Login

russian armor

Wehrmacht September patch discussion

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (11)down
21 Aug 2019, 16:32 PM
#81
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

If CP4 becomes 110 fuel with no CP requirement and the weaker aura, the Command Panzer 4 would be a tempting offer over the Ostwind. Currently it's often not an option at all because it comes so late at 9 CP, when there are already multiple tanks on the field. The 7 CP in the preview also seems too late if you want it as first tank.

Versus Ostwind you would trade some AI for much better scaling, considering you get:

- Much better armor. Ostwind has 110 armor, while CP4 has 180/234 armor.
- Better AT than the Ostwind, especially on the move. E.g. CP4 can duel a Valentine, Ostwind can't.
- Damage reduction (Good to protect infantry against indirect and to save vehicles)
- Better AI than a P4 without pintle, comparable AI to a P4 with pintle (depends on situation).


I've always found its AI performance utterly lackluster, but I freely admit I've never done a stat comparison on it.

If it really is as serviceable as you suggest, then I think you're probably right on dropping the CP requirement being enough.
21 Aug 2019, 17:08 PM
#82
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 818

If CP4 becomes 110 fuel with no CP requirement and the weaker aura, the Command Panzer 4 would be a tempting offer over the Ostwind. Currently it's often not an option at all because it comes so late at 9 CP, when there are already multiple tanks on the field. The 7 CP in the preview also seems too late if you want it as first tank.

Versus Ostwind you would trade some AI for much better scaling, considering you get:

- Much better armor. Ostwind has 110 armor, while CP4 has 180/234 armor.
- Better AT than the Ostwind, especially on the move. E.g. CP4 can duel a Valentine, Ostwind can't.
- Damage reduction (Good to protect infantry against indirect and to save vehicles)
- Better AI than a P4 without pintle, comparable AI to a P4 with pintle (depends on situation).


Good Point on the CP's. I understand why you would not want somebody to rush a heavy tank like the Tiger aces or IS2 in a team game, that's why CP's are added to units in tech. But this would be the only medium tank to have a CP + tech requirement if i'm not mistaken. Of course it is the only command vehicle of it's class. (Though brits get command vehicle designation at 2 CPS).
21 Aug 2019, 17:52 PM
#83
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2019, 16:32 PMLago


I've always found its AI performance utterly lackluster, but I freely admit I've never done a stat comparison on it.

If it really is as serviceable as you suggest, then I think you're probably right on dropping the CP requirement being enough.


The CP4 has faster reload and lower scatter compared to an Ostheer P4, but it has half the damage and no option to upgrade the pintle. It does its damage to infantry by sniping singular models, altough the majority of its shots will likely miss (but not as many as the P4).

it's like 20% worse against infantry in the open, compared to a P4 with pintle. If the enemy squad is clumped up, it will have similar performance. If the enemy squad stands in the open in yellow cover (so pintle has half the dps) it also has similar performance.
21 Aug 2019, 20:11 PM
#84
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

I'd have the cp4 follow suit of other command units. Make the unit good on its own, and give it active abilities that scale with the player instead of passive abilities that make the best or worst player harder to kill

Make the cp4 a stub nosed stug with a turret. You trade all round performance for AI so it's not a no Brainer but not dead weight either.
21 Aug 2019, 20:15 PM
#85
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

I'd have the cp4 follow suit of other command units. Make the unit good on its own, and give it active abilities that scale with the player instead of passive abilities that make the best or worst player harder to kill


This is my favorite idea, but if it's too much to ask at this point, then they should keep it at -20% and make it only effect your units. It's a simple change and it removes the only part of the unit that's cheesy in team games
22 Aug 2019, 19:06 PM
#86
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

SEPTEMBER 2019 PATCH PREVIEW - Version 1.2 Changes
August 22nd 2019

Wehrmacht

Grenadiers - Experimental Change
We think Grenadiers are in a good spot in terms of their combat performance, but with only 4 models, they get wiped too easily once heavy indirect fire and big guns start roaming the battlefield. We’d like to trial a change that replaces their veterancy 3 Received Accuracy with a Damage Reduction modifier. This should help Grenadiers survive explosions damage in the late game, without really having an impact on their durability versus small arms fire.
- Veterancy 3 -23% Received Accuracy replaced by -20% damage reduction

Wehrmacht Tech
Ostheer tech is more manpower demanding than other factions. The following two changes are designed to alleviate this slightly, and allow Ostheer to field key units slightly faster, particularly in the early game.

Leichte Mechanized Kompanie
- Manpower cost from 200 to 150

Battle Phase 2
- Manpower cost from 200 to 150

Command Panzer IV
- Fuel cost from 120 to 100

Sdf.kfz 251
- Veterancy 1 Infantry Awareness replaced by Schu Mine. Allows the Half-track to plant a Schu Mine for 30 munitions. 10 second plant time.
- Healing rate from 0.25 to 0.4

Sdf.kfz 250 Mortar Halftrack
- Incendiary Barrage now matches those fired by the LeIG. Fires 4 rounds over the target area.
- Incendiary Barrage cost from 45 to 35.

Panzer VI Tiger
- Far AOE damage from 0.1 to 1.75
- Mid AOE distance from 1 to 1.5

Osttruppen Supply Drop
- CP requirement from 4 to 3

Jaeger Command Squad
- CP requirement from 3 to 2

22 Aug 2019, 19:25 PM
#87
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Those changes look good, but I'd personally suggest putting the entire manpower cut in Light Mechanized Company. That'd go a long way towards balancing the T2 skip the PGren changes made viable.
22 Aug 2019, 19:31 PM
#88
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

even if u reduce the price it does not change the fact that CP4 is now useless for stug and puma
, especially the puma as it's literally the point of mobile defense doc :hansGG:


just make the aura for the user only and bring it back to 20 % (no more cheese in team game, still ok for 1 vs 1)
22 Aug 2019, 19:41 PM
#89
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

even if u reduce the price it does not change the fact that CP4 is now useless for stug and puma
, especially the puma as it's literally the point of mobile defense doc :hansGG:


just make the aura for the user only and bring it back to 20 % (no more cheese in team game, still ok for 1 vs 1)


CP4 is finally useful now in 1v1. 100 fuel does seem a bit cheap though, was think 110 fuel myself, but with lower CP. In either case it means 1 less P4 on the field, so I guess it's okay.
22 Aug 2019, 20:06 PM
#90
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 818

100 fuel on CP4 is probably good for performance. Does this mean Popcap goes down to 10 like 100 fuel ostwind and 90 fuel stug or will that stay at 12?

If you have .8 damage on vet 3 grens maybe this unit is okay at .9 I would not want to go through .8 * .8 gren hp to kill them. But I do think that it would be most appropriate to only affect owned units.
22 Aug 2019, 20:12 PM
#91
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

100 fuel on CP4 is probably good for performance. Does this mean Popcap goes down to 10 like 100 fuel ostwind and 90 fuel stug or will that stay at 12?

If you have .8 damage on vet 3 grens maybe this unit is okay at .9 I would not want to go through .8 * .8 gren hp to kill them. But I do think that it would be most appropriate to only affect owned units.
it could work with 0.8 for vehcile and 0.9 for inf if only for own units , but again there are other thing beside green u know that right ?
22 Aug 2019, 20:24 PM
#92
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 379 | Subs: 1

The latest changes are excellent, though I'm not entirely sold on the OKW mines on a 251 HT.

I just don't see why you'd ever use them over S-mines or Tellers. Yes, both are much more expensive, but are more suited to their individual roles.

Perhaps instead it could be given the same hulldown that the 250 has? That would give it an incentive to be used in a forward position.

22 Aug 2019, 20:28 PM
#93
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Aug 2019, 20:24 PMFarlion
Perhaps instead it could be given the same hulldown that the 250 has? That would give it an incentive to be used in a forward position.


Remember that any vet 1 ability needs to serve a purpose for both the standard 251 and also the upgraded Flamer 251. A hulldown ability wouldn't make much sense for the flamer upgrade.
22 Aug 2019, 20:29 PM
#94
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 818

it could work with 0.8 for vehcile and 0.9 for inf if only for own units , but again there are other thing beside green u know that right ?


Ya but i want to keep my grens alive most :wub:

Gren change seems super strong at first glance, vs everything except mgs suppressing them and vanilla infantry fights they will be the same or better.
22 Aug 2019, 20:32 PM
#95
avatar of murky depths

Posts: 607

Not a fan the schu mine. I don't think the 251 needs anything else, tbh, since it's flamer upgrade is quite strong (and it is incredibly fast).

Unless it's locked out with the flamer upgrade.
22 Aug 2019, 20:34 PM
#96
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 379 | Subs: 1



Remember that any vet 1 ability needs to serve a purpose for both the standard 251 and also the upgraded Flamer 251. A hulldown ability wouldn't make much sense for the flamer upgrade.


Fair point.
22 Aug 2019, 20:44 PM
#97
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

"step on it" for 251 :romeoHype:
23 Aug 2019, 00:01 AM
#98
avatar of aomsinzana

Posts: 284 | Subs: 1

No more underuse "Infantry maphax" FeelsGoodMan.
Wait ... 222 still have it Kappa.
And finally Osteer have generalist mines !!!
23 Aug 2019, 00:25 AM
#99
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

For those who are "discussing" the damage reduction changes in the general thread, here you should use quick, concise, supported discussion points to say why the changes are good/bad. Have a bit of fun but don't create a 100 post train of "damage reduction OP >:( "
23 Aug 2019, 01:26 AM
#100
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Aug 2019, 19:25 PMLago
Those changes look good, but I'd personally suggest putting the entire manpower cut in Light Mechanized Company. That'd go a long way towards balancing the T2 skip the PGren changes made viable.


^

I like the cheaper T2, but BP2 cost reduction doesn't feel right to me. IMO, the change should aim at making T2 more tempting and not buff T2 skip strats with it.

I'd remove the BP2 cost reduction and lower the cost of T2 between 50 to 100 manpower.
PAGES (11)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Livestreams

unknown 14
United States 46
Peru 19
Australia 19

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

691 users are online: 691 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49153
Welcome our newest member, Wilmor89
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM