Login

russian armor

Infiltration nades vs molotov

13 Sep 2019, 17:07 PM
#41
avatar of Mazianni

Posts: 785

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 14:49 PMVipper

Thank for trying to derail yet another thread.

I suggest you open a dictionary and check the difference between "not that great" and "the ability must be fucking garbage". But we already aware that you use the term "garbage" rather loosely from your claim about the USF mortar.


I believe it was you who decided to dedicate several pages of the USF balance thread to cryposting about the Ostheer mortar and deliberately misreading the responses you received to perpetuate the derailing, not me. If you desire to improve your reputation on this forum it might be best to keep to facts from now on.

In any case, this ability has undeniable utility compared to the stock flame grenade and exists in a very competitive doctrine; the idea that abilities have to be overpowered in order to merit their own slot is a fantasy; USF rifle company had a slot dedicated to 45 muni flares and 15 muni sprint + debuff until this last patch, and in live game Fire Up still retains a whole slot for it's worth, albeit now without the debuff.

Not every slot has to be a home run in itself, especially not in Special Ops lol

This all said, tbh I wouldn't mind decreasing the windup time some, though I'd be lying if I said I didn't think the Molotov merits that sort of buff a bit more. (Or a cost decrease, considering the whole tech required for it.)

EDIT; I just checked and the windup/winddown for the grenade assaults are the same as normal grenades throws... The delay seems to be on the ability side, which explains some.
13 Sep 2019, 17:25 PM
#42
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


... the idea that abilities have to be overpowered in order to merit their own slot is a fantasy; ...

Thank you for verifying the point have been bringing up for years now.

Yet the point I made in this thread still stands. "Infiltration grenades" is not the selling ability of either commander that they are available to.
13 Sep 2019, 19:22 PM
#43
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359



Is that the official stance going forward? If it's doctrinal it needs to be more effecient than alternatives? Or is the official stance that Soviet abilities need to be over priced or underpowered compared to others? (oorah 2x the price of sprint, molotov the same price as throwing up to 5 grenades, medics locked in base exclusively but not given aoe heals like brit and usf medics)

A long animation hardly warrants the potential to, for only 20mu, wipe a garrison if it's something like an mg that can't get out in time. Abilities of similar capability would be the molotov, which also has a long animation and certainly not that much of a threat or the satchel, which also has a long animation, and a long timer, and over 2x the cost.

It's a little alarming to think that the design philosophy going forth is that we need things to defy balance to be attractive.

Keep in mind this commander now also has near sprint coupled with minimap invisibility ontop of uncounterable recon and cover defying close range mulcher stgs. It's a very powerful ability to be so cheap with the other abilities available.


Of course not. Relic/Balance team has never identified benchmark units on what to balance against(if they have it's not apparent or communicated which units these are). Thats how you get these cost and timing disparities existing for as long as they do. If you ask about you get the buzzword "asymmetrical" thrown at you like that means anything anymore.
13 Sep 2019, 19:26 PM
#44
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

My stance is that an ability should be cost balanced to performance, if that performance isn't worth a whole slot then bundle it with something else.

For example, infiltration nades at their cost could well be restricted to Obers on and the IR StG package then it would be easier to justify. You then have the restrictions of being on elite infantry and a specific upgrade path to justify the low price. Part of the issue I think with the grenades is that they are on so accessible. I understand that the design philosophy behind volks is simply "fuck as many core mechanics of the game as possible" like cover, garrisons, relative positioning and the balance between cost and performance but it being so cheap and also on them compounds the issue.

Merging the nades and the stg and also dropping the CP could make the commander attractive enough with earlier Obers to justify actually balancing the flares as well.

But as is being the same price as molitovs is just wrong. The impact that either of these have is just so incredibly far apart... If you miss a molitovs cue you take dot damage, if you miss a infiltration cue you lose the squad. That's far more than 20mu on any squad worth of impact.
13 Sep 2019, 19:36 PM
#45
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

My stance is that an ability should be cost balanced to performance, if that performance isn't worth a whole slot then bundle it with something else.


+1

The out of combat mechanic should just be scrapped, and just increase the cost of the ability
14 Sep 2019, 00:00 AM
#46
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

dont forget when u increase the price to make it like other nades and let them cancel mid animation, with no cost or cd activation


I don't think that works for barrage like type of grenades. Could be wrong although.
14 Sep 2019, 01:57 AM
#47
avatar of 13greed47

Posts: 54

I remember someone said in the OKW thread that the changes to spec op was "too much" that if recon flare be touched, the whole doctrine will become trash.



how are they gonna scout now? by using the IR halftrack? this is proposterous the faction is total garbage now.




- OKW player
14 Sep 2019, 02:31 AM
#48
avatar of Kirrik

Posts: 573

They need flares instead of recon plane because command panther + infiltration grenades are not meta enough compared to falls+valiant assault spam.
14 Sep 2019, 11:00 AM
#49
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783


EDIT; I just checked and the windup/winddown for the grenade assaults are the same as normal grenades throws... The delay seems to be on the ability side, which explains some.



However, the ready aim time is up to 2 seconds. Also it does seem the grenade does only half the damage across the board as a standard grenade.


So you have a grenade ability with up to 2 seconds delay before throwing animation even begins that hurls half damage grenades in a spread that cant be controlled.

It is good vs mgs in buildings and good for potentially wiping squads on retreat.

It is used against units like a standard grenade only due to its low cost and not due to its actual performance.

If one had to pick between a 20 munitions standard grenade or a 20 munitions grenade barrage, the standard grenade would be taken in a heart beat.
14 Sep 2019, 13:39 PM
#50
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Sep 2019, 22:59 PMKatitof

That's still bullshit, considering they can throw 6 of them now.

Make cons throw 6 molos. Problem solved.
14 Sep 2019, 14:22 PM
#51
avatar of Raviloli

Posts: 72


Make cons throw 6 molos. Problem solved.


I'd actually love to see that, a whole other magnitude of garrison wiping.
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

578 users are online: 578 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
17 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49668
Welcome our newest member, Mckifcdvllip
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM