Fall Balance Preview

Still asking: Why would I ever go for the Panther as Ostheer player when the StuG does the job way better and cost efficient? This is a huge issue that has been discussed quite intensely on this forum. I really expected some changes here.

The Panther seriously needs adjustments. At the very least the improved AI of the OKW Panther.

ISGs seem pretty useless now that they get outranged by all other artillery barrages, mortar pit, 120 mm, pak howie. Reducing the auto fire range was surely a good idea, but the unit is way too fragile to move that close to the frontline for barrages. All other artillery seems to still do damage to the support weapon itself while the isg only damages the crew. Anyone tried using that vet one ability? Looks as though the vehicle has to be right in it's face for that to work out. It's certainly nice to have smoke now as OKW but you more or less buy that thing for the purpose of smoke only now. Allied mid game artillery can still just sit back and relax out of safety.

My thoughts:
AA All changes seem good. Consistency!
HalfTrack changes Can't see them having much impact on the game, but more usability is always nice I guess.
Movement boost abilities change Makes sense, can't blitz on broken engine.
FRP Seems reasonable. Only thing I'd suggest is lowering the cost on OKW FRP, it was really high precisely to prevent early game abuse. With it now being tied to T4, the current cost becomes a bit excessive.
Call in changes Price Premium (adding a price increase to call ins if an associated tech has not been researched/built, remove the price increase once it has) Seems by far the best option, and the one easier to tweak (just adjust the actual premium if found to be overused/underused). It keeps call ins interesting and different. Good job!
USF Can't say I love the Jackson changes. I liked the long-range glass cannon. Made it different from the other faction's Dedicated ATs. Will have to test it out properly.
UKF Very interesting changes on the mortarpit. Range reduction might have been a bit exaggerated, considering it's static and thus can't re-position. Love the whole slice the price, slice the power, add upgrade concept. Great way to think outside the box beyond the "nerf this, buff that" usual requests. Bofors I don't really care for it, either for or against it. Interesting changes to the Churchill Crocodile, will have to test them out.
WER Most changes seem good and interesting. Ostwind seems strong. Don't really understand the reasoning behind the pop increase on the Stug E though. Tiger seems fine, Elephant nerf was warranted, will have tot test to see if not too extreme.
OKW Le.ig 18 smoke! Yes! Range nerf is bad but price drop makes up for it. Smaller firing cone makes it have to move between each target, will have to see how it workes with the better turn time. Very interesting changes all in all. Hollow Charge is interesting. Jagdpanzer IV changes were unwarranted imo, stealth was it's thing. Similar thoughts to the above M36-Jackson changes, I prefer diversity in TD, even if slightly harder to balance. Kubelwagon nerf seems unwarranted.
SOV Like the Penal changes. dynamic specialization is always an interesting thing. Like the Maxim buffs, Dshka nerfs were warranted, but might be a tad extreme. Traverse speed nerf is particularly brutal. Leave it with something that gives it character. I know it's being abused, but I'd prefer to keep the M4C Sherman as a call in, with a substantial Price Premium. It doesn't make much sense to make it a buildable unlock. Most unlocks are upgraded versions of standart tanks (M4A3 Sherman -> M4A3E8 Easy Eigth; T34-76 -> T34-85; A27M Cromwell -> A34 Comet I), which makes perfect sense. The SOV M4C Sherman however, is the exact oposite of that: A foreign-made tank that was sent to help in the fight. Precisely what a call in should be!
TL;DR - Price Premium is the way to go. Good job! FRP changes are good, just lower the cost on the OKW FRP then. AA consistency! Yay! Don't really like the TD changes (M36-Jackson, Stug G, Jagdpanzer IV). They seem to reduce diversity in playstyle, making them all more like the same, but will have to try them out more. Love the changes on the UKF Mortar, range nerf may be a bit too excessive (higher range should be the trade-off for being static). OKW smoke is great, Le.ig 18 changes interesting. SOV M4C Sherman should remain a call in with a substantial Price Premium, imo.
Stuff I'd like to have seen added but wasn't - The return of the early Volksgrenadier panzerfaust to fight off SOV clown cars, perhaps at a Price Premium? Late-game WER tier 4 4th-man upgrade for Grenadiers; SOV Conscript/Guard changes to make them a viable alternative to the current Penal meta. Doesn't necessarily have to be buffs, just make them more interesting, give them new abilities/upgrades without them loosing their flavor (Conscripts: Cheap, disposable, weaker unit that may improve with time and experience; Guards: Elite, well trained, well supplied); Also, I loved the ModTeam's idea of giving Thompsons to LendLease Guards. I makes so much sense considering the doctrine's theme (hell, I'm even up for swiching the Dshka for a western-made HMG); USF M8 changes/buffs to make it fun again (I've a nostalgic affection for it, having been playing since COH1).

If call-in units had other options to be changed, like special abilities, it might be better off that said abilities require teching to unlock. Having it work only for cost seems contradictory to the (original) point of call in units, which I should add, already cost more than their closest stock equivalents (at least they should unless it's like M10 which is meant to be cheaper but overall weaker).

I mean we already have this with abilities like Panzerfaust, where if you don't tech up and Volks blob you're playing WAY less efficiently than you should.
IMO the same principle should be applied to call in units; the good step in the right direction is they FINALLY made some changes to some units with bland abilities, now they need to just take it a step further: these abilities require X tech to unlock, so while players can still "skip" tech to access the unit, they still require teching to make the most out of it.

You can even have it where ALL call-in's special abilities require some sort of additional investment (that you'd inevitably make sooner or later) to make the most out of them; this makes the

EDIT to provide some examples by skimming changelog:

-IS-2's Fragmentation Shell ability no longer requires veterancy but instead requires T4; the unit's price isn't altered; the veterancy can instead be something like reduced cooldown to this ability. The purpose is to encourage teching up.
-Command Panther's Coordinated Fire requires T4 set up, as opposed to being available immediately.
-M4C Sherman cannot upgrade pintle gun until T4

have you thouth that USF medium tanks are better than WEH medium tanks i mean sherman beats panzer iv and now i tested it jackson wins against stug

The only edge USF Tanks have Wehrmacht tanks is utility, self-repair, superglue and smoke by default.
Sherman vs PZ4 is 50/50 and so is Jackson vs StuG-G, thing is the Jackson often fails miserably at doing it's job, which is why often you just see people spam Shermans instead... Unless the Pershing is used.

Still asking: Why would I ever go for the Panther as Ostheer player when the StuG does the job way better and cost efficient? I really expected some changes here.
The Panther seriously needs adjustments. At the very least the improved AI of the OKW Panther.

Don't hold your breath mate.
I can foresee more OKW nerfs coming BTW.
The new meta will be OKW vs USF or UKF.
WER and SU will be long forgotten

The only edge USF Tanks have Wehrmacht tanks is utility, self-repair, superglue and smoke by default.
Sherman vs PZ4 is 50/50 and so is Jackson vs StuG-G, thing is the Jackson

Yeah, ok, 50 50, sure...
Jackson is a glass cannon and you need other units to spot.

I can see you are at the other end of the fanboy spectrum Outsider; therefore I will agree to disagree, and stop arguing

So your advice is to fix everything at once and to add conscripts to scope. And that 20+ pages of patch notes is "small patches" addressing "singular problems". Got it. Thanks for the great feedback, will definitely consider it for the future.

Hi Kyle,

You don't need to respond to the bitter posts, although this does make me chuckle. I think in general the community would just like to see a little more feedback here on the forums, and a bit more response to the game balance, considering some long standing issues that have not yet been examined. The game is improving, and everyone wants it to go faster, but we also have to be serious about resource allocation.

Thanks for dropping by, I hope you find some of the other replies helpful. Hoping to see you around as well.

Hi Kyle,

You don't need to respond to the bitter posts, although this does make me chuckle. I think in general the community would just like to see a little more feedback here on the forums, and a bit more response to the game balance, considering some long standing issues that have not yet been examined. The game is improving, and everyone wants it to go faster, but we also have to be serious about resource allocation.

Thanks for dropping by, I hope you find some of the other replies helpful. Hoping to see you around as well.

So you toss salads offen?

Move the M10 to 6 CP please. I still don't understand why it comes out so late. By the time most allied players have 8 CP readily available for the M10, we can already field the Jackson. This makes the M10 nonviable.

Don't hold your breath mate.
I can foresee more OKW nerfs coming BTW.
The new meta will be OKW vs USF or UKF.
WER and SU will be long forgotten


Yeah, ok, 50 50, sure...
Jackson is a glass cannon and you need other units to spot.

I can see you are at the other end of the fanboy spectrum Outsider; therefore I will agree to disagree, and stop arguing

Penetration vs Armor value has them evenly matched, as it should be, because USF doesn't have anything better than the Sherman without Commanders.

USF only unit that can spot, without doctrines, is the M20.
Such a unit doesn't fit the USF Agressive playstyle, is why the M10 is usually superior in 1vs1, which you should know if you played it... Unless this is the playercard of your smurf account.

Just because I only play USF doesn't mean my input should be disregarded!

Ostheer Panther

Ostheer Panther

I know most people like revMp OsteerPanther.
Maybe Relic think it will hurt1v1 so much, like Conscripts one Oops !!!

>2k17
>demos haven't been fixed yet

Show Spoiler

Penetration vs Armor value has them evenly matched, as it should be, because USF doesn't have anything better than the Sherman without Commanders.

USF only unit that can spot, without doctrines, is the M20.
Such a unit doesn't fit the USF Agressive playstyle, is why the M10 is usually superior in 1vs1, which you should know if you played it... Unless this is the playercard of your smurf account.

Just because I only play USF doesn't mean my input should be disregarded!

So sherman vs p4 is 50/50, while costing less than p4 and having way superior anti inf (HE rounds, superior .50 cal and fighting mostly smaller squads (4man and HE rounds is fearsome combination)
So jackson is not better than stug because it requires vision? Range is the best stat a TD can have. Try screening with the superior usf infantry?

So sherman vs p4 is 50/50, while costing less than p4 and having way superior anti inf (HE rounds, superior .50 cal and fighting mostly smaller squads (4man and HE rounds is fearsome combination)
So jackson is not better than stug because it requires vision? Range is the best stat a TD can have. Try screening with the superior usf infantry?

Well Sherman's vet is meh while P4 vet is awesome so Sherman needs to secure a lot of kills before P4 outclass it with vet.
Also I agree Jackson needs that range because with only 5 extra range over Stug Jackson cannot counter the Stug Spam as effectively as before and Jpz IV will snipe it all days long with extra range + camo.

We need another supply event i think

I find it consistently amazing that preferred gameplay has tanks fighting atgs and unturreted tank destroyers from the front.

And that this is the basis of balance decisions.

I find it consistently amazing that preferred gameplay has tanks fighting atgs and unturreted tank destroyers from the front.

And that this is the basis of balance decisions.

Well, that's because the game was balanced around 1v1 and 2v2 where tanks are much easier to flank since there are less units on the field. In 4v4, there isn't much room to crack enemy lines considering you're up against 4 players producing more units.