It's actually only 3 shots I believe.
Pretty sure it's 4, but even if you're right, 3 is even worse and it needs to be more. I think 8 is a good number. The only concern maybe is that it would make the HEAT barrage at vet2 too good potentially. |
|
It also overlaps a lot with the mortar carriage and that is arguable better.
One thing that I think it could benefit from is better barrage accuracy and more shots in the barrage, maybe 8 shots instead of 4. The huge range on the barrage is nice but for only 4 shots that can barely hit? |
|
One idea that I thought would be interesting would be to make deflection damage be a percentage that is determined by the ratio of pen/armor. So a unit with high pen, would do a lot of deflection damage, but a unit with low pen wouldn't. You could probably tweak it a bit so that there is a max/min amount of damage you can do.
This would be a pretty significant change and would likely require rebalancing the health and damage of tanks and AT weapons, but I think it would take the RNG out of tank battles which can be incredibly frustrating at times. I personally think, less RNG is better. |
|
Any word on ninja changes yet? Couldn't find anything in the forums. |
I think you underestimate the fuel gap between Soviet T3 units and Ostheer T3 units. If both teams have equal fuel income, then the Soviet player can make a Quad AA and 2 SU76s roughly and still have ~35 fuel left before a P4 can be produced.
But then they've also spent almost twice as much manpower, which is another resource in this game. |
In general, you are correct.
But at this point, for this game, something drastic has to be done and we don't have a year to wait around. By that time, Relic will already be pushing its next project, leaving Coh2 in the dust...
I agree somewhat, which is why I included that some clarity on the timeline would be nice. If it takes a year then yeah, that's really too long to execute your vision. But if it's over the course of the next 2 months, then I have no problem with that. Let's get it right. Because if they rush it and get it wrong, then we are waiting even longer because we have to wait for patches to fix the broken shit.
As long as it doesn't take FOREVER to roll out the alpha vision. I'm pretty excited about these patch changes, can't wait to play it. |
|
I think all these claims about, who cares about balanced we want fun, is really ridiculous.
Did you guys already forget all the raging that happens here when things get unbalanced? Rememeber that 10+ page thread about the king tiger being useless when they only reduced it's armor by 50? Come on, if they released an unbalance alpha patch to the public, you'd be killing them on the forums. This is exactly what people were criticizing relic for in the past, for making aggressive sweeping changes without testing them first.
Remember what they to the katy a few patches ago when it was ridiculously OP? how fun was that for axis players? How about when ram guaranteed every crit on super heavies? was that fun? Please. If the game isn't balanced, it's not fun. Unbalanced games kill the playerbase faster than slow patches.
The only thing I'd like more clarity on is the patch schedule. What's the timeline for the rollout? 1 month? 3 months? It would seem to be a little ridiculous if it took 3 months for each patch until all changes were out. |
They already get that mate.
True, but I want it to be better. |
|
I think the key to buffing the T-34 is two things:
1. Making Ram useful
2. Making their vets more useful
If Ram was a better tool, then it wouldn't matter that the T-34 can't match up in a shooting match with the P4. Also, the vet bonuses seem lackluster to me. I'd love maybe a speed bonus, better rate of fire bonus, maybe something that makes it a better flanker. |
If something is too strong, its getting a nerf to bring it in line with the other armies in the first place, so why anyone in his right mind would compensate for nerfs?
If you compensate for nerfing overpowered stuff, you create another overpowered stuff.
If you're giving away tools of X army to Y army without giving something from Y to X you CREATE another imbalance.
Imagine now USF getting ost sniper clone, because why not? USF doesn't have a sniper and they suffer greatly from fighting against one, so why shouldn't they have a sniper of their own to "balance" this out?
Does that sound fair? Because in my book, it doesn't sound fair at all and is a plain stupid. Just like alexes proposal.
I don't believe that's what was initially proposed. They want to weaken demos because they believe them to be overpowered.
In other words this:
If something is too strong, its getting a nerf to bring it in line with the other armies in the first place, ...
Now, clearly you disagree that demos are overpowered. So maybe you should concentrate on making that argument instead of trying to say that something else should be buffed, it's muddling the conversation.
I personally don't believe demos are overpowered. But I do find daspalous' idea interesting. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
