Discuss for the votes

Soviets are designed NOT to have such upgrades. That is why penals are so strong, because they have to compensate the lack. To overcome this design is not a different play-stile, it is simply a bad design, I would also say bug-using. As stupid as US vehicle-Crews, te decrew should be removed by an auto-repair function too.

UKF can donate weapons to team mates(and crew weapons).
USF can donate vehicles to team mates(and crew weapons).
Soviets can donate fuel to team mates.
Ost can donate resources to team mates.
OKW is all about leeching, so irrelevant here.

Point is, in team games completely different dynamics and rules apply.
You can't remove between faction synergies, because these synergies are what makes for team games.

Each USF donated vehicle is 1 less vehicle for USF.
Each weapon donated by UKF is 1 weapon less for UKF.
Soviets and ost also do not exactly float resources they use for their supply drops and impact of raw resource boost can be greater.

Also, weapons dropping is a thing, you will now want to remove weapon slots form certain units because they might be strong?
Will you nerf HMG42 performance, because once captures by soviets it'll have 6 men crew?

The REAL issue was cons with dual LMGs and that was already addressed ages ago, so instead of bitching about penals with LMGs, how about you'll show us examples from competitive level 2v2 where its used to the overpowering extend instead of whining how theoretically strong it is?

But Dhsk do not have more dps,...

It does, check the raw number here:
https://coh2db.com/stats/

Maxim and Dhsk stats are up to date.

UKF can donate weapons to team mates(and crew weapons).
USF can donate vehicles to team mates(and crew weapons).
Soviets can donate fuel to team mates.
Ost can donate resources to team mates.
OKW is all about leeching, so irrelevant here.

Point is, in team games completely different dynamics and rules apply.
You can't remove between faction synergies, because these synergies are what makes for team games.

Each USF donated vehicle is 1 less vehicle for USF.
Each weapon donated by UKF is 1 weapon less for UKF.
Soviets and ost also do not exactly float resources they use for their supply drops and impact of raw resource boost can be greater.

Also, weapons dropping is a thing, you will now want to remove weapon slots form certain units because they might be strong?
Will you nerf HMG42 performance, because once captures by soviets it'll have 6 men crew?

The REAL issue was cons with dual LMGs and that was already addressed ages ago, so instead of bitching about penals with LMGs, how about you'll show us examples from competitive level 2v2 where its used to the overpowering extend instead of whining how theoretically strong it is?

Yes, there are team-play abilities. But there are things, simply ARN'T balanced.

As you say, US vehicle-crews, that should be also removed too OR balance it.
Dropping reccources is fine, but tranfer vehilces and weapons is broken if you don't balance it. That is a pure gimmick and shouldn't be a normal ablity.

1. You want to drop MG's for your team-mate? Remove the extra accuracy for Penals AND give them an optional AI-weapon-upgrade like G43 of Grens instead to compensate the nerf.
-> So PTRS needs 2 weaponslots, the AI-upgrade needs 1 weaponslot for 2 guns, so you can still pick one extra weapon.

No nerf, but a way to balance that situation, if you want too keep the drop ability.

2. You want to give your team mate a vehicle? Make a pop-cap timer, so US player can't direclty build a new vehicle.
-> You use the decrew ability, your pop-cap will stay the same for 5 mins. So you can still share stuff, but have to wait 5 mins before you can reduce your pop-cap.

On the topic, we do have some ideas being formulated regarding some of the commanders. We might have details soon? I'd have to ask.

Im especially interested in reworked Panzerfussiliers which would "have exclusive anti-tank and anti-infantry paths." This sound extremely promising.

Yes, there are team-play abilities. But there are things, simply ARN'T balanced.

As you say, US vehicle-crews, that should be also removed too OR balance it.
Dropping reccources is fine, but tranfer vehilces and weapons is broken if you don't balance it. That is a pure gimmick and shouldn't be a normal ablity.

1. You want to drop MG's for your team-mate? Remove the extra accuracy for Penals AND give them an optional AI-weapon-upgrade like G43 of Grens instead to compensate the nerf.
-> So PTRS needs 2 weaponslots, the AI-upgrade needs 1 weaponslot for 2 guns, so you can still pick one extra weapon.

No nerf, but a way to balance that situation, if you want too keep the drop ability.

2. You want to give your team mate a vehicle? Make a pop-cap timer, so US player can't direclty build a new vehicle.
-> You use the decrew ability, your pop-cap will stay the same for 5 mins. So you can still share stuff, but have to wait 5 mins before you can reduce your pop-cap.

Yes hello I want to redesign the entirity of team games from the ground up with a game six years old purely so that I can avoid one squad being able to recieve an MG upgrade from one british commander

Get over yourself.

Yes hello I want to redesign the entirity of team games from the ground up with a game six years old ourely so that I can avoid one squad being able to recieve an MG upgrade from one british commander

Get over yourself.

I am posting that since 6 years. The balance team of CoH was simply bad.

Now, after it is in community's hands it got better, but still Relic has to update the Code, that is why everthing is so slow. And why? Because Steam sucks. (they wan't money for every update)




And, that arn't huge changes. You Need 5 mins of coding for that.

Penals do not get any "extra" accuracy, their vet bonuses come at cost of having shitty RA and as result dying much faster under focused fire.

Also nobody fought or tested dual DP armed Penals because the only way to have DP have on them is Guards dropping one which is rare and Vickers having old Bren stat does not make Penals OP

Also section have Brens without any doctrine locks, we're talking about doctrine commitment here, one which excludes armor call-in or LMGGuards/Shocks.

Why exactly you're arguing against droppabe DPs when it was suggested by balance team themselves in first place?

Dropping reccources is fine, but tranfer vehilces and weapons is broken if you don't balance it.

How?
A player paid full price for it and that player doesn't get to use it.

So how is that broken?
There is no free stuff involved, everything is paid for the intended amount and player who makes donation is that much more weaker as now he is short 1 unit/weapon upgrade on his army.

Its not like one player can focus on drones to get minerals and just feed other one resources so he just spams stuff and fights.

UKF can donate weapons to team mates(and crew weapons).
USF can donate vehicles to team mates(and crew weapons).
Soviets can donate fuel to team mates.
Ost can donate resources to team mates.
OKW is all about leeching, so irrelevant here.

Point is, in team games completely different dynamics and rules apply.
You can't remove between faction synergies, because these synergies are what makes for team games.

Each USF donated vehicle is 1 less vehicle for USF.
Each weapon donated by UKF is 1 weapon less for UKF.
Soviets and ost also do not exactly float resources they use for their supply drops and impact of raw resource boost can be greater.

Also, weapons dropping is a thing, you will now want to remove weapon slots form certain units because they might be strong?
Will you nerf HMG42 performance, because once captures by soviets it'll have 6 men crew?

The REAL issue was cons with dual LMGs and that was already addressed ages ago, so instead of bitching about penals with LMGs, how about you'll show us examples from competitive level 2v2 where its used to the overpowering extend instead of whining how theoretically strong it is?

"Weapon dropping" is irrelevant to "weapon donation" and specific measures have been taken to balance units that pick weapons.

That does not mean that those measures are enough, since they do not apply to all units or all weapons.

and specific measures have been taken for units that where too strong when picking those weapons.

Thank you for tl;dr'ing my whole point.

How?
A player paid full price for it and that player doesn't get to use it.

So how is that broken?
There is no free stuff involved, everything is paid for the intended amount and player who makes donation is that much more weaker as now he is short 1 unit/weapon upgrade on his army.

Its not like one player can focus on drones to get minerals and just feed other one resources so he just spams stuff and fights.

For me it is a diffrence to share 30fuel by drop (which can be countert by AA) or sharing a vehicle with 160 fuel save in your base, while you can manipulate the pop-cap system.

Ostheer only stays with two commanders can drop for you team. One is totaly crap, the other one needs all the drop for ist own. Opel-Blitz doesn't support the team anymore and osttruppen-support is crap saving maybe 100MP.


The US-decrew becomes OP in 3vs3 and 4vs4. Any player with brain would spam M8A1 Howitzer Motor Carriage for his Team. What should you do as German? Your Pop is full after 2 Panthers, while US can have its 140pop army. The game becomes cancer with such tools.

...
It may not be what you were implying, but if the argument is "vipper was right all along, but isnt listened to (hence why he has to repeat himself)" then these two examples dont really have to do with that.
...

First of all, imo, a very large portion of people posting here (some post here for other reasons) and the balance team all have the same goal. To improve the game. The fact that we disagree on how, is not really an issue.

I am under no illusion that I am always right and the fact that the majority of my post start with "in my opinion" reflect that.

The reason that repeat some things has to do more with the fact what imo are mistakes are being repeated.

Increasing the DPS of unit to make the more attractive has been used as a solution again and again and the results where mediocre. Osttuppen got LMg and they still are not much better in late game, Stormtroopers got a major DPS buff and they still are not that great either just to name a few.

On the other hand Ostheer artillery officer with diversion ability is in much better place than assault grenadiers although his comes with only 4 Mp40s.

The other examples I certainly cant disagree with though. Sector assault and jli made it through long (though by no means dense) stretches of testing. That said, its not like you werent heard. There are a lot of voices in the community. The majority was fine with jli and sector assault until it hit live. The majority was fine with valentines for a fair bit AFTER they hit live (see the post revamp poll). Having ones opinions heard doesnt necessarily mean getting ones way; that would be paradoxical with the sheer number of opinions.

The fact that broken abilities like Sector assault/JLI make it thru has more with trying to change too many thing at same time than anything else. That actually slow downs the balance process more than if someone made sure that the changes one introduces are solid.

I am certain that my opinion is being heard along with opinions of everyone else because, especially since many changes that I brought up (like the damage reduction for Dozer/Kv-2) do actually make it in live and I hold no grudge for the points I make that are not implemented.

I have vision of direction the game should be taken and I am sure that every member of the moderation team also has one. But I do think that I should point out directions that work or do not work even if that mean repeating myself, especially when direction that I consider wrong are taken.

(at least until directions are tested and are proven inferior to other solutions)

...

On the other hand Ostheer artillery officer with diversion ability is in much better place than assault grenadiers although his comes with only 4 Mp40s.

...

Tbh, assgren sprint is more useful than diversion. The diversion bonus is rather small (considering their low combat performance at 2 CP), the muni cost is fairly high and the awkward pistol animation slows down the squad.

It would be interesting if assgren sprint would unlock a second sprint ability with veterancy that lasts longer and lowers RA. Could make them a bit easier to use in the mid/late game.

Tbh, assgren sprint is more useful than diversion. The diversion bonus is rather small (considering their low combat performance at 2 CP), the muni cost is fairly high and the awkward pistol animation slows down the squad.

I suggest you test the 2 units in game. I actually have used the Artillery officer with diversion allot and it is in much better place the A.Gren, it has smaller target and also cheaper and thus more cost efficient.

I suggest you test the 2 units in game. I actually have used the Artillery officer with diversion allot and it is in much better place the A.Gren, it has smaller target and also cheaper and thus more cost efficient.

I don't agree:
Assgrens cost 40 more mp upfront, but the officer costs 2 more pop and 4 more mp to reinforce.
The officer comes at a time when it has no shock impact, unlike assgrens.
Assgrens have better RA with vet and an extra mp40, letting them outperform the officer + diversion.

The strength of the arty officer doesn't come from its combat performance, it's why the squad gets shared veterancy to keep up.


I prefer sprint over diversion, but I'd support a second vet ability for assgrens that merges sprint with lowered RA for 10 seconds (similar to UKF's battlecry).

I don't agree:
Assgrens cost 40 more mp upfront, but the officer costs 2 more pop and 4 more mp to reinforce.
The officer comes at a time when it has no shock impact, unlike assgrens.
Assgrens have better RA with vet and an extra mp40, letting them outperform the officer + diversion.

You have every right to your opinion.
From my experience I find the officer much better for offensive play and I have used "diversion" extensively. The officer actually vet quite fast dew to shared veterancy

The strength of the arty officer doesn't come from its combat performance, it's why the squad gets shared veterancy to keep up.

Not really, the officer is quite strong with diversion, the aura is also strong but only when blob.
His strength comes from diversion, smoke and vet 1 arty. The aura is only worth it when you have another 3+ squads.

I prefer sprint over diversion, but I'd support a second vet ability for assgrens that merges sprint with lowered RA for 10 seconds (similar to UKF's battlecry).

And this bring us to my point, less bleed is imo a better solution than increasing mid DPS.

Assault Grens should get body armor (similar to Shocks) with similar cost.

Assault Grens should get body armor (similar to Shocks) with similar cost.

How about a body armor upgrade for muni? Should probably disable sprint (or replace it with a smoke grenade), because both would be too oppressive.

I voted for "UK Lend Lead Assault Tactics" and hope this theme will make it to the live version.

Here's my own interpretation of that theme:

• Smoke Raid Operation (from Commando regiment)
  
• Assault Tommy Unit
  
• M1 81mm Mortar team
  
• M10 Tank Destroyer
  
• Assault Artillery (from OKW's Breakthrough, reworked by the mod team this ability could be really strong and fit really good to the theme!)
  
  

How about a body armor upgrade for muni? Should probably disable sprint (or replace it with a smoke grenade), because both would be too oppressive.

I think this could work. Maybe locked behind BP1 or something since Ass Grens can already bully squads in the early game in live version. The nice thing about the upgrade is that it would give fresh squads called in the mid-late game a little more staying power vs. vetted squads whereas now calling in fresh squads is suicide.