December Balance Preview

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 14:42 PMMr.Smith

Demos are not blobbing deterrent. They are blobbing incentiviser. Why? You only have one sweeper, so move the entire blob around your sweeper. Problem solved.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 14:23 PMA_E

What do people think about demos being visible, and you have to be cunning about where to place them?

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 15:05 PM__deleted__

I think this is golden standard what we have now. Bigger fuse would make them very hard to use and thus weak.

Jump back to quoted post10 Nov 2017, 17:38 PMMrBananaGrabber.

The change to demo charges seems to have gone too far the other way. Their main role is wiping blobs (see 75% of all COH2 youtube videos), now that's going to be impossible, unless the person happens to look away from the screen (blobbers only have to focus on their blob).

Maybe lower the time to 1.5 seconds. Or experiment with having them lower the health as much as possible but not kill models. So instead of instantly wiping several squads, it drops their health to almost nothing.

As it is now I can't see it being very useful, and potentially means the Allies are vulnerable to Axis blobs all over again.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 10:40 AMA_E

Demo changes are a buff.

39% muni reduction >>>>> 3s timer.

I really consider anyone that thinks the demo 'nerf' is a 'nerf' is wildly inaccurate and needs to think through or playtest changes more.

It's a buff in my opinion, it's a 39% cost reduction (90 -> 65) to one of the most powerful abilities in the game.

• Top level players can still put them on the side of maps on strat points, and wait a few seconds before clicking it, no one will see the timer.
  
  
• put them on buildings (near doors ways), and 3 seconds won't mean shit
  
  
• put them on retreat paths and just time the three seconds out.
  
  
• put them where support weapons are likely to set up, and that's one dead support weapon.
  
  

39% reduction is way too cheap for demos 65 muni for something of that power is crazy to me.

If you can't play around a 3 second timer, i.e. your mental faculties aren't powerful enough to still use demos, you have to question what you're doing playing a strategy game.

The balance modders are suggesting a change here that I absolutely promise you will buff top level 1v1 Soviets.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 15:38 PMJudge73

1. Cons are too good at long range now. Suggest to slightly reduce long range acc (grens and volks should have bigger advantage).

Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2017, 12:49 PMCruzz

Jump back to quoted post9 Nov 2017, 17:52 PMVipper

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:14 PMsherlock

The uplift is rather little and due to overkill and no weapon upgrades, I am having a hard time believing that the difference is even that noticeable until they bleed enough to finally reach vet 3.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:28 PMVipper

Actually it the optimum range has been moved towards far and the curve has become linear both of which are bad things.

I will make better chart when I have the time.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:35 PMsherlock

The chart is just fine. Again, DPS ratios between units are not optimum ranges. The optimal range is the range at which a unit wins the clearest. Talking of optimums by looking at DPS ratios is nonsensical because it completely ignores everything from received accuracy to target size, health pool and so on. Cons, with this DPS profile will lose at practically the same ranges as they did before.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:41 PMVipper

If grenadier vs conscript trade slightly better the closer the get, there will be very little reason for either unit to reposition. Grenadier will lose more during the move while cons will be able to simply ourah away.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:41 PMVipper

Received accuracy and target size practically the same thing and can be factor in easily.

Optimum range is not the range a unit but the range it trades better.

If grenadier vs conscript trade slightly better the closer the get, there will be very little reason for either unit to reposition. Grenadier will lose more during the move while cons will be able to simply ourah away.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:49 PMsherlock

Sorry, but no one in the history of playing ostheer ever came to the conclusion that he/she should move their grens closer. Grens win more clearly the further away they are.

No one playing soviets ever used orah to get away from grens since cons lose the further away they are and win the closer they are.

In your comparisons you neglect the health pool. We had this discussion and I showed you the calculations in the other thread so I won't go into this.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:49 PMsherlock

Sorry, but no one in the history of playing ostheer ever came to the conclusion that he/she should move their grens closer. Grens win more clearly the further away they are.

No one playing soviets ever used orah to get away from grens since cons lose the further away they are and win the closer they are.

In your comparisons you neglect the health pool. We had this discussion and I showed you the calculations in the other thread so I won't go into this.

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 18:05 PMVipper

And that is exactly my point, if the conscript optimum range is far all fight will take place far since non will have a reason to move. This change simply reduces the effect of "relative positioning" without achieving the intended goals:

Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 18:05 PMVipper

And that is exactly my point, if the conscript optimum range is far all fight will take place far since non will have a reason to move. This change simply reduces the effect of "relative positioning" without achieving the intended goals: