Login

russian armor

I hear the new patches have made western allies op?

PAGES (9)down
8 Apr 2019, 01:00 AM
#81
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 682

1v1 is their weakest showing due to the nature of infantry play in it, but whatcha gonna do.


From the recent tournaments I've observed, top players just won't pick them. Clearly they're perfectly fine.
8 Apr 2019, 01:49 AM
#82
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 01:00 AMKoRneY


From the recent tournaments I've observed, top players just won't pick them. Clearly they're perfectly fine.


Cardboard box also thinks lmg grens > double bar riflemen at midrange. Of course he thinks Ost is fine.
8 Apr 2019, 05:13 AM
#83
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2



I'd agree this is the best way to help out Ostheer, because it won't impact team games as much as, say, buffing Grenadiers. Ostheer in team games is still very strong because using their strongest units (HMG 42, Pak 40, mortars, Panther, Brummbar, etc) is much easier there.

What would also help indirectly is indeed some slight tuning of UKF and USF now that their new tech / snares have settled down, and remove some of the excessive things that they had to compensate for these weaknesses (such as the accuracy bonus vs lights for the 6 Pounder).


+1 (including Miragefla's post)

Buffing PG's and the Ostwind and slightly nerfing some US/UK units is probably enough.
Yes, OST is in a bad spot right now but we should not forget that it was really good in the 2vs2 tourney and GCS2. The light vehicle meta kills this faction though.
8 Apr 2019, 06:43 AM
#84
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

ost has the problem to must fight factions which was brought in line/ to compete with OKW.
Like you said: OKW is better than ost. And mostly all allie factions can well deal with OKW. Ost is worse than OKW. If you understand logic...you must see the discrepant.

8 Apr 2019, 08:02 AM
#85
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1



Cardboard box also thinks lmg grens > double bar riflemen at midrange. Of course he thinks Ost is fine.


I told you that they do more damage then, I'll tell you the exact same now, your bizzare personal fixation on being wrong is admirable but you can quit any time. Do I need to dig up the posts where you insisted they didn't and you were demonstrably incorrect?



Back to the point, yes. You can't just buff Ost to be better in 1v1 via gren boosts or the like without making a mess of team games, 2v2 and up. Their vehicle play and team weapons already make them incredibly viable, adding mainline infantry strength on top of that will mark a return to the misery days when team games were a 90% axis searching at any given time.
8 Apr 2019, 08:13 AM
#86
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

The problem for Ost is two fold.

Firstly, ever since the community started contributing to patches, there has gradual shift to how each faction plays. This probably wasn't deliberate but more to do with trying to balance team games as well as 1v1. Now almost every faction plays like Ostheer, ie 3 infantry, 2 mgs, 2 At guns, 1 or 2 elite squads, 1 indirect fire unit, an Lv then onto a lategame callin. Obviously there are slight variations but in general each side more or less has the same unit composition and each side will camp. The problem is, even though Ost is still solid camping, trying to push out is an uphill battle because Allies can not only provide solid defenses with MGs and At guns, they can also provide constant pressure through indirect fire and stronger mainline infantry. Those that argue that units that cost more should perform better are ignoring the fact that ost cannot really field equivalently priced units and have to rely on sniper and pgren which if wiped tip the balance of the match back to the allies.

Secondly, Ost armour has no where near the impact on the game when compared to some allied tanks.
The issue is not so much that Ost armour does not do the damage that some allied tanks do, but more the fact that Ost armour cannot maintain as much field presence due to how often allied At penetrates. I am aware that axis armour does improve with vet but often Ost is already on the ropes and doesn't have enough vps available to built vet. The other thing is allied armour isn't noticably inferior to axis armour especially when consideration is given to how often axis tanks shots fail to penetrate. I have lost count of how many times I have seen a panther or stug or P4 bounce or miss shots on pershing or Is2 ( many at point blank range from P4 ).

I am not suggesting that Axis tanks become bullet proof but when Allied tanks are penetrating more often ( I do watch some replays to check ) then it becomes frustrating.

As I have said previously, Ost's downfall has come about from numerous small changes that in isolation are not disastrous but combined are quite substantial.

To fix ost you have to buff a few stock units, nerf okw and then nerf some of the allied Op stuff.

- make g43 a teching option. Grens are often not viable with so much indirect fire that now exists in game.
- give Pgrens the stats to properly flank opposing team weapons and actually be able to actually kill a model before it retreats without using nade. Also schreck accuracy is still terrible at range.
- Ostwind needs a buff, even if it comes with price increase.
- P4 accuracy really could do with a buff. Penetration is also a huge joke when a p4 cannot penetrate an IS2 at point blank range from behind.
- Stug needs its penetration back, even if ROF is nerfed slightly.
- Panther and Brumbar are hard to solve. If Ost midgame can be buffed then these units don't need buffing much. IMO if the armour to the panther is not increased then its accuracy and penetration should be. Its a little ridiculous that a pershing is more than capable of standing up to a panther given how weak a panther is vs infantry and how long ost has to wait for it to arrive. Imo a panther should destroy a pershing if the pershing doesn't show some caution.
The brumbar for me is to easily penetrated by At guns to be worth the effort.

There are a number of other allied units that are slightly Op but too many changes would just tip everything on its head again.

8 Apr 2019, 08:18 AM
#87
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I told you that they do more damage then, I'll tell you the exact same now, your bizzare personal fixation on being wrong is admirable but you can quit any time. Do I need to dig up the posts where you insisted they didn't and you were demonstrably incorrect?



Back to the point, yes. You can't just buff Ost to be better in 1v1 via gren boosts or the like without making a mess of team games, 2v2 and up. Their vehicle play and team weapons already make them incredibly viable, adding mainline infantry strength on top of that will mark a return to the misery days when team games were a 90% axis searching at any given time.

Compare USF and Ostheer you will find that their support weapons are about equal and their infatry is better. So is their light vehicles.

Should they grenadier get a big buff? probably not but there is large number units that need to nerfed.

8 Apr 2019, 08:25 AM
#88
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 08:18 AMVipper

Compare USF and Ostheer you will find that their support weapons are about equal and their infatry is better. So is their light vehicles.

Should they grenadier get a big buff? probably not but there is large number units that need to nerfed.


If you take a really close look, you'll notice that USF infantry and lights are also more expensive and according to the ancient scripture you've refereed to yesterday, its exactly how its supposed to be.

And no, there is no "large number of units that need to be nerfed", that theory was proven to be completely ineffective in last 4 years.

Its the small number of units that require a little bit of love, in ost case, ostwind, PGs and arguably stug.
8 Apr 2019, 08:45 AM
#89
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

This idea that giving some slight buffs to some UP Ostheer units is going to fix anything is just flat out wrong.

It doesn´t solve OKW being hard countered by UKF on many maps. It doesn´t solve the braindead USF 2v2 airborne meta. It doesn´t solve how bad Grenadiers are in late game. It doesn´t nerf completly OP USF units like the WC51, 50 cal, Jackson, Scott and Pak Howitzer.

IMO the first step to improving balance would be to roll back some doctrinal stuff that USF got in the last patch. Especially 0 CP no cool down Pathfinders, WC51, cheap weapon drops in airborne doctrine and Cavalary Riflemen.
8 Apr 2019, 09:22 AM
#90
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2

This idea that giving some slight buffs to some UP Ostheer units is going to fix anything is just flat out wrong.

IMO the first step to improving balance would be to roll back some doctrinal stuff that USF got in the last patch. Especially 0 CP no cool down Pathfinders, WC51, cheap weapon drops in airborne doctrine and Cavalary Riflemen.


Completely agreed about the early call-ins. Pathfinders should get a big cooldown, same for Cavalry Riflemen.

About OST:
Sander /Miragefla already wrote that OST needs some buffs but some Allied units would also need to be toned down a little bit. I think we should do this by a step-by-step approach and dont touch too many units in the first version.
1. Start with buffing OST units (Pgren, Ostwind), minor nerfs to Allied units like jackson
2. Look at the consequences
3. Further changes if needed
2. Look at the consequences (and so on)
Its better to have 4-5 minor patches then 1 big one.

And i would really prefer making units more expensive before nerfing their performance.
1. Stug is the perfect example. It was overperforming, reaction: Nerfing the unit to the ground. Nobody (with the exection of Dane;) is using it anymore. Operation successful, Patient dead. Just bring the Stug back to the former power level and make the unit much more expensive.
I happily invest even 120 fuel if the unit gives you something back!

2. Jackson was made so good / stayed relativly cheap because USF barely had packs available with the old tech system. The reason is gone and now the Jackson should definitely be more expensive. Its quite ridiculous that the unit cost only 20 fuel more than the OSt P4 who dont stand a chance against it. There is NO BETTER stock TD in the game: MOBILE; SUPER RANGE; Good armor AND in contrast to JP4/SU85 it has a turret. Again: I can even live with the performance but its way to cheap. Unit should definitely cost 155-160 fuel.

3. If we agree that more expensive units should perform better than cheaper units then we really have to role the eyes about the cost of Pgrens and OKW Falls (Just to clarify: Volks are also way to cheap for what they do). Its quite ridiculous how bad the poor Axis fellas are compared to Allied Infantry who cost the same / only a little bit more.

4!!! men Falls cots 340 MP and have super high reinforcement costs but die like flies while US Airborne has 6! men and is hands down 10 times better.
- Make Falls more expensive (same cost as Airborne)
- Unit starts with 5 men, armed with K98
- Give them upgrade options for long/close range or a "heavy" Schreck like the Recon airborne
- Take away the stealth if needed

I also dont mind if Pgrens stay expensive or even get more expensive (380 MP) as long as they are worth the cost.

P.S. Sorry for some off topic stuff.

8 Apr 2019, 09:33 AM
#91
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

What people overlook is that Ost is still decent vs Soviets. Buffing Ost and keeping USF and UKF the same will just make Soviets UP.

If you look at USF you just have to wonder why they deserve a MG as good as a 50 cal. You have to wonder why they get cheap weapon drops + additional squad with teching. Why does Scott need to have 400 HP? Why does Jackson be the clearly best TD in the entire game? Why does Pak Howi have as much firepower as it does right now when all the other mortars got nerfed and Leig remains weak because of unreachable vet requirements.
8 Apr 2019, 09:45 AM
#92
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808

What people overlook is that Ost is still decent vs Soviets. Buffing Ost and keeping USF and UKF the same will just make Soviets UP.

If you look at USF you just have to wonder why they deserve a MG as good as a 50 cal. You have to wonder why they get cheap weapon drops + additional squad with teching. Why does Scott need to have 400 HP? Why does Jackson be the clearly best TD in the entire game? Why does Pak Howi have as much firepower as it does right now when all the other mortars got nerfed and Leig remains weak because of unreachable vet requirements.


+1 straight buffs to OST will leave soviets in the dust, and next thing u kno soviets guna need buffs, then okw/ost will seem weak again and the cycle continues. First nerf the over performing units before buffing ost. And if they do nerfs and buffs they need to do it gradually bit at a time, not triple/buffs or triple nerfs like they did to the stug
8 Apr 2019, 09:51 AM
#93
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2

What people overlook is that Ost is still decent vs Soviets. Buffing Ost and keeping USF and UKF the same will just make Soviets UP.


To be honest buffing Ostwind / Pgrens doesnt have to do anything with faction match ups.The units simply need to be better, period.
But I do agree that UKF/USF are the factions that cause the problems. Increasing the building time for the AEC is much needed for example, its just stupid that it arrives so early. THat would give Flamer HT/222 / Luchs a bigger window to operate. There is no need for an early arriving AEC as long as the brits can build the best PAK at the same time.
8 Apr 2019, 09:57 AM
#94
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

The AEC arrives so early because UKF don't have snares on their mainline infantry. The only faction that lack this functionality.

The 6pdr existing is all well and good but it's not anywhere near mobile enough to swing around the map defending infantry sections that cannot stall FHTs or a luchs.

And if it's pushed out at its earliest opportunity the UKF player is using 4 man sections and no weapon upgrades, so the lack of field time on the light vehicles is offset by weaker infantry presence.

Asymnetrical balance and all that. At least now they have snares at ALL but the AEC availability was always to offset the severe lack of vehicle snares in the brit roster. They can't even start planting mines until they tech up.
8 Apr 2019, 09:59 AM
#95
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

And if they do nerfs and buffs they need to do it gradually bit at a time, not triple/buffs or triple nerfs like they did to the stug

What tripple nerf like they did to the StuG? It only got an ROF decrease and nothing else.


StuG G
The Stug’s high rate of fire is disproportionate to its cost, particularly when produced in numbers.
• Reload from 3.5/4.5 to 4.5/5.5

Spring Update 17th of May 2018 https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/67/coh-2-changelog/p5




Asymnetrical balance and all that. At least now they have snares at ALL but the AEC availability was always to offset the severe lack of vehicle snares in the brit roster. They can't even start planting mines until they tech up.

I don't think the AEC timing is a problem, but it was one of the units designed to be excessively good to compensate for the complete lack of snares. Now that RE have snares, its Tread Shot ability should be moved to vet 1 and maybe the ability's penetration should be brought down from 1000 to normal pen values (like Puma's Aimed Shot ability). Just like the 6 Pounder should now lose its 1.5 accuracy modifier vs Light Vehicles.
8 Apr 2019, 10:14 AM
#96
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


I don't think the AEC timing is a problem, but it was one of the units designed to be excessively good to compensate for the complete lack of snares. Now that RE have snares, its Tread Shot ability should be moved to vet 1 and maybe the ability's penetration should be brought down from 1000 to normal pen values (like Puma's Aimed Shot ability). Just like the 6 Pounder should now lose its 1.5 accuracy modifier vs Light Vehicles.

You probably should read up on how threadshot works for a loooong time now.

Hint: It requires vet1 to do anything better then temporary 5 second meaningless snare.
8 Apr 2019, 10:40 AM
#97
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

I don't think the AEC timing is a problem, but it was one of the units designed to be excessively good to compensate for the complete lack of snares. Now that RE have snares, its Tread Shot ability should be moved to vet 1 and maybe the ability's penetration should be brought down from 1000 to normal pen values (like Puma's Aimed Shot ability). Just like the 6 Pounder should now lose its 1.5 accuracy modifier vs Light Vehicles.


See Katktof's post regarding tread shot.

As for the 6pdr, I disagree. REs arrive later than Infantry Sections and they cannot be a mainline infantry replacement since they were tweaked.

If only Pioneers had snares in Ost, and you had to have T2 researched to build pioneers, and you didn't start with pioneers, I would say the PaK should come with a light vehicle accuracy bonus.

Unless the snare gets moved to tommies, your actual infantry squads, that accuracy bonus is the only thing that keeps the AEC from being picked literally every single game as UKF. It makes the AT gun a viable way to defend yourself.
8 Apr 2019, 10:52 AM
#98
avatar of Grim

Posts: 1096


Secondly, Ost armour has no where near the impact on the game when compared to some allied tanks.
The issue is not so much that Ost armour does not do the damage that some allied tanks do, but more the fact that Ost armour cannot maintain as much field presence due to how often allied At penetrates. I am aware that axis armour does improve with vet but often Ost is already on the ropes and doesn't have enough vps available to built vet. The other thing is allied armour isn't noticably inferior to axis armour especially when consideration is given to how often axis tanks shots fail to penetrate. I have lost count of how many times I have seen a panther or stug or P4 bounce or miss shots on pershing or Is2 ( many at point blank range from P4 ).





Are you referring to 1v1? Because this is not indicative of the 3v3/4v4 experience.

Also you seem baffled that a Call-in heavy tank such as the IS2 (and to a lesser extent the Pershing) can bounce shots from stock units...
8 Apr 2019, 11:25 AM
#99
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 10:52 AMGrim


Are you referring to 1v1? Because this is not indicative of the 3v3/4v4 experience.

Also you seem baffled that a Call-in heavy tank such as the IS2 (and to a lesser extent the Pershing) can bounce shots from stock units...

Baffled that a heavy tank bounces shots. No.
Baffled that such a high percentage bounce from paks, stugs and panther compared to how often tigers and Panthers get penetrated by allied at, absolutely.

Axis armour should not be Op but given that allied infantry is stronger than Ost then it is not unreasonable that axis tanks should have better penetration amd accuracy than what is currently in ppace.
8 Apr 2019, 11:29 AM
#100
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


Baffled that a heavy tank bounces shots. No.
Baffled that such a high percentage bounce from paks, stugs and panther compared to how often tigers and Panthers get penetrated by allied at, absolutely.

Axis armour should not be Op but given that allied infantry is stronger than Ost then it is not unreasonable that axis tanks should have better penetration amd accuracy than what is currently in ppace.

Have you ever shot at jagdtiger frontally?

Literally nothing penetrates it.
The oh so OP allied TDs have less then 50% to pen it from max range and only bit over 50% at point blank.

Also, IS-2 is not even close to meta unit with its current state, it also happens to be the ONLY allied unit with 300+ armor and its not like axis doesn't have at least 2 units with much more armor then that AND these units also happen to penetrate IS-2 with up to 100% chance at any range.

Stop pretending the grass is greener on the other side and if you really insist on it, jump the fence and find out yourself.
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

938 users are online: 938 guests
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49400
Welcome our newest member, praptitourism
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM