Login

russian armor

Unofficial Revamp mod (EFA & WFA & Brits)

PAGES (30)down
12 Jul 2017, 16:27 PM
#341
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


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.

And the question remains tommies are one of the strongest infantry before minute 1 does it the heavy cover bonuses from minute 1? NO it does not.

Is there any reason why the doctrinal trenches are CP2 and the tommies get from start? NO.



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?

Actually it is very easy to achieve stun lock especially with Tank hunter tommies. The argument hold little water since allies can be allot "gross negligent" with their vehicles less punishment...

If TWP was nerfed due to stun-lock same should apply to 45 mu ability.



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).

Chasing units can be fixed with reducing moving accuracy flamers. Being able to run around creating DOT all over the battlefield is not actually helpful. It would work allot better if it was tied to an ability.



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.

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.

Then give EFA armies access to 5 member and LMG/ATGs...
12 Jul 2017, 16:36 PM
#342
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393



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 :P


Sounds like you are getting the gist of it's potential qualities. That's exactly how to use an Emplacement. A secondary line of defense. :)

I wouldn't call the 17 Pounder outright bad but it does need support on the flanks from a 6 Pounder or a few well placed mines. I like the fact it's a slow but heavy hitter, much like the Pak43. I feel it's meant to supplement your existing AT as opposed to replacing them, excellent against Heavy Tanks.

You are right about it being unreliable when not garrisoned though. Usually, my Sappers would be inside, armed with PIATs to deter reckless flanks. With the way the 17 Pounder is in the mod though (Last I played), it's a deathtrap when against assault infantry. Barely any time to escape at all. Certainly needs some armor to tone them down a bit.

I do need to ask. In your test, how fast did emplacement go down to Infiltration units? Was it a single unit or a double one? And was it done after your target size changes? On my end, two Fallschirmjagers with FG42s leveled both the 17 Pounder and Mortar Pit in 2 bursts each. This was done of course, the same day as my first test.
12 Jul 2017, 16:45 PM
#343
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 16:27 PMVipper

And the question remains tommies are one of the strongest infantry before minute 1 does it the heavy cover bonuses from minute 1? NO it does not.

Is there any reason why the doctrinal trenches are CP2 and the tommies get from start? NO.


At this point, I am beginning to question whether you base your assumptions on experience gained from playing the mod, or you are basing this on your own experiences from playing the live version.

Yes, there is. The reasons are called OST sniper and Vickers.

The other reason is that you cannot build trenches while capping. In the early game, you are NOT going to waste time first finishing the cap and THEN starting to build a trench; you've just wasted capping time for nothing.

I've tried very hard, but I've found it practically impossible to even think of laying Tommy Trenches before the 6-8 CP.

That's because building trenches means you need to protect them from being capped. Then why bother building trenches, when you already have garrisons around that you also need to occupy?

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 16:27 PMVipper

Actually it is very easy to achieve stun lock especially with Tank hunter tommies. The argument hold little water since allies can be allot "gross negligent" with their vehicles less punishment...

If TWP was nerfed due to stun-lock same should apply to 45 mu ability.


Target Weak point was nerfed because it's a very-high-hit-rate homing projectile fired from 60 yards range.

Tommy gammon bomb requires a squad that sucks at close range and sucks at moving DPS to start walking towards the tank, give up their long range advantage, and then require the tank driver to fall asleep for the 5 seconds needed to pull off this maneuvre.

Then, the heavy gammon bomb itself will deal small amounts of damage (mostly due to AoE) and the debuff will disappear.

Penals can get away with satchels because of their high moving performance and lower bleed; also the fact that their satchel homes in and sticks to the enemy tank. Then, there's also the convenient fact that engine damage stays there, and you have all the time in the world to follow this up with your tanks.

Also, are we theorycrafting from our experience in the live game, or are we talking actual games played in the mod? I doubt you're going to float that kind of munitions in a real game with the changes in the mod.


jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 16:27 PMVipper

Chasing units can be fixed with reducing moving accuracy flamers. Being able to run around creating DOT all over the battlefield is not actually helpful. It would work allot better if it was tied to an ability.


No, chasing cannot be solved in this way, because you have scatter.

The UC has a fixed-arc flamer that can only fire from the front, and has a very brief window during which it is useful. If you spend that time creating DoTs (through which your troops might have to go through), you're wasting your investment; you were probably better off building a mortar pit in this case.

12 Jul 2017, 17:40 PM
#344
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


I've tried very hard, but I've found it practically impossible to even think of laying Tommy Trenches before the 6-8 CP.

And thus you should not object in delaying UKF trenches and sandbags...


Tommy gammon bomb requires a squad that sucks at close range and sucks at moving DPS to start walking towards the tank, give up their long range advantage, and then require the tank driver to fall asleep for the 5 seconds needed to pull off this maneuvre.

Or simply have an engine damage or be behind an view blocker or stunned by sniper or target thread...

The stun from Gemmon has very long duration.

12 Jul 2017, 17:48 PM
#345
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 17:40 PMVipper

And thus you should not object in delaying UKF trenches and sandbags...

I think you missed his point. He's saying that delaying it is useless because using it too early is going to severely limit your capping potential. Instead of trying to nerf the British even further, why aren't you calling for the 2CP limit to Trenches for Axis to be removed instead? This has less to do with balance issues and more to do with, "If I can't have it early, neither can they".
12 Jul 2017, 19:50 PM
#346
avatar of S.T.A.L.K.E.R

Posts: 26

What

the

fuck are these changes o_Oo_Oo_Oo_O
12 Jul 2017, 21:04 PM
#347
avatar of GhostTX

Posts: 315

I like the changes I'm reading with the Kubel and swapping it as a starting unit. The OKW SP is the single most powerful starting unit in the game and it could dominate any capture point. Now, with the weaker Kubel, it reads that all sides can fight "equally" for the starting contested capture point. By the time the SP arrives, the other squads can arrive. I believe this will make a more even fight for first capture points.

It reads also, that the Kubel cheese cancer is no longer viable. RE's now have a chance to contest an important capture point.


As for the mod, is nothing being done for USF Rifleman mine laying time? Why is that the longest time for any mine laying in the game?
12 Jul 2017, 21:07 PM
#348
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 21:04 PMGhostTX
I like the changes I'm reading with the Kubel and swapping it as a starting unit. The OKW SP is the single most powerful starting unit in the game and it could dominate any capture point. Now, with the weaker Kubel, it reads that all sides can fight "equally" for the starting contested capture point. By the time the SP arrives, the other squads can arrive. I believe this will make a more even fight for first capture points.

It reads also, that the Kubel cheese cancer is no longer viable. RE's now have a chance to contest an important capture point.


That change has been reverted a few weeks ago; Sturmpioneer is once again the starting unit. Can you link to the post where you read this, so that I can edit it? The original post should be up-to-date.

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 21:04 PMGhostTX

As for the mod, is nothing being done for USF Rifleman mine laying time? Why is that the longest time for any mine laying in the game?


It's the same for all mainline infantry unit engineering tasks; they take longer because they are more spammable (e.g., Volks mine-laying, Tommy emplacement-building etc)
12 Jul 2017, 21:11 PM
#349
avatar of GhostTX

Posts: 315



That change has been reverted a few weeks ago; Sturmpioneer is once again the starting unit. Can you link to the post where you read this, so that I can edit it? The original post should be up-to-date.

Wut? I guess I misread something somewhere. And nutz to reverting it back. SPs will own the start point, but at least the Kubel won't be as effective.

It's the same for all mainline infantry unit engineering tasks; they take longer because they are more spammable (e.g., Volks mine-laying, Tommy emplacement-building etc)

Can you explain? It takes longer because there's more riflemen?
12 Jul 2017, 21:14 PM
#350
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 21:11 PMGhostTX

Wut? I guess I misread something somewhere. And nutz to reverting it back. SPs will own the start point, but at least the Kubel won't be as effective.


Can you explain? It takes longer because there's more riflemen?


It takes longer because you have 3-5 riflemen squads everywhere on the map. Other factions have to assign dedicated engineers (which could be repairing, etc).
12 Jul 2017, 21:22 PM
#351
avatar of GhostTX

Posts: 315



It takes longer because you have 3-5 riflemen squads everywhere on the map. Other factions have to assign dedicated engineers (which could be repairing, etc).

But USF mines are doctrinal, where the other sides always have them. USF is already penalized for not having them as a default and then further penalized once they get them? Heck, then at least make the doctrine so REs can plant mines instead of Rifles in the same time as other engineering squads. The long laying time of the mines is too much, IMO.
12 Jul 2017, 21:35 PM
#352
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2017, 21:22 PMGhostTX

But USF mines are doctrinal, where the other sides always have them. USF is already penalized for not having them as a default and then further penalized once they get them? Heck, then at least make the doctrine so REs can plant mines instead of Rifles in the same time as other engineering squads. The long laying time of the mines is too much, IMO.


If you want full-speed planting, go for assault engineers or Recon doctrine paratroopers. Riflemen are just too spammable for this kind of utility.
12 Jul 2017, 21:43 PM
#353
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Actually moving "field defense" to R.E. would be an improvement giving player a reason to built them.
12 Jul 2017, 22:10 PM
#354
avatar of GhostTX

Posts: 315



If you want full-speed planting, go for assault engineers or Recon doctrine paratroopers. Riflemen are just too spammable for this kind of utility.

Did you miss where I said move it to RE?
12 Jul 2017, 22:40 PM
#355
avatar of Svalbard SD

Posts: 327

When does the team expect to finish testing these changes and be ready to push them to live? Would be interesting to know in terms of knowing how soon can the game expect better balance = better player retention.
12 Jul 2017, 23:48 PM
#356
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

When does the team expect to finish testing these changes and be ready to push them to live? Would be interesting to know in terms of knowing how soon can the game expect better balance = better player retention.

Ha I wish.

This mod is independent from relic and they have DoW3 to "support " now.

You also make an interesting point that I see myself as an example of. I've been playing a lot more coh1 because I feel like it's much better balanced for the most part.
13 Jul 2017, 09:05 AM
#357
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

"Comet/Cromwell smoke shell
To promote synergy within the faction’s doctrinal elite unit (commandos), we are letting smoke shells spawn yellow cover.

- Now also spawns yellow cover
"
There is absolutely no reason for this both vehicles are more cost efficient than axis counterparts and infantry tank synergy should be limited to Churchill so that people might actually build them.

"Firefly
We are bringing the Firefly in-line with other tank destroyers, and are removing the high moving accuracy bonuses (which are meant to be a reimbursement for squishier USF tanks)

Changes to the Tulips will allow for more counterplay.

- Accuracy reduced to SU-85 levels
- Moving accuracy from 0.75 to 0.5
- Population cap from 14 to 15
- Vet3 damage bonus reduced from +80 to +40

Tulips
- Ready aim time changed from 0.125/0.5 to 0.5/1 for the two rockets
- Tulips now Blind and disable weapons for 5 seconds rather than stun the tank"


Units remain too accurate especially since commander gives an accuracy bonus. Vet 3 accuracy bonus is simply not needed.


Commandos
We are making multiple smaller changes to the Commandos to bring their performance closer to other infantry units. Changes to commando smoke grenade will allow Commandos to excell in the stealth-orientied game, which is supposed to be their main strength.

- Gammon bomb damage reduced to (EFA revamp) bundle grenade
- Gammon bomb timer Timer increased from 1 to 1.25
- Removed additional Received accuracy when in cover from Vet0
- Now receive a RA modifier of 0.85 at Vet3
- Ambush requirements reduced from 25 seconds off-combat to 15 seconds
- Non sten/Bren guns receive a +20% accuracy bonus (to bring Commandos in line with other infantry units)
- Popcap reduced to 9
- Reinforcement time reduced from 8.5 seconds to 7.25 seconds

Smoke grenade (Vet1 ability)
- Vet1 Smoke grenades now also obscure vision and prevent shots from coming through
- Using the smoke grenade no longer removes Commandos from stealth


The fact remains that the can very easily wipe from stealth with gammon grenades. Timer on gammon need to be bigger and I would even re comment that their stealth start from static and improve to moving with veterancy.

Infiltration Commandos
The changes to Infiltration Commandos will put them in-line with other infiltration units in the mod.

- Now spawn with Lee Enfields
- Cost from 440MP to 340MP
- Must purchase (free) Silenced Sten upgrade to get access to Stens and Light Gammon bomb
- At Vet1, they gain access to demo and a 5th man
(also affected by Commandos changes)

Unit is simply way to cost efficient compared to baseline infantry like PGs.

Airlanding officer
We are bringing the performance of the unit in line with other aura units.

- Recon pass cost increased from 30 to 50
- Reinforcement time/cost normalized to 37MP/7.25 seconds per model
- Gammon bomb and heroic charge now share cooldowns

Heroic charge
- Now shares cooldown with gammon bomb
- Accuracy bonus reduced from +40% to +20%
- Received accuracy bonus reduced from -75% to -20%
- Cost increased from 15MU to 40MU
- No longer affects allied units

Again unit simply way too cost efficient compared to baseline Ostheer Artillery Officer

Concentration Barrage (Artillery Doctrine)
- Can no longer be targeted in the Fog of War

With the new barrage from infantry this ability become rather pointless probably better replaces with lower CP smoke shells or some other sort of artillery (propaganda, WP...).

Command vehicle
We are readjusting some of the most extreme risk-reward elements of the ability to allow it to be integrated in more strategies. The live-version penalties make the command vehicle unsuitable for any role other than recon.

- Command Vehicle no longer affected by a speed penalty
- Command-vehicle AVRE reload by 2.5 times bigger reload time
- RA bonus from aura removed
- Command Vehicle recon cost added: 80MU
- Recon plane will now fly over the shorter distance (i.e, from friendly base)

Ability too cost efficient compared to base line ostheer Command PZIV. Might prove really problematic combined with Churchill smoke bonus for infantry.

Imo penalties should be adjusted to vehicle class (light medium heavy), for instance +100% received accuracy does little to Churchill but allot to ACE.


Valentine
With our changes we aim to make the synergy between Sextons and Valentines more “tight”

- Damage to 120
- Moving accuracy reduced from 0.75 to 0.5
- Human crush removed
- Population cost from 12 to 8
- Scan angle/range changed from 179/120 to 120/70
- Vet1 ability now bypasses Sexton cooldown
- Now receives shared veterancy from all on-field Sextons

Radar ability should become an upgrade and limited to 1
13 Jul 2017, 09:27 AM
#358
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jul 2017, 09:05 AMVipper



At this point, I give up; give us your changes (if any) for the forementioned units as a starting point, and we can talk.

Like, how much those units should cost, if we should also give 200 damage and 50 range to the Comet, etc, etc.
13 Jul 2017, 10:16 AM
#359
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

To be honest there are always the same 3 or 4 people shouting about anything that isn't a massive nerf to allies and a massive buff to axis - perhaps they should group together and make their own mod.

Bit of a coincidence (it isn't) all those players hide their playercard as well.... :huh:
13 Jul 2017, 10:34 AM
#360
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

Care to chime in? Go right ahead. The more opinions, especially from proud players, the better. :)

Only thing I care about is to have the UKF no longer be the most reviled faction in CoH2 but without them being nerfed out of existence or their very character changed beyond recognition. I can stomach nerfs if they are justified and proportionate.
PAGES (30)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

657 users are online: 657 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48939
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM