My thoughts about DBP and going forward

Hooligan and Bloodnok, this is not a resignation, so don't take it as such. However if you feel their is a site rule I've broken from this post feel free to discipline me. Show Spoiler

Backstory: if you like

I've been on this site for a full year now as a member, and I've come a long way from my first replay review of aerafield's gameplay to strategist to referee. I've played CoH2 an additional year ontop of being a member here, so 2 years. My friend introduced me to CoH2 after persuading me to buy it, and unlike coh1 which I played a bit of, I fell in love with this game immediatly.

I learned the basics from my friend and coh1 experience, and I learned further mechanics from the GeneralsGentlemen shoutcasts. TheMachine was extremely helpful in learning counters and gameknowledge and through his advice and my drive to push myself further up the 1v1 ladder. Eventually I found Tightrope's videos as well as HelpingHans tips of the week, and with all of the information at my disposal I climbed the 1v1 ladder ranks only limited because of my experience and skill.

Eventually TheMachine taught me how to use the mod tools to look up information myself, things like armor, HP, percentage to penetrate, rate of fire, etc. Armed with statistical knowledge of how engagements should go I climbed even higher up the ladder while I took favorable engagements and retreated from ones I knew I'd lose. Eventually reaching top 100 where I am today, with as minimal cheese as I can use (most of the time).

My justifications

Every once in awhile I'll jump into shoutbox, with the rare exception of making an actual thread about balance, and complain about X mechanic/unit that is horrid to deal with or too unpredictable that it doesn't create diversity or fun, just frustration. I've done this with "Main gun crit", OKW's lack of smoke (now fixed), T34/76s at 80 fuel post June 2016 buff, maxim spam (pre March 2017 nerf), JT/ele (post DBP), and many others. Sometimes people understand my frustration, sometimes they don't, but what matters is if the mod team understands them. 3 people, for the most part.

What I don't understand

What I don't understand is how even when I put solutions that are very ethical, simple, and create balance into modders hands, they're simply ignored. And I mean basic things to fix like OKW vet 5. Take vet 5, and make the XP required to get it equal to that of vet 3 of other factions, and balance the stats accordingly and evenly distributed. I just fixed vet 5 in 1 sentence. From my understanding relic doesn't want to remove the "fancy" 5 stars OKW gets. That's fine, since with this idea OKW still gets its fancy vet 5 cosmetic stars, yet its balanced. Instead most of the vet 5 bonuses have been nerfed, but still require the same XP as before.

Compare the JP4 to the SU85. The SU85 is 130(?) fuel where the JP4 is 135. The SU85 has 220 max range pen, while the JP4 sits at 170. The SU85 has a 5.4sec reload, while the JP4 has a min of 4.3 and max of 5.2. 85 has better scatter, and can spot for itself if needed. JP4 now has a reveal range in cloak of 20, which is over half of the standard infantry sight range, and the vet 2 and 5 bonuses were nerfed. Most noteably vet 5 instead of +150% damage on first strike from cloak, now deals +25%. So instead of a 400 damage round, it now deals a 200 damage round. This wouldn't be that big of an issue to me, if there was an actual value in having that additional 40 damage, but there is not a single piece of armor in this game that has 680 HP and would die in 4 shots instead of 5. I didn't do that math for larger HP entities like the churchill or KV variants. Meaning that although vet 5 is fancy, that extra damage actually doesn't do shit. And now for the biggest offender of the SU85 comparison to the JP4. Vet requirements for vet 3 on SU85 is 7160 xp. JP4 is 14298. Nearly double what it takes to get vet 3 on the 85, and its amazing veterancy doesn't do a damn thing.

People seem to think because 5 > 3 that all OKW things are just significantly better because vet. While I think there are some units that are, some are far from it. For example the LeFH compared between Ostheer and OKW. They gain the exact same vet bonuses, except the ostheer one has significantly lower xp requirements for its peak potential. However because of the scatter values, technically the OKW one is still better when fully maxed.

When I told miragefla how the maxim felt post march 2017 nerf but pre GCS patch, I told him "it felt like a shitier 50 cal". But it was not changed for the patch, and the justification was they didn't receive enough feedback IIRC. I understand I'm just 1 person, but was I wrong about it? Same arc, weaker suppression, slower setup time. Sounds like a shitier 50 cal.

The pershing fell from meta after the stuart nerf, because USF needed a faster solution to the luchs. The m10 was never very far from the meta anyways, became the dominant force post GCS patch simply because of the luchs and its ability to seal the game against any threat against lategame OKW. Command panther callin? No problem, 3 m10s at the same price and no chance for the panther to deal 12 hits before the m10s could deal 5. KT? same deal. Although higher armor and more damage, its slow speed was its downfall against the m10s since it could be circled and killed. I've even had games where I backed my KT against a building to force front pens, and still couldn't deal with 4 m10s frontally. Now that the KTs scatter has been nerfed, it is significantly less lethal vs infantry. I think it was justified since clump wiping lategame squads isn't exactly fair, but then guess what came back to the meta? That's right, the pershing. Similar scatter and AoE to the prenerf KT and -50% reload at vet 3. Talk about deleting squads. Yet somehow avoided nerfs aside from double tap being fixed for most vehicles (Yes I still know of a few which can). There is very limited answers from OKW to deal with a pershing and a good player. The pershing, given stats hold and you arn't dealt horrid RNG, WILL out trade a panther at max range. The JP4, 56.6% chance to pen at max range, and if you get flanked or caught out you lose that JP4. KT can potentially answer, but costs more and is less effective vs infantry. Lastly, guess what just received a nice role change. The jackson, now takes 3 KT shots or 4 standard AT shells to kill, is highly mobile, and can easily kite a KT.

What I want

I just want balance and for the player who exerts the most skill and strategical thinking to be the victor of a match. I want EVERY faction to be viable with STOCK tools that allow them to deal with ANY issue. Most noteably, only 2/5 factions have non doctrinal flamers. And probably most importantly, I want the mod team to actually listen to the community, or at the very least, justify the changes when they're done if they're asked. I understand that they do this with most of the things they do. For example, most people could see conscripts could use a buff, so they buffed them and no one really contested that. What I contest is a strong mainline infantry, which has oorah, a snare, flame grenade, trip flare, merge, and 6 men. Although I want cons to be good, they need to sacrifice something more than 4 damage per shot.

I don't want to call out specific people, but it isn't hard to see bias. And I know since I've talked with 2/3 memebers on the mod team which factions they like and how they justify x,y and z. Please also note that I'm not saying this patch was biased, since I think 80% of it were just and thoughtful changes. Especially the QoL changes that were just 100% helpful. Noteably the cloaking changes; when revealed units move at normal speed instead of adding the extra micro to disable cloak. However some changes looked 100% loaded. Noteably the luchs change. One could argue they waited till the "final patch notes" 2.0 to throw an additional 45 seconds to the build time so outside members could not contest it as much. Although this was changed down to 75 seconds (-10) for the final notes, you can see how that change looks loaded. Other changes like I mentioned above, pershing unnerfed while KT was nerfed, JP4 wasn't compensated for vet nerfs, etc.

I want to support my fellow staff members and the mod team to help construct a better game, but if I (a decent player with "solid" knowledge of unit stats comparable by only a few) needs to point these things out to a team which is leading our game at this point, I don't know if I want those people leading, at least not without additional help. I understand its in their free time, and I want to believe they're trying to maintain non-bias as best as they possibly can, and guilty I'm not without any bias either, but I feel bias potentially crushed this game this patch. Part of the reason was it was targeted at teamgames, and that gamemode is just an indirect clusterfuck anyways. Even after testing the new JT/ele, and I'll admit they're nerfed and toned down a good damn margin in those big game matches, the mode still turns into that indirect clusterfuck of "will I survive the 4th rocket barrage without losing a squad". Which is why I think it was a mistake to target teamgames as the main gamemode change. Unfortunatly 1v1s are practically dead.

At the very least, CoH3 2020, and this time not take 2nd largest RTS behind Starcraft, but largest RTS.

Sorry for the wall of text and I'm sorry if I offend anyone, perticularly the mod team. You all have done phenominal things for this game when relic nearly kicked the bucket, but I just want the best for a game I've enjoyed even for a brief time.

I just want balance and for the player who exerts the most skill and strategical thinking to be the victor of a match.

Heresy.

Kappa.

Agreed with everything said. It's frustrating when you have to put in twice the work to achieve the same success your counterpart gets by default.

Imo it is difficult to prove faction bias so I am reluctant to ever make that claim and to be perfectly honest I don't see any real evidence of such claims in latest patch.

That being said, some of the modders can fixate on certain issues, such as Frp and house hopping and just be blinded by personnel opinion and just go completely overboard with a "This must be fixed at any cost mentality".

The house enter/exit changes are an absolute mess and a good example of leaving well enough alone. In all the thousand of hours I have played, this has never been an issue that I have ever considered anything more than mildly irritating. The fix that has been implemented really detracts from the game because it interferes with unit control and really removes some of the fluidity from the game. A number of times now I have notice mgs setting up after exiting houses because there are opposing units close to it and because I can't get control of the unit quickly enough. Also lets not forget all the bugs surrounding entering houses. A much simple fix would have been flamethrowers, and/or flame nades for each faction. If asymmetrical balance is required and that is becoming a giant stretch since there are numerous mechanics/abilities shared by all factions, then maybe adjust house bonus or change the bonus, or adjust damage vs houses. Anything except the current changes.

As to your views on the luchs nerf, well I think your showing your bias here. Most people are strongly of the opinion that something need to be done. The fact that m10's were the go to callin for usf further strengthens that view. All your posts about the luchs, that i read all focus on soft counters that often were ineffective on some maps. Almost never did you concede anything or suggest any real effective change that could allow for other metas to be effective.

The issue of the luchs aside, i do agree that the (some)mods are at times a club to themselves and can often disregard many community opinions simply because they are deemed unqualified and irrelevant to mod way of thinking. This is not just my perspective since there are many on this site that mods simply refuse to acknowledge or interact with, a fact that has be noted by those concerned. Unfortunately this has simply led to further elitism and increase hostility towards some mod members.

Unfortunately I doubt much will change.

The difficulty for the balance team is that it is impossible to properly balance and fix the various issues because the faction design is so flawed. (A lot of it stemming from non-linear teching)

A good example is the recent changes to timing of OKW vehicles. Previously the Panzer 2 and Flak Half Track arrived too early, so in order to balance them, they now have a huge build time. The Panzer 2 takes 75 seconds to build, which is 20 seconds longer than a Panzer 4. It is such a contrived change to have light vehicles with a significantly longer build time than a Medium Tank. Having such a weird change being neccesary to balance the timing of it shows just how flawed OKW's design is, but short of fully reworking OKW teching, simple & intuitive balance changes are not enough.

The same issues with Penals, where they have to basically be OP in order for them to ever be useful over Conscripts because then the player is denying themselves of HMG's, Mortars and AT guns. The only way Penals could have worked is removing non linear teching and shifting around tier 1 & Tier 2 units, or if Penals were made into Elite Infantry from the Tier 3, which makes no sense given the nature of the squad, so instead Penals could be exchanged for Shocks or Guards which are then Tier 3 elite infantry.

These are huge changes that would never get approved, how else is it possible to properly balance Penals without making them gimicky/cheesy or never used? It's basically impossible to balance Company of Heroes 2 without fully reworking stuff, which will be very divisive and too much for the Relic Scope Police. In a sense, balance patches are destined to fall short given the limitations of what they can do and the extent of which Coh2's poor faction design ruins the ability for minor balance changes to be a viable fix to things.

As Shadowlink pointed out, the biggest problems with Coh2 are so underlying and not merely balance, such as cover clumping frequently resulting in RNG wipes, Abandon/Main gun Crits, vet5 being a mess, some factions lacking access to core tools and mechanics such as flamers, mortars, some factions having forward bases etc.

However, it's certainly the case that Company of Heroes 2 continues to get better, more balanced and enjoyable every patch, so I certainly appreciate all the time and effort that has gone into it and it is giving the game more and more longevity.

As to your views on the luchs nerf, well I think your showing your bias here. Most people are strongly of the opinion that something need to be done. The fact that m10's were the go to callin for usf further strengthens that view. All your posts about the luchs, that i read all focus on soft counters that often were ineffective on some maps. Almost never did you concede anything or suggest any real effective change that could allow for other metas to be effective.

Thanks for analysis, and I do agree the luchs needed some kind of nerf. It was just so poorly implemented. With other things nerfing it like the handheld AT bug being fixed, or conscripts becoming meta, I don't think a now +35 second build time was justified. At least when there are so many other options that could have been implemented like an actual snare mine or nerfing the base stats to be regained with veterancy. It looks like what I stated above, either intentionally held till version 2.0 or just a panic implementation becaause they knew the luchs was still going to dominate.

Speaking for 3vs3 and 4vs4 game format only.

I'm sad for you, but I disagree completely.

All games were always the same with OkW using all the same units over and over.

Without this patch neither me or any of my friends would have return to the game.

Now The game feel new and balanced and we now must all adapt.

The good players will still be on top regardless of faction they play and the casual like me will at least have some fun.

Think this game as a new one and play without looking back. I'm sure you will return to success.

I've have watched 10 high ranked matches post patch with Axis winning half of them. yep it feel a bit harder then usual for the Axis and it's fine cause before the patch they would have would 75% of the matches.

If after some time, If the metrics show that the Axis are in the hole too much, well some adjustments will have to be made to rectify it. And so on.

Those changes were needed.

The mod team did a tremendous job and i think them for that.
Don't let comments like that touch you. The great majority of players are with you.

What i would like this game to have is 2 simple things :

1) In game automatic voice communications with options to mute teammates like all modern game have.

2) Automatic Drop penalty for the first player who drop on one side.( first who drop for Axis and first who drop for Allies) 3 minutes delay in automatching for first offence, 7 min for the second and 15 min for the third. All reset after an hour without dropping. (for automatches only).

Other players who quit after the first one don't have a penalty. (just surrender that's the way to do it)

Dropping (technical failure or intentional dropping) kill the game.

Thanks for analysis, and I do agree the luchs needed some kind of nerf. It was just so poorly implemented. With other things nerfing it like the handheld AT bug being fixed, or conscripts becoming meta, I don't think a now +35 second build time was justified. At least when there are so many other options that could have been implemented like an actual snare mine or nerfing the base stats to be regained with veterancy. It looks like what I stated above, either intentionally held till version 2.0 or just a panic implementation becaause they knew the luchs was still going to dominate.

The luchs itself was never the problem, although the fact that it was built almost every game suggests it was certainly a key part of a strong okw meta. The problem was getting counters on the field in a timely manner. The fact was okw could harass allied cutoffs and fuel points to easily and simply deny resources thus resulting in the luch being able to cruise around with little to fear. Note my views largely relate to usf and what I witness on pro player streams.

The solution unfortunately was going to be extremely difficult to determine because there are 3 allied factions with each faction handling the luchs with different degrees of success and with different methods.Personally i think usf is by far the most disadvantaged due to lack of mines which also adds to the problem.

In the end there were to many things to consider, especially given all the other changes and thus an inelegant fix (but safe) was implemented. Why it was left so late to test is quite strange given that it was certainly a priority for the patch.

Over-all I agree with OP, the patch is a move in the right direction, but it really feels like half a patch. Axis vehicles have been reduced in strenght, and rightfully so, because they were so dominant in late game. Support weapons have been adjusted to better fit their roles (LeiG smoke, etc.). Volks were nerfed since they scaled so well into late game vs. elite infantry.

And Rifles/Tommies with double upgrades were... not changed at all.

People seem to think because 5 > 3 that all OKW things are just significantly better because vet. While I think there are some units that are, some are far from it.

This is a huge problem and it's really evident in the DBP. I'm currently doing some testing, but from what I can tell, volks are almost worthless right now in nearly every single situation, and it seems to be mostly because of over-nerfing due to the perceived "5>3".

Right now, in neutral cover, if vet 3 cons w/ PPSH's attack vet 5 volks, and close in from maximum range, the cons will win with 4 models left. Meanwhile, if Vet 5 volks w/ MP40's attack vet 3 cons and move from max range, it's almost always a tie (1 model left with almost zero hp). It doesn't make sense for there to be this much difference between the two (almost identical) units, especially with volks requiring tons more xp to hit max vet.

This general trend applies to a bunch more units too, like you said with the JP4.

The difficulty for the balance team is that it is impossible to properly balance and fix the various issues because the faction design is so flawed. (A lot of it stemming from non-linear teching)

While challenging, the balance team missed many changes that were/are needed to fully fix many of the 'meta' strategies (at least in 2v2). Double bar and double M1919 are still very dominant compared to any mainline axis infantry in every combat situation, especially with vet. The same can be said for tommies with double brens. Despite this, no changes were made to rifle's combat power or tommies (except for cover bonus nerfs and a moving accuracy nerf), and as a result both these units continue to massively outperform grens, and now even volks thanks to a nerf, requiring the cheese/rush meta of things like the luchs and flaktHT.

These are huge changes that would never get approved, how else is it possible to properly balance Penals without making them gimicky/cheesy or never used?

Personally, I would just give the penals an 'upgrade' kit. At T1/T2, the penals would be re-balanced to perform similar to grens/volks; less HP, less damage at range, etc. At T3 or 4, an upgrade would become available (45 muni?) that would upgrade the squad to its current stats.

This would result in penals being balanced in the early game, and meaning that a wiped penal squad would actually be costly in the late game, rather than only a slight annoyance. Right now the vet 0 penal stats allow for them to tie/win against vet 5 volks and mid/close, which is quite problematic in late game. It's a pretty 'obvious patch' type fix, but I think it would work.

Speaking for 3vs3 and 4vs4 game format only.

I'm sad for you, but I disagree completely.

All games were always the same with OkW using all the same units over and over.

This problem wasn't just OKW though, every factions falls back to incredibly repetitive builds in most games. USF will always double-bar rifles in the late game, supported by jacksons. Soviets will always go Penals supported by T34's/SU85s depending on enemy vehicle composition. Brits will always go double-bren tommies supported by fireflys/commets.

OKW build p2 every game it's OP
USF build Stewart every game it's fine
SU build T70 every game it's fine
UKF builds AEC every game it's fine

Kubel inflicts early MP bleed Nerf it
M3 inflicts early MP bleed it's fine
UC inflicts early MP bleed it's fine

OST has no bulletproof light armor to kite and harass infantry and mostly punish enemys for not building AT. The .222 is trash at killing snipers. And gets countered by the very units it's made to counter.

OST is forced tier 2 every game for AT, no other army is forced a tier like so.

My point of this is I see a lot of OK's for the same unit types that are NOT OK for different armies.

You can say "well allies are superior early game as to where axis are late game"

Givin the recent tournaments, you can tell that claim is false now.

I think that 2v2s are now in a deeper hole to satisfy the 4v4 people, and like everyone else I appreciate the effort and time the mod team puts in, I just think some changes are ridicules and unwanted.

Panzwerwerfer is trash hit and miss
Stuka is now trash without LOS and it's the definition of hit and miss.

TLDR it's okay for some and not okay for others is bs. Quick complaint about axis mobile artillery

OKW build p2 every game it's OP
USF build Stewart every game it's fine
SU build T70 every game it's fine
UKF builds AEC every game it's fine

Kubel inflicts early MP bleed Nerf it
M3 inflicts early MP bleed it's fine
UC inflicts early MP bleed it's fine

OST has no bulletproof light armor to kite and harass infantry and mostly punish enemys for not building AT. The .222 is trash at killing snipers. And gets countered by the very units it's made to counter.

OST is forced tier 2 every game for AT, no other army is forced a tier like so.

My point of this is I see a lot of OK's for the same unit types that are NOT OK for different armies.

You can say "well allies are superior early game as to where axis are late game"

Givin the recent tournaments, you can tell that claim is false now.

I think that 2v2s are now in a deeper hole to satisfy the 4v4 people, and like everyone else I appreciate the effort and time the mod team puts in, I just think some changes are ridicules and unwanted.

Panzwerwerfer is trash hit and miss
Stuka is now trash without LOS and it's the definition of hit and miss.

TLDR it's okay for some and not okay for others is bs. Quick complaint about axis mobile artillery

Are you drunk. Your entire post is disjointed, rambling and of little relevance to the thread.

Have a lie down and try again later maybe.

Agreed 100%

Jp4 need a pen buff

Cons 20mp per model is bs now...22-4 would be much more balanced

Show Spoiler

I think you should align your expectations with what is possible to achieve. Of course Relic isn't going to allow any modding team to completely rework the game. There is a need to a certain continuity with what is in place and how to balance it. And I don't really understand what you said about the M10, the unit is now tied to tier3, USF doesn't have anymore an emergency tank at disposal.

Show Spoiler

I think you should align your expectations with what is possible to achieve. Of course Relic isn't going to allow any modding team to completely rework the game. There is a need to a certain continuity with what is in place and how to balance it. And I don't really understand what you said about the M10, the unit is now tied to tier3, USF doesn't have anymore an emergency tank at disposal.

Yeah that's bs i'm sorry to say that..

The game is old so the balance team can't fix lackluster jp4 penetration/insane vet xp requirements. But has time/resource to
-completely rework infantry balance (including elites)
-completely rework doctrines...even adding new/singleplayer abilities
-buff doctrinal vehicles/units
-rework other doctrinal abilities outside said doctrines (ex htdirt)
-rework emplacements after MONTHS of balance addressed those before
-....

but couldn't simply copypaste an higher penetration value to the newly all around nerfed jadgpanzer 4 (which was only good because cloak and armor, and both have been nerfed, now it's just overall a worse su85 with lower mobility, pen...) ?
I don't buy it

Now zooks three shot luchs properly and there are tons of soft counters to luchs.
The luchs change was driven by the sentiment towards previous meta and nothing more.
Not that i care, now that flak ht and mg's are decent...but don't write on notes that the objective is to increase diversity if you are killing a tier like that, and don't add such change at the last moment like a snake just because you already know it's bs...it's pathetic.

When I told miragefla how the maxim felt post march 2017 nerf but pre GCS patch, I told him "it felt like a shitier 50 cal". But it was not changed for the patch, and the justification was they didn't receive enough feedback IIRC. I understand I'm just 1 person, but was I wrong about it? Same arc, weaker suppression, slower setup time. Sounds like a shitier 50 cal.

While I can't, nor want to reply to everything you said, as the resident maxim/hmg "enthusiast", I will tell you about this part of coh2's balance history.

Prior to GCS, maxims were broken OP, to the point several top players were practicing maxim based strategies for the tourney. It was thus including in the scope of the GCS patch, and I was asked for input, based on my history with the unit.

However, I was the only player to help in this regard, and my ability to spam maxims is only equal to my inability to incorporate them in a normal build: In English, I could help with fixing the spam, but not with fixing the maxim as the support unit it was supposed to be.

Thus, we managed to "balance" the spam but due to the maxim's nature (6 man, fast retreat etc) the unit itself was broken in its support weapon role. However, the limited goal of preventing maximspam from dominating the tourney was achieved, which in a small way, was a victory (this is my personal opinion and mine alone).

Currently, the maxim is yet again buffed, and yet again it's possible to spam it to victory.
It is my personal belief that you cannot have a balanced maxim support weapon without an overpowered spam unless you significantly overhaul the maxim.

Because I am not without ego, and like to offer some proof to my claims, here is a replay of me using maxims in the current patch:

•  
  

  0

  VS

  [L2P]BartonPL

  Zarok

  Maxims vs barton

  by: zarok47 map: Unknown

  1

  -

The gist of all this, is that you don't know everything that goes on into creating the balance patch: From relic scope, to player input to human error, there are factors at play which makes things more complicated than they appear.

As a final aside, the .50 call is the second best HMG in the game, so calling the maxim a "Shittier" .50 call is not stating anything.

And Rifles/Tommies with double upgrades were... not changed at all.

Brens were buffed, because "reasons"

If over 90% of players in PvP multiplayer at any one moment are playing team games, why would you continue to balance around 1v1?

We are heading to the 5th year anniversary and the 1v1 e-sports coh2 dreams are long dead. Why balance the game around that mode when almost the entirity of those still playing are in team games?

What i would like this game to have is 2 simple things :

1) In game automatic voice communications with options to mute teammates like all modern game have.

2) Automatic Drop penalty for the first player who drop on one side.( first who drop for Axis and first who drop for Allies) 3 minutes delay in automatching for first offence, 7 min for the second and 15 min for the third. All reset after an hour without dropping. (for automatches only).

Other players who quit after the first one don't have a penalty. (just surrender that's the way to do it)

Dropping (technical failure or intentional dropping) kill the game.

+1

I would also add a in game page with all units statistics, and vet bonuses. It's kinda stupid that player doesn't really know what buffs unit gets with vet etc. It's important to show possible new players how the game works

What I don't understand is how even when I put solutions that are very ethical, simple, and create balance into modders hands, they're simply ignored. And I mean basic things to fix like OKW vet 5. Take vet 5, and make the XP required to get it equal to that of vet 3 of other factions, and balance the stats accordingly and evenly distributed.

I just fixed vet 5 in 1 sentence. From my understanding relic doesn't want to remove the "fancy" 5 stars OKW gets. That's fine, since with this idea OKW still gets its fancy vet 5 cosmetic stars, yet its balanced. Instead most of the vet 5 bonuses have been nerfed, but still require the same XP as before.

People seem to think because 5 > 3 that all OKW things are just significantly better because vet. While I think there are some units that are, some are far from it. For example the LeFH compared between Ostheer and OKW. They gain the exact same vet bonuses, except the ostheer one has significantly lower xp requirements for its peak potential. However because of the scatter values, technically the OKW one is still better when fully maxed.

That's not so simple. When it comes to OKW veterancy, for the most part their Vet1-Vet3 bonuses are mostly identical to other faction Vet1-Vet3 bonuses.

However, at a closer glance, OKW gets their bonuses faster than other factions, due to OKW Vet1 not being a useless ability or something that could trivially belong to Vet0 (e.g., Riflemen AT nades could easily belong to Vet0). Volks get RA bonuses at Vet1 on top of being very strong at Vet0, and on top of getting their cooldown bonuses earlier at Vet2.

If you have OKW getting their passive combat bonuses much earlier than allied squads, just because Vet4 and Vet5 also need some screen time, then that's unmitigated disaster waiting to happen.

Sure, ideally we should have moved the Vet5 niche bonus (e.g., sight bonus) to Vet2 like we did in the revamp mod and go from there. However, the effort for this patch began at summer, and we don't have the energy anymore to argue with Relic on every single minute change. Thus, we pick the fights that are worth fighting for.

Compare the JP4 to the SU85. The SU85 is 130(?) fuel where the JP4 is 135. The SU85 has 220 max range pen, while the JP4 sits at 170. The SU85 has a 5.4sec reload, while the JP4 has a min of 4.3 and max of 5.2. 85 has better scatter, and can spot for itself if needed. JP4 now has a reveal range in cloak of 20, which is over half of the standard infantry sight range, and the vet 2 and 5 bonuses were nerfed. Most noteably vet 5 instead of +150% damage on first strike from cloak, now deals +25%. So instead of a 400 damage round, it now deals a 200 damage round. This wouldn't be that big of an issue to me, if there was an actual value in having that additional 40 damage, but there is not a single piece of armor in this game that has 680 HP and would die instead of 4 shots instead of 5. I didn't do that math for larger HP entities like the churchill or KV variants. Meaning that although vet 5 is fancy, that extra damage actually doesn't do shit. And now for the biggest offender of the SU85 comparison to the JP4. Vet requirements for vet 3 on SU85 is 7160 xp. JP4 is 14298. Nearly double what it takes to get vet 3 on the 85, and its amazing veterancy doesn't do a damn thing.

JP4 also gains extra accuracy and pen with that round, and it's still damn beefy at Vet2.

When I told miragefla how the maxim felt post march 2017 nerf but pre GCS patch, I told him "it felt like a shitier 50 cal". But it was not changed for the patch, and the justification was they didn't receive enough feedback IIRC. I understand I'm just 1 person, but was I wrong about it? Same arc, weaker suppression, slower setup time. Sounds like a shitier 50 cal.

We also received feedback from multiple top players that were abusing Maxims alongside us. They could all swear that even a 10% increase in suppression would keep maxim spam in-game due to glorious OKW teching design.

To be completely fair however, we didn't specify that they weren't allowed to use maxim bulletins in their testing, and we only had 2 weeks to find a solution. So, I'm not accusing them in anyway.

It's easy to sit back and criticise the people that tried to help playtest maxim spam back then. However, those guys busted their balls going through tenths of mod sub-versions when most people couldn't even be bothered to lift a finger to help us.

The pershing fell from meta after the stuart nerf, because USF needed a faster solution to the luchs. The m10 was never very far from the meta anyways, became the dominant force post GCS patch simply because of the luchs and its ability to seal the game against any threat against lategame OKW. Command panther callin? No problem, 3 m10s at the same price and no chance for the panther to deal 12 hits before the m10s could deal 5. KT? same deal. Although higher armor and more damage, its slow speed was its downfall against the m10s since it could be circled and killed. I've even had games where I backed my KT against a building to force front pens, and still couldn't deal with 4 m10s frontally. Now that the KTs scatter has been nerfed, it is significantly less lethal vs infantry. I think it was justified since clump wiping lategame squads isn't exactly fair, but then guess what came back to the meta? That's right, the pershing. Similar scatter and AoE to the prenerf KT and -50% reload at vet 3. Talk about deleting squads. Yet somehow avoided nerfs aside from double tap being fixed for most vehicles (Yes I still know of a few which can). There is very limited answers from OKW to deal with a pershing and a good player. The pershing, given stats hold and you arn't dealt horrid RNG, WILL out trade a panther at max range. The JP4, 56.6% chance to pen at max range, and if you get flanked or caught out you lose that JP4. KT can potentially answer, but costs more and is less effective vs infantry. Lastly, guess what just received a nice role change. The jackson, now can withstand 3 KT shots or 4 standard AT shells and highly mobile, can easily kite a KT.

Ideally the Pershing shouldn't benefit from the 0.75 moving accuracy it gets, and it should cost a decent amount of popcap. At the very least now it actually yields experience to the enemy player when it gets shot at.

I don't know of any vehicles/units that still doubletap. Let us know if you find any.

Pershing, like Command Panther also need to be completely tier-locked.

I don't want to call out specific people, but it isn't hard to see bias. And I know since I've talked with 2/3 memebers on the mod team which factions they like and how they justify x,y and z. Please also note that I'm not saying this patch was biased, since I think 80% of it were just and thoughtful changes. Especially the QoL changes that were just 100% helpful. Noteably the cloaking changes; when revealed units move at normal speed instead of adding the extra micro to disable cloak. However some changes looked 100% loaded. Noteably the luchs change. One could argue they waited till the "final patch notes" 2.0 to throw an additional 45 seconds to the build time so outside members could not contest it as much. Although this was changed down to 75 seconds (-10) for the final notes, you can see how that change looks loaded. Other changes like I mentioned above, pershing unnerfed while KT was nerfed, JP4 wasn't compensated for vet nerfs, etc.

That's a complaint you need to take to the scope police.

JP4 also gains extra accuracy and pen with that round, and it's still damn beefy at Vet2.

What ? Vet 5 penetration buff comes terribly late and only applies to first shot, while the gthing bounces to anything more armored than a medium/easy8

Su85 is faster, has vet 0 high penetration, low vet xp requirement, is cheaper, comes in a tier that comes faster...the only supposed advantage is an armor that may or may not bounce generalists shot now.
Where's the balance in that ?

Ps: OF COURSE...the SCOPE...if jadgpanzer 4 nerfs aren't compensated is because scope.
I'm sure that if after all the approved changes to jadgpanzer 4, if after all this "balance" and "normalization" of vet and such, if changelog listed:
-jadgpanzer4 penetration increased in line with other tier 4 TD's
-jadgpanzer4 rotation rate from 20 to 22 in line with other unturretted TD's
Relic would have SURELY got MAD

That's ridicolous...what was the scope for DBP ? Why jadgpanzer 4 nerfs are in scope and buffs aren't ?

Always the same meme of bad relic and bad scope...