Login

russian armor

OKW September patch discussion

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (29)down
18 Aug 2019, 10:49 AM
#201
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2019, 08:43 AMJilet


PGren G43 has better DPS at almost all ranges and with their insane RA and vet RA PGrens are stupid strong compared to Falls. And it looks like with current changes Falls are gonna be a cheese unit with his current "First Strike Bonus" nothing else.


Falls are actually good at long range unlike Pgrens or G43 Pgrens.
18 Aug 2019, 10:56 AM
#202
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2

No matter how you look at Falls I think we can all agree that the last changes were nerfs instead of buffs and made an already struggeling unit even worse.


+1

@modteam:
About OKW tech changes:
HI guys, i think we all agree that Battlegroup HQ is too weak compared to Mechanized HQ and is not really attractive. The proposed changes aim to make Battlegroup HQ at least indirectly more attractive - Obers would be available earlier. I dont want to discuss this changes here -good feedback was already posted- but want to bring one new perspective to the discussion.

One of the most powerful abilities of Battlegroup HQ was the FORWARD RETREAT POINT option that was (over?)nerfed long time ago.
Im fully aware that FRP are a very delicate and problematic issue but at least it would offer a straight way to buff Battlegroup AND it could be combined with the proposed OKW tech changes.
Maybe you find a salomonical solution - making the FRW point and Battlegroup more attractive without the problems it caused in the former version.
18 Aug 2019, 11:29 AM
#203
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2019, 10:20 AMgbem


tommies are getting nerfed and cons are a joke lmao
again do we price unit by their performance when upgraded ? no need to dodge the issue , is would be 300 mp and cons would be 260 is we counted the extra men in the upgrade like it's done for Pfusi
18 Aug 2019, 11:45 AM
#204
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

18 Aug 2019, 11:52 AM
#205
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 556



Falls are actually good at long range unlike Pgrens or G43 Pgrens.


G43 PGrens has almost the same DPS at every single range. With a difference of 0,5 DPS at 35 range if I remember correctly. And their RA really helps. Add their timing and them being non-doctrinal to the mix.
18 Aug 2019, 11:53 AM
#206
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2019, 11:45 AMgbem
obers
so u are saying ober are trash with out lmg ? i agree and once again why are not IS 300 mp and cons 260 ?
18 Aug 2019, 11:57 AM
#207
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 556



We tried concentrating DPS in 2 FG 42s like with IR STG 44s, and giving them really high damage bursts but longer cooldowns (which I thought was pretty cool). We've also tried making them more a close range ambush squad like Stormtroopers (to set them apart from Obers). Ultimately we decided to go with a more conservative approach for now. One of the problems is that Valiant Assault is in the same doctrine so there's the risk of overbuffing Falls with them becoming terminators when the ability is active (which is quite spammable in teamgames).


German Infantry has both Stormtroopers and a Valiant Assault like (I don't remember the name currently) skill yet it is not overwhelming ? I think Falls need to be the infiltration squad just like you first tought. With their current gun DPS profile it will not be "decimating" infantry at any range while their RA will prevent blobbing micro due to models dropping real fast.
18 Aug 2019, 12:09 PM
#208
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2019, 11:57 AMJilet
German Infantry has both Stormtroopers and a Valiant Assault like (I don't remember the name currently) skill yet it is not overwhelming ?


Big difference between purely close range orientated Stormtrooper MP 40s and the all-ranges orientated Falls FG 42s though. Assault and Hold also doesn't let Stormtroopers sprint in for maximum damage / minimum exposure.
18 Aug 2019, 12:14 PM
#209
avatar of Aarotron

Posts: 563

I wonder if we could see possibly alternative weapon choices for falls as upgrades. My personal favourites would be flamethrower (long strech but as 4 man squad manageable) storntrooper mp 40s or g 43s
18 Aug 2019, 13:38 PM
#210
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783

I tried out the September patch as OKW.

It felt surprisingly different and better.

Feels more smooth and fun.

No frustration and limitations as before, I feel


Raketenwerfer

Feels more like a better support weapon now, less frustrating to use.

It is simply a way better improvement. Not cheesy anymore, more fun to use. No frustration feelings anymore for both Axis and Allies anymore.

5 man really solves their survivability issue. Removal of retreat is fair and a just decision.

Camo nerfed is definitely a good change.


Though I feel it needs something:

Either improve its "Delay" (like decreasing its time since it is nearly triple the length of other AT guns) or decrease the "Reload" time a bit.

Just to make it a better AT support gun.



Early game

Feels different, cant acquire the Volks as quickly as I had used to due to the changes made.

Makes you resort to getting one Kubel in some way to counter the delay effectively.

Reduces the effectiveness of Volks spamming. Early gameplay is different now.

Truck price changes are nice, it is better

Starting manpower has some effect and the price on volks increase means decrease in Volks spamming early game anymore.


Teching

Feels like an improvement overall.

The fact Obers can be acquired earlier, by choice, is a nice thing.

Do you agree though, with locking the MG34 upgrade for Obers behind PzHQ tech upgrade?

Flak Halftrack price decrease does not really bring much incentive but the changes on Raketenwerfer does as it helps better fulfill the role of AT support better.

Flak Halftrack is in my opinion, not that good when vet 0 or 1, since it is inconsistent and not too accurate. Only vet 2, then it becomes good which is pretty bad timing.

PanzerHQ upgrade costs 40 fuel, not bad.


Maybe the last base can be cheaper at the cost of upgrading is higher. Say Base is 70 fuel instead and upgrade 50 fuel Instead. Just a suggestion.


Sturmpio


Simply a great change.

Scales so much better, you can actually depend on using that unit for combat also, which is simply a great change.

Vet fix and adjusted for scaling better performance, GOOD JOB.

They are now a competent combat unit, reliable, viable more than before.

Simply plays a good role. Especially when vet 1 grenade arrives instead is a good change.

Vet 3 grenade arrival was simply ridiculous.


Changes to Doctrines, Overall Effect


Fallshirmjagers, feels different but improved, more reason to use them now since they are actually more viable espeically when their price decreased accordingly.

Before, it was simply terrible, price and performance simply did not match.

It is viable now.


I believe Feuersturm will be the next, if not the best doctrine if the September patch was actually released since that would incredibly enhance their overall infantry firepower. Especially support weapons.



What changes do I believe it needs


Raketenwerfer, to improve either its "Delay" (like decreasing its time since it is nearly triple the length of other AT guns) or decrease the "Reload" time.

Just to make it a better AT support gun.


Starting Manpower:

Volks, do you guys think the reinforce cost should be increased accordingly to adjust to its new set price?

Might be necessary, now since other infantry units in OKW has been improved.

OR

Change its starting MP to the decided Sep Patch 320 manpower starting to 300 instead. Might help effectively more, if only deemed necessary to decrease the early strength.

___________
All in all, I like the September patch. It is enjoyable and most of the changes will stay.

I like the changes on the Sturmpio and Raketenwerfer best. It was a necessary change.













18 Aug 2019, 13:40 PM
#211
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 857 | Subs: 2

I wonder if we could see possibly alternative weapon choices for falls as upgrades. My personal favourites would be flamethrower (long strech but as 4 man squad manageable) storntrooper mp 40s or g 43s


If i remember it correctly there is a fall pio unit in the gamefiles, they could also go in that direction.
18 Aug 2019, 13:48 PM
#212
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2019, 11:52 AMJilet


G43 PGrens has almost the same DPS at every single range. With a difference of 0,5 DPS at 35 range if I remember correctly. And their RA really helps. Add their timing and them being non-doctrinal to the mix.


Vet 0
4x FG42 = 20 dps at far range.
3x Pgren G43 + 1x STG = 10,7 dps at far range.

Vet 3
4x FG42 = 29,8 dps at far range (estimate, cause the vet 3/5 numbers in Cruzzi's chart are wrong.)
3x Pgren G43 + 1x STG = 16,6 dps at far range.

Almost double the dps.

Note: I didn't account for patch buffs to the weapons themselves, only the veterancy, but considering both get a far range buff I doubt the ratio would be much different.
18 Aug 2019, 14:16 PM
#213
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

tight rope tested the falls on YouTube, they are bad
18 Aug 2019, 14:30 PM
#214
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

tight rope tested the falls on YouTube, they are bad


Yeah, in a scenario that they're not meant to used in at all. That test doesn't tell us that much about their actual performance in their real role. Is it really surprising that a 320mp and 60mu ambush unit lost to 360mp and 120mu pure combat Paratroopers in a head-on fight?
18 Aug 2019, 14:32 PM
#215
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

tight rope tested the falls on YouTube, they are bad


Tightrope used tested them in a situation they're terrible in. Two reasons:

1. FG42's don't have focus fire (= damage gets spread across squad) and they went up against LMG para's that do have focus fire (= damage concentrated on a single model). Falls are a squad that absolutely can't lose models, so they're bad against weapons that have focus fire (namely DP28's, 1919's and Brens).

2. Falls have a bad squad formation in the open. 1 guy stands infront that always gets targeted first. They have to be in cover to work, just like Panzergrenadiers and Grenadiers.

Again, their dps is absolutely great, but you have to get them in an advantageous position to work. Use cover and camo. Flank with them. Screen them with your other infantry. Attack head on only if you have larger numbers.

If the balance team wants to make Falls better in brawler fights, give them 2 different types of FG42's. Two with focus fire, two without focus fire. That way they can actually kill models instead of only doing health damage until the enemy squad hits <50% hp.
18 Aug 2019, 14:36 PM
#216
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Tightrope used tested them in a situation they're terrible in. Two reasons:

1. FG42's don't have focus fire (= damage gets spread across squad) and they went up against LMG para's that do have focus fire (= damage concentrated on a single model). Falls are a squad that absolutely can't lose models, so they're bad against weapons that have focus fire (namely DP28's, 1919's and Brens).

2. Falls have a bad squad formation in the open. 1 guy stands infront that always gets targeted first. They have to be in cover to work, just like Panzergrenadiers and Grenadiers.

Again, their dps is absolutely great, but you have to get them in an advantageous position to work. Use cover and camo. Flank with them. Screen them with your other infantry. Attack head on only if you have larger numbers.

If the balance team wants to make Falls better in brawler fights, give them 2 different types of FG42's. Two with focus fire, two without focus fire. That way they can actually kill models instead of only doing health damage until the enemy squad hits <50% hp.
it does nothing, they tested it, check the cruzz thread

18 Aug 2019, 14:38 PM
#217
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Yeah, in a scenario that they're not meant to used in at all. That test doesn't tell us that much about their actual performance in their real role. Is it really surprising that a 320mp and 60mu ambush unit lost to 360mp and 120mu pure combat Paratroopers in a head-on fight?
at long range i can understand, but at mid range, where they are supposed to be good, I can't, and shock simply walked in on them fine from long range to close
18 Aug 2019, 14:43 PM
#218
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

2 CP Shocks can walk in on 2CP Falls from max range and still win easily by just walking into melee range. They aren`t priced that differently. Why is this ok? 4 x FG42 Falls are decent vs Shocks but the 3rd and 4th FG comes way later.
18 Aug 2019, 14:58 PM
#219
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

it does nothing, they tested it, check the cruzz thread







I just learned this too.

So weapons with focus fire on "true" have a definite advantage in killing models fast. It's quite apparent if you put Falls and LMG Para's against each other.
18 Aug 2019, 15:18 PM
#220
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

I found the tanks tested in the UKF/OKW video by tightrope very lack luster. It shouldn't take a stationary tank 50 seconds to kill a single squad, panzer 4s and HE shermans are currently all better than the Tiger/KT/comet in the AI department at max range for some reason. And don't say "armor", armor is completley RNG dependant and honestly is probably the primary issue with tank balance.

IMO I think the comet needs a faster "projectile" even though there is no projectile as far as I'm aware.

KT needs better AoE or something, the display was pitiful vs a conscript.

The Tiger was even worse, taking ages to even hit the opposing squad.

I like the brummbar treatent to tanks, I don't like how they deal next to no damage along side the larger damage spread.

If there is truely and issue with tanks being too lethal, specifically heavies, change the defensive stats so TDs are more reliable and thus are better at repelling them. That and adjust the price. Make the KT an actual threat to infantry and raise its price to 310F again.
PAGES (29)down
3 users are browsing this thread: 3 guests

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

937 users are online: 937 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49104
Welcome our newest member, zhcnwps
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM