Sidaroth who hurt you
Your bitterness against OKW is palpable everywhere i see your posts lol
I just play USF, so you can imagine how sick I am of OKW being basically "USF but better" in 1vs1, heh.
Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1
Sidaroth who hurt you
Your bitterness against OKW is palpable everywhere i see your posts lol
Posts: 808
They could just ignore them to be honest, Volks are a funny unit, you need to spend more to beat them because Vet 5 special snowflake faction.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
fyi, upgraded riflemen beat upgraded volks
Posts: 808
For that to be true you need to spend 300mp and 40 fuel on side techs, plus all the muni. And they cost 30mp more to begin with.
Meanwhile for only 10 more MP more Volks stomp cons around the whole game. They also get a better version of their grenade and an equivalent snare for free.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
and when it comes to the flame nade, it costs far more then cons flame nade to use and finally snare aint free, it costs to use
Posts: 2742
Posts: 808
Both of those unlock for free was my point. The soviets need a side-tech for their molly (who cares if its cheaper to use its absolute garbage) and a seperate one for their AT nades.
I'm well aware of what OKW needs to do to get their grenades and snares, that is not the same as side-tech. Those costs are the tech costs for units, and everyone has to pay those.
Yes OKW has to pay for a truck before teching, but that is offset by the bonuses their teching gives them. The Soviets would gladly pay more if it meant they got more than a redecorated base sector.
Posts: 808
The biggest issue for cons right now is that they weren't really considered when volks got the StG upgrades. In fact, not much with considered with volk StGs except removing their panzerschrecks.
Volks without StGs are much more in line with how the unit is supposed to function.
The StGs do two things: improve volks damage output at all ranges, and it eliminates their weakness: close range. Both cons and rifles are designed to function best at close range.
If the remaining Kar98ks are replaced with mp40s in the StG upgrade, Volks continue to have a weakness: which becomes long range. Rifles and cons would then benefit staying at range against upgraded volks and it would be the volks that would have to close.
The StGs just give volks the full strategic advantage the way they currently are.
Posts: 2742
if mp40s replace stg's, ther vet also needs to be reworked for received accuracy so they suit ther purpose. i'd personally remove stg's and give them shrek thats nerfed to bazooka levels and see how that pans out
Posts: 59
Returning to volkschrecks would require removing the faust as well most likely.
Posts: 571
Posts: 5279
offset for what? they pay for it finished. just like how con have to pay for side techs, it doesn't come free
Posts: 3053
The biggest issue for cons right now is that they weren't really considered when volks got the StG upgrades. In fact, not much with considered with volk StGs except removing their panzerschrecks.
Volks without StGs are much more in line with how the unit is supposed to function.
The StGs do two things: improve volks damage output at all ranges, and it eliminates their weakness: close range. Both cons and rifles are designed to function best at close range.
If the remaining Kar98ks are replaced with mp40s in the StG upgrade, Volks continue to have a weakness: which becomes long range. Rifles and cons would then benefit staying at range against upgraded volks and it would be the volks that would have to close.
The StGs just give volks the full strategic advantage the way they currently are.
Posts: 2742
Vanila cons will actually straight up lose to vanilla volks even if they pop out of a corner and go straight into cqc.
Posts: 172
Posts: 2742
IMO best way of balancing the game would be first to adjust costs and side techs.
Game should be balanced stage by stage. First early game, then mid game and late game lastly when previous two stages allow both sides a fair game.
Posts: 172
Timing and pacing of units and tech is such an important component of this game. One would think this would be clear, right? Balance requires a stable foundation to measure.
Considering 5 of the 5 factions were designed to be imbalanced at specific stages of the game, this is a challenge. The purported goal of the balance patches is to achieve balance, but I don't think there's much consensus on what that looks like, how to get there, or to be honest, even where we are now.
Posts: 2742
This kind of attitude changes nothing. Because views on balance vary things should stay the same. Nonsense.
Clearly current balancing strategy didnt improve state of the game.
Posts: 172
You do realize I was agreeing with you, right?
This is, like, basically what I was saying.
COH2.org Balance Forums.
803 | |||||
125 | |||||
8 |