Profile of Mr.Smith

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

General Information


Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.1 Update7 Dec 2016, 11:42 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Dec 2016, 09:58 AMTheMachine If we're going to touch Greyhound might as well do the WC51 truck too. But these two are super low priority if we are happy with how everything else is balancing out. WC51 is more tricky to balance than the other two due to its early arrival. I would have to request 5 replays from 60 people to consider lifting my veto on this unit. Just remember, that those replays need to come fast (within 2 weeks), so that any changes we can thoroughly playtest whichever changes we make to non-meta units. In: Lobby
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.1 Update7 Dec 2016, 09:37 AM Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 21:56 PMTheSleep3r Will there be anything done with the Greyhound? It's pretty useless in it's current state and since the team is addressing light vehicles something should be done with it, same with WC truck I am, personally, opposed to touching doctrinal stuff when stock armies are being changed so radically: - We want people to try out the stock army, and discover boring no-brainer meta, before it becomes actual live-version meta This statement doesn't hold for the Stug-E, for obvious reasons. However, if we manage to get more people involved in giving feedback from actual in-game experience vs human opponents, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't fix the Greyhound, or other useless doctrinal stuff (e.g., the 250). Thus, if by some miracle we manage to get 50 people to contribute 3 replays each in the replay thread within the next two weeks, I will do everything in my power to convince the others to consider fixing those units. Thus: - Contribute 3 replays to the thread - Try to abuse the stuff that we've changed as hard as you can - Try to abuse the stuff we have not been able to change, even harder - Save Greyhound/250 from uselessness In: Lobby
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.1 Update7 Dec 2016, 09:13 AM Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ UKF bren carrier with flamer is too good right now I think. Even better if we take new 222 cost into account. I suggest moving munnition cost back to 90 or at least 75 (so it isn´t useless and serves job, but also losing it prematurely will hurt you) Apologies for asking you again about the same thing: Do you consider the Flame Carrier OP in which of these types of situations: - When units are in a garrison (alpha damage) - When units are clumped up behind cover - When units are spread out in open ground - All of the above I know you've uploaded a UC flamer replay, but I didn't have the opportunity to watch it before the new version came out In: Lobby
Thread: Winter Balance Preview Changelog7 Dec 2016, 07:52 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Dec 2016, 06:04 AMscratchedpaintjob in my experience it is lacking the pen to reliably counter medium tanks, especially at long range and one question i havent tested: does the puma win vs the stuart with stun shot in the preview? because in vanilla the stuart won that battle Stunshot doesn't stun anymore. Thus, if you get harassed by a stun-shotting stuart, you just move away and come back when the debuff is gone. Of course, if you stay still and eat Stuart's attacks like a chump, the result between live version and preview version will be indistinguishable. In: Lobby
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.1 Update6 Dec 2016, 22:12 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ Grenades: standardise grenade damage to buildings by their cost or something. Right now for example shock grenade or rifle grenade or USF grenade or british grenade will damage wooden building for like 20-33% while axis bundle grenade one shot building (whitch is really stupid). Also can you make russian and frakish houses similary strong, one tend to fall to fast when under fire (sov) while other tend to survive thorough whole match, only falling to strong arty like stuka bomb. Is it indented ? I will add this to the list of bugs/inconsistencies we have. However, giving more HP to certain building types may actually require a lot of legwork: - Identify these entities in the files - Modify the HP to the right value Since this mod is already retouching pretty much everything else, I would rather postpone this bugfix for another, more lightweight patch. Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ UKF bren carrier with flamer is too good right now I think. Even better if we take new 222 cost into account. I suggest moving munnition cost back to 90 or at least 75 (so it isn´t useless and serves job, but also losing it prematurely will hurt you) Instead, or in addition to a munitions cost increase, would it help if we locked the Bren carrier behind something else? - e.g., AEC/Bofors tech - or, grenades tech (if we could offset some of nade tech cost to T3) - Or, otherwise, by how much fuel would you delay the UC? Otherwise, what do you think would help? Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ British glider medics: They take ages to be built. Decreasing their training time will make much more used I think That's an inconsistency I am already aware of. I'll pass this on. Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ AC - tend to miss too often against vehicles while moving Technically the AEC should be at least equal to the Puma with respect to moving accuracy. Do you think the AEC requires a buff for a particular reason. Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ OST Assault grens: 5 popcap is too low for 5 member squad and can possibly lead into big blobs in team games and also they have make smaller bleed. Suggestion: change popcap at least to 6 Could be an idea. I wouldn't consider assault grens an issue in teamgames though, due to their pathetic range. Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ Puma - tend to miss too often against vehicles while moving Same as the AEC. At the very least it should be a lot better this patch though, no? Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ Panther - tend to miss too often against vehicles while moving Out of scope Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ SOV Penals: Penals with PTRS in M3 scout car are really strong combo, they can hunt down damaged 222 or even outfight it run in, disembark troops, kill 222 while M3 leaves. I don´t think this is intended. Also weapon changing in M3 doesn´t make them particulary weak against infantry while in M3. I think this is not intended - giving soviets relatively good AT vehicle in tier 1 that is spammable ( will always counter 222 and then can sniper roam even more because otheer player is set back even more). Suggestion: once penals get PTRS, they shouldn´t be able to garison into M3 (they should into quad thought because it comes later) -visual change - give them some icon that represents to the last men ability, because right now many players don´t even know they have tha ability Will have to discuss with others. Is there any reason why Guards-in-M3 wouldn't be a stronger combo for that matter, though? Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ Su76 barrage cost is too low to make it no brainer for soviets (they fload to much munni) and also at same time recharge time is set too high to make it less useless. Changing munnition cost to 30 while decreasing time to zis level will make it much more interesting Technically, the SU-76 munitions cost is there to prevent SU76 blobs from scaling too well. In teamgames I regularly float about 4-6 SU-76's, and they really pay off. Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ I think USF is fine, have to test them more Haven´t tested OKW because they weren´t changed that much. Luchs seem to be fine (except fuel change to 60 if haven´t done already would be great). Already in the plans Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:57 PM__deleted__ Bugs: in my game (arnhem brits vs ostheer) commados were ordered to throw grenade, then they were ordered to not throw the grenade. I lost munnition and ability was set to cooldown afterwards. After 1 second grenade blow in location where it was meant to be fired without showing timer on ground. Snipers, especially soviet snipers sometime to tend crawl ages before they shot their tager, even at cost of going from cover and actually being in range already - you can see it in my caen game when they attack mg42 in north-western house (in later part of game, don´t know exact time) Ghost wire- we all know what ghost sandbaggin and ghostwiring is. You should change it in next patch (or even in this one if possible) - ghost structures (sandbags, wire, tank traps) should die after few shots when they are not actually being constructed or already build. PS: If I find something else I will surely tell you Once again then you for you time and efforts Hector I have never ever seen or experienced the gammon bomb bug you describe. To me, it seems as if no projectile was spawned. I noticed that weird crawling thing about the snipers in the game you mentioned. I'll have to look it up. Thx again! In: Lobby
Thread: Request for reproduction: Panzerfaust bug6 Dec 2016, 20:03 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 19:20 PMTobis I have also for sure encountered this with the USF riflenade shooting the ground. I have no evidence or means of reproducing this. I have never, ever had the riflemen AT nade bug on me before. Do you remember if it hit the ground between the target and the shooter, or what? Does this happen often? On the other hand, Panzerfaust bug seems to happen all the time, since it collides: - vs ground - vs buildings - vs walls - vs enemy snipers In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.1 Update6 Dec 2016, 18:33 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Dec 2016, 18:20 PM__deleted__ Have overperforming penals with new PTRS profile have been noted and are you working on fixing it before patch becomes live ? If you don´t know what I´m talkinb about, look at my replays with that PTRS and my tests. Yes, they may be counterable in top 10, but definitely they will become problem and meta in anything below 200 because that combo is literally uncouterable unless you screw up or your opponent completely outplays you(none of my oppoents was able to counter it, and there were many player on same level as me.). Also I don´t thing tier1 stalling meta into sherman spam isn´t something we want to create. Hector PTRS penal adjustments is nr1 in our list of upcoming changes for the week. At the very least, we will be nerfing PTRS anti-infantry damage by an additional 50% (so that it deals 10 damage). Thus, even if Penals get lucky, you won't be seeing 20-damage spikes. Unlike the guards PTRS anti-infantry nerf, we will be doing this in a way that won't affect anti-vehicle performance (i.e., the note about Guards PTRS in the v1.1 changelog). Thanks for taking the time to abuse the meta, before it becomes the meta! In: Lobby
Thread: Request for reproduction: Panzerfaust bug6 Dec 2016, 18:28 PM I was looking through the panzerfaust bug (panzerfaust not always hitting the intended target), and I believe I may have found what causes it. However, in order to be able to include a fix for this bug, I need to be able to know how to trigger this bug reliably. Can we make this happen? Please post precise reproduction steps. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Winter Patch 1.1 Stug E example.6 Dec 2016, 13:31 PM I'll have to watch the replay to give you an opinion. We can change other things to balance the Stug-E. However, imo it should keep its longer range to differentiate it from the Brummbar (which is a close-range AoE demolisher). That way, an OST player can have both units on the field at the same time, without one being strictly better than the other. What is important for the Stug-E, though, is that it should feel "strong" despite the fact that it cannot kill things with a single shot anymore, and despite the fact that the enemy can relocate to dodge the projectile. It was definitely not our intention to allow the Stug-E to fire over base-covering hedges. Thus, I'll have to see if something can be done about the firing angle. The map hedges I tried when testing the Stug-E were the crossroads ones (which should be, easily, the most abusable ones). Thanks again for helping us review our changes! In: Replays
Thread: Idea for balance patch a.k.a CoH3 version6 Dec 2016, 12:36 PM I am going to have very limited free time until February or so. Thus, I can't help you actually implement the mod. However, I can actually help you refine your ideas. This is for the express purpose that if we are given concrete ideas we can do something about it and, who knows, they will perhaps make it to the main game. 1) The main restrictions that a mod cannot lift have to do with models. If there is a model missing, you either need Relic to introduce one, or reuse an existing model. This might affect what happens if a G43 rifle gets dropped; there might not be an appropriate model for a G43 rifle. 2) It might be possible to change base layouts. I was looking a bit into that, before all my free time was sucked by the balance mod. However, in the worst case, one can definitely add build abilities to Pioneers etc to construct things for you (e.g,. Weapon racks). 3) From Relic's perspective, I am not sure whether they will welcome the idea of harmonizing all factions. They definitely want each faction to "feel" different when playing it. Of course, such a restriction can be lifted if there is a very important reason behind it Now, regarding your ideas: 1. Base artillery This is a very neat idea actually. Are you thinking of base artillery being used like the Infantry-Section flare-mark & barrage system, or are you thinking of giving factions an actual, controllable, free LeFH/etc in their base? 2. Weapon racks For that you will have to reuse some racks models (or bunkers, or crates, or whatever). Limiting how many weapons of each kind can be picked up by each squad is doable. However it is tricky. If some modder wants to implement the mod for you, I can provide the code I used in the balance mod to limit things. Also, regarding LMGs. Are you thinking of also restricting LMGs to 1, even when picked up from the ground? (In the balance mod, for instance, a rifleman can still end up with double LMGs, if they picked the 2nd up from the ground). 3. Weapon drop on death I am really fond of this idea. I don't know how to do this yet, but I am pretty sure there must be a way to do this without Relic intervention. 4 & 5. Weapon slots and Veterancy Those two are actually linked together in a very ugly manner. The only thing that matters for slot weapons is accuracy veterancy; not the original weapon that you sacrificed to pick it up. Thus, you can have things like Commandos (which gain very little veterancy) being the worst squad in the game to handle a stolen LMG42. Secondly, you have things like Cooldown veterancy, which means very different things when applied to different weapons. E.g., the Infantry section penalty that affects cooldown barely affects their rifle DPS at all, yet it butchers Bren DPS. Thus, even though all squads can gain the same % of cooldown bonuses, this can cause some squads to scale better than others. Finally, you have things like a-moving long-range squads becoming more dominant in the late-game, as close-combat squads will have more trouble closing in. If you want to offset this, without giving too many bonuses to close combat squads you need to consider one of the following: - Give every faction easy access to smoke for the late-game - Make veterancy gains favour received accuracy over accuracy, to prolong fights (and let close-quarter squads to cover the distance) - Give every faction a cheap, cost-efficient way to create craters on the field (same rationale as above) With respect to lame Vet1 veterancy bonuses: - On one hand it is very difficult to create unique veterancy abilities for each squad (though, you are welcome to try) - On the other hand, even a lame copy-paste ability feels interesting compared to a passive % increase in stats 6. Vehicle crews This is doable. However, on the other hand, if one faction gets access to decrewable tanks, then for every decrewable tank, you need to allow all squads to drive that vehicles (e.g., you will also have to allow Grenadiers to drive Stugs, for instance). In: Modding and Tools