Profile of Mr.Smith

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

General Information


Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.3 Update17 Dec 2016, 19:04 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 19:02 PMOsinyagov I have found two bugs (?) with guards upgrades: 1. If you lose two DP, you will lose possibility to buy single DP (as result, your gurads will be without DP untill the end of the game) 2. You can use 2x PTRS-41 and 1x PTRS-41 upgrades only once. Then they will be locked as used. P.S. I have tested it with Cheatmod, it can be a reason to incorrect work of guards upgrades. I'll have to recheck this. How did you make the guards models lose their weapons; killing them? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Comunnity poll for T1/penals design17 Dec 2016, 19:02 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 18:54 PMstrafniki i am a huge penal squad fan since coh2 release, and the 1.2 change with only 2 ptrs gave me nightmares. they are aggressive close range units, so i am really happy about the flamer ppsh package. BUT: any chance to fix models, so the ppsh models always lead the squad into combat? seeing the ppsh behind svt rifle models is disgusting.. I haven't had the chance to really playtest this; is this always the case? Don't the two types of models mix randomly, depending who died? i.e., I don't think that the SVT/ppsh mixing is predetermined. The only other option is make PPSh a slot items, which means you will get frustrating behaviour like Vet3 Tommies In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: [WBP] Frequently Questioned Comments about Soviet T117 Dec 2016, 18:43 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 16:28 PMZombiFrancis You make it really hard to want to read the following wall of text when you start things off like this. This isn't an 'us' and 'them' this is all 'us'. Except all of 'us' need to get through to 'you'. Technically, there is a large congregation of people that bash the effort in v1.3, clogging up the thread, and making it difficult to receive feedback from actual in-game experience. The mod is out for less than 24 hours, the thread has received 117 responses; most of them stating the same. Yet I doubt that people have really had the time to play the mod. That's because I was also on a lobby waiting for games to show up, so that I can also play the mod myself. Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 16:28 PMZombiFrancis Option #4: Realize that the viability of Soviet T1 has everything to do about the viability of T2 and the necessity to rush for T3. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think we are converging to the same conclusion. The overarching answer to the T1 conondrum has to be one of the following: - Keep Penals OP, as they are (so that a T1 investment is worth it) - Give T1 access to some AT options, so that they can hold off until T3 - Make T1 free/ultra-cheap (that way, a T1 will be less of a costly detour) According to your feedback and responses so far (which have been helpful, btw), you seen to be converging very hard towards option #2. Correct me if I am wrong, but you've been advocating for homing CoH1-style satchels. That's already an AT option; and that's already something that a T1 could use to hold out to T3. The AT solution doesn't necessarily have to be PTRS. However, if we are discarding option #1 (because we'll be shooting ourselves in the foot for other gamemodes) and option #3 (because that takes away choice; and also, we don't know how non-doc Penals & maxims will really look like) we have to go for option #2. Personally, I don't care if option #2 entails PTRS, or AT nades, or M42 or something. However that option needs to be side-tech free, if T1 is to remain competitive. That option doesn't have to be a silver bullet, but it should be good enough to guarantee you will make it to T3 the majority of the time. T2 will still help; but that's the tapping-in option. However, T1-to-T2 shouldn't be the prescribed option; it should be the fallback option. Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 16:28 PMZombiFrancis Trying to break apart this massive wall of text and address these issues does not seem that productive when this thread itself is a rejection of multiple threads of feedback. I can add spoiler tags to allow people to home in on their preferred question. It's just tiresome having to deal with the same questions in 10 different threads. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: [WBP] Frequently Questioned Comments about Soviet T117 Dec 2016, 15:40 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 15:20 PMVipper Ok but can a 6 man unit actually be a glasscannon especially since it get defensive bonuses with each member lost? Can Penal actually be wiped out out by small arms fire unless extremely bad play? Since axis luck close range infantry other then pios and assault grenadiers are they not going to continue to dominate axis infantry? Shouldn't they be more weak at long or mid range? Panzergrenadiers? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Comunnity poll for T1/penals design17 Dec 2016, 15:35 PM I think it would help us the most, we split the options of the poll into 4 groups. So that we know how people perceive Penals. First group should focus on T1, and the self-sustainability options. For instance: - Keep Penals OP, as they are (so that a T1 investment is worth it) - Give T1 access to some AT options (so that they can hold off until T3) - Make T1 free/ultra-cheap (that way, a T1 will be less of a costly detour) - None of the above (That way, we also know how much percentage of the votes we should disregard) Second group should focus on the AI utility of Penals and scaling (sans Flamers). Compared to the WBP v1.3 WBP v1.3 UNUPGRADED Penals early game is: - Too weak - they need a buff - OK - it's the right spot - Too strong - they need a nerf somewhere WBP v1.3 UNUPGRADED Penals late game is: - Too weak - they need some buff somewhere (scaling/upgrade) - OK - it's the right spot - Too strong - nerf something; what? The third group should focus on flamers, and whether people want Flamer Penals: - Penals require no flamers at all - WBP v1.3 version flamers (sprinkled with PPSh) (no received accuracy/no oorah) - WBP v1.3 version, but with some received accuracy/oorah, so that Penals can close in - Current version flamer Penals are OK. (This should also give us a second indication about how much of the poll to take seriously) The fourth and final group should focus on the AT utility of the tier: - 2x PTRS/satchel (WBP v1.2) -- homing satchel though; skillshot satchel was a failure - 2x PTRS/satchel with the ability to upgrade to 3rd PTRS (WBP v1.3) - 3x PTRS/satchel (all-or-nothing) - No PTRS - yes satchel - M-42 at T1 - Zis-3 at T0 - Zis-3 at T3 - No AT options needed (even if you add conscript PTRS, they are out of scope, so that won't help at all) Finally, an opinion poll. If you ever built a T1, which one of the following units would be the LEAST likely for you to ever build: - M3A1 - Sniper - Penal Battalion In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: [WBP] Frequently Questioned Comments about Soviet T117 Dec 2016, 15:05 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 15:02 PMVipper Can we start by clarifying what is the design intent of Penals? Penals Currently in 1.3 are: No upgrades Strongest AI infantry with very good DPS at ALL ranges and anti-garrison, anti-building abilities (what is the design intent of this unit?) Mid-long range semi-elite glasscannons. Just like all other AI-only infantry, they too get access to grenades now. Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 15:02 PMVipper Penal Flamers: One of strongest mid (15-20) AI infantry with anti-garrison, anti-building abilities (what is the design intent of this unit?) Anti-garrison, anti-building specialists. Molotov is really redundant here, but it's a nice touch; innit? When you get a chance to try them in game, they aren't as strong as you claim. that's because they will randomly shed SVTs PPShs as models die. Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 15:02 PMVipper Penal PTRS X2 X3 Average AI good against all vehicles from light to supper heavy due to 100% chance to hit vehicles and lots of deflection damage (what is the design intent of this unit?) Defensive AT infantry vs vehicle rushes. Just like other AT infantry that cost something, they also have access to grendes that can be thrown defensively. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: [WBP] Frequently Questioned Comments about Soviet T117 Dec 2016, 14:46 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 14:16 PMAustralian Magic Wall of text in which you didn't touch most important option, M-42. Updated! In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.3 Update17 Dec 2016, 14:17 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 14:05 PMferwiner What Barton proposes here might be a good solution of T1 problem. Imagine penals are ok early game and good in late game but only AI. That way T1 is still a "high risk high reward" early game tier thanks to snipers and m3s, but also, an often build back-tech making it useful overall, even if not that much in the early game. How to acheive that? It's quite simple. You keep T1 without AT and penals on what they are at 1.2 but without upgrades. Then, you add one upgrade unlockable by T4 that gives them good long range dps but bad on short range (like scope for their mid range SVTs for example). That way they become potent but ballanced late game elite AI squad that you need all buildings to go for if you are going standard T2 route. If you risk going commander only AT, you can make it to them without building T2. I like Barton's ideas, and I think it could work. Tbh, though, I don't think that an upgrade is really necessary to achieve this balance between early-game OK-ness and late-game scalability. I mean, if they do get an upgrade, that will allow them to scale. Though, the question is what kind of upgrade to give them to prevent role overlaps: - Guards have long-range DPS covered - Shocks should, in theory, be the goto squad for short-range DPS There are ways of letting Penals scale with their SVT rifles, with bonuses alone, without turning the unit into death-gods of they pick up weapons. e.g. Suppose you want to make Penals 15% weaker at Vet0 and 30% stronger than what they are, at Vet3: - Take WBP current Penals - Apply a +30% accuracy buff to Penal SVTs (the weapon) - Apply a -34% accuracy nerf to the squad (the models) - Progressively, apply a 52% buff to the squad, as they vet up (according to how fast you want them to scale) Finally, the reason we are fixated on fixing the Penals is because out of all possible openings, we deem that Soviet T1 to be the most problematic tier of all. Since we have the tournament coming up for Sunday, we wanted to make sure people would feel invited to try all possible tier openings, so that we can gather better quality feedback. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: [WBP] Frequently Questioned Comments about Soviet T117 Dec 2016, 13:17 PM There's a lot of backlash about the particular design decision of giving Penals access to the PTRS upgrade. Since everybody seems to be converging to the same objections, I think it is more productive to gather all these comments here, in a thread, so that everyone can look them up. I can partly understand the hate vs putting PTRS on Penals (especially from people that haven't tried; or don't even want to bother trying the mod). However, if you guys ever want to see T1 built again, until the next patch, there needs to be some compromise somewhere. In short, with this thread, I hope I'll be able to convince you that for T1 to be viable, one of the following should hold. The three possible options are: 1. Keep Penals OP, as they are. Thus, a T1 investment will be worth it. The only issue is which gamemode you balance this opportunity cost to? 2. Give T1 access to some tech-free AT options, without requiring that T2 be built, so that they can hold off until T3. 3. Make T1 free/ultra-cheap. That way, a T1 will be less of a costly detour. Which one would you choose? The rest of this post is dedicated to the people that believe that no such compromise is needed. "T1 doesn't need AT options because..." "The Soviet guy can always build T2 to get a Zis gun" "The Soviet guy can always pick a commander with Guards, if things go sour" "You don't need T2/commanders. Just tech AT nades, and you should be fine vs vehicles" "I don't agree with the Anti-infantry direction of current Penals because..." "Penals are just fine in the live version; T1 is a risk-reward tier." "Penals are just fine in the live version; Just remove the flamethrower and we're done" "Penals were fine before the May Preview buffs. Just revert those buffs; done." "Penals were already too strong before the May Preview buffs. Revert the buffs and remove access to the flamethrower" "Penals get too much utility now, overshadowing Conscripts. Wasn't the point of Penals to supplement Conscripts, but not replace them? Molotov?" "It is obvious that the reason Penals do not scale because they lack weapon upgrades (e.g., DP-28). Why not fix that?" "Regarding Flamethrower&PPSh Penals; this is complete nonsense because..." "Didn't we already establish that 6-man flamethrower squads are bad?" "Aren't Flamer Penals going to make Shocks completely redundant now?" "Aren't Flamer Penals going to make PPSh Conscripts completely redundant now?" "What is this nonsense about Penal PTRS. Revert this change at once because..." "T1 doesn't need access to AT; it's a risk reward tier" "PTRS Penals are going to make Light Vehicle play unviable for axis" "Why do PTRS Penals need to have worse-quality PTRS than guards" "PTRS Penals have simply too much anti-infantry capacity" "PTRS Penals accuracy will make their PTRS snipe infantry, won't it?" "Penals can buy a THIRD PTRS, now? What do they need this for? Isn't that too complicated?" Why mess with PTRS Penals, when you can add M-42 to the tier? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.3 Update17 Dec 2016, 09:59 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 09:55 AMEsxile The way you focus on Penal scare me a lot. You (and me) have no idea how people will use it, what kind of silly OP strat someone will find from what you change and ruin your patch. But I can already tell you with the change you do on Penal, T1 Penal spam + lend lease commander will be more than broken. I know cuz I did it. This is why there is a Tournament going on tomorrow; and I would advise you to sign up. We expect that a great-many broken things that we were not allowed to change will become even more broken with some of the changes. What we hope that the players will do is find out those broken things, and abuse them in the tournament in order to win. That will hopefully give us the bargaining chips to be allowed to fix those things as well. In: COH2 Gameplay