Profile of Svanh

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 181

General Information


Thread: Should squads gain XP for repairing?14 Dec 2016, 02:18 AM Jump back to quoted post14 Dec 2016, 01:47 AMZombiFrancis The problem is indirect. But I will admit, I know I'm arguing a weak point here. Veterancy in CoH2 has needed an overhaul for a long time. If anything my argument only applies for infantry squads. For vehicles the current vet system more or less works, but for infantry, especially ones that wield AT weapons, it's a problem. That said: I think vet is far too ubiquitous which lowers the impact vet has (and can have, to be balanced.) But quite frankly, infantry vet was outright BROKEN for MONTHS and no one really noticed. (Or attempt to explain it without certain people shutting down all discussion for the sake of post count.) Units get to max vet almost independently of any strategy or tactics. In fact, just keeping a unit alive means that they'll most likely be maxed out in vet. But I'm mostly talking about the first few units built in the game, not Comets, Tigers or OKW units getting to vet 5. I mean, I feel like units on the field could get veterancy automatically on fixed timed intervals and the vet system would play out more or less the same that it does now. I agree that hand-held AT weapons are an issue with the current system but vet being ubiquitous is a balancing factor. Veterancy already has a significant impact and a system in which you might have one or two vet 3 squads in a close game might lead to the issues CoH1 had with the Brit veterancy system where losing one specific unit could lose you the game. Especially with often worthless vet 1s, CoH2 wouldn't work with hard-to-acquire veterancy. While keeping a unit alive will generally end in vet 3, it becomes harder to do so over the course of the game and well-used units will gain vet faster than poorly-used ones. I think the current system is the best of a bad lot so far. Survival-based veterancy (by time intervals) would be far worse than the current XP base. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: [WBP] UKF Command Vehicle14 Dec 2016, 01:49 AM "Designate Command Vehicle" is a doctrinal UKF ability for the Royal Engineer Regiment and Tactical Support Regiment commanders. It is available at 2cp and allows a player to add a 30-radius aura which affects that player's UKF units to a selected UKF vehicle for 75 munitions. The vehicle chosen receives significant nerfs to its combat ability and speed as well as gaining a free recon loiter. Only one Command Vehicle can be designated at a time. The aura grants -30% received accuracy, +35% accuracy (exclusive), -30% reload time, and -30% cooldown time to all player-owned UKF units in its radius except the Command Vehicle. While the Command Vehicle is designated, it also reduces the recharge time of the player's doctrinal abilities by 25%. The Command Vehicle has its reload time, cooldown time, and received accuracy doubled as well as its accuracy and speed halved. All offensive modifiers both from the aura and on the Command Vehicle apply to hardpoint_01. The previously mentioned recon loiter lasts for 90 seconds with a 30-second recharge time. Its lack of a munitions cost has previously been seen as a balance issue. The Winter Balance Preview makes a single change to this ability; it removes the ability to designate the Universal Carrier as a Command Vehicle. This change was made because the Universal Carrier was the only unit players were designating as a Command Vehicle due to its general expendability. I think this solution is overly simplistic and doesn't take into account Relic's intended use of the Command Vehicle, which should arrive as infantry support sometime after 2cp. At the same time, the ability needs to encourage its use on vehicles other than the Universal Carrier. The Proposal: - Increase the cost of Designate Command Vehicle from 75 munitions to 100 manpower & 20 fuel - Reinstate Universal Carriers as Command Vehicles - Remove the speed penalty - Add a 30 munition cost to the recon loiter Using a fuel cost instead of a munitions cost helps already munitions-heavy doctrines while turning the ability from a vehicle upgrade into a teching decision. The reinstatement of Universal Carriers allows players to decide to go for heavy early-game firepower while the removal of the speed penalty (and the new fuel cost) adds a reason to use the ability on a unit other than the cheapest available vehicle (losing 100/20 to a Volks/Grenadier squad isn't fun). The recon loiter change has been coming for a while. What do you think? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Should squads gain XP for repairing?14 Dec 2016, 00:57 AM Jump back to quoted post13 Dec 2016, 14:43 PMZombiFrancis Vet should be earned. Support teams are still just as survivable/wipeable regardless of their vet. Light vehicles and infantry squads will still get vet. They just won't get boosts for every time they use an AT weapon, or walk into a mine. The point is it slows down how much vet gets thrown around. I prefer that competent usage of a unit results in veterancy. Many units in CoH2 follow the rule of "using a unit results in vet, which makes it competent" which is rather backwards in my opinion. But I know this is an unpopular opinion. I wouldn't have said that kills necessarily correlate to "competent usage of a unit". Using a T-70 to get a lucky last hit in on a Tiger, for example, would award all credit to the T-70 and neither the AT guns and TDs that did most of the damage nor the infantry that snared it would gain vet. Experience is currently gained as the percentage of the resource cost of a target unit done as damage. Saying that vet isn't earned unless a unit dies ignores the advantage gained by heavily damaging a super-heavy and the difference between losing a Conscript model and an Obersoldaten model. A kills-based veterancy system benefits high-cost, low-model units and heavy tanks at the expense of everything else and would worsen the unit obsolescence issues CoH2 already has. Again, what problem does this solve? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Should squads gain XP for repairing?13 Dec 2016, 11:42 AM The Soviet and Ostheer engineer squads definitely need it but I'd prefer that it was given to all repairing squads for consistency's sake. Any issues that arise with the more combat-focused engineer squads can be mitigated by adjusting their veterancy requirements. Jump back to quoted post13 Dec 2016, 01:17 AMZombiFrancis Sure, so long as xp from dealing and receiving damage is throttled to something like 10%, if not outright removed. Veterancy for kills. You do realise that this change would heavily nerf 6-man infantry squads, support units, and light vehicles (Kubel, M3, UC, etc.) right? What problem do you think this will solve? Jump back to quoted post13 Dec 2016, 09:18 AMPlanet Smasher I'm not sure if it's possible to have them gain vet from mine/demo kills, since those are separate entities. It's a great idea, though. Gaining XP for building would also be nice, but it should be restricted to stuff that costs resources, so you can't spam sandbags for free Vet. I'd say that the Power Creep from the original factions to the newer ones is especially apparent on Pioneers and Combat Engineers. You obviously need them, because they're your only option for repairs (and because these factions actually have to construct their base buildings ), but they just perform poorly in nearly every regard. I don't think the issue is power creep. If any unit has it bad, it's Rear Echelon squads. Dedicated engineer units just don't work if there isn't enough to build and UKF are the only faction with any real defenses. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Kyle wants feedback on the PIV11 Dec 2016, 07:01 AM Jump back to quoted post9 Dec 2016, 23:20 PMMr. Someguy The Comet has always been ridiculously strong, it's like a Panther with the Tiger's gun. Insanely good, should be limited by the 1 Heavy Tank rule. The Comet has the same AOE as a Cromwell and fires slower. The only reason it seems like a Tiger is the extremely low scatter values (4.2 max scatter versus the Cromwell's 6.2). The Tiger has a similar scatter value, slightly lower range, significantly larger AOE and significantly better ROF. The Comet is nowhere near the same power level. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Relic Winter Balance Preview v1.1 Update8 Dec 2016, 23:42 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2016, 14:43 PMZombiFrancis Well, as long as it's considered by you to be something different and not affecting how snipers are used in the game I guess that's the best we can hope for right? I mean, the changelog actually has the change described as within the scope of "Light Vehicles". So you can categorize the change however you want to justify it as valid. Doesn't the Sniper cloak change only affect the instant-recloak exploit? In: Lobby
Thread: Kyle wants feedback on the PIV8 Dec 2016, 12:06 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2016, 07:51 AMVipper Imo it is actually a problem of the TDs and not the Panther. The Panther was in good spot before WFA and some people where even complaining of it being OP. So what happened that made the unit UP since it has seen little change in stats? Two of it's advantages went down the drain, Extra HP and Armor had less value than before. Extra HP become irrelevant when M-36 and Firefly where introduced and took it out in 4 shots. Armor become of less value when bazooka and Piat blob did deflection damage and when M-36/firefly/su-85 got enough penetration to punch thru its armor, out of range, reliably... My suggestion is not to nerf Stug. My suggestion are: 1)Remove deflection damage of hand held weapon to medium tanks including Panther Reason: promotes blobbing reduces the effectiveness of medium tanks vs infantry. 2)Reduce the penetration of "medium tank" hunters (su-76/Stug possibly m10 that should be closer to the penetration of Puma) Reason: This units do not need 100% penetration at max range to be effective vs mediums and are currently far more cost effective than their heavy brothers (Panther ,Su-85) both vs mediums and vs heavies. The change actually promotes teching. 3)Reduce damage of M-36/firefly to 160 and use target tables to increase it vs Super heavies. Reason: stop Fireflie's alpha strike to medium, makes 800/400 units actually benefit from the extra HP. 4)Reduce chance to hit from 60 range units vs medium either by reducing accuracy or size. Reason: Gives some room to sorter range units maneuver. This chances imo would help the Panther,PZIV, Churchill and Kv-1 by giving them some breathing space, and establish the concept that T3 units are better at fighting T3 units while T4 units are better fighting T4 units or super heavies, and give an actual advantage when teching to T4... Before the buffs to TDs the Panther was not easily counterable. The Allied factions (pre-UKF) didn't have the stock tools (infantry AT and reliable TDs) to deal with it and had to rely on call-ins. The problem is that its lacklustre offensive capabilities weren't addressed when it acquired counters. As to your suggestions: 1). Deflection damage for infantry AT is necessary to prevent heavy tanks (IS-2, King Tiger, Panther, Comet) being completely invulnerable to infantry. Removing it only from medium tanks would be fiddly and probably wouldn't do much anyway (due to penetration and armour values). "Promotes blobbing" is an issue with price and availability rather than the weapons themselves. 2). I agree that the Su-76 and Stug could do with a slight penetration reduction to better encourage the use of heavy TDs but the Puma has horrific penetration at long range (50% against Allied medium tanks). The SU-76 and Stug would be better served by a fairly constant penetration profile (perhaps 180/170/160?). 3). Target tables for specific units make the game harder to learn and balance and also reduce authenticity. Should we give the kubelwagon, UC, M3 etc. partial immunity to AT weapons because they aren't useful in late-game? It would be better to use accuracy and target size rather than target tables. The heavier (damage and penetration-wise) the gun, the lower its accuracy and turning rate should be to prevent it from completely obsoleting units (the problem with the Tigers, IS-2, Comet, etc.). 4). Better to go all the way, balancing accuracy/target size for all vehicles. It would help fix the problems with light units being balanced entirely around shock value. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: (Mr.Smith's) Quality of Life mod3 Nov 2016, 00:27 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Nov 2016, 14:33 PMMr.Smith You make a good point. However, hear me out! The command vehicle benefits are some of the most powerful buffs in the game. The aura is seriously good, especially for LMG infantry. At the same time, the free recon is the cherry-on-the-top. To counteract this, the player should be forced to give up something. Normally, the debuff of this ability, is one of the most debilitating debuffs in the game (even worse than suppression). If you apply this debuff on a unit that would, otherwise, be a viable fighting unit, then you have the your trade-off right there. Normally, the kind of decision the player should make is between applying the buff on a vulnerable but cheap target, or a more-beefy but expensive tank. The UC option allows the player to completely bypass any decision making in this part. As you correctly point out, the UC is already completely redundant the moment the ability becomes unlocked. Both because of its low damage output/survivability and because of the wide availability as hardcounters. Why not extend its life as free Fog-of-war dispeller. This is the equivalent of spotting-scope 222 cheese we see in the live version currently. (Spotting-scope 222's have also been hard-nerfed in this mod). For the reasons outlined above, keeping UC + free recon is not an option: - UC-command vehicle + munitions-cost run is one option. - Non-UC vehicle + free recon is another option. - However, I went ahead with a more conservative option: Non-UC & munitions cost. The reason for this is that, unlike other aura-unit commanders, the command vehicle is not the focal point of the respective commanders; AVRE and Artillery Cover are. Thank you for explaining your reasoning. I think the issues with the UC Command Vehicle are issues with the UC (becoming instantly obsolete) rather than the ability to make it a Command Vehicle. Since you are trying to avoid significant balance changes in this mod, completely re-balancing light vehicles (Kubel, UC, M3, 222 etc.) isn't practical so disallowing UC Command Vehicles is the best solution for now. Regardless of what you end up doing, adding a munitions cost to the recon plane was a very good change. It would be nice if Relic had made the aura effects and debuffs depend on the vehicle used. Balancing for edge cases (UC or Comet Command Vehicles for instance) would be much easier. In: Modding and Tools
Thread: (Mr.Smith's) Quality of Life mod1 Nov 2016, 13:48 PM Jump back to quoted post24 Oct 2016, 08:42 AMMr.Smith Command vehicle Universal carrier command vehicle is super cheesy. So is free recon. Everybody knows this. At the same time, using the command vehicle for any other role is prohibitive due to the speed debuff. To address this: - Universal Carriers can no longer be turned to command vehicles - Recon now costs 40 munitions - Command vehicle given a toggle ability to disable the command vehicle bonuses, along with the speed debuff Command vehicle toggle Toggling out of the ability has the following effects: - The sight of the recon airplane drops to 0 - The speed debuff is gone - The received-accuracy debuff is gone - All aura bonuses are gone Note, that even if you switch out of the command vehicle mode, you will forever retain the following debuffs: - Cooldown/Reload debuffs to your vehicle - The ability has a 5-second delay between toggling (while toggling the tank is affected by the speed penalty) If you don't mind me asking, what's so cheesy about the UC Command Vehicle? It isn't as fast as an AEC Command Vehicle, will be killed by a single Volks/Grenadier squad, and loses any protection its smaller target size would provide against AT weapons. In addition, the Command Vehicle ability is available at 2cp. The UC is the only practical vehicle to use it on at this point in the game and the ability provides a reason to buy a UC throughout the game. Also, the toggle ability seems to over-complicate the situation. The reload and cooldown debuffs are the main deterrent to creating a Command Vehicle since most UKF armoured units are not especially nimble (Centaur, Firefly, Churchill variants). An ability that only alleviates the speed penalty won't change much. Why not simply remove or reduce the speed penalty and further nerf firepower (by increasing the reload and cooldown debuffs or just disabling the main gun)? Sorry to bring up an older change but it looked a little odd to me. In: Modding and Tools
Thread: Losing1 Nov 2016, 12:18 PM Jump back to quoted post31 Oct 2016, 22:55 PMmiragefla Where is the evidence? If they have the best units then why does the faction have to cheese in tournament settings with 1/2 of the core not being in play? I certainly don't agree with zerocoh, but "cheese in tournaments with 1/2 of the core not being in play" is true to a greater or lesser extent for every faction. In: COH2 Gameplay