...
Suggestion:
- As Miragefla said increase mid range DPS,
...
Once more as in post #72, increase of mid DPS is a step in the wrong direction imo, since there will weapon overlap between SMG/assault rifles/carbine(semi auto). It would be a far better design if each of these weapon had a clear advantage of the other in specific range. |
OKW : flamethrower with mp40&grenade in one slot
allies : only flamethrower in one slot
assault package is trash??? that is just greedy thinking
No that is not "greedy thinking" PPsh is far superior upgrade. SMG Vgs are a weak infatry that only bring smoke grenades to the table, PPsh conscripts are one the most cost efficient infantries.
all SMG in coh2 is weaker than all-round long range weapons(mg42,m1919,brens,etc)
it is just fate of CQC unit
No they are not Thompson, is great weapon to range up 25
|
And with some creativity, they might be able to revive some of the old under/unused commanders by changing some overlapping units/abilities. Such as Assault Grenadiers.
Mechanised Assault commander needs a redesign. It used to be the Ostheer equivalent of what Soviet commander used to be. A commander relying on call-in units.
The game has taken another root where teching is mandatory and this commander has to catch up.
Once more the focus should be creating fresh balanced commander and not fixing design issues of other commander. Creating 5 new commander is an ambitious project on its own and adding other goal to it will probably end up is a mediocre result. |
I said penals are an alternative to elite infantry, not that they ARE elite infantry. I do feel that penals are over performing and have said as much, have discussed as much with you so don't put words in my mouth you know damn well I didn't say. ...
I am sorry if you feel that I have put words in your mouth, but if read my post I have used quotation marks in "elite infatry" to indicate that I am using the term in what ever manner you are using it. Since you feel that I replace it with "elite infatry replacements".
I also have to point out that it extremely difficult to have 3 different debates with 3 different people especially if they quote and respond to things that are directed to them.
It is still my opinion that one should first fix VGs and Penals and then check if any further changes are needed for Conscripts. |
Stuff I've tossed around with Mp 40s in general for the artillery officer, Volks, and Assault Grenadiers are:
-Better on the move capabilities than other SMGs
-Bumping up only their mid-range DPS rather than short-range as currently Grease Guns blow them away so you can have somewhere to fight other SMGs to compensate for having the worst near DPS outside builder SMGs and Conscript PPsH.
On Assault Grenadiers themselves, there was one idea of a six man squad after BP 2/3 who might make them stronger like Veteran Squad Leaders from Infantry.
Other upgrades could just be raw stat boosts in the late game rather than weapon upgrades. I doubt their veterancy itself needs a massive rework as they would still get clubbed if you needed to bring new squads onto the field.
I also had the dumb idea of Bundle Grenade Assault  .
Also no more StGs, we got enough of those.
Imo increasing the mid DPS of smgs a step in the wrong direction. The problem is not their damage out put but their bleed.
One should make the DPS of other weapon flat (or even reverse in some cases) bellow 15-5 range (depending on the type) while make the DPS curve of SMG linear increasing bellow 10. That would make the weapons trade better at point blank giving these unit a clear advantage when they achieve point blank.
Imo active abilities increasing durability that scale with veterancy is one of the best tools to allow this to close the distance. It will make the better without being OP due to time restriction of the ability. |
Nobody but you (and perhaps one or two equally blinkered forumites) thinks conscripts scale well agianst anything in the late game, not even grenadiers.
Now PLS try to actually read and understand what other are posting before replying and PLS stop putting words in other people mouths.
Unless you want to claim that:
Volks vs Conscript
volks vs Riflemen
Volks vs Tommies
Gren vs Riflemen
Gren vs Tommies
are better match ups, my point stands.
Conscripts vs grenadiers is and has been one of the best balanced match for year now. |
If penals are "elite infantry" then so are Rifles, who have pretty much exactly the same dps curve, better vet and weapon upgrades and arrive even faster on field...
You have to weather Penal are "elite infatry" or not with thedarkarmadillo since he brought "elite infatry" and not. Even more so since I explained to you multiple times that I have no intention of debating semantic with you and help you derail another thread.
If you're losing to penals, rifles must completely roflstomp you and be like, most op inf in game, because they are not only elite infantry, but also T0.
I have to repeat myself again since you seem to have trouble understanding, the balance of the game is not a personal thing and has nothing to with what I can and can not do.
Since you keep repeating like a broken record that cons should be balanced with grens on mind, that means you are also in full support of direct upgrade for mid and late game to mirror grens scalability through LMG.
Actually your conclusion is completely wrong, Grenadier vs Conscripts is one of the best balanced match in the game and it has been so for years.
Now pls stick what you have already posted.
Have a nice day.
|
I dont know if this suggestion has been made already, but my idea to revamp assault grenadiers is:
Once battlephase 1 is researched, assault grenadiers have access to a 60mun upgrade which replaces all 5 MP40s with the Sturmpioneer version of the Stg44.
Thoughts?
Imo giving QCQ units more DPS (which is the current trend) is the wrong way going about it. These units should be given tools that reduce the bleed from using them. One could have them become more durable/have the cost less to reinforce or use (which already test and worked) active abilities like the "Diversion" in artillery officer.
These tools would allow these unit to be balanced better. |
Penals are intended to be optional and an alternative to maxims or elite infantry.
...
Then they are badly designed because they come too early and Soviet is the can field an exclusively "elite infatry replacements" army.
My point is rather simple buffing conscript to make them more attractive the Penals is the wrong way go about. Conscripts should be balanced with Grenadiers as the benchmark and designed so that that there is room for both units (conscript and penal) to coexist in composition of army each one bringing something worthwhile into the table.
(I refuse to get drug in a debate about "roles".) |
I think this approach is viable for EFA, considering there are still many lackluster commanders like mech assault, festung armor and fortified armor.
Imo those lackluster commanders should be fixed with patches specifically designed to fix commanders (not necessarily revamps). At this point if one try to fix allot of different things one end up creating at least he same amount of problems one solves. (as clearly demonstrated by revamp patches)
The infantry abilities don't affect Ostheer's core infantry (normal grenadiers), so if assault grenadiers aren't overbuffed, but only get a slight scaling improvement, it shouldn't pose a problem. There's also a lack of indirect abilities, a heavy call-in and recon.
Imo commanders should not offer benefits to the faction across a wide section that includes both vehicles and infatry unless those benefits are minor. Else the have a major impact in balance and can end up in snowball effects.
Superior infatry->faster armor->Superior armor, little counter. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
