Login

russian armor

FBP Update v1.2

PAGES (8)down
7 Aug 2017, 19:11 PM
#81
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Aug 2017, 19:05 PMVipper


Maybe you should read again:

"The prioritized scope for the team game related balance changes has been focused around Tank Destroyers & On-Map Artillery."

Su-76 is a TD so it what the mod should focus on.

Units that are is scope should be fixed regardless of priority because it might month before they enter scope again. BB for now.


Go argue petty schematics and wording of patch notes around the scope with MrSmith's team and not with me. Newsflash: It's utterly pointless to do that, and it doesn't help at all with what they are working on.

They told you already that they won't care about YOUR OWN preferred priorities. MrSmith's team has clearly told you that they got THEIR OWN priorities and timescales for the FBP mod whilst keeping within the tight permitted scope. They WILL keep to it nevertheless what you see written in the notes. What YOU want to see being worked on is either not the priority at all or not in scope!
7 Aug 2017, 19:18 PM
#82
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

Panther and SU-76 got shot down. I can attempt to argue for them again and then pray.
7 Aug 2017, 19:21 PM
#83
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

Exactly miragefla, and that's known for a while now. No need for Vipper to keep arguing that it should be included within scope just because she interpret the patch-notes in her own way.
7 Aug 2017, 21:36 PM
#84
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808



Go argue petty schematics and wording of patch notes around the scope with MrSmith's team and not with me. Newsflash: It's utterly pointless to do that, and it doesn't help at all with what they are working on.

They told you already that they won't care about YOUR OWN preferred priorities. MrSmith's team has clearly told you that they got THEIR OWN priorities and timescales for the FBP mod whilst keeping within the tight permitted scope. They WILL keep to it nevertheless what you see written in the notes. What YOU want to see being worked on is either not the priority at all or not in scope!


lel someones butt hurt.

@miragefla

The stug is getting nerfed, so the same reasoning should work for the su76 nerfs. Panther changes should be of high proioty with the changes to wher (e.g. stug) and USF's jackson. Did relic give a reason ?
7 Aug 2017, 22:00 PM
#85
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2



The stug is getting nerfed, so the same reasoning should work for the su76 nerfs.


Got some news for you. The SU-76 has
- 120 dmg until it hits vet2
- a very small firing arc
- 400 hp which makes it a 3 shot vehicle, instant engine criticals, it also has just half the armor of the stug
- inferior RoF

...while being cheaper, having more range than the stug and offering a free barrage ability to scare away the enemy.
7 Aug 2017, 22:35 PM
#86
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808



Got some news for you. The SU-76 has
- 120 dmg until it hits vet2
- a very small firing arc
- 400 hp which makes it a 3 shot vehicle, instant engine criticals, it also has just half the armor of the stug
- inferior RoF

...while being cheaper, having more range than the stug and offering a free barrage ability to scare away the enemy.


got some actual game play experience for you, 1v1 stug is fine, its because this unit gets spammed in team games effectively to counter AT (+ heavy tanks like the is2) is why its being nerfed. The same thing is currently happening in team games with the su76, getting spammed like crazy + having an AI barrage.

Also by nerfing the stug, which is SUPPOSED to pave the way for t4 becoming more viable but the changes (like the panther buffs) are not making it through.

8 Aug 2017, 09:14 AM
#89
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Got some news for you. The SU-76 has
- 120 dmg until it hits vet2
- a very small firing arc
- 400 hp which makes it a 3 shot vehicle, instant engine criticals, it also has just half the armor of the stug
- inferior RoF

...while being cheaper, having more range than the stug and offering a free barrage ability to scare away the enemy.

Su-76 has one of the lowest XP values for a TD even lower than an m20 and simply vet way to fast.

In the patch by vet 2 its DPS vs Tiger is very close to that of Stug vs Comet.
9 Aug 2017, 14:37 PM
#92
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Dear balance team. I have tested the new stug relentlessly in the last few days. The following problems have come to my attention:

The Stug is, as we know, the crutch of tier 3 for Ostheer. Tier 3 is, as we know, the crutch for Ostheer. The current stug, although a good and effective unit like in the live version of the game, gets completely shut down and bullied by the Jackson. Not only is it outranged by the Jackson, but it is also has to deal with swarms of USF infantry with at capabilities. This means that the crutch unit in the crutch tier of the Ostheer faction, is in serious peril vs USF.

This is bad because tier 4 has not been adjusted. It remains an overpriced tier with overpriced units that don't perform anywhere near their cost (brumble is decent but requires constant attack ground babysitting to be good). The Panther, with which the Jackson is supposed to duke it out and for which, amongst others, it had its stats buffed, is rarely seen in a 1v1. The reason for this is because Ostheer HAS to crutch on tier 3 and the Stug. You can't reliably get tier 3 and your crutch units up and tier 4 afterwards to get a Panther to counter the Jackson that is totally bullying your Stugs. There is almost no way to do this vs a worthy opponent, because quite frankly, you can't find the resources for it.

Skipping tier 3 isn't a viable option either, since you will get pushed off the field before you ever reach your Panther.The Ostheer Panther is overpriced and performs horrible, there is no reason to get this unit as 2 stugs (which are still cheaper resource wise, including teching) will do the job nicely.

The initiative to make the stug less attractive and thus stimulate Panther play will not work, since the Ostheer Panther is overpriced in an overpriced tier and performs, as a late game unit, quite frankly horrible.

Conclusion: The Jackson is buffed for a situation which might be reasonable vs OKW, but in 99% of the cases, not vs Ostheer. The Jackson now shuts down Tier 3 Ostheer play, which in itself creates further problems for the Ostheer faction in 1v1 as it already HAS to crutch on Tier 3 or be in serious peril. This in combination with the lackluster Tier 4 and the overpriced and underperforming tier 4 units, makes the situation for Ostheer anything but flexible.
9 Aug 2017, 15:27 PM
#93
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

Dear balance team. I have tested the new stug relentlessly in the last few days. The following problems have come to my attention:


Feel free to contribute to this thread, so that we may also have a look:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/62386/fall-balance-replays

This month, we want to focus a bit on how indirect fire changes work for the 5 factions. We'll revisit Jackson later during the FBP cycle, when we've panned out the early game.

Also, I don't want to spoil anything, but:

9 Aug 2017, 15:52 PM
#94
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Feel free to contribute to this thread, so that we may also have a look:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/62386/fall-balance-replays

This month, we want to focus a bit on how indirect fire changes work for the 5 factions. We'll revisit Jackson later during the FBP cycle, when we've panned out the early game.

Also, I don't want to spoil anything, but:

panther buff comfirmed kappa
9 Aug 2017, 16:49 PM
#95
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066



Feel free to contribute to this thread, so that we may also have a look:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/62386/fall-balance-replays

This month, we want to focus a bit on how indirect fire changes work for the 5 factions. We'll revisit Jackson later during the FBP cycle, when we've panned out the early game.

Also, I don't want to spoil anything, but:



Interesting!

As for replays, I have them disabled. I will enable them for this occasion.
9 Aug 2017, 17:26 PM
#96
avatar of Strummingbird
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 952 | Subs: 1

ML20

I'd think trialling a small buff to the LEFH together with a small blindfire nerf for both howitzers would be preferable to nerfing the ML20. Counterbarrage has always been pretty underwhelming, and if it's within scope giving the LEFH a small stat buff (ala ML20 extra shells at vet 1) to accompany counterbarrage at vet 1 would be interesting.

Larger scatter into FOW would be the most direct counter to blindfiring into bases, and further incentivize shooting units on the field in concert with other attacks. I wouldn't go overboard with a nerf in this aspect though.

Mortar pit


I understand the problem with allowing base pits. It's not a problem I have an answer for; I wouldn't restore the ability for base emplacements.

I'm not sure why the new iteration of the mortar pit is so resistant to antitank fire. It feels to me quite counterintuitive [pit is now immune to lategame vehicle dives IF vehicle has no machinegun eg JP4.] I see why target size is that small (to reduce vulnerability to AT guns) but perhaps this could be moderated in a way that allows vehicles up close to reliably hit it while reducing the effectiveness of 60-range snipes.


It's about having alternatives. It's also about having an early tool you can use to take down high received-accuracy infantry on maps where you can't or don't want to rely on the sniper. And it's also about having a vehicle that can move that can do that.


It's an alternative, but speaking from ingame experience in 2v2 and especially 1v1 it's an alternative that simply needs to be more attractive in some way to be useful and competitive. 1.0 showed that a performance increase was problematic, live game shows that the Ostwind is rarely used for various reasons. Hence, my suggestion to try a third tweak i.e. cost reduction and / or improvement against light tanks.

Either way, it's not an early tool to counterharrass- it's a solid mid-late game vehicle built after other T3 vehicles establish a comfortable safety margin, since it's never built first from T3 unless the game is pretty much won already. A cost reduction would allow it to fit more comfortably into this role, and increasing penetration would make it a solid first-build choice against heavy light tank play.

Other observations from further games:
LeIG barrage is very reliable at hitting crewed weapons and infantry with the AOE changes. Not sure if it's a little too strong at the moment.
Pack howi performance is very good. With cost reduction I suspect that they snowball a winning game a bit too well, but at the same time they need to be good since USF has no proper arty lategame besides Major. Perhaps adding a small fuel cost (10-15 fuel?) would differentiate it from the mortar, would thematically be in line with how the full-size howitzers and Land Mattress have a fuel cost.
11 Aug 2017, 10:43 AM
#97
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

I'am still not convinced the changes brought to the Jacksons are going to be balanced in teamgame. I'am really afraid Jacksons + Su85 or Jacksons + FF are going to dominate the 4vs4 meta.
I mean the FBP Jackson is good in 1vs1 and probably 2vs2. But 4vs4 is another story, sadly it is almost impossible to test, I have already difficulties just to do a FBP 1vs1...

In my opinion, TDs/mediums/heavies are balance in the live version today if we exclude the Jagtiger and Elefant from the table. There are some minor changes to be done of course around them but I think the FBP are taking good care of them.

The Jacksons, as much as the USF faction is badly design, is ok today. So why taking the risk to sink the balance between TDs/mediums/heavies in teamgame in order to get the Jackson relevant on late game vs the Efe and Jag? Why not simply work around the Elefant and Jagtiger because they are the biggest offender here.

I don't think those two tanks should see their stats nerfed neither than the Jackson buffed. So the solutions I propose, and many other players already mentioned already are quite simple.

1- Make repairing them cost manpower and fuel, a full repair could cost between 1/3 and 1/2 of their initial price.

2- Make them un-repairable neither from pioneers, sturmpioneers or the OKW truck. Once dead, you must call another one. To mitigate it, remove the engine damage on them.

Both solutions would reduce the resource gap between their initial cost and the resource cost allied factions have to put together to take them down. We all agree that the problem isn't when you kill them but when you leave them at 10% life while losing your tanks. They come back full life couple of minutes later for free while you must reinvest manpower and fuel to try to counter them a new time.

Both solutions would actually make them vulnerable to TDs since each pen shot on them would cost the player resources, or on reparation or after its death to call another one.

Applying one of those solutions would reduce the number of Jag and Ele per game and players would actually think about it before calling them. They would lose their status of TD that counter anything for a high initial cost but in fact quite a small one in comparison with what your opponents must invest to take them down.

This would reward good players on both side and punish sitting ducks that just repair after each attack.

This also wouldn't affect at all the rest of the balance if for instance they become too weak. Some tweek are probably required like increasing a bit more the Efe range.
11 Aug 2017, 11:54 AM
#98
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

upgrade the jackson, while nerf the stug and panther get no love...really false direction.

maybe make jackson better vs super heavy tank, but lower its performanche vs mediums and tds. for expamble it miss alot vs them. or it must stay to hit something (like panther) why in the hell can all allie tanks shot while cruise fast around the map like gocarts..and german tanks must stay to hit somehting.

11 Aug 2017, 15:30 PM
#99
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

upgrade the jackson, while nerf the stug and panther get no love...really false direction.

maybe make jackson better vs super heavy tank, but lower its performanche vs mediums and tds. for expamble it miss alot vs them. or it must stay to hit something (like panther) why in the hell can all allie tanks shot while cruise fast around the map like gocarts..and german tanks must stay to hit somehting.



Cromwell and Firefly have the same moving accuracy of 50% as a result of a recent change, if I recall correctly.
17 Aug 2017, 14:59 PM
#100
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289

Balance mod is alive still ? no new version ?!
PAGES (8)down
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: 589 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49989
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM