Login

russian armor

OKW back to stone age?

26 Jun 2017, 21:25 PM
#61
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jun 2017, 19:54 PMDanielD
Adding ways to improve existing units/abilities with fuel should have been done pre-release. Totally agree. SVTs on cons is a great idea. I also think certain units that struggle to be useful without vet like PGrens could be helped with making an option to purchase veteran infantry that has an additional fuel (and maybe MP) cost.

What like the BAR and M1A1C (sherman upgun) in Coh1? That I could get behind. The part about veterancy for fuel was a thing for a while (elite troops doc for ost, veteran riflemen for usf rifle company) but it got removed because it screwed things up or something.
26 Jun 2017, 22:04 PM
#62
avatar of I984

Posts: 224

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jun 2017, 19:03 PMNosliw
...


Can't agree more on this - besides the strategic depth suggestions - especially on the balance/mod team's missed opportunities. They are are just trying hard tuning things instead of actually improving the game.
27 Jun 2017, 00:20 AM
#63
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jun 2017, 22:04 PMI984


Can't agree more on this - besides the strategic depth suggestions - especially on the balance/mod team's missed opportunities. They are are just trying hard tuning things instead of actually improving the game.


You have to give them credit though for the volumes of QoL and bug fixes they've managed to get into the game. Say what you will of everything else they've done, but those changes are at least worth keeping in mind.

That said, there's a lot of opportunity for soviets to have global upgrades:

Conscript PPsh or SVTs or even DP-28s
Penal SVTs or DP-28s or PPsh
Demo charge unlock (and/or)
Satchel charge unlock
Cheaper upkeep
Faster vet

OKW Veterancy levels 4 and 5 could easily be unlockable through upgrades.

Ostheer has Battle Phases, but they're pretty necessary and apart of teching anyway.

At the very least USF has weapon racks and grenades.
27 Jun 2017, 06:33 AM
#64
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jun 2017, 19:03 PMNosliw
snip


Basically Vcoh
US - Rush M8 or Upgrade your BARs
Werhm - Build a tank or buy vet
US - upgrade your sherman or build a m30
US - Want some more RM on the field (more than 4) = upkeep is hurting you now = upgrade your Depot
etc...
27 Jun 2017, 15:11 PM
#65
avatar of MarioSilver

Posts: 62



I just wish this wasn't still being said in 2017 when it was bleeding obvious in 2013.
Yep, it is discouragint to see how a developer doesn't pay enough attention to their product, the only source of making money.
27 Jun 2017, 15:51 PM
#66
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jun 2017, 06:33 AMEsxile


Basically Vcoh
US - Rush M8 or Upgrade your BARs
Werhm - Build a tank or buy vet
US - upgrade your sherman or build a m30
US - Want some more RM on the field (more than 4) = upkeep is hurting you now = upgrade your Depot
etc...


Even though you are severally undermining the strategic diversity in CoH1, I still feel like your little example here is more diverse than the COH2 play I see.
27 Jun 2017, 19:40 PM
#67
avatar of MarioSilver

Posts: 62

27 Jun 2017, 22:15 PM
#68
avatar of DanielD

Posts: 783 | Subs: 3

Decisions like the supply yard upgrade (trading the resources for a unit now in order to afford more units than that later) are very interesting from a gameplay perspective. Finding ways to add them would be good. Who cares if it's like vCoH or not?

Any way you can add strategic depth where you have to go "should I do X or Y" would help the game. Currently most factions lack these decisions. OKW is a great example where it's just "pick a truck, build 1 (or no) units from it, then build T3. The idea someone had about segmented T3 (starts out cheaper, and you unlock other tiers of units) is a great example of how nosliw's suggestion could be implemented in CoH 2.
28 Jun 2017, 16:25 PM
#69
avatar of LegioxRoma

Posts: 267

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jun 2017, 19:03 PMNosliw
I think fixing this game will take more than adjusting some damage values and price values here and there. I think the problems in the game are due to how factions are designed. The game feels to be designed in a way to make it as easy as possible for all factions to get to late game, and making sure all factions have fairly equivalent tools for all scenarios.

Fuel is spend to tech linearly for basically all factions. The only choice of what to spend fuel on is either: more shitty vehicles, or tech to better vehicles, or wait to spend on vehicle call ins.

There are not enough options to dump fuel into upgrading existing units. All factions are designed around dumping fuel into creating new units, not making an existing army better.

I think more global upgrades would have multiple benefits:
  • add more strategic diversity
  • help balance infantry combat


For example, for a game that has been out for 5 years, and whose developers have pushed the "we balance to increase strategic diversity" slogan, why then is the only viable soviet strategy seen amongst people who play this game seriously the same T1 + lend lease?

The only obvious option for soviets is to rush T70, and save fuel for sherman. They can be confident in the fact that their Penal squads will get stronger passively as the game goes on. There need not be any thought or decisions put into how will my infantry scale. The infantry will scale, since vet requires 0 skill to gain (just use the squad in combat, and push T when it's unsafe)

Imagine then, if say, instead of balancing conscripts usefulness as the game progresses by changing their vet and rifle damage, you added a global upgrade. Then at all stages of the game, you could have the option to invest in the performance of your units. Are your conscripts performing poorly? Maybe don't spend 80 fuel on another T34 and instead spend 80 fuel to upgrade all conscripts with SVT40s. As the game is right now, all that can be done is keep your conscripts alive, and buy more tanks.

It is so frustrating to me that this is how the game works. All the interesting fuel dump options have been removed too. Elite troops' veterency ability, CAS's fuel to munitions conversion. These were the abilities that made the game interesting. They added the choice between "okay I made a P4, do I make another, or save for Tiger" to, "do I delay my P4 for 5+ minutes to put LMG42s on all my squads".

The balance team, in my opinion, is completely missing their chance to make a mod that turns CoH2 into an interesting game. I feel as if I'm a broken record, and pretty sure I'm just repeating an opinion that's been floating around forever. But how come literally every RTS (SC2, CoH1, AoE franchise) has global upgrades for units, while CoH2 is stuck with only a few, inexpensive options.

I want more options than "build 4-5 grens, give them LMG42 or G43, and keep them alive". Where is the fun in that? Where is the decision making? All wehrmacht games are just "rush P4" or "stay alive till puma". Imagine if you had the options for more global upgrades, like CoH1 had. Veterency upgrades (basically requesting elite troops to assist your combat), global weapon upgrades, more smaller upgrades (group zeal, vet sergeant, AT nades, incendiary nades, base healing, grenades, increased squad sizes, increased veterency gain, decreased unit upkeep). So many options for play to improve an army, rather than expand it.

I feel as long as the game revolves around purchasing tanks, and having all infantry scale into late game via free veterency, and easy to buy, fuel free weapons, the game will forever be riddled with linear play, and limited strategic depth.

TL;DR: game cannot be fixed by adjusting mosin nagant damage and giving cons -50% accuracy at vet. Give the game more global upgrades to fix unit deficits, to give the player more options, open up strategic diversity, and make commanders more interesting.


u're totally right! and just for putting more wood on the fire...maps ,exspecially for 2v2, are just terrible.
5 Jul 2017, 15:00 PM
#70
avatar of Bravus

Posts: 503

Permanently Banned
Mix army = loose.

Spam = ez win.

That is the tip now.

Nosliw say right things, and i think that is caused by the 90% crap maps of the game and "Man running with no cover, and no problem into you front, making some RNG or call" because volks just kill 1 in 1 minute.

If grens with lmgs have this problem, by the enemy run into your face with no problem, while you are in green cover, imagine the crap bad trained volks..

This is more a early game problem, because in late game maybe you have more units to kill just 1 kamikaze squad, and other kamikaze survivor will call, yeah =/.

Try survive with crap volks and sturmpioner. Need doo a structure to call some crap MG34, and kubel is soo paper, they loose for soviet enginers. OKW in trouble, until call King Tiger Jesus, but maybe you are already loose on that time.
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

589 users are online: 1 member and 588 guests
Protos Angelus
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM