Login

russian armor

About USF early game, how about finally buffing RE a bit?

5 Aug 2018, 14:52 PM
#21
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Aug 2018, 13:52 PMVipper

Storm troopers tactical advance get half speed and x150 target size

Smgs Thompson tactical movement reduced speed and x150 target size


You either mean x1,5 or 150% I assume?
5 Aug 2018, 15:32 PM
#22
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

Ost vs USF is fairly balanced. USF vs OKW is broken which is why OKW did so well against USF in GCS2. OKW early manpower advantage is significant with how much better sturmpioneers are than riflemen and RE. It puts USF on the backfoot immediately.

Something needs to be done about USF early game against OKW. Maybe put MG in beginning in place of mortar. .50 cal would not be good against Osteer early game but would be much better against OKW in beginning and stopping sturmpioneer abuse.





I would like to see mg in tier 1 instead of mortars


Not that I'm against it but making this change would trigger a chain reaction in the balance of the USF.

Without smoke being available in T0 this would more or less force the player to go the tier in which there is smoke, but then that would make the player predictable and vulnerable to another counter.

Specific scenario for example:

Ost player gets MG42s, USF players is forced to go LT for the Mortar in order to provide smoke for his riflemen and destroyed the garrisoned MG42s, Ost player reacts to this by getting 222s as someone else already mentioned, the USF player then falls behind because even with the .50 cal and AP rounds it doesn't provide the fast punch of the 57mm AT gun needed to reliably destroy said 222(s).

So case in point, the USF needs the mortar right now in order to be effect early game because of the mortar's smoke and anti-garrison capabilities, if let's say the REs are replaced by Assault Engineers with the flame upgrade which would handle the anti-garrison dilemma of the USF but there is still smoke left, if the rifles are given back their smoke then people will again mainly only go for rifles, unless of course the USF T0 is redesigned with 4 or 5 man Assault Engineers, Riflemen with smoke and let's say a WC51 to provide more options for the USF's start but then people would complain that they're mimicking the OKW in a way with their Volks, Sturms and Kubelwagen.

But I think that perhaps all T0 MGs should be removed as AEgion suggested as well so there is less of the early game MG lockdown problem which would make it so there would be less reliance on smoke and anti-garrison capabilities, this would in turn also benefit the UKF which rely on the UC WASP for anti-garrison capabilities against Ost MG42s and have no reliable smoke because of the static nature of the mortar pit not being able to reach certain places on the map which you might need smoke right on the second.

But then again maybe the Ost will suffer then even if the MG42 is replaced by the Grens in T0, I'm not sure of that but I know that Relic made this change with a purpose during the UKF Alpha because they saw that the Ost would then underperform.

Maybe giving them 5 men Grenadiers and Panzergrenadiers would solve the issue and would make them less reliant on the MG42s? No idea, I sadly didn't reach this phase of testing in my mod to say from experience.

All in all I believe there are several ways of tackling the issue, question is which way the devs think of and decide on, that's all.
5 Aug 2018, 21:42 PM
#23
avatar of Onimusha

Posts: 149

5 Aug 2018, 23:26 PM
#24
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

I would not mind giving USF a jeep.
6 Aug 2018, 04:48 AM
#25
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1





Not that I'm against it but making this change would trigger a chain reaction in the balance of the USF.

Without smoke being available in T0 this would more or less force the player to go the tier in which there is smoke, but then that would make the player predictable and vulnerable to another counter.

Specific scenario for example:

Ost player gets MG42s, USF players is forced to go LT for the Mortar in order to provide smoke for his riflemen and destroyed the garrisoned MG42s, Ost player reacts to this by getting 222s as someone else already mentioned, the USF player then falls behind because even with the .50 cal and AP rounds it doesn't provide the fast punch of the 57mm AT gun needed to reliably destroy said 222(s).

So case in point, the USF needs the mortar right now in order to be effect early game because of the mortar's smoke and anti-garrison capabilities, if let's say the REs are replaced by Assault Engineers with the flame upgrade which would handle the anti-garrison dilemma of the USF but there is still smoke left, if the rifles are given back their smoke then people will again mainly only go for rifles, unless of course the USF T0 is redesigned with 4 or 5 man Assault Engineers, Riflemen with smoke and let's say a WC51 to provide more options for the USF's start but then people would complain that they're mimicking the OKW in a way with their Volks, Sturms and Kubelwagen.

But I think that perhaps all T0 MGs should be removed as AEgion suggested as well so there is less of the early game MG lockdown problem which would make it so there would be less reliance on smoke and anti-garrison capabilities, this would in turn also benefit the UKF which rely on the UC WASP for anti-garrison capabilities against Ost MG42s and have no reliable smoke because of the static nature of the mortar pit not being able to reach certain places on the map which you might need smoke right on the second.

But then again maybe the Ost will suffer then even if the MG42 is replaced by the Grens in T0, I'm not sure of that but I know that Relic made this change with a purpose during the UKF Alpha because they saw that the Ost would then underperform.

Maybe giving them 5 men Grenadiers and Panzergrenadiers would solve the issue and would make them less reliant on the MG42s? No idea, I sadly didn't reach this phase of testing in my mod to say from experience.

All in all I believe there are several ways of tackling the issue, question is which way the devs think of and decide on, that's all.



I like playing Ost but 5 man Grenadiers/Panzergrens would definitely be too good. Maybe something similar to bolster infantry available at BP3 could be possible.

I do think MG42 shifted into T1 might be fairer as well.



That said, I liked your initial suggestion far more than 50 cal in T0. 50 cal in T0 would be oppressively overpowered vs OKW - which can barely handle maxims as it is, much less 50 cals.
6 Aug 2018, 07:39 AM
#26
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2




I like playing Ost but 5 man Grenadiers/Panzergrens would definitely be too good. Maybe something similar to bolster infantry available at BP3 could be possible.

I do think MG42 shifted into T1 might be fairer as well.



That said, I liked your initial suggestion far more than 50 cal in T0. 50 cal in T0 would be oppressively overpowered vs OKW - which can barely handle maxims as it is, much less 50 cals.


Agreed, so perhaps you're right about a sort of Reserves/Bolster infantry upgrade be available later on to unlock 5 man squads to improve the survivability of these units in the late game where 4 man squads suffer the most in my experience.

As I said, not just the MG42, but the Vickers as well.

Which suggestion do you mean specifically? And the .50 cal was not my idea, I'm just providing a top down perspective of what MIGHT happen if this change was to go through, that's all.
6 Aug 2018, 12:33 PM
#27
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Can we not take poorly designed features and stuff then willy nilly into properly designed factions?
6 Aug 2018, 14:39 PM
#28
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1



Agreed, so perhaps you're right about a sort of Reserves/Bolster infantry upgrade be available later on to unlock 5 man squads to improve the survivability of these units in the late game where 4 man squads suffer the most in my experience.

As I said, not just the MG42, but the Vickers as well.

Which suggestion do you mean specifically? And the .50 cal was not my idea, I'm just providing a top down perspective of what MIGHT happen if this change was to go through, that's all.


I was referring to assault engies instead of RE. That solves flamer + sturms dominating early engagement quite elegantly.
6 Aug 2018, 14:55 PM
#29
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2



I was referring to assault engies instead of RE. That solves flamer + sturms dominating early engagement quite elegantly.


Agreed.

Can we not take poorly designed features and stuff then willy nilly into properly designed factions?


You mean like the raketenwerfer?
6 Aug 2018, 20:08 PM
#30
avatar of Euan

Posts: 177

Is there some technical reason we can't just make RE volley fire a timed ability, independent of equipped weapons? Like, suppresses a squad after 3 seconds if the RE squad is still alive and firing?

If not that, then 5 man RE or free smoke or whatever. Or remove the dumb-ass StG upgrade for Volks. Really anything that could make USF even slightly playable again, please.
6 Aug 2018, 21:49 PM
#31
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

Wow the amount of exaggeration from these posts is staggering.


Coming from a guy who spent the last 8 months telling people that the coming patches (which you claimed were designed specifically with allied bias) would render Ostheer unplayable....
7 Aug 2018, 05:41 AM
#32
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned


Coming from a guy who spent the last 8 months telling people that the coming patches (which you claimed were designed specifically with allied bias) would render Ostheer unplayable....


Before the current patch, the only thing people did in 1v1 Ost was spam g43 grens lightning war and T3 rush. That's it. The # of cost-effective units in the roster was at an all time low which is why T2 and 4 were barely touched in 1v1 Ost. So any other build order is almost "unplayable." Prove that the patch where KT, fusiliers and bundle nades were nerfed is NOT allied biased. That patch had significantly more axis nerfs than allied nerfs and some of the axis nerfs were over the top.
7 Aug 2018, 05:54 AM
#33
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post6 Aug 2018, 20:08 PMEuan
Is there some technical reason we can't just make RE volley fire a timed ability, independent of equipped weapons? Like, suppresses a squad after 3 seconds if the RE squad is still alive and firing?

If not that, then 5 man RE or free smoke or whatever. Or remove the dumb-ass StG upgrade for Volks. Really anything that could make USF even slightly playable again, please.


Volks have already been nerfed though they only apply to mid-late game. Removing Stgs would be over the top. In 1v1, it is possible for OKW to outmuscle USF for the first 5 minutes. However, with the free squads and the lack of a mid-game from OKW, USF should dominate at 5-20 min which should give USF resource advantage to allow USF to better prepare for the OKW late game. USF already dominates Ost for at least the first half of 1v1 games (unless the Ost player spams 222s and the USF is too cheap/thinks it's beneath him to sink some mp into an at gun.) Hence your claim that the USF is not even slightly playable is nothing but a wild exaggeration, none of this surprises me at all since as I mentioned earlier that the amount of exaggeration on this thread is quite shameless.
7 Aug 2018, 06:08 AM
#34
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Volley fire is a bonus ability. Be grateful about it whether it works well or not. Rear Ech ALREADY have a lot of utility especially after getting the batshit op vehicle mines which cost less than a third of pak TWP while doing roughly the same as TWP. You can litter the field with these dirt cheap mines and not worry about split second micro like what TWP requires.
7 Aug 2018, 07:52 AM
#35
avatar of NorthFireZ

Posts: 211

Actually volley fire being a timed ability doesn’t seem like a bad idea at all. Cause atm it’s just a waste of time because correct me if I’m wrong but I think the ability currently depends on the accuracy of the carbines or weapons equipped. but if reliably suppresses (let’s say there’s a different timer depending on what kind of cover the unit targeted is in at first. So negative cover 2 seconds, no cover 4 seconds, light cover 6-8 seconds, green cover never) During that time you can definitely choose to target down the RE squad cause it has a lot of negative debuffs, but the best part is volley fire will at least the reliably suppress it would be pretty darn useful :D

7 Aug 2018, 08:29 AM
#36
avatar of smoked04

Posts: 5

I don't get the "rifleman are under powered" thing. I feel like they're fine. With microing you can get that early sturm. If there's two def not happening but once the half-track comes out you render okw infantry useeless for a while. Mid to late game playing riflemen right makes them powerful. Imo the German factions have been nerfed enough. Seems like some of rhetoric here is going the way of trying to get them nerfed again.

I agree rear echelons are pretty useless though. Assault engineers would be a better start but at the same time I feel like it isn't all that bad. Ost pios are pretty useless too in infantry fights.


Edit: I should have been more clear in my post. I'm coming from all other modes beside 1v1. In team based games imo early allied units are much better than the German units.
7 Aug 2018, 18:11 PM
#37
avatar of Euan

Posts: 177

Hence your claim that the USF is not even slightly playable is nothing but a wild exaggeration, none of this surprises me at all since as I mentioned earlier that the amount of exaggeration on this thread is quite shameless.


I'll admit that my post was hyperbolic.

On the other hand I think it's well-known from e.g. recent polls and GCS results that USF and UKF are very weak at the moment.

I do support certain OKW buffs such as to the KT, but if we want to re-balance things overall we have to undo at least some of the past nerfs to USF and UKF. (BTW I don't think you can claim that this patch is "allied biased" then ask us to prove it to you; rather for such a strong claim against the current consensus, the burden of proof lies on yourself.)

Anyway back on topic, we know that building REs is effectively early-game suicide at the moment due to the large amounts of infantry pressure in the current meta, so I would lean towards the edits to volley fire over free smoke (since smoke would be great against OST but not do anything much against OKW, which IMHO is the harder matchup...)
7 Aug 2018, 18:19 PM
#38
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post7 Aug 2018, 18:11 PMEuan


I'll admit that my post was hyperbolic.

(BTW I don't think you can claim that this patch is "allied biased" then ask us to prove it to you; rather for such a strong claim against the current consensus, the burden of proof lies on yourself.)




Never said that the latest patch was allied biased. I specifically said "before the current patch" the game was allied biased for quite a while. The current or latest patch however has corrected quite a few of the mistakes that the balance team made in the past 2 years and has made Ostheer enjoyable again.
7 Aug 2018, 18:31 PM
#39
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Aug 2018, 18:11 PMEuan

(BTW I don't think you can claim that this patch is "allied biased" then ask us to prove it to you; rather for such a strong claim against the current consensus, the burden of proof lies on yourself.)



Never said that the latest patch was allied biased [...]

The most recent patch is undeniably and massively allied and team biased [...]



Dude, I remember reading your posts through which you regularly called out that the latest big balance patches is allied biased in every possible thread just a while back. Just do a quick lookup on your posts, search for 'biased;

Yet the results of recent patches are clear on the current meta: USF and UKF are just burdened in team-games, and they lack power in 1on1, and OST is in a relatively goodish position.
7 Aug 2018, 19:56 PM
#40
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911



I’m not going to address the other things except for RE as I feel like you’re touched on things that other people didn’t even bring up here 0-0

In a straight up firefight, despite being better than CE, RE has neither the survivability or firepower to tickle enemy squads. e


Why should they? They are cheap, and have great utility. They don't need to be good in combat too.
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

546 users are online: 546 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49852
Welcome our newest member, vn88company
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM