Unofficial Revamp mod (EFA & WFA & Brits)

Why is my post to dopeWhore invisi'd while he's able to continue trolling the mod makers?

Get real.

There is a Report button. This thread is too large and too active so mods and go can't read through every single thread!

Building a mod with just those features is, quite simply, a complete waste of time. That's because, even if the changes are reasonable, there's nothing interesting to test.

FRPs and Call-ins, sure; everybody knows those need a nerf.

Repair speeds? The only way to test this is playing a game and counting the seconds until your tanks are back online.

Emplacements? To test them, you need to find somebody that builds emplacements, and somebody that loves playing against emplacements. I don't know of anybody like that.

[...]+rest

I am sorry to say this and i certainly dont want to be an ass, but this does not sound like the solid foundation you'd need for a balance patch of this scope. In fact, for a balance patch of any scope.

That doesent mean, that this wont be successful. I appreciate the work you and your team put into this and hope for the best. But to me it sounds like this is the worst starting condition for a patch Ive seen thus far.

This isnt meant to be just another rant either. Its just something to keep in mind for you as a balance mod/patch dev (and your team obviously).

Edit: To clarify: With "foundation" i am, in this case, not refering to your current list of balance changes, but the situation you are facing and the premise under which youre working.

Brace


- Duration reduced from 30 to 5

I love you

...

good points. Although I am still ambivalent, I have no doubt this patch will make things better.

I am just opposed to micromanagement on the basis that it is really hard to justify unless glaringly OP like original Obers with bonus accuracy against retreating squads. You need time for an organic discovery and revelation and not a week where you just grind and grind every possible scenarios. But I am fine with just trusting the better men and players than me at this.



GCS, yes it was shame more commanders did not see light but I think a big part of it is because how new the patch was. and the top players in the tournament has been dominated by same people. Maybe another contestant who uses more unique strategy just did not make it due to shear lack of micro.

Even if that is not case, the real part of the tournament only lasts a short period. Any given time, no matter how well the game is balanced, there will be a go to strat solely because people like DevM and Luvnest prefers those strats and they become like idols to follow by. And it does not make sense to experiment either since it is risky although it does happen time to time but safe thing to do is hone the skills/strat you have even if you knew another strat might work, too - which is the case in almost all sports.

What I am trying to say is yes, tournaments give a different outlook on balance. But just because same strategy gets seen most of the times does not mean stale balance or imbalance, it is just how it plays out in all sports when the stake is the highest.

The thing about Tommies is that we've already had 1-2 weeks of intensive testing with them, back before WBP was even announced (I don't remember who TheMachine was playtesting them with). So, none of these numbers came out of nowhere.

Like many changes, that one didn't meet the scope, and was left out. Now, we're just picking up from our experience with pre-WBP testing (neither OST nor OKW infantry has changed since then).

(neither OST nor OKW infantry has changed since then).

OKW infantry have changed in the MOD rather dramatically actually...

Instead of shifting balance around why don't you fix long standing issues with units like:
Vet bonuses
example does the added armor offer an true advantage to stug?
Does 20+ reinforce range benefit the quad or the FHT?
Why should grenadiers get only a single bonus at vet1?
Why Partisan PS should get more penetration and be better at the hands of partisans than trained troops?
Do allied TD need even more accuracy with veterancy while they can easily snipe enemy tanks at max range?

Vet abilities
too common among offering little to units AND most of the do not scale with veterancy creating either a pick in performance or little affect at all (blitzkrieg vs cap Territory).

Vet bonuses and abilities are tools that solidify the role of units and increase diversity by ringing more to the table.

If you suspect an OKW zeroing artillery nuke (e.g., if you see LeFH's and the enemy hoarding munitions) consider packing up and selling for scraps. Nobody will ever use zeroing artillery vs singular mortar pits. On the other hand, the armagedon effect will, hopefully, continue to incentivise people not to do sim city.

You gain nothing by blobbing your emplacements anymore (e.g., FRP aura removed); except maybe for reducing the amount of territory you need to protect.

With respect to emplacements in the mod, we've found a few bugs; namely that the extra HP on the second mortar doesn't apply etc. In the next version, we will also be trialing reduced hitboxes for mortar pit/17 pounder and see if that addresses some of their main durability issues.

You make a fair point. While this would have been a major problem in the live version, being able to pack up does reward those who can read the wind. That way it isn't as painful, even if you do lose the veterancy. Though it would be nice if Trenches themselves could be more resistant to that ability to at least maintain some kind of foothold.

In my defense though, I won't go beyond 30 Pop Cap towards emplacements in any given match. Beyond that and you are a sitting duck. I'd go with Mortar Pit first and later a Bofors or a 17 Pounder. Everything else in my defensive line is a mobile unit inside a trench or on the flanks. I don't consider it blobbing.

That being said, the Mortar Pit's auto-fire range decrease is going to make people build it closer to their other emplacements. My normal, idea layout involved placing the Mortar pit behind the Forward Supply Station, the 17 Pounder/Bofors on the outer limit of the aura facing the enemy and Trenches about 20 Range in front of that.

While I do still feel the armour increase is the way to go for both the Mortar Pit and 17 Pounder, I will look forward to testing your way first with the target sizes. That and re-test the Mortar Pit durability after the upgrade bugfix.

You make a fair point. While this would have been a major problem in the live version, being able to pack up does reward those who can read the wind. That way it isn't as painful, even if you do lose the veterancy. Though it would be nice if Trenches themselves could be more resistant to that ability to at least maintain some kind of foothold.

In my defense though, I won't go beyond 30 Pop Cap towards emplacements in any given match. Beyond that and you are a sitting duck. I'd go with Mortar Pit first and later a Bofors or a 17 Pounder. Everything else in my defensive line is a mobile unit inside a trench or on the flanks. I don't consider it blobbing.

That being said, the Mortar Pit's auto-fire range decrease is going to make people build it closer to their other emplacements. My normal, idea layout involved placing the Mortar pit behind the Forward Supply Station, the 17 Pounder/Bofors on the outer limit of the aura facing the enemy and Trenches about 20 Range in front of that.

While I do still feel the armour increase is the way to go for both the Mortar Pit and 17 Pounder, I will look forward to testing your way first with the target sizes. That and re-test the Mortar Pit durability after the upgrade bugfix.

He makes a good point that mortar pits will still have to be built close to other emplacements in order to cover them from indirect fire since brits have no alternative counter to indirect.

I still think they should just get a copy pasta'd ost mortar and be done (or even a soviet mortar because apparently ost is the only faction in the game with 4 man squads/weapon teams) as that would also allow 100% mobile british players like myself to do their own thing without being incessantly punished by nigh uncounterable indirect fire.

I'd rather not try and change the British in that way. If I want a mobile mortar, I'll steal it off the enemy. Their use against me is inevitable, so the opportunity to get a hold of one or two isn't hard to come by.

Not to mention that the 25 Pounder in this patch is more reliable now.

Good job with this mod, solid.

I would suggest removing sandbags and trenches from tommies or at least have the require T2 (same goes for all most mainline infantry).

Only units like the live conscripts should be able to built heavy cover.


"Mills Bombs
We feel that Mills Bombs are very often skipped. We feel that the primary reason for this is the disparity of Manpower Costs between mainline teching and optional upgrades.

- MP cost reduced from 150MP to 80MP
- Now required for Comet/Churchill grenades"

Grenades should simply be removed from Comet. Thee is no reason why such a fast tank that can destroy pak from distance with WP should also get sort range grenades.

"Heavy Gammon bomb
- Cost to 45MU
- Damage now on par with Soviet satchel"

Price is too low since it more cost efficient than base line which is bundle grenade.

"Heavy Sappers upgrade
We find that the trade-offs involved in the upgrade are too extreme making counterplay options too narrow. This limits the number of strategies possible both by the British player and those by their opponents.

- From +100% construction +30% construction speed
- From +1 armour to +0.25
- From posture penalty to -25% speed
- Vickers_K now takes 1 slot item
- (see repairs for repair speed changes)"

There is no reason for upgrade to give both fighting and repair bonuses especially since R.Eng. is far more cost efficient that the baseline pioneers.

Either separate into to 2 different upgrades one as fighting unit 1 repair unit or chose between one upgrade.


"WASP
- Cost/delay from 90MU/20 secs to 70MU/50 secs
- Now also reduces received experience by a factor of 0.5
- Increased number of dots from 1 to 2 per shot
- Garrison damage multiplier from 1.25 to 1"

Have vehicle flamer work as hand held and make DOT as an ability. That will help balance flamer vehicles.


"Brit Sniper
We feel that using the 25 pounders shouldn’t be as available to the Sniper, given 25 pounder increased potency.

- No longer benefits from RA cover bonus
- Now requires Veterancy 1 to use 25-pounders
- Marker flare range reduced from 35 to 30"

Most stun have been fixed so should sniper shots vs unturreted vehicles.

(move in to one at moderators request)

You make a fair point. While this would have been a major problem in the live version, being able to pack up does reward those who can read the wind. That way it isn't as painful, even if you do lose the veterancy. Though it would be nice if Trenches themselves could be more resistant to that ability to at least maintain some kind of foothold.

In my defense though, I won't go beyond 30 Pop Cap towards emplacements in any given match. Beyond that and you are a sitting duck. I'd go with Mortar Pit first and later a Bofors or a 17 Pounder. Everything else in my defensive line is a mobile unit inside a trench or on the flanks. I don't consider it blobbing.

That being said, the Mortar Pit's auto-fire range decrease is going to make people build it closer to their other emplacements. My normal, idea layout involved placing the Mortar pit behind the Forward Supply Station, the 17 Pounder/Bofors on the outer limit of the aura facing the enemy and Trenches about 20 Range in front of that.

While I do still feel the armour increase is the way to go for both the Mortar Pit and 17 Pounder, I will look forward to testing your way first with the target sizes. That and re-test the Mortar Pit durability after the upgrade bugfix.

So far, I've only been playing Trois Ponts specifically to test how the new emplacements work in a worst-case map.

My experiences so far are:
- FRP aura removal makes it near impossible to build up a sim city.
- Garrison bonus is crucial; without it your emplacements aren't worth a damn. This means that the more emplacements you build, the more hoping-in-out you need to use them. e.g., an ungarrisoned 17 pounder is dead meat.
- Garrison bonus means that you now have to make sure that the garrison squads are healed up, won't die; that you can repair your emplacements, and that you also have enough force in the frontline to hold people from rushing in. The amount of micro required to get a sim city running will not be worth it.
- Emplacements are crappy if used as a first line of defence, but amazing if used as a second line of defence. Their goal is to provide a save haven to (soft)-retreat to, while you build up your main force.
- e.g., the goal of Bofors is not to hold back entire armies; it's to allow you to survive light vehicles, while covering your attacks with suppressive fire
- The goal of the mortar is to build it all the way back, so that it's barely in-range for a barrage. At the same time you can use it to cover your Tommies with smoke as they relocate/build sandbags
- With super-range ISG gone, there's literally no reason to bunch up your emplacements; you only have to build the mortar pit close enough to cover your frontline with a barrage; not any closer
- 17 pounder is bad; so don't build it. The long reload time would have been OK, if not for the long setup/teardown time (which we can't fix without introducing graphical glitches)
- You shouldn't worry about LeFH/zeroing arty any more than you need to worry about upgraded infiltration units

I would suggest removing sandbags and trenches from tommies or at least have the require T2 (same goes for all most mainline infantry).

Only units like the live conscripts should be able to built heavy cover.

Tommies require cover to function; especially in the late-game. If they don't require cover to do so, we'll make them. We just want to focus on fixing emplacements first.

So far, Infantry combat vs OKW works very fluidly, both ways. I haven't tested Brits vs OST much yet, so I can't say yet.

"Heavy Gammon bomb
- Cost to 45MU
- Damage now on par with Soviet satchel"

Price is too low since it more cost efficient than base line which is bundle grenade.

The baseline for the Heavy Gammon bomb is the satchel, towards which it has been normalized. Bundle grenades have a 40MU cost, a singificantly longer throw range, and a significantly shorter fuse time. If you are losing infantry models to satchels/heavy gammon bombs that's more down to negligence than anything else.

"WASP
- Cost/delay from 90MU/20 secs to 70MU/50 secs
- Now also reduces received experience by a factor of 0.5
- Increased number of dots from 1 to 2 per shot
- Garrison damage multiplier from 1.25 to 1"

Have vehicle flamer work as hand held and make DOT as an ability. That will help balance flamer vehicles.

WASP doesn't have a retreat button, unlike engineer squads. You can see one coming from a mile away, and 50 seconds of build-up time is more than enough to make preparations for it. Either get a raketenwerfer or plan to get a Vet1 MG.

"Heavy Sappers upgrade
We find that the trade-offs involved in the upgrade are too extreme making counterplay options too narrow. This limits the number of strategies possible both by the British player and those by their opponents.

- From +100% construction +30% construction speed
- From +1 armour to +0.25
- From posture penalty to -25% speed
- Vickers_K now takes 1 slot item
- (see repairs for repair speed changes)"

There is no reason for upgrade to give both fighting and repair bonuses especially since R.Eng. is far more cost efficient that the baseline pioneers.

Either separate into to 2 different upgrades one as fighting unit 1 repair unit or chose between one upgrade.

All flamer upgrades actually do give repair AND fighting utility to the engineers that affect them.

For EFA, we kept their repair speeds intact (1.6 at Vet0, +1 at Vet2). Flamers make it a near guarantee you will hit Vet2 and, therefore get repairs. EFA minesweeper engineers aren't that fortunate; with high probability they will not hit Vet2.

For WFA, we assumed that half EFA engineers will hit Vet2 and half of them will not. Therefore, for WFA we gave the same Vet0 repair speed as EFA, but cut Vet2 repair speed bonus to half.

The Heavy sapper bonus makes it so that a 4-man Vet2 heavy sapper will repair at the same speed as a 4-man vet2 EFA engineer. The 5-man upgrade inflates Sapper cost to 236MP, which makes it kinda fair.

"Brit Sniper
We feel that using the 25 pounders shouldn’t be as available to the Sniper, given 25 pounder increased potency.

- No longer benefits from RA cover bonus
- Now requires Veterancy 1 to use 25-pounders
- Marker flare range reduced from 35 to 30"

Most stun have been fixed so should sniper shots vs unturreted vehicles.

Maybe we can give it a slow instead.

"Mills Bombs
We feel that Mills Bombs are very often skipped. We feel that the primary reason for this is the disparity of Manpower Costs between mainline teching and optional upgrades.

- MP cost reduced from 150MP to 80MP
- Now required for Comet/Churchill grenades"

Grenades should simply be removed from Comet. Thee is no reason why such a fast tank that can destroy pak from distance with WP should also get sort range grenades.

Have you actually used the Comet in-game vs the new OKW and the new OST? Does it really require additional nerfs?

Tommies require cover to function; especially in the late-game. If they don't require cover to do so, we'll make them. We just want to focus on fixing emplacements first.

Grenadiers need heavy cover more and they do not get, Osttruppen also. Having too much utility on mainline infantry is actually bad designs since it leaves little room for other units.

If ones moves trenches and sandbags to R.Eng., tommies will still have access to them in late game but they will be unable to lock sector early when anti-cover/anti-garrison options are not available.

The baseline for the Heavy Gammon bomb is the satchel, towards which it has been normalized. Bundle grenades have a 40MU cost, a significantly longer throw range, and a significantly shorter fuse time. If you are losing infantry models to satchels/heavy gammon bombs that's more down to negligence than anything else.

Actually it is not about me and losing infantry to gammon bombs, its about being able to "stun lock" a tank with gammon bombs from 2 tommies squads.

These abilities can be used against infantry/fortification and vehicles for little more cost than bundle grenade. They are simply too cost efficient.

WASP doesn't have a retreat button, unlike engineer squads. You can see one coming from a mile away, and 50 seconds of build-up time is more than enough to make preparations for it. Either get a raketenwerfer or plan to get a Vet1 MG.

And flamer engineer do get pinned and lose models on approach to garrison. WASP can use the flamer behind shot blockers and so no you might not actually see it coming. My suggestion has is not limited to Wasp but to all flamer vehicles. They can be balanced far better if the DOT is available as an ability and not always on.

All flamer upgrades actually do give repair AND fighting utility to the engineers that affect them.

For EFA, we kept their repair speeds intact (1.6 at Vet0, +1 at Vet2). Flamers make it a near guarantee you will hit Vet2 and, therefore get repairs. EFA minesweeper engineers aren't that fortunate; with high probability they will not hit Vet2.

For WFA, we assumed that half EFA engineers will hit Vet2 and half of them will not. Therefore, for WFA we gave the same Vet0 repair speed as EFA, but cut Vet2 repair speed bonus to half.

The Heavy sapper bonus makes it so that a 4-man Vet2 heavy sapper will repair at the same speed as a 4-man vet2 EFA engineer. The 5-man upgrade inflates Sapper cost to 236MP, which makes it kinda fair.

Flamer do not give any repair bonus to engineers it is the veterancy that gives it to them. And that also should change engineers should either be good at fighting or repairing not at both.

Have you actually used the Comet in-game vs the new OKW and the new OST? Does it really require additional nerfs?

It is not a matter of a nerf it matter of being able to counter ATGs that should actually be able to hard counter a Main battle tank. Grenades as an ability is not need on MBT it is under-performing it should receive other buff and not abilities that allow it to charge on atgs.

Grenadiers need heavy cover more and they do not get, Osttruppen also. Having too much utility on mainline infantry is actually bad designs since it leaves little room for other units.

If ones moves trenches and sandbags to R.Eng., tommies will still have access to them in late game but they will be unable to lock sector early when anti-cover/anti-garrison options are not available.

Both of those units have fausts and other combat utility (e.g., rifle grenades) to keep them useful throughout the game; Tommies do not have any kind of snare. They compensate for that with higher anti-infantry efficiency and non-combat bonuses. Not to mention the fact that T1 is dirt-cheap compared to the sum of upgrades required for Tommies.

Actually it is not about me its about being able to continuously stun a tank with gammon bombs from 2 tommies squads.

These abilities can be used against infantry/fortification and vehicles for little more cost than bundle grenade. They are simply too cost efficient.

Getting tanks stunned with Gammon bombs is down to gross negligence on behalf of the vehicle user. Getting gammon bombs to work requires constant movement and concentration; in which case where is the supporting infantry?

And flamer engineer do get pinned and lose models on approach to garrison. WASP can use the flamer behind shot blockers and so no you might not actually see it coming. My suggestion has is not limited to Wasp but to all flamer vehicles. They can be balanced far better if the DOT is available as an ability and not always on.

DoT damage is a better way to balance things right. Giving high alpha damage to WASP etc means you can chase and wipe units on retreat (see flamerHT).

Flamer do not give any repair bonus to engineers it is the veterancy that gives it to them. And that also should change engineers should either be good at fighting or repairing not at both.

That's how EFA engineers have worked since the dawn of time. We tried to change that and it proved unpopular. Therefore we're changing WFA to meet EFA standards.

It is not a matter of a nerf it matter of being able to counter ATGs that should actually be able to hard counter a Main battle tank. Grenades as an ability is not need on MBT it is under-performing it should receive other buff and not abilities that allow it to charge on atgs.

The job of the Comet is to incentivise a T4 investment on behalf of OST and also help breakthrough AT guns; not to be hardcountered by them. If you want to hardcounter a Comet build a Panther.

Otherwise there is literally no incentive to ever build a Comet; just spam Cromwells instead.

Comet grenades are considerably weaker than other types of grenades and immobilize the tank while being thrown.