Vet5

Thus, it takes roughly the same amount of effort to go from Vet2 to Vet3 as it takes to go from Vet3 to Vet5 (in-between, your squad benefits from better bonuses)
aaa
1 Mar 2017, 14:08 PM
#14
avatar of aaa

Posts: 1487

non top tens shpuld not vote
1 Mar 2017, 14:11 PM
#15
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1

OKW Vet 5 is incredibly stupid because it rewards a player for being ingame at the 20 minute mark and not for being good at the game.

i think you are wrong and part of why i think you are wrong was written by aerafield:

This is very interesting.. because there is something which vCoH and CoH2 have in common:

Both games have perfectly balanced and very skill-based vanilla factions..

and what vcoh wehrmacht had was the option to buy veterancy and quite strong veterancy. so naturally, wehrmacht got strong in the lategame and as both sides lost units, wehrmacht could replenish their forces with veterans while US could not. and this worked out, therefore i wouldnt say that having vet 5 is intrinsically imbalanced



- Vet5 for certain units giving far too strong raw stats

what are the biggest offenders in your opinion?
1 Mar 2017, 14:32 PM
#16
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17


what are the biggest offenders in your opinion?


Disclaimer:
- This assumes we are rebalancing the late-late-game strength of all factions to match post-WBP Soviets. If somebody tries to hijack the thread by saying "But Brits!", we know.

Tanks:
- JP4 veterancy. Like, the entire Vet2 set of bonuses. Just look at it. How are you supposed to even counter that?
Command Panther Vet5. +range/+speed completely breaks infantry combat. There's no reason CP should give strong infantry-buffing effects. It is already donating the strongest tank-related buffs by that point.
- Sturmtiger is severely undercost. This is obviously because its cost was not adjusted after the resource penalties were lifted (yes, we know it's same story for AVRE too).
- Jagtiger popcap is completely wrong. For its effect on the field, it should take a 30-ish popcap. Also, that 50-munition engine upgrade.

Infantry squads:
- Panzerfusiliers. First, have a look at their bonuses, and now compare them to WBP Penals, which cost more. Then, let it sink that Pfussies are a 6-popcap squad.
- Obersoldaten don't need passive suppression. If suppression-wars is the way to go, they could get a Paratrooper-like ability instead. Otherwise, they either need to come out earlier, or come out stronger to reward teching-over-callins (Commando-style frontloading). Aren't Obers supposed to be weathered-veterans type of unit?
- Sturmpioneers get too many bonuses. It didn't matter much though, and I doubt it will matter anymore post AT-veterancy fix.
(I can't really comment on JLI, since I don't use the doctrine).
1 Mar 2017, 16:10 PM
#17
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1

i'm just gonna comment on those where i disagree

Command Panther Vet5. +range/+speed completely breaks infantry combat. There's no reason CP should give strong infantry-buffing effects. It is already donating the strongest tank-related buffs by that point.

i think there has already been a lot of discussion about vet 5 cp. the only time, where that was reached in competetive was one game with noggano i believe and the enemies had several moments where they could have traded one of their tanks vs the vetted cp iirc. and getting there requires a fuckton of luck and micro, therefore it being a completely broken unit at vet5 is fine

- Jagtiger popcap is completely wrong. For its effect on the field, it should take a 30-ish popcap. Also, that 50-munition engine upgrade.

its popcap is already 21, 25 may be still alright, but 30 just means that the rest of your army gets really small

- Sturmpioneers get too many bonuses. It didn't matter much though, and I doubt it will matter anymore post AT-veterancy fix.
they get a good amount of received accuracy and accuracy buffs, but all other buffs are more or less buffing their pioneer capabilities. wouldnt say that this is too many, especially considering cost and fragility
1 Mar 2017, 16:31 PM
#18
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17


i think there has already been a lot of discussion about vet 5 cp. the only time, where that was reached in competetive was one game with noggano i believe and the enemies had several moments where they could have traded one of their tanks vs the vetted cp iirc. and getting there requires a fuckton of luck and micro, therefore it being a completely broken unit at vet5 is fine


ergo, make vet5 attainable, but make it reasonable. All armies are supposed to converge to similar and/or comparable late-late-game strength, otherwise it becomes unmanageable to allow for 1v1 balance to trickle down on other modes (i.e., making it a nightmare).

Therefore, all armies should reach their peak strength at a comparable point in time; ideally within the timescale of 1v1. Since veterancy contributes to strength, that should also be factored in.


its popcap is already 21, 25 may be still alright, but 30 just means that the rest of your army gets really small
they get a good amount of received accuracy and accuracy buffs, but all other buffs are more or less buffing their pioneer capabilities. wouldnt say that this is too many, especially considering cost and fragility



The JT forces a massive shift in playstyle on the entire opposing team (unless they want to lose, or unless allied BS that goes above the Soviet-level goal; calliope/party cover).

It is a fair trade-off if the army of the 1 guy that fields the JT has to shrink to accommodate this. The dudes that need to kill the JT have to work in unison. Similarly, the dudes fielding the JT should be required to work in unison to "carry" the JT-fielding guy.

There are issues surrounding 5-star OKW vet, but it's probably not the top-most-broken thing out at the moment.
1 Mar 2017, 16:47 PM
#19
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

Level 5 vet and the Emplacements are not flawed, they're just designed or at least implemented in the wrong way.

My man Planet Masher knows what I'm talking about.

As for the nerfs to both of these Armies, I think their power should be balanced, not nerfed or buffed directly.

The Brits only have their tanks going for them anyhow, since like I mentioned Emplacements are badly implemented, while OKW's vet 5 is almost unreachable for certain support units like the Leig, Stuka and Sturmtiger, again, these are not all of the units, they're just examples, I'd also add the Flame Hetzer to these but since I don't have the doctrine and don't play with it... but I still hear people say it's pretty bad, and that's probably why I almost never see it in action, like ever.
1 Mar 2017, 17:42 PM
#20
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1


[...]

My reasonable suggestion is to remove OKW, USF and UKF alltogether, but I can't find that in the poll for some reason:help:.


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

887 users are online: 887 guests
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50008
Welcome our newest member, Goynet40
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM