Login

russian armor

Ostheer T2 Skip

PAGES (8)down
24 Jun 2019, 09:33 AM
#41
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392



Ostheer players opponent, not a balance team, should provocate him to not skip this tech, which still be relevant and important.


That is true, if skiping T2 doesn't opens a weak spot it isn't the failure of balance.

-> Most threads are about problems of players, which don't want to change their old "broken" play-style.
24 Jun 2019, 09:56 AM
#42
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Ostheer players opponent, not a balance team, should provocate him to not skip this tech, which still be relevant and important.


But it is a question of balance. Internal balance.

It's the value of T2 vs the value of skipping it.

Formerly, that balance was way in favour of T2: skip T2 and you've got barely any AT.

But now you get decent AT anyway, is T2 worth 200 MP 20 FU now? If you're not building multiple T2 units, it's 400 MP 50 FU to get an LV out or 520 MP 20 FU for an AT gun.

Those just aren't good value compared to Panzergrenadiers.


I've got no problem with this new tech structure, but T2 should have a comparable cost to T1 in its current state, at least in manpower.
24 Jun 2019, 10:02 AM
#43
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2019, 09:56 AMLago


I've got no problem with this new tech structure, but T2 should have a comparable cost to T1 in its current state, at least in manpower.

+1

MAybe it would be an option to increase the cost of battlephase 1 and decrease the cost of t2 building.
24 Jun 2019, 10:27 AM
#44
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2019, 10:02 AMSmartie
+1

MAybe it would be an option to increase the cost of battlephase 1 and decrease the cost of t2 building.


That's my suggestion.

You can also shunt resources to BP2 if you want to strengthen T2 without weakening the T2 skip.

You could even do both.

For example:

BP1: 100 MP 40 FU to 150 MP 45 FU
T2: 200 MP 20 FU to 100 MP 10 FU
BP2: 200 MP 90 FU to 250 MP 100 FU
24 Jun 2019, 10:39 AM
#45
avatar of YeltsinDeathBrigades

Posts: 110

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2019, 09:56 AMLago


But it is a question of balance. Internal balance.

It's the value of T2 vs the value of skipping it.

Formerly, that balance was way in favour of T2: skip T2 and you've got barely any AT.

But now you get decent AT anyway, is T2 worth 200 MP 20 FU now? If you're not building multiple T2 units, it's 400 MP 50 FU to get an LV out or 520 MP 20 FU for an AT gun.

Those just aren't good value compared to Panzergrenadiers.


I've got no problem with this new tech structure, but T2 should have a comparable cost to T1 in its current state, at least in manpower.


Ostheer is actually the only faction, which can tech skip. It is OK, it is like "faction design", because ostheer should have something for all this tech tree crap compared to other factions.
Just look: ostheer is the only faction which is researching and then building a structure on the base. Compared to UKF or USF, for example, which require nothing but brainless click when there is enough resources.
Opportunity to skip t2 or t3 ot even t1 is about in-game situation. You can skip it, if you are sure in your strength and map control or play safe. Your choice, just like your opponents. Everybody can force opponent into choice they like, or don't like. Just like with OKW, just like it should be, when things are balanced.

Your point here, I'm sorry, looks like "USF has an opportunity to skip M20 because Captains non-resercheable BAR which brings to a single squad enough firepower for killing sniper on retreat after flank". Yes, it is possible, but Ostheer can force USF into buying LVs and not just saving for Shermie and there is definitely no reason to do something in USF tech design just because of that argument.
24 Jun 2019, 11:10 AM
#46
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

Ostheer players opponent, not a balance team, should provocate him to not skip this tech, which still be relevant and important.


True, but only to some extend. The goal is always to give players as much freedom as can be allowed, but somewhere a(n) (arbitrary) line has to be drawn. This line is based on (cost) effectiveness.

If this new T1 + T2 skipping becomes a too effective meta, and if it ultimately proves that other factions can't reliably cope with that, something will have to be done about it. It's on the radar.
24 Jun 2019, 11:27 AM
#47
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2



True, but only to some extend. The goal is always to give players as much freedom as can be allowed, but somewhere a(n) (arbitrary) line has to be drawn. This line is based on (cost) effectiveness.

If this new T1 + T2 skipping becomes a too effective meta, and if it ultimately proves that other factions can't reliably cope with that, something will have to be done about it. It's on the radar.


Would putting schreck upgrade for pgrens behind t2 not solve the issue? Allies would then have a good chance to punish players skipping t2 with light vehicles.
Pfussies also need tech to get the At upgrade.
24 Jun 2019, 11:51 AM
#48
avatar of YeltsinDeathBrigades

Posts: 110



True, but only to some extend. The goal is always to give players as much freedom as can be allowed, but somewhere a(n) (arbitrary) line has to be drawn. This line is based on (cost) effectiveness.

If this new T1 + T2 skipping becomes a too effective meta, and if it ultimately proves that other factions can't reliably cope with that, something will have to be done about it. It's on the radar.


Well, I hope that people will find a solution by their own (like I did, for example) without any interventiuon from balance team. Really appreciate your work, but "for small government" and all that, yknow.
24 Jun 2019, 16:00 PM
#49
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2019, 11:27 AMSmartie
Would putting schreck upgrade for pgrens behind t2 not solve the issue? Allies would then have a good chance to punish players skipping t2 with light vehicles.
Pfussies also need tech to get the At upgrade.

That would restore the previous dynamic where skipping T2 entirely means giving up Ostheer's anti-tank tools.

It's a tried and tested dynamic that works well and around which the game has already been balanced. It's probably the best suggestion so far.

If this new T1 + T2 skipping becomes a too effective meta, and if it ultimately proves that other factions can't reliably cope with that, something will have to be done about it. It's on the radar.

There's still an internal balance concern: 200 MP 20 FU is a steep price to pay for T2 if you don't actually need it any more.


Your point here, I'm sorry, looks like "USF has an opportunity to skip M20 because Captains non-resercheable BAR which brings to a single squad enough firepower for killing sniper on retreat after flank". Yes, it is possible, but Ostheer can force USF into buying LVs and not just saving for Shermie and there is definitely no reason to do something in USF tech design just because of that argument.

That's not how it works at all.

Building a light vehicle usually gives you an immediate advantage at the cost of slowing your teching. That's why you build them.

Nobody built the M20 Utility Car when it cost 340 MP because it didn't give you an advantage: it wasn't any more effective than just spending those resources on more infantry so you slowed your tech for nothing.

I fear Ostheer T2 is in the same position: a 222 or 251 just isn't worth 400 MP 50 FU worth of stuff.
24 Jun 2019, 16:29 PM
#50
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783

T2 is extremely useful. Skipping it is definitely a real bad idea.

I mean it is possible to skip as well as any other Tier but T2 is essential still however.

I always use T2 because Pak40 is great. It provides good AT support. I would better make use of Pzgrens for Infantry engagements instead.

Scout Car although it is weak, it helps take ground a lot when the enemy has not yet acquired AT weaponry, very useful. Although time gap is short but it always makes a difference.

Halftrack provides great support but it is definitely more effective to use the Flame for infantry engagements instead.

If anyone skips T2, that means they leave themselves heavily exposed. According to my experiences.

You can make do without but that would essentially make it much more difficult.

24 Jun 2019, 17:10 PM
#51
24 Jun 2019, 17:12 PM
#52
avatar of YeltsinDeathBrigades

Posts: 110

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2019, 16:00 PMLago

That would restore the previous dynamic where skipping T2 entirely means giving up Ostheer's anti-tank tools.

It's a tried and tested dynamic that works well and around which the game has already been balanced. It's probably the best suggestion so far.


There's still an internal balance concern: 200 MP 20 FU is a steep price to pay for T2 if you don't actually need it any more.



That's not how it works at all.

Building a light vehicle usually gives you an immediate advantage at the cost of slowing your teching. That's why you build them.

Nobody built the M20 Utility Car when it cost 340 MP because it didn't give you an advantage: it wasn't any more effective than just spending those resources on more infantry so you slowed your tech for nothing.

I fear Ostheer T2 is in the same position: a 222 or 251 just isn't worth 400 MP 50 FU worth of stuff.


As far as I can see you ignore, that light vehicles are bringing map control to a player or are preventing from losing it.
Even M20 or 222 (we leave a bigbullshitflamerofdoom without lot of attention now) can, as I said before, "outprice" own build in manpower and bring more map control for a player building it.
With logic that "It not worth it" we could ignore sniper and grenadiers and just go for osttruppen and only balance team then forces to prevent this pathetic abuse... G-d, I should stop, it's too funny, I apologize..
Point is, that 222 performs well, it is not underpowered. 251 is ok, it's veterancy with flamer is just broken. If you are not building them because you want jump straight into a medium or even tiger ace, it should be possible as ost until you can carry own disadvantages.
24 Jun 2019, 18:45 PM
#53
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

T2 is extremely useful. Skipping it is definitely a real bad idea.


It used to be: without it you relied on Panzerfausts and Teller mines for AT.

Now you get the Shreck PGrens in T0, it's much harder to make the argument for T2.


As far as I can see you ignore, that light vehicles are bringing map control to a player or are preventing from losing it.

Point is, that 222 performs well, it is not underpowered. 251 is ok, it's veterancy with flamer is just broken. If you are not building them because you want jump straight into a medium or even tiger ace, it should be possible as ost until you can carry own disadvantages.

Before the Panzergrenadier changes, you (usually) had to build T2 anyway. Therefore, the cost of getting a 222 vs not getting a 222 was 200 MP, 30 FU.

However, now you can safely skip T2, the cost of getting a 222 vs not getting a 222 is 400 MP, 50 FU. If you're not going for a light vehicle, you don't really need to build T2 at all.

The 222 is excellent value for 200/30. Do you honestly think it's excellent value for 400/50?
24 Jun 2019, 18:46 PM
#54
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



That is true, if skiping T2 doesn't opens a weak spot it isn't the failure of balance.

-> Most threads are about problems of players, which don't want to change their old "broken" play-style.
but it does open a weak point, u skip at guns and LV like the 222 and 251
24 Jun 2019, 18:48 PM
#55
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392



As far as I can see you ignore, that light vehicles are bringing map control to a player or are preventing from losing it.
Even M20 or 222 (we leave a bigbullshitflamerofdoom without lot of attention now) can, as I said before, "outprice" own build in manpower and bring more map control for a player building it.
With logic that "It not worth it" we could ignore sniper and grenadiers and just go for osttruppen and only balance team then forces to prevent this pathetic abuse... G-d, I should stop, it's too funny, I apologize..
Point is, that 222 performs well, it is not underpowered. 251 is ok, it's veterancy with flamer is just broken. If you are not building them because you want jump straight into a medium or even tiger ace, it should be possible as ost until you can carry own disadvantages.


- The 222 works fine, that is true. But its abilities need some improvement, so it gets useful after the 10min marker.

e.g. Scope is OP -> remove it as commander ability -> give 222 an scope upgrade non-doc (nerf the scope, so it only reaches 70 range with vet 2).

- 251 is only useful with flamer, most maps work better with bunkers. Give it something, so it gets a special role.

e.g. give it a small aura, so Pioneers repair 5 - 10% faster.

- PaK40 is fine, I only think that british 6 pounder makes too much damage, with its faster rotation it is better (that is my opinion) -> nerf 6 pounder damage from 160 to 140 - 150. Now US PaK doen't look so bad anymore.
24 Jun 2019, 18:49 PM
#56
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

I think the skip has weakness in 1v1, but is way more flexible for 2v2 and upwards for obvious reasons. Previously, Ostwind was not worth and the time to get a PIV left you vulnerable for far too long, making the skip of T2 not a reality.

222 is nice against heavy clowncar, Dodge, Brens, as well as soft counter or supporting killing other lights as the game progress. But if you can kill or deal with them, i don't think there's too much of a need to get one.
251 FHT is great, but it also requires a hefty munition investment (which can be spent elsewhere for similar long term results aka infantry upgrades).

The whole thing that makes T2 skip worth, is getting the Ostwind. It would be interesting to see what is the fuel gap between the arrival of the T70 (only T1, T2 + AT nade/molo or T1 + T2) and Ostwind.

I feel like the natural punish unit for this kind of strats are either not seeing use, not worth the cost or have limited timeframe to do so. Ex: M20-AAHT-Greyhound, call in and non doc M5 Quad.
The Stuart/Aec are not disruptive enough to merit getting T2, more so if it will delay you from getting a real med to deal with the Ost. It's like getting a Puma for map control and then crying when you see a Centaur on the enemy team.



I think more time has to pass to see where the meta finally settles down. If small adjustments are done to the Flakpanzer*, i don't think any change in the tech must be done.

*


24 Jun 2019, 18:56 PM
#57
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

but it does open a weak point, u skip at guns and LV like the 222 and 251


That is true, in 1vs1 it is a huge gap. But in larger team-game you can handle it.

I would be a huge fan of improving the abilities of Ostheer's light vehicles. They simply lose their role in late-game, while T70 can still snipe Obersoldaten etc. 222 becomes an AA, while Ostwind is simply better. It should be a mobile scoter for PaK and StuG etc.

German Pioneer is simply better at scouting, if 222 has no Scope (which is OP xD)

-> even when Pioneers are broken, because they have weapon-range of 35 with MP40, making them suicide Scouter.
24 Jun 2019, 19:00 PM
#58
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

but it does open a weak point, u skip at guns and LV like the 222 and 251


You don't need a Pak any more than Soviet T1 needs a ZiS: you've got Panzergrenadiers.

That leaves the light vehicles, which are a pretty hard sell at their new effective price point. You can almost buy a 250 and a Pioneer to go in the back for the cost of a 251.

T2 just isn't worth 200 MP, 20 FU any more. Not unless they lock the Panzershrecks back behind it.
24 Jun 2019, 19:10 PM
#59
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2019, 09:56 AMLago


But it is a question of balance. Internal balance.

It's the value of T2 vs the value of skipping it.

Formerly, that balance was way in favour of T2: skip T2 and you've got barely any AT.

But now you get decent AT anyway, is T2 worth 200 MP 20 FU now? If you're not building multiple T2 units, it's 400 MP 50 FU to get an LV out or 520 MP 20 FU for an AT gun.

Those just aren't good value compared to Panzergrenadiers.


I've got no problem with this new tech structure, but T2 should have a comparable cost to T1 in its current state, at least in manpower.

+1

Although not having paks against a t70 or AAHT sucks.
24 Jun 2019, 19:17 PM
#60
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1


I would be a huge fan of improving the abilities of Ostheer's light vehicles. They simply lose their role in late-game, while T70 can still snipe Obersoldaten etc. 222 becomes an AA, while Ostwind is simply better. It should be a mobile scoter for PaK and StuG etc.


So you go from wanting the thread closed because someone suggested MINOR nerfs to Ost, to criticising the thread saying it's just ppl not wanting to change, to now asking for Ost buffs.

If you can't ask for nerfs right after a bunch of buffs, then it's way more absurd to start talking about getting even more buffs
PAGES (8)down
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

539 users are online: 539 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM