Faction Fuel Balancing

We have fully prepared patch - Fall Balance Patch that adresses many of current issues like call in meta or penals. There is no need to make balance discussion until Relic finally published ALREADY MADE patch which was point of discussion for like 3 months

Hope I helped you,
Hector

Sorry bad I have to disagree. The nerf to Penal are too little to have an significant impact while the patch creates a whole new set of issues with nerf to Axis TDs, OKW support weapons and buffs to allied TDs...

In addition the call in changes leave axis weaker and only nerf "lend lease" that will be replace by "counter tactics" (for mother Russia and Kv-1 spam)

Sorry bad I have to disagree. The nerf to Penal are too little to have an significant impact while the patch creates a whole new set of issues with nerf to Axis TDs and buffs to allied TDs...

People respond to the novelty of it all. The game would be different, therefore 'new', and therefore there'd be a period of time where players could figure out the next broken meta strategy.

And that's what people really want: to be the first to devise the next cheese to the top 10.

It's never been about balance.

People respond to the novelty of it all. The game would be different, therefore 'new', and therefore there'd be a period of time where players could figure out the next broken meta strategy.

And that's what people really want: to be the first to devise the next cheese to the top 10.

It's never been about balance.

There is nothing to discover mother Russia/KV-1 spam will rule.

Both KV-1 and B-4 receive buffs while for mother Russia remain as broken as ever.

Sorry bad I have to disagree. The nerf to Penal are too little to have an significant impact while the patch creates a whole new set of issues with nerf to Axis TDs, OKW support weapons and buffs to allied TDs...

In addition the call in changes leave axis weaker and only nerf "lend lease" that will be replace by "counter tactics" (for mother Russia and Kv-1 spam)

+1
1)Nerfing stug but leaving panther like that.
2)Increasing RA of raketenwerfer crew despite they get no cover
3)Ostwind (tier 3 unit) linked to tier 4
4)Panzer 4 still cost inefficient trash
5)Penals were still ultra cost efficient and still got their weapons for free, while the cooldown on the move nerf was really minimal.
6)Mg34 already ridiculously low dps was nerfed hard with nerfed weapon crew, but no compensating buff to suppression/mg dps
7)Jadgpanzer 4 with 185 average pen nerfed AND increased cost.
8)135 fuel jackson with no flaws ever in hp, pen, damage, mobility, all while point 1 and 7

+1
1)Nerfing stug but leaving panther like that.
2)Increasing RA of raketenwerfer crew despite they get no cover
3)Ostwind (tier 3 unit) linked to tier 4
4)Panzer 4 still cost inefficient trash
5)Penals were still ultra cost efficient and still got their weapons for free, while the cooldown on the move nerf was really minimal.
6)Mg34 already ridiculously low dps was nerfed hard with nerfed weapon crew, but no compensating buff to suppression/mg dps
7)Jadgpanzer 4 with 185 average pen nerfed AND increased cost.
8)135 fuel jackson with no flaws ever in hp, pen, damage, mobility, all while point 1 and 7

Yeah, completely nonsensical. Especially the raketenwerfer nerf. Don't forget Firefly being an Elefant on steroids, while Jackson could survive 3 shots from Ele.

It was a 'teamgames patch' aka break the game patch

Didn't realize there were so many people against the teamgame patch. I agree with most points as well too which worries me. Of course the issues with the axis heavy TDs nerf could be seen a mile away.

Didn't realize there were so many people against the teamgame patch. I agree with most points as well too which worries me. Of course the issues with the axis heavy TDs nerf could be seen a mile away.

The point isn't heavy TD, which was ok to nerf and deserved.
The point is the supposed team games patch would have never buffed UP ost/okw armor like panzer 4, panther.. (yeah okw panther is a bit better, still utter trash at 200fuel), while nerfing a jadgpanzer 4 because of the veterancy THAT WAS A PROBLEM ONLY IN TEAMGAMES and increasing the price, basically nothing decent enough to replace meta.
Actual jadgpanzer 4 has only 20 more pen than ez8, modders completely forget that jadgpanzer 4 may perform well at vet 5, but 1vs1-2vs2 never see vet 5 and 145 fuel for a antimedium is totally unviable in such modes.
Axis armor is DE FACTO complete trash considered price (only katitof and completely biased folks can deny it), and new stug (which I didn't like when I played mode, already expressed my idea of casamate TD being overhauled as anti heavy in lines with jackson and firefly, and increasing panther dps for pen and range) could be considered "fixed" while being the crutch of ost underwhelming armor.

ALL THIS, while Heavy td (which have been teamgames replacement of shit panther) get "fixed" like stug

Add to it another allies TD buff (which could be okey if panther was merely decent).

ps:It makes me wonder why the hell the resource gained in teamgames isn't reduced

Honestly, OKW armour isn't that bad as you're stating. The main issue is replacing their T4 if it gets blown up which generally happens as call-in tanks attack the thing with no tech investment required, unlike the T4. If OKW could rebuild the T4 more easily or get like half the units from it (Obers and Jagdpanzer) for cheaper, things would be pretty great for them.

Yes, SOME Axis tanks could be slightly cheaper/better, but they aren't miserable.

Also, people are forgetting the Jagdpanzer IV has the fastest ROF over Jacksons and FFs, the hardest to hit -and the Jackson has the worst base accuracy of all medium-based TDs- and armour that reliably deflects mediums. Maybe it could come earlier or be part of that cheaper T4 I mentioned, but in the majority of cases, Axis don't need that pen as the highest armour out of Soviets and USF is 160. Only the British field anything remotely close to the 300 mark.

Only the Jackson ever got buffed out of the Allied TDs with those changes still being tweaked. FFs actually got nerfed with worse moving, Tulips no longer cancelling commands, and lowering its ridiculous accuracy.

Onto the actual topic of fuel:

The main discrepancy with fuel is the OKW snowball that builds unless you cheese them. The moment one truck comes online, which is likely Mech, you're facing a lot of infantry incoming with upgrades and the light tank. So you've got to pick, AI or AT?

Ostheer does get earlier vehicles than Soviets outside the M3 but they are all flimsy and lack the shock value of an actual light tank unless it's a very expensive 251 flamer half-track. 222 only does crushing things if someone's AA HT is looking directly at it, guns backwards, or they still have their ultra-lights still alive.

As for being forced into T2, Soviets can still stall via various methods that have been mentioned. Hopefully T2 and Cons can be fixed at some point to be more reliable outside ATGs.

snip

IMO the problem with OKW and to a lessor extent axis in general, is that they are more dependant on their vehicles armor for their fuel investment. While it doesn't sound to bad having a unit with 375 armor (KT), the problem is it just might not work. I can have a JT with 525 armor but that armor doesn't mean a damn thing if a T34 gets lucky and pens ever single shot from the front.

So if the OKW p4 decides to bounce T34 shots, then you get your 150 fuel worth which would be more or less balanced as intended. But if it doesn't then you sink more fuel into something which is no better than the cheap cost efficient mediums of the allies.

@miragefla

Well let's discuss about it.

Nothing of what you said really is different from my statements.
Jadgpanzer 4 has faster fire rate and better accuracy, but is limited from having lowest mobility out of all casamate TD, low pen and more than that low damage (which is part of the reason why jackson doesn't fire as fast).
Now new jadgpanzer 4 would have costed 10 fuel more than jackson, while being able to deal damage only to mediums..so if some player decide to field some pershing (300fuel) or is2 (375fuel). It will never be able to do anything but the cool visual effect of bouncing, it wouldn't be a problem if it didn't cost 10 more/less fuel (less with su85/jackson) than more mobile (all of them, including su) TD with more pen and more damage.
You are basing your balance on your assumption that most of the time soviets and us won't field doctrinal heavies, which is unlikely considering shock rifle/heavy cav ARE META...and allies TD aren't giving anything away but armor for more consistant dps,mobility,...for cheaper MEANWHILE jadgpanzer 4 is lacking in the intended role of anti mediums because apparently 145 fuel doesn't deserve a decent rotation.

Panther, well like shadow said, overglorified meatshield that become useless by the time you select the building slot. Saying it's dps is nonexistant is not an hyperbole at all, while the armor can't make up for it with 240-230-220 TD cheaper of 50 or more fuel hitting the field much before you even think about building it.
Now it EVEN MORE overlaps with stationary TD with nerfed moving accuracy (basically the opposite direction of what I would give, panther overhauled would be perfect as anti mediums spam) all for 200 fuel, so basically the most expensive TD in game can't reliably destroy anything nor chase down damaged tanks, thanks to the now nerfed moving accuracy.

Panzer 4 150 fuel
T34-85 130 fuel
Ez8 140 fuel
I think it is enough...

And don't tell me "scope" there is nothing in the unofficial balance patch that tells me you would change things other than give it a minimal fuel cost decrese and minimal scatter improvement, while it would cost as much as ez8 anyway and have a nerfed blitz.

Ps: all of this while raketen become even MORE inconsistent (NOW it does frontally to tanks at range, can post you proof, it will even die to small arms fire easily now).

@VIPPER yeah at this point it would be great if they stopped destroying OKW at, removed volks stg, balanced panzerfus (reduced flak ht fuel cost to less spammy/luchs and more combined arms early game) and focused on making okw armor not completely useless nor reliant on a stug-like crutch unit.
Finding a proper role to panther could be the start...

Honestly, OKW armour isn't that bad as you're stating. The main issue is replacing their T4 if it gets blown up which generally happens as call-in tanks attack the thing with no tech investment required, unlike the T4. If OKW could rebuild the T4 more easily or get like half the units from it (Obers and Jagdpanzer) for cheaper, things would be pretty great for them.

That's funny because in order to compete vs OKW you must use call-in doctrines and because you use a call-in doctrine OKW T4 get destroy too easily.
Have you try to play vs OKW without call-in? I do it all the time and destroying OKW T4 that cut 1/3 of the map is an accomplishment on itself and this just to be able to harass his fuel and victory point again.

There is an easy solution about OKW T4, remove the cannon on it so ppl will build it in their base and reduce the chance to get it destroyed. This cannon comes from a era when OKW needed it to stay on the field, this is not the case anymore.

FBP goes to the wrong direction.
Soviet one of strongest factions gets mostly buffs
Ostheer one of the weakest faction get nerf to most of its units that allows to stay afloat.
USF get buffed.
UKF come to strange uncharted territory.
OKW have the a number of the unit nerfed and being forced to depend on their over performing VG and PF even more.

Honestly, OKW armour isn't that bad as you're stating...

No they are not that bad and that is because of their high defensive properties.

On the other hand most of those defensive properties go out the window due to over performances of allied TDs.

Even the cheap Su-76 will penetrate everything up to Tiger more time then not at max range...

FFs actually got nerfed with worse moving, Tulips no longer cancelling commands, and lowering its ridiculous accuracy....

FF can still everything with 100% chance (or close to it) max range when stationary due to accuracy from commander and veterancy.

FBP goes to the wrong direction.

FBP is meant to be a companion patch to WBP-GCS, to address the emerging side-effects to teamgames. You know, the modes where Axis teams currently fare a 75-80% win ratio, and that's slowly bleeding the game out of its playerbase.

The changes were specifically targeted to address that discrepancy, while having a minimum amount of impact on 1v1.

Soviet one of strongest factions gets mostly buffs

Soviets received nerfs to their only strat that is currently viable (Penals, DSHK, Lend-lease Shermans). They received some compensating buffs to the Maxim, but without any Conscript buffs whatsoever, and that's it for them.

Thus, I don't see your point. You need to elaborate a bit more.

Ostheer one of the weakest faction get nerf to most of its units that allows to stay afloat.

Ostheer is nowhere near the weakest faction in terms of teamgames. While it's true that OST have a higher skill ceiling than all other factions, they are probably the strongest faction once you master them.

Now they get to face weaker penals, in exchange for some late-game nerfs that would only really affect them in teamgames (where they should).

USF get buffed.

USF actually got their major cheese strats nerfed (Priest spam & Calliopes). Outside those two doctrines, USF is trash and constantly on the backfoot in teamgames.

1v1-wise, call-in changes are a major nerf to USF that requires call-in cheese to even survive. What they get in return is affordable pack howitzer, so that they can do something about pak walls.

UKF come to strange uncharted territory.

Is giving UKF access to indirect fire and smoke earlier in the game that bad, in exchange for killing sim city?

OKW have the a number of the unit nerfed and being forced to depend on their over performing VG and PF even more.

Being "forced" to depend on overperforming units implies that some of OKW changes went too far in one extreme (i.e., overnerfing). Otherwise the changes were not in the wrong direction; they just didn't go far enough.

Sorry bad I have to disagree. The nerf to Penal are too little to have an significant impact

Penals essentially lost a lot of killing power with the moving-DPS nerf, which would prevent them from scoring wipes-on-retreat so effortlessly.

They also lost access to the sticky satchel, in AI mode, and that opens up an entire new range of counterplay to them.

Can you elaborate what was your experience with countering penals on the FBP was like, and whether you pushed your vehicle advantage vs them?

FBP is meant to be a companion patch to WBP-GCS, to address the emerging side-effects to teamgames. You know, the modes where Axis teams currently fare a 75-80% win ratio, and that's slowly bleeding the game out of its playerbase.

The changes were specifically targeted to address that discrepancy, while having a minimum amount of impact on 1v1.

You are probably talking 3vs3 and above since allies do quite good at 2vs2 where Ostheer are almost extinct.

Yet in the team 4vs4 tournament it was the allied that won if I am not mistaken.

The factor that seems to favor axis in big mods (3vs3+) is the resources inflation and little is being about that.

The assumption that player leave because of 3vs3 or 4vs4 is only an assumption they could as well be leaving because soviets dominated 1vs1 and 2vs2.

Soviets received nerfs to their only strat that is currently viable (Penals, DSHK, Lend-lease Shermans). They received some compensating buffs to the Maxim, but without any Conscript buffs whatsoever, and that's it for them.

Thus, I don't see your point. You need to elaborate a bit more.

Firstly Lend lease is a 1vs1 or 2vsv2 strategy so I that contradicts you opening statement and majority the changes effect 1vs1 and 2vs2 modes profoundly.

In addition the factional showdown demonstrates that "lend lease" is hardly the "only viable strategy".

And in FBP lend lease is simply replaced by KV-1/for mother Russia spam since 2 of the units receive significant buffs, while the axis Tds get nerfed.

Ostheer is nowhere near the weakest faction in terms of teamgames. While it's true that OST have a higher skill ceiling than all other factions, they are probably the strongest faction once you master them.

The fact that their almost non existent in 2vs2 indicates either-wise.

Now they get to face weaker penals, in exchange for some late-game nerfs that would only really affect them in teamgames (where they should).

Penal are hardly weaker

USF actually got their major cheese strats nerfed (Priest spam & Calliopes). Outside those two doctrines, USF is trash and constantly on the backfoot in teamgames.

1v1-wise, call-in changes are a major nerf to USF that requires call-in cheese to even survive. What they get in return is affordable pack howitzer, so that they can do something about pak walls.

Priest is the most powerful artillery piece in the the game and it get a buff.

Pack howitzer get a buff while Leig is receives several nerfs.

M36 get a buff.

Pack wall can be easily countered by the extremely cost efficient barrage or the scott.

Is giving UKF access to indirect fire and smoke earlier in the game that bad, in exchange for killing sim city?

The number of changes to UKF open a whole new territory of balance issue before the main issue of mainline infantry balance is fixed.

Being "forced" to depend on overperforming units implies that some of OKW changes went too far in one extreme (i.e., overnerfing). Otherwise the changes were not in the wrong direction; they just didn't go far enough.

No it actually means that instead of nerfing the OP units and see how it goes from there the player is left with even less other options than blob.

The number of nerfs to OKW units that are not OP simply is not justified.

Penals essentially lost a lot of killing power with the moving-DPS nerf, which would prevent them from scoring wipes-on-retreat so effortlessly.

They also lost access to the sticky satchel, in AI mode, and that opens up an entire new range of counterplay to them.

Can you elaborate what was your experience with countering penals on the FBP was like, and whether you pushed your vehicle advantage vs them?

Penals do become worse at killing at retreat but other than they remain about as strong as they where. Can you pls explain to me why in your opinion Panzerfusilier's killing power needs to be nerfed (apart for the nobrainer pop) while Penal do not?

Vehicle advantage? what vehicle advantage? Penals can defend vs light vehicles once in cover or garrison.

And isn't the fact that you suggest countering Penal with vehicles a proof that the PTRS Penals have failed at their designed role of "a light AT unit".

Vehicle advantage? what vehicle advantage? Penals can defend vs light vehicles once in cover or garrison.

And isn't the fact that you suggest countering Penal with vehicles a proof that the Penals have failed at their designed role of "a light AT unit".

It forces the Soviet player to upgrade to PTRS Rifles to stop LVs if they're relying on T1 as unupgraded Penals can now do absolutely nothing to anything that is bigger than a Kubel? Which results in vehicles having far greater capacity to push dedicated AI squads and players know which squads to evade and not rush towards?

It forces the Soviet player to upgrade to PTRS Rifles to avoid LVs from simply closing distance to unupgraded Penals and firing at short-range?

So are PTRS penals a "a light AT unit" as designed or not?

And the simple presence of m3 forces axis to invest in AT further weakening their AI.

At this point a I feel the need to explain that I do appreciated allot, the hard work some people from the community have put in patches of the game.

Imo it is the goal of most us to improve the game, any disagreement are about how.

It forces the Soviet player to upgrade to PTRS Rifles to stop LVs if they're relying on T1 as unupgraded Penals can now do absolutely nothing to anything that is bigger than a Kubel? Which results in vehicles having far greater capacity to push dedicated AI squads and players know which squads to evade and not rush towards?

And such balance wouldn't make OKW even MORE luchs meta dependant ?
Why not simply target the fact that for 25 mp they get an insane early shock power with stv avaiable from min 0 ?

Yet in the team 4vs4 tournament it was the allied that won if I am not mistaken.

I didn't watch any such tournament. Please posts links to matches where no Calliope or Priest was involved.

The factor that seems to favor axis in big mods (3vs3+) is the resources inflation and little is being about that.

No. This has absolutely nothing to do with resource inflation. It's a synergy issue that is exacerbated by map design issues.

Axis synergy is as follows:
- OKW effortlessly pushes and establishes a foothold (either Sturmpioneers or Kubelwagen, depending on the map)
- OST locks down the territory with MGs, to keep OKW safe from Penal hordes
- OKW establishes a FRP to solidify OST, and starts spamming LeIGs to hardcounter allied indirect fire
- Then, interesting stuff happens in the mid-game where factions can push and pull, depending on player skill
- Eventually this snowballs into axis territory. That's due to:

- OKW Vet5
- OKW FRP
- OKW repairs (that spill over to Ostheer)
- Heavy TDs
- OKW Combat Blitz that allows their tanks to cheat death

The only synergy that allies have to counter that are:
- Turbo-charged fireflies
- Turbo-charged USF artillery

If allies don't have access to both these assets, they might as well quit the moment that an Elefant steps in.

Firstly Lend lease is a 1vs1 or 2vsv2 strategy so I that contradicts you opening statement and majority the changes effect 1vs1 and 2vs2 modes profoundly.

In addition the factional showdown demonstrates that "lend lease" is hardly the "only viable strategy".

And in FBP lend lease is simply replaced by KV-1/for mother Russia spam since 2 of the units receive significant buffs, while the axis Tds get nerfed.

Yes, I get it. Both Lend-lease and Counter-attack are both viable Soviet strats and are OP in the live version. However, both rely on the call-in element to be useful, and call-ins have been nerfed.

Please describe what experiences you had when using/facing KV-1 doctrine in FBP.

Penal are hardly weaker

What is your counterpoint to the facts that:
- Penals are worse at wiping retreating units
- Penals have no access to snares without gimping their AI; by a lot.
- Soviets have no access to snares, without spending resources on the most useless mainline infantry in the game (Conscripts)

"Penal are hardly weaker" is not a valid argument.

Priest is the most powerful artillery piece in the the game and it get a buff.

That's false. Calliope is the strongest artillery piece in the game, followed by LeFH.

Priest only appears strong if you can spam 3-4 of them. USF already suffers from popcap over-saturation. The fact that Priests can no longer be decrewed means they can no longer be spammed.

If you wish to contradict my point, do so with evidence. E.g., link to me a game where 1-2 Priests were used, max, and counterpoint this with LeFHs being used.

Pack howitzer get a buff while Leig is receives several nerfs.

Pack howitzer received a straight buff, because it needed one.

LeIG did lose some range. However, it also received a bucketful of buffs:
- A smoke barrage that has cooldown independent from normal barrage
- Accuracy and reliability significantly improved, due to projectile changes*
- Faster-moving projectile that reaches the target faster*
- Improved AoE
- Improved anti-garrison
- Improved firing speed
- Reduced cost and popcap.

* You wouldn't get those two by just reading the notes and theorycrafting. Trust me.

The point of all these changes is that so that LeIGs become valuable assets for pushing. However you cannot rely on afk-ing them next to your truck and expect to win. So, again; give us a break, please.

M36 get a buff.

Pack wall can be easily countered by the extremely cost efficient barrage or the scott.

I won't bother answering those. You've already received multiple answers to the same questions over and over again. Repeating the same answer is just a waste of time, if you would agree.

The number of changes to UKF open a whole new territory of balance issue before the main issue of mainline infantry balance is fixed.

If you disagree with our approach, go ahead and make a poll about what should be our primary focus with respect to UKF:
- Sim city and emplacements
- UKF infantry rebalance

Out of all the 4v4 teams we asked, not a single one mentioned infantry rebalance as a major contributing issue to 4v4 problems. All of the teams responded with artillery spam and extreme lockdown being the two most significant issues.

Also, we just wouldn't be able to fit an infantry rebalance without this being a major 1v1 patch, which it was not.

No it actually means that instead of nerfing the OP units and see how it goes from there the player is left with even less other options than blob.

Yes, that would have been ideal. However, no, this is not possible to do this in a patch where we aren't supposed to mess with 1v1 meta. The approach to FBP was:

- Fix call-ins and see how 1v1 behaves to take things from there
- Fix the most eye-glaringly late-game OP stuff which has little/no relevance to the early game

The number of nerfs to OKW units that are not OP simply is not justified.

Please provide a list of those "unjustifiedly" nerfed units, so that I know what you're talking about.

Penals do become worse at killing at retreat but other than they remain about as strong as they where. Can you pls explain to me why in your opinion Panzerfusilier's killing power needs to be nerfed (apart for the nobrainer pop) while Penal do not?

This has absolutely nothing to do with FBP. In this thread, I will only respond to criticism that "FBP direction was wrong".

I've already explained to you (specifically) all the issues that make Panzerfusilier ridiculous. I don't want to waste more time in repeating this here.

Vehicle advantage? what vehicle advantage? Penals can defend vs light vehicles once in cover or garrison.

Penals hit the field later than most other mainline infantry. If you've lost early garrisons to Penals try improving your early game; or nuke them out of the garrisons with indirect fire (yes. Leig got buffed in FBP, so don't bother recycling live-version leig stats).

And isn't the fact that you suggest countering Penal with vehicles a proof that the PTRS Penals have failed at their designed role of "a light AT unit".

No. PTRS Penals have only failed at that because M3A1 is shit (and only works when abused vs OKW), Conscripts are shit and Shock troops are shit. Also, PTRS is too slow at aiming; therefore it's too weak. So it's a weak support unit currently, with nothing else worthwhile to synergise with.

Again the direction was not wrong. It's just that progress has to be made step-wise at a pace imposed by Relic.