|
I agree they drop like flys now with their bullet magnet qualities and the upgrade hardly increases damage better to build a free sandbag wall and camp with default rifles which got buffed so they give up more dps to buy the ppsh now |
This.
As Sovjet KT should be hit by mines and then finished with circling mediums ( 85s are good for this), IS2 ( also able to outrun KTs turret) , ISU or even su85 +arty.
As USF try to kite with Jacksons. This is harder , but manageable. Also use m20 mines.
Kt costs 260 OKW fuel, which is a shitton and without transfering ammo it is 390 fuel for allies! So it has to be that good. Use its very slow turret speed and general speed to your advantage.
Imo the IS2 is far better for cost. 230 fuel for a better tiger with almost kt armor.
Units should be evaluated based on their price not on some conversion madness. The unit should perform like it costs 260 fuel or just give okw full resources and make them pay 390 fuel. If their tanks are evaluated on the other factions fuel cost then there was no point in giving them reduced income in the first place.
Furthermore I Think the KT does perform like a 260 fuel tank, its really not that far off an is2 its really just got a much better offense( and blitz instead of secure mode  ) but using half your popcap on tanks that may still struggle to kill it seems ridiculous |
|
I think there is also a popcap issue at play, The Kt at 26 popcap requires a signifigantly higher pop of medium tanks to engage roughly 4 t34-76 or 3 su85s. The panthers popcap is also a little low at 16 imo when the jackson is at 14.
I think both increasing the popcap of the KT signifigantly, the panther by like 2 and increasing the performance or decreasing the popcap of some medium vehicles like the jackson, sherman, t34 could help this issue considering a p4 costs more than sherman/t34 same pop and jackson costs the same as a p4 and has 2 more pop |
|
Its a bug since they didn't put anything about it in change log and since there's no way this is an acceptable performance for a 300 munitions ability just spam s mines instead ig |
Can we make Pioneers more effective given they are the most expensive builder to help the faction on more crowded maps along with changes in tech costs? They got nerfed after the March Deployment but every other combat unit got buffed. They cost too much for their actual performance coming at 25mp per man, 200mp in a faction that has high costs in terms of mp for their tech, despite how easy they are to kill and their range forces them to have to close to be effective whereas CE and even RE can at least slowly peg away at you from cover. They only really stop charges by rifles and cons who are running into a Gren squad and that is when no one is shooting them or simply waiting behind cover and letting their units tie/beat the grens at mid range.
Sure they beat other builders, but that still doesn't help that really with map control/stopping units from breaking the line to the cut-off. And USF can just volley fire for an auto-win vs pios further halting any attempts to capture points away from the conflict.
If they got buffed we'd have a better option than just Gren,Gren,Gren,Gren on most maps. The Flamethrower is good, but it can explode and that's more munitions on a faction that generally needs munitions for other things.
Sturm Pios also don't really count: they are more of a utility combat unit.
I agree they are quite bad, 25 manpower for less dps than 28 manpower rifles at every single range. Even a price reduction could be fine for less expensive flamer units or cheaper weapon recrews. It also hurts that ostheer always needs a sweeper pio vs soviets and very often vs USF where as the allied factions and OKW don't need to invest as much manpower for this every game |
|
Thanks for the post Cynthia, good to hear what step of the ESL partnership you guys are working since all we had on that previously was speculation as to what exactly was happening |
|
Ostheer 105 is abysmal compared to the mediocre 152. It does half the damage with the same scatter and aoe. Its shoots 2 more shells...but thats not enough to compensate for the fact that shells individually do almost nothing. It honestly looks like they didn't even pay attention to the statistics when typing them or test out the unit in its present form. Theres no way this could be valued at 600 manpower |
|
I think its important to differentiate The consistent fire weapons such as mortars and pack howies and tanks from the barrage style of Katushas and artilery pieces.
The prior doesn't need to kill models that badly b/c they can keep shooting but the latter would be useless if it didn't 1 shot models, i recall the Katusha of a few months ago was super useless b/c it just did hp damage and never killed stuff. Also the latter seems much harder to balance since its gonna kill something and be useful or not kill something so it heals later and be useless. |
|
I think making infantry gain fewer accuracy bonuses on vet and or more recieved accuracy ones might help to reduce lethality by mitigating the more lethal weapons and upgrades in addition to the more impactful offensive bonuses that occur later in the game. This would make aoe weapons and grenades, tanks much more effective by comparison to small arms, but it would make infantry fights progress slower. So its a trade off really, but it would have the desired effect
Edit: this would probably also make cqb units stronger since it will be less punishing to close, but i would want them to try this and see if it makes it more rewarding to walk to cover b/c right now you can lose like several models trying to get to cover which makes it not that valuable and i think that is undesirable |
following that kind of logic one could also argue that it doesnt seem to be a problem... if noone used it that way, it cant be too effective, can it? otherwise everyone (especially with money being involved) would use it
funny thing is that its only a problem now, after someone started a thread about it being able to shoot without setting up at all (which is wrong).
and i dont think its better than a luchs. more fire power sure, but it wont wipe squads while driving away in reverse, it wont circle strafe at guns and its less durable (smoke increases is survivability but doesnt actually improve its durability)
anyways if its that big of a problem for many ppl it should be changed (again: it never was that effective when i played against it, despite it being used in this manner)
I actually only saw it as a problem if it was considered the only and best option however i do think going this teching path has signifigant tradeoffs, late healing or obers, and this creates a good dynamic. But the damage at 6 mins is kinda ridiculous when it glides towards the target settign up. I think the decision to change this should be based on whether or not it is too strong or with it or too weak without it. Finding unique behaviors such as this are a cool part of every game. It's not like something created unintentionally can't be just as awsome a mechanic as one carefully constructed.
|
0
United States
CookiezNcreem
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
