Hey,
as you have already stated you do not consider yourself a very good player. Maybe it will be wiser to stick to state office and ask for help when you are stuck with some replay (often different viewers see different problems, you might not be even aware of some common mistakes you make) instead of creating a balance threads. Because trolls often make fun out of newer players because they are an easier targer.
Hmm... okay. But you are not giving any arguments for the matter at hand, instead you are taking this on a "You are not a good player"-basis, which I can't understand, because it doesn't explain the discrepancy-topic.
And I thought trolls come out of their corners and write aggressive, non-solution-orientated comments and spam everyone with things noone think is relevant. How can my beeing a newer player and opening my first thread make me a target for trolls? Is there a "How-to-open-a-thread-without-pulling-the-trolls-in"-guideline?
Currently I do not see a big point in balance threads at all because game patching was freezed some time ago and there is no official statement that there will be new patch soon. Once another patch will be coming it will make sence to start discussing balance reasons.
Oh, I didn't know about such news, which is kind of bad, I agree. But wouldn't you say that there is no point at all to talk about any balance-issue, like the penal-op-issue?
I understand you frustration in a way, but I also don't understand every notion of your argumentation, as I stated above.
But thank you again  |
Hi WhatSadFace.
I don't want be rude towards you but I think that this is a learn to play issue. Currently Soviets are one of strongest faction and the disatvantage of having a light tank with slowest arrival time is easily mitigated by 2 factors - having the best main line infantry - penals - and having the earliest show unit - clown car (m3 with engineers put inside).
Another fact is that T70 hardcounters both luchs and 222 while still being very good against all infantry squads.
I think there is no point in buffing (balancing) Soviet light tanks t70 arrival time. At least not until penals, dushka and lend lease sherman are balanced.
If you continulously have problems with Soviets I recommend you visit State Office and post a replay in Replay Reviews thread. There are many good community members which are eager to spot your mistakes and help you to improve in your play
Hi Hector,
no problem. I would never consider myself to be a very good soviet player... definitively not. I watch my replays very often and there is soo much that needs to be done: Micro, Map-Awareness, etc. And I'm not saying, this needs to be fixed. I started this thread to hear what kind of arguments there are to justify that discrepancy. So actually, I'm looking - with you guys - for valid categories and indicators that can be used to underline that. And so far, I have read a few: Multi-useability of the T-70 (Scout, Recon, Cap), that translates better into the late-game. The need for a fast and powerful counter to the penal-meta.
I totaly see these points. I would love to hear your reply to my other post, about the indicators or factors that can be used, to analyse such an issue as here at hand. Maybe these can make your point more obvious to me and other (and maybe even some trolls, who knows?  ) |
To attempt to bring the discussion back on track: To the OP of this thread, the main explanation that people have for the fuel discrepancy between the t70 and the luchs (or between any 2 vehicles in any two factions) is that theyre two fairly different vehicles, operating in two different factions, facing two different sets of units. This means that comparing the two on any single level leads to extremely skewed results. Coh2 is actually really complicated with an absurd amount of factors to consider, so only using one factor (or a few of them) doesnt give nearly enough context for why things are the way they are.
Thank you for your reply, I'm surprised how fast things can escalate when people mixing up facts with personal experiences and emotions.
I totaly agree on the terms you named: It's complicated and there are many factors, correlations etc. to consider. But I wonder: What are the main-factors you would name to debate a topic like "fuel balancing"? Imho, timing, fuel cost and tech-requirements felt okay, but I still think - as you marked by your post - there are maybe others we need to take into account there. I'm very interested, which else you or others would consider critical for this issue. |
T-70 price is based on its old impact value, when it was the king of early/mid game with its auto-repair. At that time the 70 fuel price was justified. Today it is not anymore, end of the story.
Hmm... okay, that sounds like it or the T3 should be rebalanced, prise-wise, don't you agree?
And since it says in the faction-diagramm by relic ( http://www.companyofheroes.com/blog/2015/08/17/coh2-faction-comparison), that the Soviet should have a stronger impact in the mid-game, I found this argument even more reasonable.
Which - and I can't stress this enough - doesn't mean that there are other balancing-issues like the penals, that needs to be fixed too. But that's not the topic of this thread |
They do not fill the same roles exactly.
T-70 is a light Recon tank that uses its main gun that has AOE.
Luch is light AI tank that uses "small arm" fire.
I understand, but isn't that just different means for the same purpose, Infantry-Hunting?
Even if they did fill the exact same role any discrepancy would mean little because they are facing different enemies.
Even if they were facing similar enemies it would still not mean much since different faction are designed differently with different strengths and weakness.
Your first argument doesn't connect to me: How is the enemy you are facing correlating with the fuel-discrepancy? Shouldn't similar roles equal in a similar resource-cost?
Please don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the differencies between the factions and I don't agree on comments that propose making the core-units (like MGs, Motars etc.) all the same. And I don't have any problems with the T3 costing maybe 10 Fuel more then the T2-equivalent of the OKW. But 35 Fuel more, doesn't seem right.
If you are having trouble countering the luch try getting a Su-76. It's a solid AT unit with a bonus barrage.
Which then cost 5 Fuel more then the T-70, which makes the discrepancy rise to 45 fuel and still not have undermined the core-argument: Why this discrepancy?
Once more Penal are OP and blobbing them should not be a path to victory, Luch a a counter to exclusive Penal spam and actually there should be more.
I agree, there should always be more then one option to counter an enemy-measure. Although, OKW gets an MG-Option at T0 with the first Halftrack set up, which seems to be an effictive counter-measure, besides the Luchs and later on the Stuka-zu-Fuß... but that's too far up in the game already.
But again, I want to stay focussed on the discrepancy-discussion, not Penals
Thank you for your reply |
It's not that soviets lack a counter to light vehicles and need to be buffed, its that they lack options and need their power redistributed (to other doctrines and units). As things are now, penals and lend lease allow a pretty well balanced and even match against okw, the winner generally really is the one that played better. That said, this balance relies on mechanics and units that may or may not be particularly healthy for the game.
As to refocus how this reply applies to the greater discussion: I don't think they need an early t3/t70 timing. I don't think soviets need a buff (read: more power added). They need the power that they do have to be redistributed to things other than dshks, penals, and m4cs.
That's true, I don't think, soviets need another unit, but I just wonder how this Fuel-discrepancy between the Luchs and T-70 can be explained, since they fullfill similar roles, don't you think?
But what do you mean with the term "need their power redistributed (to other doctrines and units)"? I can't picture what you are implying.
And I certainly disagree that Lend-and-Lease- or Soviet-Industry-Doctrin used against other OKW-Meta-Commanders evens out the score (the fact, that you need doctrins to even out the score seems, imho, like another indicator that some balancing needs to be done), since the Fuel-plane can be shot down by the flak-emplacements of the OKW... I sincerly would love to see a valid statistic, that shows how many out of 100 planes gets shot down by their base-emplacements. And that's 100 Munition or 3 Mines waisted. Which then again would be needed for Luchs-denying. Feels tricky.
Before this discussion gets out of hand focussing on Lend-And-Lease-Doctrin: I used it only a few times (I like the Soviet-Industry better) and don't know its impact, but I read a lot of complains. But - I guess - there is another thread focussing that issue.
Again, thanks for reply |
You have to understand that there are different kinds of back n forths regarding vehicles rushes/stages which can be heavily determined by who has the map resource advantage.
That's true, but in my mind I have a balanced-case scenario were both players have averaged the same amount of resource-income. Let's take this as a base for the discussion.
Working by memory it goes something like this:
1- Kubel-Bren Carrier. BC kills kubels. Get's countered by any of the following vehicles.
2- Dodge-M3A1(SU)
2.5- 60/90muni timing. BC gets upgraded and SU gets flamer clowncar.
3- 222-M20
3.5- FHT/AAHT/Flak HT. Not sure about Greyhound but who use it lol. Same with HT (USF).
4- P2-AEC-M5 AA (SU)
4.5- Puma-Stuart >> T70/Su76 (meaning later).
5- Medium tanks UKF>USF>SU=OH>OKW
I guess I understand what you want to communicate there (Time-Slots of vehicles and upgrades), but just to make this argument more intersubjectively verifiable, do you know any source where we/I can check this?
Because these numbers don't mean a lot, if not feeded by some understandable measuring unit (like "In a even-out match, where both participants have a fuel-income of [x], faction [y] will have the Vehicle [z] by the time-point "... sounds utopic, and I don't know where to find such data, but I hope, you know a source )
I'm curious about this source, since I actually don't know that much of CoH2-information-sources.
So thank you for your reply and by the way: Also thank everyone who has posted so far for staying in the radius of non-violent and objective communication. |
In the end of the day why should Soviet be allowed to spam only Penal and win? Does that make the game better? If one needs snares one should make conscripts or other units.
[...]
Finally the fact that in the factional showdown Soviet played Penal and won all the games demonstrates that soviet are OP and they should probably don't need more buffs.
I would counter-argue, that the Penal-Balance is not the topic of this thread and is discussed in other threads more then enough. Although I kind of understand that issue, I felt that Grens with G43s or LMG or just beeing supported by an MG-42 (which you can build without teching in your T0) are more then capable of dealing against my Penals. And they only cost 250 MP, is that right?
About the Cons, I just stated before, that you need to spend another 25 Fuel to get that Nade. And its not save to say, that you will have a chance of throwing it at the Light Vehicle. So a 25-Fuel-Upgrade for a 30 Fuel Light-Vehicle...
One has also to keep in mind that Luch is terrible at dealing with units in cover due to low modifiers so one might have trouble killing the luch but one can reduce the bleed by using cover/garrison.
Do you have numbers for that, especially compared to the T-70? I thought, they changed that Issue with the last patch.
Thank you for your reply |
As for playing T1 opening, there are too MANY options to deal with the 222:
- DSHK machine gun (has AP rounds)
- Penal squad PTRS rifle
- Guards with PTRS rifle
- Tech to T2 to get ZIS
- Get 1-2 cons and get AT nades
- Go a doctrine with Partisan Tank Hunters
- Lay lots of mines to deter aggressive 222 play
- Make good use of houses and heavy cover to stall the 222 (especially with your PTRS squads)
T70 is better than 222 so of course it comes later. But thinking you are "forced" to go T2, or that you HAVE to play T1 is where you're wrong. Soviets have so many options and I think you should explore them.
I agree on parts of your position: There are indeed many ways to play the Soviets and the Cons are a way, I often underconsider, since they feel like a pretty bad choice. Although I often see good players go with them.
But if you consider Cons AT-Nade, thats another 25 Fuel to spend, just for a vehicle, that costs 30 Fuel... don't you think, that's an issue?
The DSHK, Guards and Partisan Tank Hunters are all doctrinal units. I think using a Doctrin to counter a 250 MP and 30 Fuel Light-Vehicle is a little bit too much (although I must agree, many good Doctrins have a Guard-Option and of course, you can use these Doctrins beyond the 222 )
The Penal-PTRS is an T1-Option, but as I pointed out before, they scale very bad into the late-game then. Again, for 30 Fuel-Vehicle and without the real chance of destroying it...
But never the less, I am greatful for your response, since it pointed out some options I did not consider before. Thank you |
Depends of course (the math was already done in this thread anyway). If you're stomping, which is unlikely considering OKWs early strength, you can get out your t70 at the same time. If you're even, though, the luchs will have around a 2 minute window before you get your t70 out. I'm of the opinion that penals with ptrs are good enough to hold it off and really worth getting, but the fact remains that the t70 has a noticeably later fuel timing; whether this timing is proper or not is... a much longer discussion.
That is true, but that's the kind of discussion I am aiming at. Since the T3 for the soviets feels way to expensive (compared to the other Light-Vehicle-Buildings of the two axis-factions) with 85 Fuel, I wonder if that is a topic that needs to be taking into account at the next patch.
I'm not talking about a awful lot of cost-reduction, but 30 Fuel sounds fair, since a Fuel-Difference of 40 between the Luchs and T-70 feels definitely too much imho.
But again, that's what I hoped to bring into the community and into discussion and sofar I am very happy about the responses.
I haven't included the other allied factions so far. Does anyone has numbers and experience on them (How much fuel is the AEC? And the Stuart?)?
I can't stress enough being thankfull for all the replys I have seen so far. Thank you again |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
