December Balance Preview

"Nerfs" means better out of cover performances for a minimal durability nerf of 0.9 RA ?

[citation needed]

CoH2 is strategically shallow, and it has always been.

Players have, outside their initial build order one real meaningful decision: their first fuel investment.

Buffing and nerfing that one decision players can make won't change the landscape of players really having no strategic diversity to begin with.

It is not the luchs fault that strategy is shallow in coh2.

#FREELUCHS

No seriously, make it at least 60 or 65 seconds to start and see how things change, if at all. The hammer can't be swung too hard like that.

[citation needed]

+1

[citation needed]

"Moving accuracy modifier increased from 0.25 to 0.35
Vet 0 Received Accuracy reduced from 0.8 to 0.9
Scoped Enfields Vet 3 bonus removed (this causes Tommies to drop their Bren guns, even though enough models are alive)
Bren gun reload time decreased from 8-9 secs to 6.5 secs
Population cap reduced to 6 from 7 (Becomes 7 at 5-man)
Increased cone of fire from 1 to 5

Tommies are receiving additional changes to their Received Accuracy to allow them to be more offensive and less dependent on cover to engage enemy squads effectively.

Removed in-cover defense bonus (0.9 RA) -- squad retains offensive bonus in cover
Reverted target size from 0.9 to 0.8
Lowered Veterancy 2 RA bonus from 0.76 to 0.78"

So...? Improved in everything but doesn't get a situational RA cover bonus

Their veterancy RA bonus has also been adjusted as starting RA improved.
Better moving accuracy, better bren reload, better pop to avoid low mp income with pop...care to EXPLAIN where is such "hurr durr muh nerf" ?

"Moving accuracy modifier increased from 0.25 to 0.35
Vet 0 Received Accuracy reduced from 0.8 to 0.9
Scoped Enfields Vet 3 bonus removed (this causes Tommies to drop their Bren guns, even though enough models are alive)
Bren gun reload time decreased from 8-9 secs to 6.5 secs
Population cap reduced to 6 from 7 (Becomes 7 at 5-man)
Increased cone of fire from 1 to 5

Tommies are receiving additional changes to their Received Accuracy to allow them to be more offensive and less dependent on cover to engage enemy squads effectively.

Removed in-cover defense bonus (0.9 RA) -- squad retains offensive bonus in cover
Reverted target size from 0.9 to 0.8
Lowered Veterancy 2 RA bonus from 0.76 to 0.78"

So...? Improved in everything but doesn't get a situational RA cover bonus

Their veterancy RA bonus has also been adjusted as starting RA improved.
Better moving accuracy, better bren reload, better pop to avoid low mp income with pop...care to EXPLAIN where is such "hurr durr muh nerf" ?

care to explain why 45 sec increased time for luchs, is such a bad move? 45 SEC 45 SEC will make you loose even more?

Their veterancy RA bonus has also been adjusted as starting RA improved.

Calculating RA stats for dummies:

"Moving accuracy modifier increased from 0.25 to 0.35
Vet 0 Received Accuracy reduced from 0.8 to 0.9
Scoped Enfields Vet 3 bonus removed (this causes Tommies to drop their Bren guns, even though enough models are alive)
Bren gun reload time decreased from 8-9 secs to 6.5 secs
Population cap reduced to 6 from 7 (Becomes 7 at 5-man)
Increased cone of fire from 1 to 5

+

Removed in-cover defense bonus (0.9 RA) -- squad retains offensive bonus in cover
Reverted target size from 0.9 to 0.8
Lowered Veterancy 2 RA bonus from 0.76 to 0.78"

=

Removed in-cover defense bonus (0.9 RA) -- squad retains offensive bonus in cover
Lowered Veterancy 2 RA bonus from 0.76 to 0.78"

"Moving accuracy modifier increased from 0.25 to 0.35
Scoped Enfields Vet 3 bonus removed (this causes Tommies to drop their Bren guns, even though enough models are alive)
Bren gun reload time decreased from 8-9 secs to 6.5 secs
Population cap reduced to 6 from 7 (Becomes 7 at 5-man)
Increased cone of fire from 1 to 5

Can you explain where you saw any RA buff in any of this? (Higher RA modifier = worse RA modifier).

0.9 RA gone from cover from Vet0 onwards is a big nerf. 0.9 RA is literally what stands in the way of turning Tommy (specialist) AI performance equal to Grenadier (generalist) AI performance; not counting cost difference, riflenades and fausts and stuff. The vet2 nerf is an additional 2.5% nerf on top of the Vet0 nerf (which affects Tommies for the entirety of the game).

PS: The offensive bonus in cover refers to the absence of 20% cooldown 40% reload penalty out of cover.

There are only 2 ways how to balance lights vehicles:

1. Decrease their shock value by making the come later, at the same time their counterparts hit the field, but make them useful through whole game (eg current Luchs nerf)

2. Decrease vehicle performance so its shock value doesnt hamper the balance so much. This change, however, results into useless late-game vehicles.

The Luchs is killing strategic diversity in the game because it makes certain builds impossible due to its oppressive timing.

To be clear, I am not against this statement, but there exist certain builds that force axis into rushing atg's, but for allies, the only one that does the same is infact the luchs rush.

This difference seems odd to me, and I rather wish I could fight lights as axis without sinking MP into a unit that does jack shit vs infantry.

To be clear, I am not against this statement, but there exist certain builds that force axis into rushing atg's, but for allies, the only one that does the same is infact the luchs rush.

This difference seems odd to me, and I rather wish I could fight lights as axis without sinking MP into a unit that does jack shit vs infantry.

like which unit?

flame car?

Calculating RA stats for dummies:



+



=



Can you explain where you saw any RA buff in any of this? (Higher RA modifier = worse RA modifier)

0.9 RA gone from cover from Vet0 onwards is a big nerf. 0.9 RA is literally what stands in the way of turning Tommy (specialist) AI performance equal to Grenadier (generalist) AI performance; not counting riflenades and fausts and stuff.

+1
woot!!!!! someone getting owned here.

There are only 2 ways how to balance lights vehicles:

1. Decrease their shock value by making the come later, at the same time their counterparts hit the field, but make them useful through whole game (eg current Luchs nerf)

2. Decrease vehicle performance so its shock value doesnt hamper the balance so much. This change, however, results into useless late-game vehicles.

welcome back hector

+1 for the comment, so true

like which unit?

flame car?

vs okw indeed, but vs ostheer the list gets expanded to m5, usf ht (forget which m-designation that one has) stuart, aec and ofc the t70.

EDIT: forgot to add, but the UC also does the same vs okw

vs okw indeed, but vs ostheer the list gets expanded to m5, usf ht (forget which m-designation that one has) stuart, aec and ofc the t70.

your right about the flame car, depend on the map, since small arms and mines can kill it tho.

but it never have the impact a luch does. but when i play okw sometimes i go an at gun just becouse of the flame car that is coming.

t70 come very late, u got already snares, mines, and a luchs which is a soft counter,

your right about the usf ht

aec - is a light veciule coutner, it does almost no dmg to infantry same thing with stuart,

and osther got snares, and mines which kills in 1 hit some of these.

your right about the flame car, depend on the map, since small arms and mines can kill it tho.

but it never have the impact a luch does. but when i play okw sometimes i go an at gun just becouse of the flame car that is coming.

t70 come very late, u got already snares, mines, and a luchs which is a soft counter,

your right about the usf ht

aec - is a light veciule coutner, it does almost no dmg to infantry same thing with stuart,

and osther got snares, and mines which kills in 1 hit some of these.

I'll clarify: vs okw, UC and flamecar generally forces a rak (as you always do) since other ways aren't reliable enough.

Vs ostheer, t70, aec, stuart etc are all enough to harrass infantry on the map and forcing retreats. You have soft counters (tellers) but those, again, aren't reliable enough.
Therefor, most ostheer players (myself included) go pak40 vs these threats.

The same is currently true for the luchs: you have soft counters, but you need an ATG to reliable stop the threat in time.

Impact of luchs is greater sure, but forcing 270-320 mp into a pure AT unit for axis cannot be underestimated.

I would rather see similair things happening to UC etc, so I don't have to rush ATG's as the axis factions either.

To be clear, I am not against this statement, but there exist certain builds that force axis into rushing atg's, but for allies, the only one that does the same is infact the luchs rush.

This difference seems odd to me, and I rather wish I could fight lights as axis without sinking MP into a unit that does jack shit vs infantry.

+1.

I understand the approach in regards to luchs rush, but still looks a bit ackward to me. The amount of time to deploy it seems a bit too much imo.

I'll clarify: vs okw, UC and flamecar generally forces a rak (as you always do) since other ways aren't reliable enough.

Vs ostheer, t70, aec, stuart etc are all enough to harrass infantry on the map and forcing retreats. You have soft counters (tellers) but those, again, aren't reliable enough.
Therefor, most ostheer players (myself included) go pak40 vs these threats.

The same is currently true for the luchs: you have soft counters, but you need an ATG to reliable stop the threat in time.

Impact of luchs is greater sure, but forcing 270-320 mp into a pure AT unit for axis cannot be underestimated.

I would rather see similair things happening to UC etc, so I don't have to rush ATG's as the axis factions either.

we share the same oppinion, about the flame car and the UC even if they have limited power.

but i dont see how u can balance those units.

if u make em less good, nobody will use em.

they have such a small windows where they can impact a game.

while luchs is always good.

other units come very much later, so it normal to have an at gun.

some wher players rush a p4, it is normal for me to get an at gun to counter it.

but being forced to get an at gun in the first 1-2 mins, and then u know it is gonna be "useless" for 5-10 mins, is another story.

+1.

I understand the approach in regards to luchs rush, but still looks a bit ackward to me. The amount of time to deploy it seems a bit too much imo.

it is 45 secs more. im an okw player, i love to use the luchs. but i dont see why people think that this will kill the luchs...

while sometimes when i rush a luchs against brits or soviets, i destroy em becouse of lacks of snare(brits) and lack of at(soviets) since in the actuel games soviet are forced to go t1

You should probably explain target size and RA to people, or at least use consistent descriptions then.

You describe RA changes and target size changes synonymously, which is confusing to those who don't spend hours in the attribute editor.

Thank god they are increasing the build time on the luches. I was totally fine with it having incredibly dangerous anti-infantry potential but it just came out way too soon. This change also makes it so mech HQ isn't hurt by a fuel increase to indirectly nerf the luches.

I want to help clear up a few misconceptions. People realize that Piats don't actually have the range normal anti-tank weapons have right? So a squad has to run out in the open in a vain attempt to hit a light vehicle. Additionally the Luches comes in a faction that has an incredibly oppressive early game. That's the reason why it's timing needs to change. If it was on say, Wermacht then it's current timing would be fine. Since OKW can shut you off your fuel near the very start of the game, then seal the deal with the luches, that needs to be changed.

I can agree that USF light vehicles force a response, just like luches forces a response. The difference is USF banks on the fact they win early, cuz if they don't they aren't going to win at all. OKW still has an amazing late game to fall back on compared to USF. The Luches also just ruins any sort of diversity in build orders for USF and UKF. There can be an argument that Wermacht is forced to respond to threats with little in the ways of build orders but that's a separate problem then the Luches build time.

Also, if we're being honest, all light vehicles are overpowered in the hands of a competent player.

You should probably explain target size and RA to people, or at least use consistent descriptions then.

You describe RA changes and target size changes synonymously, which is confusing to those who don't spend hours in the attribute editor.

or maybe these people should stop posting shit 24/7 when they dont know what they talk about? and start playing the game?

maybe they just start learning how to game work but not asking buffs or nerfs all the time becouse they loose some game?