Teamgame dominant meta

You don't. It means, that they need to be looked at too. Neither of the factions should have so easy to wipe abillity, even in the doctrines.

Maybe i am wrong, but it is not about assymmetrical balance.
Symmetrical balance is in World in Conflict (mirrored factions with extremely small differences). It is more about rules of the game, which need to be followed by all factions. Like all mines not wipe infantry, like all grenades have reduced range when squad pinned in yellow, like neither assault abillity can be dropped on the base sector.



You said to stop listening axis fanplayers, when they said to nerf something (f.e. democharge). I am against wipe abillities, doesn't matter which faction has it. It is my own vision. I want to say, that it is ok to touch abillities like this and doesn't matter, which faction has it and which faction do you prefer.

From my own expirience, soviets have gotten buffs too, not only nerfs (summer patch strongly buffed the Red Army). WBP and GSC nerfed or rebalanced soviets in some ways, and it is ok for me, because i can understand the reason, why it was made.

Not every change i like, f.e. new maxim doesn't pinned in yellow after first burst like other HMG. But as Miragefla said:


Don't forget, balance team has a scope. Their possibilities are limited, and they do the best what they can with this scope.

UPDATE:

As i said, abillities like that need to be looked at.

Yes, its looks like easy, but lets see in another side, like i say its part of soviet defend. Need it fix, yes, but not nerf to nothing.
So if you are against wipes, balance team need change all units that can make wipe to make that one model survive ? Can thay do it ? Are this things in scope ? I dont think so, relic dont give them so many tools. So its will be soviet wipe potential nerf only.
LEts see what best from scope thay do. Soviet now have only 1 meta (broken or not its another question), before change soviet have more meta. Now every soviet game in tourney are like Groundhog Day, only some people with balls use soviet Defencive doc or another strats (but its dont mean that thay have chance to win). Some brits stuff still dont fix, i mean not only cancer nerf, but where buffs, valanteine 12 POPCAP (pls guys). I always think that relic are interested taht more units are live, more strats, more docs can be use, but after all this SCOPE, i dont know what to think.

Certainly interesting (and promising) to see that team-game meta is even being considered for balance.

Stuka Dive Bomb
As elchino7 already pointed out, reducing the Stuka Dive Bomb's instant-kill range from 15 to the 6.5 would make it work as intended. A price increase would also reduce the frequency that victory points can be neutralized in team games while also making it less cost effective at killing static artillery pieces (especially considering that three doctrines feature the 2-click Wündercombo of recon overflight followed by the Stuka Dive Bomb).

ISG/Mortar Pits
The proposed changes to the ISG/Mortar pits look good. Why not give the ISG a smoke barrage, something that the OKW severely lacks? This would give the OKW a means of countering Bofors and HMG garrisons using combined arms.

Jagdtigers/Elefants
These heavy tank destroyers dominate team games because of the decreasing effectiveness of flanking maneuvers with increasing players on the field. Of course this is highly map dependent and is exacerbated on narrow maps (e.g. Rails and Metal or Road to Kharkov). This issue balloons disproportionately in the clustergarden that is 3v3 and 4v4 where, for all intents and purposes, flanks cease to exist and the otherwise prohibitive cost of these units is irrelevant. One possible solution to this problem would be to lower the mobility of these units to enable flanking (e.g. remove the Jagdtiger's engine upgrade). While damage changes might help to some extent for the tanks with 640 health, I think that a firing rate reduction might be a more appropriate solution under the circumstances (e.g. match the 10s reload of the ISU-152). Of course, the proposed normalization of repair speed would also help reduce the relative over-performance of the Jagdtiger.

Sturmtiger
While I agree with the rest of the changes to the Sturmtiger, mutual-exclusiveness with the KT might be a little excessive. A slight population and/or fuel cost increase might be more appropriate.

Demo Charges
I would propose to make demo charges only kill a maximum of 3 models in any individual squad while suppressing/pinning survivors to maintain their utility against blobs.

Misc.
I realize it isn't on the list of changes, but I would also like to propose including upper limits on the number of models killed by any single mortar/Leig/Pack Howi bomb. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing a whole squad get wiped by an RNG bomb because the CoH2 engine remains incapable of preventing models from clumping up. Simply limiting the maximum number of models that can be killed by mortars would be an enormous boon for infantry of all factions (obviously helping OST the most since they already have the smallest squad sizes). I suppose this would also be an indirect buff to HMGs, but so long as the ISG gets a smoke barrage no single faction would gain the upper hand. In my mind, this would be an enormous quality of life change by removing one of the largest sources of RNG wipes remaining in CoH2.

Everybody must take a chill pill, be constructive and rational.

We want our favorite game to be fun, to last and thrive !

Lets give all our full support to Mr Smith and the balance team.

Thank you everyone for you efforts !

Elefant/Jagdtiger

2-shots -> medium tank/TD dead

Damage needs to go down from 320 to 280 to:
- Prevent these tanks from wiping veterancy left and right
- Keep them relevant vs advanced mediums/heavies
- Reworked to keep remotely relevant for smaller modes (e.g., cheaper, barrage at vet0, etc)

Imo the problem is equally big with Firefly, M36 and Su85 being to good at countering mediums.

Also the solution can be is same:
1) Lower size of medium tanks
2) Increase size of heavy tanks
3) Reduce the accuracy of TD with range above 50
4)Lower the damage of all doctrinal TD to 160 (if more damage vs heavies is needed they can get that either vs target tables or abilities that can only target these vehicles)

Its just good meta doc, like ostheer with ele + dive bomb, like tiger + OP planes, like commanpanther, like JT doc. Thats why you see it so many, but i whanna remember thatsoviet dont have armor in tiers, dont have elite infatry, like another factions, so go doc for soviet is life, no doc, no win.

I agree, and I believe that those "all-in-one" commanders are pretty stupid. Instead of having to think about your strategy and how to utilize your commander, you can just use those overly effective commanders. What is the point of having a strong unit PLUS all the things you need to counter the natural counters (like the Ele + Stuka)?

Oh, and I think Penals are worse than before. They still have insane dps and surviveability, but now they are not even punishable with light vehicles. Soviets dont even have to think about At and then they can simply spam the incredibly cheap t34s. Literally everygame you see Penals into t34 spam, with occasional 120mms and katyushas. Its just not fun at all to play against Soviets, since you always see the same. Dont remember when I saw a maxim for the last time. But why would you get one when penals just outright destroy (or rather humiliate?) everything on the field?

Again the problem in large games is not the units themselves but the inflated economy fix.

You can't fix having mostly 3 VPs and limited amount of strategic points for 2/3/4 players which makes unit concentration a reality.

You can't fix having mostly 3 VPs and limited amount of strategic points for 2/3/4 players which makes unit concentration a reality.

? In the current live a cache in a 4vs4 is X4 more effective than in 1vs1. If one reduced the resource return is more player in game closer the 4vs4 economy will be to 1vs1 economy.

Currently the CP gain in 1vs1 is faster than in 4vs4. If one speeds up CP gain in 4vs4 again the economy will be closer to 1v1

? In the current live a cache in a 4vs4 is X4 more effective than in 1vs1. If one reduced the resource return is more player in game closer the 4vs4 economy will be to 1vs1 economy.

Currently the CP gain in 1vs1 is faster than in 4vs4. If one speeds up CP gain in 4vs4 again the economy will be closer to 1v1

There is so much you can fix with economy/teching timings. Units which are "problematic" on teamgames and not so much on 1v1 are also due to sheer number of units on the field, both to attack and to defend it and the actual flow of gameplay.

It's not the same to fluctuate around the map, spreading your army thin because you actually have to defend 2 VP on your own to actually win, in comparison to having the possibility of having 200 popcap sitting around on a single VP.

This thread is Christmas come early for me as I play mostly 4v4s with friends. Admittedly I play allies more, so will refrain from balance comments except to say I believe that nerfing Stuka will probably have more effect on the allied/axis winrate than all the other changes combined.

The thing with the Elefant and Jagdtiger is that they come in doctrines which make them seem more OP than they are: both Elefant doctrines come with the Stuka Dive Bomb (and one with scopes), and the vetted Fusiliers' LOS synergizes great with the Jagd.

I would personally disable fire on the move from both the Jagd and the Elefant (and ISU). Require a second of being stationary before they can fire. I believe this would greatly facilitate flanking.

If oneshotting howies gets fixed, I propose making indirect fire a soft counter for heavies: howitzers should get a damage bonus versus them (KT, Pershing, IS2 and up) and/or get arty-cover-style gunner criticals.

Imagine having to deal with MG42s with infantry only, if you had no indirect fire and no smoke. This is what allied play vs Elefant/Jagdtiger looks like at the moment. This is why mortars exist, so you can deal with the slow but powerful machine guns indirectly. In this analogy, howitzers are to heavies what mortars are to MGs - artillery should absolutely MURDER stationary superheavies or force a reposition so that tanks can roll in, just like it is a good idea to follow up a mortar barrage with an infantry attack. Except artillery is a minor inconvenience to heavies at best (that can be one-click deleted off the map to boot).

Also, shared income from caches needs to go. (I realize this will never happen and is outside of the authority that was given to the community balance team.) This would not impact the precious 1v1s and would do wonders for larger team modes. If a team of 4 puts up 3 fuel caches relatively early on, this injects a total of ~1300 fuel into the economy of a 4 person team over the course of a normal 4v4 game, which is completely insane.

You have 4 games of 4v4 as random USF. You have 404 games as random OST. That's a very interesting definition of "as much as".

Please show us the replay where you isolated the Elefant using smoke and killed it with Shermans.

Holy dude do you know how a player card works ? Do you know that ostheer has been out for twice as long as the other factions? You failed to regard the amount of Brits games I have, failed to regard any team games I have with other players and decided to cherry pick instead. Good conclusions bro.

I have a noob mate who's terrible at the game who I played with back in the day and I swopped between all the Allies factions when I played with him. His name is Jebuscrust and you see I have more games as Allies with him than axis.

This thread is Christmas come early for me as I play mostly 4v4s with friends. Admittedly I play allies more, so will refrain from balance comments except to say I believe that nerfing Stuka will probably have more effect on the allied/axis winrate than all the other changes combined.

The thing with the Elefant and Jagdtiger is that they come in doctrines which make them seem more OP than they are: both Elefant doctrines come with the Stuka Dive Bomb (and one with scopes), and the vetted Fusiliers' LOS synergizes great with the Jagd.

I would personally disable fire on the move from both the Jagd and the Elefant (and ISU). Require a second of being stationary before they can fire. I believe this would greatly facilitate flanking.

If oneshotting howies gets fixed, I propose making indirect fire a soft counter for heavies: howitzers should get a damage bonus versus them (KT, Pershing, IS2 and up) and/or get arty-cover-style gunner criticals.

Imagine having to deal with MG42s with infantry only, if you had no indirect fire and no smoke. This is what allied play vs Elefant/Jagdtiger looks like at the moment. This is why mortars exist, so you can deal with the slow but powerful machine guns indirectly. In this analogy, howitzers are to heavies what mortars are to MGs - artillery should absolutely MURDER stationary superheavies or force a reposition so that tanks can roll in, just like it is a good idea to follow up a mortar barrage with an infantry attack. Except artillery is a minor inconvenience to heavies at best (that can be one-click deleted off the map to boot).

Also, shared income from caches needs to go. (I realize this will never happen and is outside of the authority that was given to the community balance team.) This would not impact the precious 1v1s and would do wonders for larger team modes. If a team of 4 puts up 3 fuel caches relatively early on, this injects a total of ~1300 fuel into the economy of a 4 person team over the course of a normal 4v4 game, which is completely insane.

+100

I was thinking of a way the Sturmtiger could be different. First all who here remembers the Sturmtiger's Vet 1 abillity. Answer: Show Spoiler
I was thinking how could the Sturmtiger could be changed and this is my answer.

Making a rapid fire grenade launcher as a Primary and make the reload action a munition sink. Make all the reload inveterancy and vet 1 reduce the cost of the reload. I am currently making a mod for adjusting all the commanders to make more viable. I just want to know what do you all think of this. This will transform the Sturmtiger from a one shot wonder to more of a sustain type unit.

Making a rapid fire grenade launcher as a Primary and make the reload action a munition sink. Make all the reload inveterancy and vet 1 reduce the cost of the reload. I am currently making a mod for adjusting all the commanders to make more viable. I just want to know what do you all think of this. This will transform the Sturmtiger from a one shot wonder to more of a sustain type unit.

Gameplay implications aside, the defensive smoke grenade on the Sturmtiger is launched from the the Nahverteidigungswaffe. This thing had to be manually reloaded by a rather slow process for each grenade fired. I am not a stickler for realism, and Relic has some dubious representations of ww2 in CoH2, but at least all their weapons and units have basis in reality. The rapid grenade launcher as seen in your video simply did not exist on the Sturmtiger.

Bakance team, can you do this ? "We suggest adding a button (combination) that rotates the map by 180 degrees, maintaining the elevation angle, so that the player who starts in the upper position could avoid struggling with cover foir his infantry. Just for convenience purposes. Many players try hard to achieve that manually, so why not help them and make the whole process automatic"

Gameplay implications aside, the defensive smoke grenade on the Sturmtiger is launched from the the Nahverteidigungswaffe. This thing had to be manually reloaded by a rather slow process for each grenade fired. I am not a stickler for realism, and Relic has some dubious representations of ww2 in CoH2, but at least all their weapons and units have basis in reality. The rapid grenade launcher as seen in your video simply did not exist on the Sturmtiger.

True but I can be adjusted so instead of firing in bursts it can be fired one at a time with a rapid reload rate.

While I haven't been in a balance discussion for a long time, I really have to voice my opinion here. Some of the suggestions are downright unsettling to me.

Firefly

Fireflies are mostly OK for 1v1. However:
- They have too good accuracy and moving accuracy making vehicle-play impossible against them
- This is, unless, OST/OKW use heavy-TDs (which will be getting nerfed, btw)

Solution:
- Reduce accuracy/moving accuracy to SU-85 levels
- Remove movement-stun from Tulips
- Remove damage bonus from Vet3 (too good vs mediums; might require cost decrease though)

I can agree with a Moving Accuracy Decrease. But I believe it's Stationary Accuracy should be left alone. It fires very slowly already so you want that first shot to count.

Just the Moving Accuracy Decrease alone will make a huge difference since Kiting with it will become rather useless. So a British Player will need to support their Firefly to allow it to remain useful, such as supporting with PIAT Infantry.

No other change will be needed in my opinion. We should test how things go with the Moving Accuracy Nerf first before throwing anything else in the mix.

Crocodile

This is, again, an issue with super-specialized hardware. Even if you make them OK for 1v1, they become a menace in anything bigger than that.

- Simply too good for its cost at killing infantry
- Remember that range-affecting nerf some year ago? Well, it never properly made it in

Solution:
- Fix flamethrower damage and range (downwards)
- Upgrade cannon damage from 80 to 100 so that it can threaten tanks
- Allow players to control cannon directly

This allows Crocodile to be an AI-mostly generalist, which means it no longer has to absolutely murder infantry by staring at them.

While I agree with the point that Crocs can be an annoying thing to fight in Team Games, I feel decreasing it's range and damage is going over the top. The Croc's Armour already sucks as it is so having to come in close is way too risky, especially since Axis AT in general is formidable. It's suppose to help you break down concentrated defenses towards the end game. If you can't do that reliably, why the hell would anyone want it to begin with? I'm willing to bet most British Players don't want the Croc to become a Generalist Tank, that's what the Normal Churchill is for.

So I have an alternative proposal. Let's decrease the Rate of Fire instead (Like the rate of fire of a Firefly.) and change the Rate of Fire Vet bonuses it gets into something else. This allows it to maintain it's Fear Factor with powerful streams of fire that players call it in for but still give the Axis more time to counter it or maneuver their infantry. This also make sense when you look at the size of the fuel tank on the Croc. I imagine that the crew in real life wouldn't dream of firing it as fast as in the game, since they would burn through the fuel quickly.

Preferably, I would say make it fire a 5 Second long stream of fire and let it cool down for at least 10 Seconds or so.

I believe this should be reasonable while allowing it to remain a desirable tank to get. Just ask yourself, do you see yourself ever getting into a position where you will feel you NEED a Croc once you nerf it's damage and range? I feel it will never see the battlefield again after that. I IMPLORE you, Mr.Smith, to consider a heavy rate of fire nerf instead. It's an endgame unit after all and should remain a desired unit for the player to use.

Emplacement/ISG rework

- Mortar pit/ISG auto-attack range needs to go down (to at most 80)
- Barrage recharge could happen faster for Mortar Pits
- ISGs need anti-garrison upgrade for sure
- Brace needs rework (at the very least, it should disable repairs while active)

No, no, NO to the range nerf for the Mortar Pit. The Mortar Pit is Immobile and CANNOT be broken down. There is absolutely no fair reason why the auto-attack range should be nerfed. Once the British Player builds one, he can't move it to somewhere more useful once he pushes the enemy back, unless he break immersion and kills his own men. It needs that extra range to remain useful, especially on larger maps. As long as this limitation exists, a range nerf is not something I'd recommend.

I do have an alternate proposal for this too, however.

We know that once buffed by a garrisoned squad or a Foward Assembly, the Mortar Pits becomes extremely potent killing machines. This is because the Rate of Fire for their Auto-Attack gets a huge buff. I believe this is where we should divert our attention. I believe the bonus should no longer be applied to their auto attack and should instead be limited to their barrage commands, making it fire at a quicker rate and sooner. And while we are at it, I feel it should also speed up it's abilty to deploy their smoke barrage. That way they get a meaningful buff elsewhere in exchange for removing their overpowered rate of fire when supplied. If it's not enough, decrease the Auto-Attack rate of fire to match the Soviet 120mm Mortar.

You're already paying a whopping 400 Manpower. It has to remain useful. I'm sure as hell not going to pay that for a normal range mortar I can't move. The British are a Pop Cap heavy faction and can't field a large force like the others, especially when you dare to build emplacements. Being able to get fire support in a wider area of the map makes up for their small numbers. My proposal allows them to keep this without being overpowered.

As for the ISG, I believe it's range should also be left alone. I agree that it's a real pain in the ass to deal with but I feel that since it can only fire within an arc, it need that extra range to compensate not being able to engage in a 360 Degree angle. Not it mention it doesn't have a big splash. Accuracy is where it might be a problem.

If something REALLY had to be done with it (Even though I think it's fine as is...), I'd say make the Auto-Attack Scatter Radius wider. But again, not really a big issue to me.

I can agree with a Moving Accuracy Decrease. But I believe it's Stationary Accuracy should be left alone. It fires very slowly already so you want that first shot to count.

Just the Moving Accuracy Decrease alone will make a huge difference since Kiting with it will become rather useless. So a British Player will need to support their Firefly to allow it to remain useful, such as supporting with PIAT Infantry. But again, not really a big issue to me.

No other change will be needed in my opinion. We should test how things go with the Moving Accuracy Nerf first before throwing anything else in the mix.

You might want to check the stat of the change to score a hit with a Firefly...By vet 3 that thing can hit infantry.

First off, disregard the "But again, not really a big issue to me." in that quote, as I meant to right that at the end of my post. lol.

As for the topic at hand, I'd feel it's a waste of a shot to hit infantry with it anyway. I keep my Firefly on Prioritize Vehicles every time I use it. Though I could see it being an issue if you are an Ostheer Player. I wouldn't complain it it got an accuracy nerf against infantry only.

First off, disregard the "But again, not really a big issue to me." in that quote, as I meant to right that at the end of my post. lol.

As for the topic at hand, I'd feel it's a waste of a shot to hit infantry with it anyway. I keep my Firefly on Prioritize Vehicles every time I use it. Though I could see it being an issue if you are an Ostheer Player. I wouldn't complain it it got an accuracy nerf against infantry only.

The point is it absolutely can't miss. If only ostheer panthers with their slow reload could also make shots count everytime!