Login

russian armor

Balance 2018 2vs2

PAGES (9)down
9 Apr 2018, 17:51 PM
#61
avatar of d0ggY
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 823 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Apr 2018, 15:53 PMSully
My thoughts on 2v2 balance since the latest patch:

USF
  • Jackson is over-performing, especially coupled with popcap manipulation allowing them to be spammed.
  • Indirect fire options are very strong compared to OKW, Ost can keep up for the most part.
  • Infantry is in a good spot.


Brits
  • Double bren Tommies are overperforming, they should be limited to one LMG.
  • Indirect fire options are lacking now that the mortar pit has been nerfed into the ground.
  • Lack of vehicle snare can be really painful.
  • Firefly feels very balanced compared to the Jackson.


Soviets
  • All openers (Cons/T1/T2) are very strong. Sniper being OP on most maps.
  • Katyusha is way too effective at long range. It can safely get wipes and vets up very quickly.
  • SU76 is over-performing. Its range/pen need to go down, and the barrage needs to cost munitions.
  • SU85 is a monster with vet, possibly over-performing.
  • PPSH cons are too cost-effective, leaving Shocks with no place in the game.
  • Guards are back to being the jack of all trades elite inf. The buff to PTRS damage vs infantry was completely unnecessary.


Ost
  • Mortar is over-performing, especially vs Brits early game.
  • Grens are incredibly fragile mid/late game; I'd love to see a 5th man either via vet like REs or via upgrade like Brits.
  • 222 is a joke unit that really needs some love vs snipers especially.
  • Panther is in an awkward spot. Is it a TD, or is it a brawler? Pick one and give it the same treatment that its allied counterparts get.


OKW
  • Good aggressive early game.
  • Vet system needs an overhaul, right now it's inconsistent and often detrimental. Make vet levels 1-3 equal in strength and attainability to other factions and levels 4 & 5 unlock abilities across the board.
  • Popcap numbers need to be brought down on a lot of units now that they're not nearly as strong; vehicles mostly.
  • Struggles vs both maxim and sniper openers from Soviets.
  • Same Panther issues as Ost.



Thanks for saving me a lot of work to write it down like that.

Also i would say the Rate of fire the centaur shoots might be a bit too fast :S

9 Apr 2018, 18:11 PM
#62
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Apr 2018, 15:53 PMSully
snip


I agree with everything Sully says. The only thing that aggravates me at the moment is playing against Soviets. I find that when players make multiple units from Sully's list, their OPness almost compounds. Guards with snipers and SU76 support is just too good at fighting off everything with minimal skill required by user (just a-move all your units...)
9 Apr 2018, 18:30 PM
#63
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21

I find it very unfortunate that this site is not updated anymore

http://coh2chart.com/

from there it was pretty easy to get an overall impression of the dominant factions in every game mode and skill bracket.

"Unfortunately, Relic hasn't been able to update their database since 16.5.2017."

Considering this data hasn't been updated in almost a year and we've had at least 3 decently sized patches in between that time I wouldn't consider this reliable in determining what the balance is like in 2v2 atm. It would be better to compare what tools were most effective during that time and today.

In all honesty though I find in 2v2 whoever can tech up to t3/t4 vehicles faster and camp the VPS well, while also continually forcing your opponent to fall back and have mp bleed will be in an advantageous state. It all comes down to area lockdown and strategically outpacing your opponent. I find with allies it is determined either by camping VPS early and hold both sides or one large side of the map, and with axis, being able to bleed allies faster with indirect fire and elite/vet units without getting suppressed or bled in return. I agree with Cruzz that certain maps are more effective for axis in the long run, but I wouldn't say it's impossible or highly unlikely for allies to win on those maps. It all comes down to the major engagements mid-game and the ability to bleed your opponents mp/resources/vehicles/and VPS. At the lategame stage it really comes down to how well you use your armor and arty to counter your opponents exact arsenal while also retaining more inf. If you lose the first major vehicle engagement more often then not, you lose the game, unless you throw your advantage to well positioned AT afterwards. I find with allies it's more so they win if they can overwhelm axis effectively mid-game(unless they allow axis to recover in lategame). With Axis it's more so can they keep their armor alive and prepare for the effective dive rush killing allied armor in a decisive engagement after arty and inf has damaged their defenses.

In conclusion I find it is a little easier to come back with Axis than Allies as Axis vehicles have better AT capability as long as they're not picked off 1 by 1 but push in a combined push(stugs/jp4/p4s/jadgtiger), and axis arty can decimate allied at-guns more effective in 1 salvo(as opposed to raketens which can sometimes escape if retreated in time) pak guns also can get away if arty misses during 1st salvo.

As a side note IL-2 and P47 seem to be slightly more effective than JU-87. Especially since ostwinds have a hard time shooting down p47/il2 while flak hf can shoot down il-2 but not P47 if it targets the flak(unless it's vet 3 or above). So I feel IL-2 may need either a suppression or dmg nerf. While P47 may need debate on what should be changed.
9 Apr 2018, 19:00 PM
#64
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

5Th man USF rifle needs a buff to not die within the first 3 seconds of combat and reduce the overall dps .

:snfQuinn::snfQuinn:


I wouldn't be surprised if there is some super deep bug in which all the damage gets absorbed into one model for rifles. It would explain why the first model drops so fast while the other 4 are capable of soaking up damage. Plus Ive had rifles in which should definetly not have a dropped model if the damage was spread out more evenly.

Also the reason I bring up other games is b/c I feel like COH2 should balance in a specific way other games have been done, thats the main reason why.
9 Apr 2018, 19:22 PM
#65
avatar of SweetrollNearTheDoor

Posts: 170 | Subs: 1



Considering this data hasn't been updated in almost a year and we've had at least 3 decently sized patches in between that time I wouldn't consider this reliable in determining what the balance is like in 2v2 atm. It would be better to compare what tools were most effective during that time and today.



I'm pretty sure I mentioned it was unfortunate that the site was not usable anymore since lack of update support :guyokay:
9 Apr 2018, 19:26 PM
#66
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 422 | Subs: 2

How I see it:

Conscripts are overperforming at long ranges. Nerf far efficiency and allow them to pick up 2 slot items again.
Penals need to be completely reworked so they don't conflict with Conscripts.

Guards need to be completely reworked so they have less slot items and specialized roles.

KV-2 and KV-8 should receive the same received-damage-hp modifications done to the KV-1.
Double LMG/BAR for Allies needs to be looked at. Should only be able to double equip by picking up dropped weapons instead of picking up at weapon rack.
Jackson mobility needs to be lowered by quite a bit.
OKW indirect AoE should be buffed a bit.
Partially revert Luchs build time.
Walking Stuka should have fuel slightly lowered.
OKH light vehicle fleets should have more armor.

SU-85 should have RoF reduced slightly and get the same restricted vision as the JP4.
StuG should have damage reduced to 120 (same as SU-76) and get the same restricted vision as the JP4 (MG42 upgrade removes restricted vision).

SU-76 is fine as is.
Panther is fine as is.

I'd also like to see assault guns like SU-76 and StuG III be able to switch ammo like ISU or Sherman, but that's probably just wishful thinking.
9 Apr 2018, 19:39 PM
#67
avatar of VonIvan

Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21



I'm pretty sure I mentioned it was unfortunate that the site was not usable anymore since lack of update support :guyokay:

I know, I'm just saying in general for new people that think it might still be viable to look at those statistics from a certain point of view.

I'm sorry if it looked like I was trying to say what you noted was wrong, that is not the intention comrade.
9 Apr 2018, 20:06 PM
#68
avatar of Gbpirate
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1153 | Subs: 1

I find the early game against double OKW extremely difficult.

It seems to be out of fashion lately, but the Kübel should not have a faster cap rate. In the early game, it already caps faster by being inherently faster than infantry.

But the good 'ol Sturmpio, Volks, Kübel combo; or even just the Kübel + sturmpio is real frustrating. Sturmpios should start with MP40 and have a mu upgrade to StGs. Early game OKWx2 is just too easy to steamroll allies (but again, this may be map-dependent or a reflection of skill level).

I also subscribe to the theory that balance is perceived differently at different skill levels. At the highest level, there may be a few builds for each faction that work right and oftentimes there is a unit that must be built at a certain time to counter another unit. At a lower skill level, the best strategy for another faction may not be employed, so that allows the opposing faction to have more choice regarding builds or composition.

This makes balance discussions difficult because there are different issues of "balance" at different ELO ranks.

Frankly, these balance discussions have been going on for years and for many they've been extremely tiresome. My favorite was on the official forums back when Scavenger doctrine artillery had no shell ceiling so it was possible to wipe a USF base and win an annihilation victory and when I made a post about it, people told me to stop complaining because I didn't need to spend fuel to re-tech...but, of course, the replay and example was from a 1v1 ;)

+1 to whoever said that people should go into the replay review or strategy section. Uploading replays is very useful and there are still people here (myself included) that will take the time to watch most or all of a replay and give specific pointers. From there (and even right after the game, possibly), you should catalogue why you lost. Was it an error in build or tech? Was it picking the wrong commander too early?
Poor micro that cost you an important engagement or a unit? Was it a tank bouncing 4 AT shells in a row?
From that point, you should look at what the issues are and address them as best you can. If you genuinely think a unit is OP, build your army up so you can counter that unit.

I've watched many of my own replays (or sometimes, a game is cast) and I can remember losses where every single grenade missed, preventing me from getting upgrades; I laid down a defensive mine too far in the back and when an early tank got shot at, it detonated the mine and that cost me the game; I've even played a game where there was no single point that I lost, it was just that I always fought losing engagements and was consistently outplayed.

tl;dr play games, upload replays here, ask for advice, watch your own replays, listen to the advice, and adjust.
9 Apr 2018, 20:40 PM
#69
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Where any of you get the idea that axis get more rewarded for squad preservation is just plain dumb, good luck reinvesting 120 muni into infantry over and over again so they can get rewiped by brumm/werfer.

What the fuck are you losing axis infantry to other than a centaur


What are you smoking dude? Grens are just as fragile as ever and the T34/76/85, sherman HE, persh are also tanks that are great at wiping units. Meanwhile the p4 still misses infantry regularly at point blank, the shell cratering the ground a mile away. Getting wiped by werfer? If it isn't a point blank shot from the werfer, there is no wipe. If the ost player risks getting that close with the werfer, you should be able to dive a tank in before the werfer can retreat.
9 Apr 2018, 20:48 PM
#70
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Never seen so much out of date shit in a balance thread before, maybe you guys should work on your builds, try out new units.

Gren fragile meme is long dead, axis have better value units for trading, the good allied off-maps are much better in 1v1 than 2v2, axis still has aura units that haven't been touched in years and are completely op, axis has better indirect across the board, heavies are almost always useless at this point.



M8 calm down with that allied bias. You gotta at least put some allied stuff in there to make it look credible Kappa
9 Apr 2018, 20:57 PM
#71
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
5Th man USF rifle needs a buff to not die within the first 3 seconds of combat and reduce the overall dps .

:snfQuinn::snfQuinn:


You can get your bug fixed after the Jackson gets nerfed a bit. Or else no deal.
9 Apr 2018, 21:01 PM
#72
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Double LMG/BAR for Allies needs to be looked at. Should only be able to double equip by picking up dropped weapons instead of picking up at weapon rack.


What if you just ditched double equipping entirely? Make it so that if a squad's got a weapon silhouette it can't upgrade to anything else and it can't pick anything up.

You might have to power up the individual rack weapons a bit to compensate but it'd work better with the UI. I'm not sure why Relic added weapon dropping in the first place when their UI can only display one silhouette.

It'd be more elegant all the little case-by-case equipping restrictions and inconsistent inventory sizes we currently have. If you've got no weapon upgrade you can pick up anything from a rack, your upgrade bar or the floor. If you've got an upgrade weapon already you can't.
9 Apr 2018, 23:32 PM
#73
avatar of siddolio

Posts: 471 | Subs: 1



M8 calm down with that allied bias. You gotta at least put some allied stuff in there to make it look credible Kappa


OKW and OST my most played factions m8, maybe if people took a step back and actually thought about their builds and how to use their units they wouldn't have such a hard time



What are you smoking dude? Grens are just as fragile as ever and the T34/76/85, sherman HE, persh are also tanks that are great at wiping units. Meanwhile the p4 still misses infantry regularly at point blank, the shell cratering the ground a mile away. Getting wiped by werfer? If it isn't a point blank shot from the werfer, there is no wipe. If the ost player risks getting that close with the werfer, you should be able to dive a tank in before the werfer can retreat.


Completely untrue, make a 25% damage reduction tank, it's very balanced you might enjoy it.

Werfer is infinitely better than other rocket artys, its the only one to not be nerfed substantially in recent times. Brumbarr is better than an AVRE or Sturmtiger at this point at wiping squads.

P4s especially the OKW one are performing really well cost/pop atm, dont know how you have this experience with them.

Dont have your units upagainst a shotblock as axis and you're pretty much only losing infantry to late retreats and centaur, anything else you're just unlucky or misplayed.
9 Apr 2018, 23:40 PM
#74
avatar of Leo251

Posts: 311

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Apr 2018, 15:53 PMSully
My thoughts on 2v2 balance since the latest patch:

USF
  • Jackson is over-performing, especially coupled with popcap manipulation allowing them to be spammed.
  • Indirect fire options are very strong compared to OKW, Ost can keep up for the most part.
  • Infantry is in a good spot.


Brits
  • Double bren Tommies are overperforming, they should be limited to one LMG.
  • Indirect fire options are lacking now that the mortar pit has been nerfed into the ground.
  • Lack of vehicle snare can be really painful.
  • Firefly feels very balanced compared to the Jackson.


Soviets
  • All openers (Cons/T1/T2) are very strong. Sniper being OP on most maps.
  • Katyusha is way too effective at long range. It can safely get wipes and vets up very quickly.
  • SU76 is over-performing. Its range/pen need to go down, and the barrage needs to cost munitions.
  • SU85 is a monster with vet, possibly over-performing.
  • PPSH cons are too cost-effective, leaving Shocks with no place in the game.
  • Guards are back to being the jack of all trades elite inf. The buff to PTRS damage vs infantry was completely unnecessary.


Ost
  • Mortar is over-performing, especially vs Brits early game.
  • Grens are incredibly fragile mid/late game; I'd love to see a 5th man either via vet like REs or via upgrade like Brits.
  • 222 is a joke unit that really needs some love vs snipers especially.
  • Panther is in an awkward spot. Is it a TD, or is it a brawler? Pick one and give it the same treatment that its allied counterparts get.


OKW
  • Good aggressive early game.
  • Vet system needs an overhaul, right now it's inconsistent and often detrimental. Make vet levels 1-3 equal in strength and attainability to other factions and levels 4 & 5 unlock abilities across the board.
  • Popcap numbers need to be brought down on a lot of units now that they're not nearly as strong; vehicles mostly.
  • Struggles vs both maxim and sniper openers from Soviets.
  • Same Panther issues as Ost.


+1 . These are nice fixes in order to balance the game once and for all.
:clap:
9 Apr 2018, 23:58 PM
#75
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4



OKW and OST my most played factions m8, maybe if people took a step back and actually thought about their builds and how to use their units they wouldn't have such a hard time


I've played OKW 10x as much as any other of my factions, but I still fight to balance all of them. Playing factions more doesn't always mean you want them balanced equally. Grens are prone to wipes more frequently because AoE weapons don't care about your squad model count. It's also significantly harder to recrew weapons as ostheer.

How do axis have better trading infantry if gren reinforce cost is 30 while tommies is 28, yet tommies beat grens in all situations given they're equal?

Command panther aura was nerfed either last patch or the previous one.

How do axis have better indirect across the board? the ISG is literal garbage in 1v1 and can't dislodge a machine gun for its life if it's behind green cover. Espeically for 270mp.
10 Apr 2018, 00:09 AM
#76
avatar of siddolio

Posts: 471 | Subs: 1



I've played OKW 10x as much as any other of my factions, but I still fight to balance all of them. Playing factions more doesn't always mean you want them balanced equally. Grens are prone to wipes more frequently because AoE weapons don't care about your squad model count. It's also significantly harder to recrew weapons as ostheer.

How do axis have better trading infantry if gren reinforce cost is 30 while tommies is 28, yet tommies beat grens in all situations given they're equal?

Command panther aura was nerfed either last patch or the previous one.

How do axis have better indirect across the board? the ISG is literal garbage in 1v1 and can't dislodge a machine gun for its life if it's behind green cover. Espeically for 270mp.


Tommies need a 120 muni investment to reach a point where they beat vet 3 lmg grens, coming up with 60 munitions more = less replaceable. Especially with the 0.13 RA when they arent vet. Also Allies need their infantry to be more generalist than Axis given how good Stugs and Jp4s are relative to allied TDs and how much more usuable in indirect spam meta raketens are given they can retreat, fire rate is king in 2v2 you can be way more aggressive. Fireflys and Jacksons dont belong in the current meta, SU85 sure.

Axis have better trading infantry because Allied ways of wiping squads have been removed or nerfed patch after patch for a long time, not that it's a bad thing. I dont like insta wipe-units but thats what Brumbarr and Werfer are to an extreme. You're far more likely to see Grens and Volks survive a game with competent players controlling every faction in the game.

In 2v2 Axis are a huge step-up from Allies right now, I don't see how anyone could make a case they aren't and I haven't read one that is remotely coherent to what I've seen in the 2v2 tournament or in my own games.
10 Apr 2018, 03:46 AM
#77
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276



You can get your bug fixed after the Jackson gets nerfed a bit. Or else no deal.


The Jackson already got a pretty heavy handed nerf including a price increase....
10 Apr 2018, 04:59 AM
#78
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Apr 2018, 03:46 AMMittens


The Jackson already got a pretty heavy handed nerf including a price increase....


Price imcrease means little when the buffs it received make it nearly unkillable. You can treat it like the other TDs (the ones with exploitable weaknesses) and sit it at 60 range and outrange most armour, or if you chose you can utilize the mobility it required to survive being squishy even tho it no longer is. Did you smash all the enemy armour? Cool hop out and releive your pop cap. Oh shit heavy armour? Load up HVAP and increase your damage output to supremely reliable levels.

If its only drawback is cost its not really a drawback.
10 Apr 2018, 06:16 AM
#79
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

I just have a question for people against USF/UKF double weapons slot. Do they want Riflemen and Tommies being weaker than Gren or Volks? Because that's what actually Riflemen and Tommies with one weapon are.
10 Apr 2018, 06:22 AM
#80
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Apr 2018, 06:16 AMEsxile
I just have a question for people against USF/UKF double weapons slot. Do they want Riflemen and Tommies being weaker than Gren or Volks? Because that's what actually Riflemen and Tommies with one weapon are.


tbh idk. Allies or Axis are in a weird spot depending on which you consider the weird one. OKW for example, is currently meant to use volks for early through mid then transition to obers for lategame infantry. While the idea sounds ok, Obers then arrive w/o vet against already vetted infantry and soon if not already upgraded allied infantry. Which means they become bleed machines till they hit about vet 2.

Essentially imo all factions need either strong scaling infantry from the start, like allies currently have with weapon upgrades, or they need elite infantry in lategame like OKW has. But having both leads to 1 faction being stronger than the other, because one faction needs to rebuild vet, while the other doesn't.
PAGES (9)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

790 users are online: 790 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
32 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50074
Welcome our newest member, GeorgiadfHess
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM