Login

russian armor

FBP Update v1.2

PAGES (8)down
7 Aug 2017, 09:07 AM
#62
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

hey Balance Team,

soviet 120mm mortar flare bugs out. not sure if normal sov 82mm does that, too.
7 Aug 2017, 09:43 AM
#63
avatar of Strummingbird
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 952 | Subs: 1

It's pretty much bait for USF, but can be effective against T1 heavy Soviets since Ostwinds can actually survive Soviet T3. (Note the same weakness of Soviets to Luchs)


Actually one of the problems I have with the ostwind is how dismal its performance is vs light vehicles. T70 and Stuart cannot be killed in reasonable time as long as front armor is shown, SU76 will bully the ostwind head to head and when flanked doesnt die quickly, and AEC will give it a very good fight straight up.

So the ostwind doesnt make a good showing when it competes against the obvious contender (P4) which zones out light armor effectively and can equal opposing mediums generally, and also has no real purpose imo with lmg /g43 mass upgrades, the sniper, and a whole host of other effective anti infantry units wehr already has (MG, mortar, etc).
7 Aug 2017, 10:05 AM
#64
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

hey Balance Team,

soviet 120mm mortar flare bugs out. not sure if normal sov 82mm does that, too.


Did you try combining 120mm mortar flares with hold fire on? This might help convincing the 120mm fire the flares. I'll have a look again at the 120mm.

The issue with the Soviet howitzer is the guaranteed payoff on base bombardment picking up retreating squads, moreso than actually targeting units on the map. It was always extremely effective at this but with the AOE increase and the ability to fit it into a composition with much greater ease due to cost changes it's even better now.


At Vet0 there's some tradeoffs between the ML-20 and LeFH. Those tradeoffs probably go away with the 2 shells the ML-20 gets at Vet1. We could rework Vet1 to something different, basically (e.g., make ML-20 fire slower, but Vet1 resets the reload time between to normal).

Regarding base-barrages; would something like lower range help? (we can restrict howitzers from firing in bases, but that's counter-intuitive)




I'm not sure about the Mortar Pit - the way it's set up now, its probably even more untouchable when ahead due to higher HP and reduced vulnerability to AT weapons, but when playing from behind and fighting takes place near your base it basically cannot stay alive. I doubt this is a good thing.


Let's break this up into two parts.

With respect to when playing from ahead, perhaps, indeed the mortar pit is too durable, especially when upgraded. That's probably fixable by reducing the amount of hitpoints. We could also remove the barrage cooldown bonus that the upgraded mortar gets, so that you only have 1 barrage every 60 seconds to worry about.

With respect to when playing on the backfoot, the only thing we can do is allow mortar pits to be built in base territory. Then, when you push the enemy out, you have access to smoke that you can use. However, such a change would be catastrophic for maps like crossroads, where a base pit can probably reliably harass mid.

With respect to coming back on the game and establishing a foothold, Brits would normally have the 25 pounder barrage, if it weren't a complete garbage ability. However, that's called #BalancingWithScope, and we have to live with it.

To be fair. In the live version, if you are on the backfoot, your pit would be most likely to explode to AT guns on Stugs that glance at it for even a second. The change, hopefully, makes it so that people can't arbitrarily prolong matches to the late-game simply by spamming sim city.


Ostwind is not nearly as potent as it was in FBP1.0. Effectiveness is probably about right, but the Wehr faction has plenty of very strong anti-infantry tools and I suspect the Ostwind will not find a niche. I'd suggest a 10 fuel drop in price, perhaps with corresponding manpower reduction, to allow players to fit it into a T3 based composition more easily

If you'd like a replay to demonstrate the last two points I'll gladly upload.


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.
7 Aug 2017, 11:43 AM
#69
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9

4 offtopic posts and 2 flame posts reported and invised

Please stay on topic. :)

7 Aug 2017, 11:45 AM
#70
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

4 offtopic posts and 2 flame posts reported and invised

Please stay on topic. :)



My posts are about the scope if you are gonna invis them you need to invis cardboard box as well

To reiterate, scope won't get changed. Complaining about scope won't help. Ostheer t4 is viable in team games.
7 Aug 2017, 11:57 AM
#71
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36



Ostheer t4 is viable in team games.


Yes but not in 1vs1. You can't go t1, t2 for paks and 222/ flamerhft etc into t4 for panther. Sadly.
7 Aug 2017, 12:00 PM
#72
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36

For all the KT and Fireflystuff. Play the mod and see what happend.

We nerfed Tulips at all. In v1.0 already. This is v1.2 now
7 Aug 2017, 12:54 PM
#73
avatar of lel69fgt

Posts: 41

Permanently Banned
For all the KT and Fireflystuff. Play the mod and see what happend.

We nerfed Tulips at all. In v1.0 already. This is v1.2 now

So right now jackson is the only thing to fight with already great panthers, tigers, kt's and jt's.

You know what would be the best thing in this update? Big penalty for blobing with 3+ squads. Like 50% lower dmg, 50% lower accuracy, 50% higher chance to die.
7 Aug 2017, 13:20 PM
#74
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36



You know what would be the best thing in this update? Big penalty for blobing with 3+ squads. Like 50% lower dmg, 50% lower accuracy, 50% higher chance to die.


I like that :P

But this will not happen in coh2 i guess.
7 Aug 2017, 14:44 PM
#75
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740


So right now jackson is the only thing to fight with already great panthers


Can you guys please decide on whether the Panther is OP or total garbage for once?
You are all just interpreting things how it fits your point of view in this forum. Annoying as hell if you ask me.
7 Aug 2017, 14:52 PM
#76
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

Ostheer t4 is viable in team games.
That statement is up for debate. I say, it's not. It's possible, yet Tier 3 is more cost efficient in any regard. Hell, even the Panzer IV has a higher damage output than the Panther and let's not talk about the StuG. And Tier 3 gets the job done just barely.
7 Aug 2017, 15:21 PM
#77
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

That statement is up for debate. I say, it's not. It's possible, yet Tier 3 is more cost efficient in any regard. Hell, even the Panzer IV has a higher damage output than the Panther and let's not talk about the StuG. And Tier 3 gets the job done just barely.

I build t4 solely for the brummbar. It's worth it in teamgames. Pwerfer is okay too, but panther is atm overshadowed by stug spam in most cases. They're still useful sometimes, like for hunting katys or proper TDs like jacksons or su85s.
7 Aug 2017, 17:13 PM
#78
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2



...
At Vet0 there's some tradeoffs between the ML-20 and LeFH. Those tradeoffs probably go away with the 2 shells the ML-20 gets at Vet1. We could rework Vet1 to something different, basically (e.g., make ML-20 fire slower, but Vet1 resets the reload time between to normal).
...


if ML-20 is overpwerforming in FBP, why not revert back some old changes like AOE? rather than keep adding on to it?

7 Aug 2017, 17:37 PM
#79
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742



if ML-20 is overpwerforming in FBP, why not revert back some old changes like AOE? rather than keep adding on to it?



Where is the fun in that? The goal is to make changes and see what happens and if the changes are liked by people. You're suggesting solving problems and making manageable changes, which is really been proven not to be the goal of any of the community patches.
7 Aug 2017, 19:05 PM
#80
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Read again : It's low priority. They won't change their priorities and unit focus because you argue schematics and the way things are worded in the patch notes. There's other important things than the su76.


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.
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

824 users are online: 824 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49115
Welcome our newest member, Pound309
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM