Login

russian armor

MARCH 28th UPDATE

PAGES (12)down
22 Mar 2017, 20:59 PM
#61
avatar of Switzerland
Donator 33

Posts: 545

Lol cloth complaining about 222. With the cost reduction bulletin it was sonething loke 200 mp 13 fuel. Cost effectively clubbing seals. Just happy to know a date. Easter comes early.

Just hope there not some wack hilarious bug like IR searchlight becomes death ray on set up, or shermans duplicate themselves when crew evacuate. fingers crossed for the team on patch drop day.
22 Mar 2017, 21:53 PM
#62
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Lol cloth complaining about 222. With the cost reduction bulletin it was sonething loke 200 mp 13 fuel. Cost effectively clubbing seals. Just happy to know a date. Easter comes early.

Just hope there not some wack hilarious bug like IR searchlight becomes death ray on set up, or shermans duplicate themselves when crew evacuate. fingers crossed for the team on patch drop day.


Lol cloth also said in that same post "In all honesty, it was way to easy to get like 3-5 of them and dominate the field lol."

22 Mar 2017, 22:05 PM
#63
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
About bugs, did bug when you build wire, but behind this wire will be cover fixed ? Coz its reterded, need build 2 line of wire to fix cover.
22 Mar 2017, 22:17 PM
#64
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4




Not quite right. Some light tanks just need a bit more time to wipe inf now.

That's a nerf.


The AEC received massive buffs, and it can out-cheese the Stuart's stun shot by its new thread-breaking shot. The T70 is a lot more durable now. The Stuart has better penetration, and can vet faster.

The aec received massive nerfs to ai performance, the gun is shit now. If you are sad that you will lose armored cars to a dedicated tank hunter you should rethink your priorities. The treadbreaker was also nerfed, it lasts less than half as long now. They fixed the buggy stats with it so it will actually work reliably now instead of bugging out.

t-70 has same health as stuart. Both received heavy AI nerfs. Do you honestly think 10 more pen on the Stuart outweighs the nerfs?


Not to mention the fact that the new PIAT is a super Bazooka-Shreck hybird.

With the shortest range of any infantry AT. PIAT was op before if it would actually hit anything. Now it will function well against lights and suffer versus heavies, which is exactly what brits need for a snare replacement.


Allied Light Tanks will be still powerful, and people will be building them as often as they used to. The 222, on the other hand, has literally no purpose anymore, as by the time it arrives the allied "Scout/Clown Cars" have done the their damage.

If you are only getting the 222 to counter vehicles you are using it wrong.
22 Mar 2017, 22:22 PM
#65
avatar of JackDickolson

Posts: 181



I disagree with everything you said and consider your reasoning and explanations invalid. [Including those "it's just you mate" or "yo doin it wrong" kind of comments]
22 Mar 2017, 22:24 PM
#66
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4



I disagree with everything you said and consider your reasoning and explanations invalid. [Including those "it's just you mate" or "yo doin it wrong" kind of comments]

I said straight-up facts. What do you disagree with?
23 Mar 2017, 00:21 AM
#67
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2017, 22:17 PMTobis

The aec received massive nerfs to ai performance, the gun is shit now. If you are sad that you will lose armored cars to a dedicated tank hunter you should rethink your priorities. The treadbreaker was also nerfed, it lasts less than half as long now. They fixed the buggy stats with it so it will actually work reliably now instead of bugging out.


Yeah, but I've got to ask, were people effectively using the AEC for fighting infantry? In my experiences the AEC is what made Axis incapable of rushing light vehicles against Brits. The thing has always been a tool for cleaning up axis light vehicles.

23 Mar 2017, 00:25 AM
#68
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4



Yeah, but I've got to ask, were people effectively using the AEC for fighting infantry? In my experiences the AEC is what made Axis incapable of rushing light vehicles against Brits. The thing has always been a tool for cleaning up axis light vehicles.


Yes, in 1v1s brits get an AEC maybe 75% of the time. It's not going to annihilate you like a t-70, but it's still strong enough to beat up squads and force retreats. Much stronger than the puma, atleast.
23 Mar 2017, 07:40 AM
#69
avatar of mycalliope

Posts: 721

okw will stil be underwhelming still no reilable at,underwhelming infantry stg volks,obers and falls..etc,overpriced tanks,lame abilites compared to other factions.
23 Mar 2017, 08:41 AM
#70
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1




Not quite right. Some light tanks just need a bit more time to wipe inf now.

The AEC received massive buffs, and it can out-cheese the Stuart's stun shot by its new thread-breaking shot. The T70 is a lot more durable now. The Stuart has better penetration, and can vet faster.

Not to mention the fact that the new PIAT is a super Bazooka-Shreck hybird.


Allied Light Tanks will be still powerful, and people will be building them as often as they used to. The 222, on the other hand, has literally no purpose anymore, as by the time it arrives the allied "Scout/Clown Cars" have done the their damage.


Dunno, if they really lost their shock value vs infantry, many people will simply decide to not use them anymore. Let's be honest many players were building those units because of their high wipe potential with close to 0 micro giving them the edge on the match. Look at the Luch for example, they did removed its shock value some time ago. The unit is still performing well but is a lot less used because it requires brain and micro to get the best of it.

Playing Ostheer everytime I face a Light Tank, the question I ask myself is not how much damage it will do to my army before i finally kill it but how many of my squads will be wipes by them in 1 or 2 shots. Today When I manage to dodge those wipes (but not the damage), I'm in better condition to win the game and it is all what I want today.

Imo, Penals and Guards nerfs are also a nerf for the T70 strategy, those units have less impact when hitting the battlefield and will require more micro to deal the same amount of damage they deal today. Sov players will need to go T1 and T2 to get a viable army composition.
T2 maxim spam isn't great vs Ostheer and T2+T3 alone doesn't work neither on a balanced match. So yes, I can imagine the 222 will have a greater room to dominate the battlefield when it is available and probably force the Sov player to build a T70 to counter it which is different from today where Sov players are buidling T70 anyway.

Vs USF, the mortar nerf is basically all what we need today. Maybe the match-up will be still unbalanced but today we don't yet, let's see how the game evolve with the mortar nerf and Stuart nerf and M15 nerf.

Vs Brit, the AEC nerf is a good point, there is a need for more adjustment with the faction ofcourse but out of scope, so let's wait for the next patch.
23 Mar 2017, 08:43 AM
#71
avatar of Carlos Danger

Posts: 362

Lot of talk about light tank performance against the 222 but I'm thinking that, with the 222 arriving 15 fuel later, M20s and M3s are the real threat.
23 Mar 2017, 10:12 AM
#72
avatar of Gluhoman

Posts: 380

So wait guys, guards nerf are to hard (i am dunno why you decide make double nerf of price and stats).
So no m3 buff (so many words was writing here from you, that early light vehicles must more useful), like we see you guys like to talk many like relic.
No m20 buff (hello dead tier vs okw). Luchs more cheaper, nice one guys, if it was allies light vehicle meta, no its will be okw.
So new patch its will be OKW and Ostheer vs brits, its will be even more terrbile then now. And sometimes its will be maxim spam.
Nice one guys, 4 month of work for this, i must say if you build pyramides, its will be not ending in 2017.
Can you explaine why you dont add another change and why this ?
Agreed
23 Mar 2017, 10:39 AM
#73
avatar of le_saucisson_masque

Posts: 485 | Subs: 1

i see a bunch of people waking up today when you literraly got MONTHS to test these changes, provide feedback and give review.

I remember Smith complaining about the lack of feedback, and when i used to play coh2, couldn't find a single WBP game during hours.

to resume, you could have moove your *ss before and it would actually have an impact but now, it's a bit too late.
23 Mar 2017, 10:45 AM
#74
avatar of synThrax
Donator 11

Posts: 144

So make every unit equally pudding to make this game balanced. :D

Just kidding, a big thanks in advance to the devteam for this.
I'm really excited what new (horrors ^_^) things this patch will bring.
23 Mar 2017, 12:02 PM
#75
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

to resume, you could have moove your *ss before and it would actually have an impact but now, it's a bit too late.


Hey, it tends to be that the guys who QQ the most are the ones with 0 replays uploaded or PC been unknown.


222 costing 210/15 was an almost 2 year bug. It was supposed to cost 230mp/20f BEFORE the HP buffs. That was the cost of the 221. They removed the autocannon cost and they double increased the HP (from 200 to 240 to 320) and somehow the 222 went back into it's original cost.

23 Mar 2017, 12:22 PM
#76
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

i see a bunch of people waking up today when you literraly got MONTHS to test these changes, provide feedback and give review.

I remember Smith complaining about the lack of feedback, and when i used to play coh2, couldn't find a single WBP game during hours.

to resume, you could have moove your *ss before and it would actually have an impact but now, it's a bit too late.


That's not entirely correct.

We got a lot of feedback about Penals. Metric fucktons of it. Unfortunately, since the feedback we got was almost exclusively about Penals, we didn't feel confident adjusting anything else.

That was until KoTH incentivised people to play the mod more. Then, we were able to make adjustments on stuff that were not Penals.


23 Mar 2017, 12:47 PM
#77
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

i see a bunch of people waking up today when you literraly got MONTHS to test these changes, provide feedback and give review.

I remember Smith complaining about the lack of feedback, and when i used to play coh2, couldn't find a single WBP game during hours.


Yeah, the 20+ pages threads for every single iteration of the WBP really was quite little feedback, eh? The problem was rather, that no feedback except 20000 word posts with peer reviewed, scientific studies were considered acceptable. Which is quite funny, considering the reasoning for any of the changes is based on "we try", "we want to", or "attempt to".


jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2017, 18:35 PMEsxile


You'll probably see less Light tanks in the first place, or if you see them have more time to react with your infantry since they removed their wipe machine potential.
In resume, no need to invest on 2x222 to keep them at bay, one is enough with your pak and gren.


You do realise that people got two 222s because one wasn't cutting it? Two of them performed the way people needed them two, for an acceptable cost. Now that the 222 performs worse against vehicles due to the lower rate of fire on the auto-cannon, and now that you will only be able to get one of them, their performance against vehicles went down the drain for the same cost. That is effectively a nerf.

And it doesn't help at all, that the Stuart and T-70 now have less wiping potential, because they will still wipe your infantry and (in the case of the Stuart) have super-glue-repairs without the need to manage an engineer unit. Meanwhile, the performance of AT guns hasn't changed, so light vehicles can still YOLO dive AT-guns and circle around them while the AT gun can't do a thing.

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2017, 18:20 PMTobis
Has anyone complaining about the 222 changes actually played the patch?


Yes. At least the versions that were available, and due to lack mostly against AI. And the 222 changes were not impressive, to phrase it carefully.

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2017, 18:20 PMTobis

The 222 was ridiculously cheap and effective for the price as an AT-unit. Are you really going to argue about a light vehicle costing less that a JEEP was beating light tanks?

The changes to the mg will end up evening out the performance, because it was bugged before. The mg was actually incredibly powerful, it just never fired. Against infantry the performance is pretty much the same as before; it's just more reliable now.

Against other light vehicles at a distance it will be slightly better now too, with the added pen and accuracy.

The only real nerf was to the cost, which was more than overdue. It's not designed to be a YOLO spam unit anymore, now it is a scouting and soft vehicle counter tool, which should be obvious because it is a SCOUT CAR.


Every light tank in the game was also nerfed, btw. Across the board light vehicles were overperforming.


First of all, regardless of what Relic claims the unit's name is, the 222 is an ARMOURED SCOUT CAR. Leichter Panzerspähwagen. So why does it have less than a third(!) of the armour of the bloody M5 half-track? Not that this should matter in any case, as balance is more important than all the real-life names and performances in the world. (And that is why the M5 correctly has more armour, just to do away with the surely coming attempts to claim that I called for an M5 nerf.)

So the 222, according to your statement, is supposed to perform the same against infantry as it did before, only more "reliably". That is no improvement, because of all the light vehicles the 222 performed the worst against infantry. A fucking 251 performed better against infantry (except for the lack of a turret). So no change there.
At the same time, the 20cm cannon performs worse in any scenario, because it fires more slowly. Okay? Never mind the fact that the cannon is supposed to work better at range now, due to better penetration (LOL) and accuracy. Are you taking a fucking piss here? The chance to penetrate the T-70 and Stuart has changed by single-digit percentages (because having 35 or 40 penetration against 70 and 80 armour doesn't make much difference), and the accuracy was never an issue, as the opponents had target sizes between 18 and 20. The 222 relied on firing quickly, so that the penetration chances of a single shot weren't much of an issue, due to the volume of fire. YOU NERFED THE FIRING RATE, remember?
That same argument was also the reason, why people went for two 222s, because a single one couldn't reliably shit out enough shots to make the equation work - that isn't possible anymore, due to 30 fucking fuel, while having the pressure of researching and building the next tech-tier ASAP in order to come out with a Panzer IV two or three minutes after the first Sherman, T-34, or Cromwell.

So, let's sum it all up: The 222 is effectively worse against vehicles, and allegedly performs the same against infantry (per your statement). At the same time, the enemy will now have to drive longer behind your retreating infantry squads in order to wipe them. At the same time, you can't keep the enemy at distance with the 222, because everything is either just as fast or minimally slower than the 222, while at the same time the Stuart still has an 0.75 moving accuracy modificator, compared to the usual 0.5.
Yeah, I wonder how that will play out.

------------------------------


So, considering that sniper play was nerfed (good riddance, that was obnoxious at best), and the 222 doesn't do a better job while being more expensive, and also considering that all infantry changes of Allied infantry only affect later game stages when vet3 becomes relevant, how exactly is that not a direct nerf to Ostheer's early game capabilities? Sure, your Grens now perform better against vet3 Riflemen, but that doesn't fucking matter when you lose the game before vet3 Riflemen become a thing! Not to mention that Ostheer reinforcement costs are still higher than those of the Brits when they were incorrectly readjusted that one time, so bleed will effect them significantly more than most other factions.

Combine this with the abysmal situation that tanks are in right now (which I know is not the fault of the patch team, but the issue exists nonetheless), which means that the only crutch Ostheer has left is the StuG. Congratulations, you now have to set up your entire faction play around spamming as many StuGs as fast as possible and pray for luck. I wonder what will be nerfed with the next patch...

Don't get me wrong, there are loads of changes in the patch that were fucking overdue, and the cost of the 222 was definitely one of them. But that doesn't mean that effectively nerfing the performance of the 222 at the same time was a smart idea.
23 Mar 2017, 12:52 PM
#78
avatar of MoerserKarL
Donator 22

Posts: 1108

finally :P
Time for a cumback :)
23 Mar 2017, 12:53 PM
#79
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17



Yes. At least the versions that were available, and due to lack mostly against AI. And the 222 changes were not impressive, to phrase it carefully.


Just out of curiosity, how was your preservation like with the 222? The new 222, as well as most of the vehicles in the patch, actually require you to acquire veterancy before you can go for the deep dives.

The new 222 is no longer a vet0 suicide-rush vehicle. You invest in it, it gets veterancy, and it pays back. It also pays back a lot better than live-version 222.

The changes also mean that you don't have to dive-in every time for the 222 to do any damage. You can sit back, and kite. Then, use the improved mobility and keep your distance and keep kiting; while doing damage; while gaining vet. Ask anybody that has actually played WBP vs a human opponent, and they will tell you the same.

This requires a change in mentality.

PS: If the only testing you did was vs AI then, of course, the changes in 222's mobility make absolutely no difference. The AI is static either way.
23 Mar 2017, 12:55 PM
#80
avatar of le_saucisson_masque

Posts: 485 | Subs: 1

think it's called 'strategy', not many coh2 players knows that word :lol:


Yeah, the 20+ pages threads for every single iteration of the WBP really was quite little feedback, eh? The problem was rather, that no feedback except 20000 word posts with peer reviewed, scientific studies were considered acceptable. Which is quite funny, considering the reasoning for any of the changes is based on "we try", "we want to", or "attempt to".


i am speaking on the amount of "valuable" and "usefull" feedback. I saw too the huge thread for WBP but most of it was garbage.

Everytime someone said something on balance, he wouldn't provide any replay to give credibility to its point of view.
That was quite laughable actually, the wbp feedback thread was more than 20 pages, but the REPLAY thread on WBP was only 2 pages :rolleyes:

PAGES (12)down
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

757 users are online: 757 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM