|
I think the CoH2 experiment has made it abundantly clear that factional identity should not deprive a faction of the basic tools.
All factions should have access to the basic tools of the game - HMG, ATG, mortar, etc.
Factional identity can then be achieved by:
1. using unique units for these basic tools, so that they fill the same purpose but with a slightly different mechanic. For example: mortar vs ISG. Or one faction relying on a manpower Panzerschreck squad instead of ATG, or a mortar/AT Half Track rather than an infantry based unit.
2. using mid and end game units (and tech) to make factions unique. Soviets get a horde of cheap disposable tanks, the Germans get few quality-over-quantity tanks. Brits get a special "end game" tech that unlocks an exclusive high tier vehicle. OKW gets a stock heavy tank if they put down all tech. Et cetera.
TLDR: there should've be a distinction between "basic tools" and "mid and end game units" and all factions should've gotten easy access to these basic tools. Diversity, identity and uniqueness should then be achieved with certain "mid and end game units" and tech only.
|
|
Trois Points is pretty bad but it might be worth giving it a shot to fix that map by removing the central river, rather than straight up deleting the map. |
The UC, Bren and Kubel don't need Command Tank abilities. I don't see why the cheapest vehicle in the game needs them.
The Kubelwagen barely has any utility and sucks in combat. The result is that the unit is considered very weak and is rarely used (except for some backcapping strats).
The UC is UKF's only tool for early MP bleed and garrison/cover denial. It's pretty strong at this combat role without being cheesy, so it doesn't need utility.
The WC-51 is currently the opposite of the Kubelwagen, having both a strong combat role and utility. Take away the WC-51's utility and all that it'll have left going for it is the cheesy and arguably OP garrisoned Cavalry Riflemen combo, which is something I think most people will agree with has to be toned down. But nerf both and the unit will never see use (like the Kubelwagen). So the way I see it, nerfing its combat cheese potential and leaving its utility is the only way to balance it while keeping it viable. |
I think the WC51 should lose Mark Target, 155mm Artillery and decrew.
The first two abilities have no place on a 200 MP 0 FU clown kubel. The latter allows you to drive it off: it's got to crawl back to its engineers like a Soviet M3 or a UKF UC.
I'd rather have a unit like the WC-51 have some utility (with the abilities) than its sole purpose being a cheese clowncar. I think it's better to go after some of its combat stats (armor, HP, accuracy penalty for garrisoned squad, etc.) so the Cavalry Riflemen WC-51 combo won't be as strong anymore. |
Spring balance update(last year) reduced penetration, reload time, increased accuracy and nerfed barrage.
Pen change was in a preview but it was reverted before final patch was released. |
You probably should read up on how threadshot works for a loooong time now.
Hint: It requires vet1 to do anything better then temporary 5 second meaningless snare.
I know how it works thanks. A temporary 5 second stun is enough to chase down enemy light vehicles straight off the bat even when they started retreating in time. See https://www.twitch.tv/videos/407580970 at 47:40m.
It's an unfair advantage that IMO shouldn't be enabled at vet 0 now that UKF has snares on RE.
|
And if they do nerfs and buffs they need to do it gradually bit at a time, not triple/buffs or triple nerfs like they did to the stug
What tripple nerf like they did to the StuG? It only got an ROF decrease and nothing else.
StuG G
The Stug’s high rate of fire is disproportionate to its cost, particularly when produced in numbers.
• Reload from 3.5/4.5 to 4.5/5.5
Spring Update 17th of May 2018 https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/67/coh-2-changelog/p5
Asymnetrical balance and all that. At least now they have snares at ALL but the AEC availability was always to offset the severe lack of vehicle snares in the brit roster. They can't even start planting mines until they tech up.
I don't think the AEC timing is a problem, but it was one of the units designed to be excessively good to compensate for the complete lack of snares. Now that RE have snares, its Tread Shot ability should be moved to vet 1 and maybe the ability's penetration should be brought down from 1000 to normal pen values (like Puma's Aimed Shot ability). Just like the 6 Pounder should now lose its 1.5 accuracy modifier vs Light Vehicles.
|
But they do cost an arm and leg to field. 175 and 200 fuel. Most non doc mediums are around 120 fuel.
Are you still living in 2017? Both Panthers are 185 fuel nowadays. |
The main issue I see with is a number of their units aren’t that viable/need tuning to help diversify what the faction can do. WFA only needs slight nerfs with USF only really needing some tuning on the Jackson and M8 Scott in terms of the core. Things like the Pack Howie are stronger than mortars due to price, tech and having to fulfill the role of pseudo heavy artillery aka medium artillery. From what I play as USF, double bars might be strong but it’s also counteracted by cost and it’s best range is to fight at mid-short which is harder to achieve.
Boosting Ostwinds, PGs and a simple target size on the stug G would give them more options to fight.
I'd agree this is the best way to help out Ostheer, because it won't impact team games as much as, say, buffing Grenadiers. Ostheer in team games is still very strong because using their strongest units (HMG 42, Pak 40, mortars, Panther, Brummbar, etc) is much easier there.
What would also help indirectly is indeed some slight tuning of UKF and USF now that their new tech / snares have settled down, and remove some of the excessive things that they had to compensate for these weaknesses (such as the accuracy bonus vs lights for the 6 Pounder). |
Yeah, they do.
At veterancy three both Pershing and Panther have 2,6 accelleration/deceleration, which means that they have the exact same speed up to basically 3 seconds, point where Panther gets 0,6 better speed, aka you couldn't tell the difference if it wasn't to advance a narrative.
Meanwhile Pershing gets much better on the move stats for firing. Only a would see any kind of advantage in 0,6 extra max speed over the exact a (completely irrelevant most of the time) when the Pershing is just much better on the move as a tank and can chase or escape while firing much better.
Ps: 2.6 Pershing acc is retained at vet1, while Panther 2,6 acc is retained at vet 3. Pershing has effectively more acceleration for most of the game compared to Panther.
Yeah whatever dude, it doesn't matter which way you try to spin it, the Pershing does not have "far better mobility" when the Panther's stats are either equal or higher.
Also, the OKW Panther still starts with 2.4 acceleration stock and gets 3.1 acceleration with vet 3 as well as 36 rotation (Pershing has 30 at vet 3) and the 6.6 top speed so that one is more mobile than the Pershing in every single way.
Also also firing on the move is an accuracy stat and not a mobility one. Mobility is literally the ability to move from point A to point B, and the stuff you list does not count as mobility.
Mobility
/məʊˈbɪləti/
noun
the ability to move
https://www.google.nl/search?q=mobility+definition&ie=&oe=
Pershing is the only Tank to carry such kind of penetration while being a mobile "standard" tank, and other tanks don't even get this close,
I'm not sure what you're talking about here? The Panther has the exact same penetration values and isn't even doctrinal. Unless with "standard" you mean generalist, in which case, yes it is. |
Netherlands
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
