|
Hi,
Here is my idea of OKW rework:
Resources:
Fuel income: 66%
Amo income: 66%
Salvage bonus: from 5 fuel to 2 fuel. In case of scavange doctrine, 2 fuel + 5 amo.
Pioneers can build now observation posts (vCoh style). Observation Post cost: (250 mp/300 mp – feel free to discuss). While having the same effect as caches, they cost more and they will provide a slightly increased sight range.
Effects: this will reduce manpower stockpiling and indirectly reducing blob build phenomenon. OKW player will be tempted to build at least 1 OP. Exclusive builder unit should be sturmpioneers – they are more expensive (both in requisition cost and reinforcement cost) and takes longer to reinforce, not so easily spamable, and they are effective combat units, so while building caches they will be out of combat (their overall fighting contribution would be lowered). OKW player will have to chose weather he will adopt a strategy based on amo supply or fuel supply increase (not really increase of course, rather compensating handicap trial, but that will cost mp), or stay with the current resources income.
In startgame, OKW player will be obliged to rely on at least one raketenwerfer due to the amo shortage that won’t allow him to build enough schrecks. If he wants to go on “schreck blob” way, this will cost him manpower also (he will need amo observation posts).
Units:
Lower KT and Jagdtiger rear armor (values are debatable, feel free to discuss). This way, flanking would be rewarded more.
Kubelwagen – stays the same, but a cost of 10 fuel will be added. This way, because every fuel drop is important, OKW player will have to be extremely cautious with it, most probably unit will be build once per game and the “kubel spam” phenomenon will be greatly reduced. Penalty for losing it will be higher.
OKW trucks (undeployed) – Stay the same but now the damage received while undeployed will stay the same after the truck is deployed (this will eliminate truck pushing “tactic”). No one will like to have a brand new half-health deployed truck.
Booby-trapping can now be done just by Obersoldaten.
Tiers:
OKW T2 truck will be able to lock territory (T2 = the building with jagdpanzer and searchlight). This way, an aggressive or good placement (protecting owner’s cutoff or locking opponent cutoff) will be as well rewarding but riscky all the same because it will draw all attacks upon it. Can be placed on any point on the map, it will not provide an increased resources income, it will just lock that point. The locked maped point cannot be taken if truck is not destroyed.
Converting T2 into a retreat point costs now 200 mp.
While not affecting so much 1v1 games, this changes may affect the 3v3 and 4v4 games by offerring a different perspective on OKW and bringing some balance maybe. Decisions for OKW player will be harder to make and if wrong, more costly. The manpower reserve scalling of OKW will be tempered through build of OPs wich will not give a real advantage but rather will reduce the resources handicap.
Now shoot.
|
|
Well tbh I'm not so disappointed by their performances, if bazookas are not panzerschrecks, I count bars as good infantry weapons, the difference between a bar equiped and a non equiped squad are quite obvious. From this point of view I would exchange lmg grenadiers on bar equiped rifles any day. |
|
I don't think a cost reduction to 50 amo would hurt, but not more.
Anyway, what's realy expensive is the amo cost for paras weapon upgrades. I mean, imagine the difference. Why in the world wouldn't you go with your paras to the weapon rack and give them a bar or a bazooka instea of those expensive upgrades?! |
|
Axis lost one of its best players...
Studies, marriage, marriage + kids... never went well with COH. Sigh. Good luck, general! |
To fix some misconceptions...
.50 cal has lower suppression than maxim at max range. .50 cal also has lower damage than maxim at max range. .50 cal has higher aoe suppresion than maxim, but slightly weaker than MG42. .50 cal has very good scaling of both damage and suppression as you get closer to your target, but because it has the weakest HMG crew in the game by a huge margin, taking advantage of that is practically impossible.
Fair enough but I still got the impression that is supressing faster than MG42. |
Furthermore, cheese can be defined if there are no valid transitions out of the said strategy.
Cheese is not:
- Kubel openings
- Double Soviet snipers
- Double M3 flamecars
- Maxim spam
as these are all standard openers for their respective factions. They may be easier or harder to execute, but they are all standard builds (the "meta".)
Cheese would be something more akin to:
- 6 RE starts > Fighting Positions
- Lenny's 8 to 11 conscripts
- Barton's 5S strategy
- 3 Kubel starts (prior to 40 range buff)
So I guess I am not using a cheese strategy while playing OKW, because I'm using 1 kubel. Thank you. Instead,
- Double Soviet snipers
- Double M3 flamecars
- Maxim spam
I'm seeing all the time.... |
the allied fanboys need something to complain about.
It's full of them on this forum. I like playing with USF but this doesn't make me a fanboy. I like OKW even more but the fact that I am astonished by the absurdities I am reading here and state it out loud, it doesn't make me a fanboy eather. People are difficult to understand. Sigh. |
I'm sorry I can't take you serious. I have known people that clown around a lot and then you never really know when they are telling the truth or still clowning, because what they say are funny either way.
Speaking of funny, I've been paying more attention to this unit and building it even more often, and it's hilariously bad. A pak40 destroyed it in one game. Napalm is right too, I can't get the crew not even the main gun in cover ever. For such a decent weapon my axis opponents never pick it up when decrewed, why is that? Worst HMG in the game with the highest price.
I am probably playing other game with the same name if I'm saying 50 cal' has an instant supression and a good damage. I am looking at what these guys are saying related to weak supression rate and I am like....  Are we talking about the same HMG? The one from the lieutenant building (american T2)?
Oh, and by the way, I like playing USF I think they're cool. Much cooler than soviets, altough not that strong. |
I dont know what game mode you play, but clearly no one plays the same game as you.
Actualy he has a point, manny things I saw here is just pro-Allied bias. This guy is rare, it realy understands the game.
You are kind of delusional to not at least igknowlege the fact the USF and Soviet design are flawed in a way that forces to cheese strats to even stay competitive, which get out scaled hard core by Axis late game.
Nobody force Soviet or USF to use cheese strats. Cheese strat = easy mode and that is why people use it, because they are in love with their stats.
Even if you think the charts dont represent balance, clearly they represent that out of the top 200 players of each game mode the win loss ratios significantly favor Axis. You might want to go brush up on your statistics....
Oh, and I imagine the game is built just for top 200 huh? I am pretty sure it will be realy interesting what is going on below that. You would be surprised. |
Dear Relic.
The balance process, to whatever extent there is one, needs serious adjustment. It is painfully obvious that the balance team doesn't know what it is doing. When a buff is given out to a unit in one patch, and then reverted quickly in the next one, it is an obvious sign that something is wrong. And when it happens over and over again, it is even more obvious.
There doesn't even seem to be a basic common sense starting place on balance such as "balance for 1v1 first, then for higher numbers." Why do I say that? OKW munitions income just got nerfed (itself a revert of a previous buff), specifically because 4v4 games were having issues. (Really? Nerf 1v1 because of 4v4? Couldn't you just have adjusted 4v4 instead? You will still have issues, but instead of having them with 4v4 you will now have more with 1v1. Does that make sense?)
I have serious questions as to whether the balance team even plays the game (or if they do, whether they play it enough). The reason I say that is, looking from the outside in (the only way I can view the process), it appears as if they deliver balance edicts born from pure theorycraft from within a locked room without any windows or computers. As a locked room without windows suggests, it appears as if they have little communication with anyone else as to what balance needs to be adjusted, in which direction it should be adjusted, or how a potential adjustment might affect the game.
It appears as if there is little or no testing of patches before they roll out. This is easy to determine because adjustments wouldn't have to be quickly reverted if things were tested adequately, would they?
Furthermore - and I consider this a very serious issue - there are many units that have been completely nerfed out of the game, and the balance team refuses to address those units. I could name all these units, but that would take too long. A case in point would be the wehrmacht flame halftrack. It is a total and complete joke, and everyone knows it. Firstly, it is seriously underpowered as far as dps goes. A friend and I did testing of it and posted the results plus replays showing the tests. A single flame engineer out-dps's it, which is ridiculous. Furthermore, by the time you can get one out tanks are on the field. Yet patch after patch, month after month, eon after eon, the thing just sits there unadjusted.
I can't judge what is in someone's heart or brain. or what goes on in the balance office of Relic. But I can judge by appearances, actions and results. My judgement is therefore that the balance team purposefully nerfs many units out of the game (flame halftrack, etc) because they already have enough trouble doing their jobs, and their jobs are made much easier if they have a small core of units to balance for each faction vs a plethora of them. Well, it might make their lives easier, but that's not my concern as a game player and a paying customer. I'd like to have the game units I paid for to actually be functional, not simply units I build "for the lolz" or to troll an opponent.
In short, the balance process is in need of serious adjustment before any real balance is ever going to be forthcoming. I don't know why they are having the issues they are having, but I suspect there just isn't enough manpower or money being directed towards it.
Stop your attempts at "balance" now. Work on your balance process instead.
Do you need to hire more people? Do it.
Do you need more equipment for testing? Buy more computers, designate a room for "testing," and have your developers write balance testing and simulation code.
Does the balance team not play the game enough? Do it.
Do you not collect enough data? Do it. Hire a statistician while you are at it.
Do you not read forums or talk to people in the community? You should. Now, that is a far cry from saying "implement all balance advice you read on the forums or get from top-tier players," as they all have biases and many of them are idiots to boot. But at least you will be aware of POTENTIAL problems, and POTENTIAL adjustments that may be needed.
In short, get your act together please. This hit-and-miss joke balancing act where you seem to throw darts at a dartboard with a bunch of random balance adjustments pasted to it just isn't working.
+ 1 !!!!!!!!!!!! |
0
_Hiena_
xingyuguan
Relic Entertainment
