I still miss a change on Cromwell. It comes too early and it outplays P4. I think they should consider at least an acceleration/deceleration nerf. Make it slight faster than T34/85 but with the same acc/deceleration stats and I think it would be fine
Focus in 1 faction (Russian is fine). Download Replays and watch how the russian play. Build order, how do he moves and position,commander selection, etc.
After you do that, you try to COPY the same strategy and build order when playing automatch. You will feel improvement. Don't matter if you loose, just keep fighting and try to preserve units and VP
Saw the vid and you briefly mention the M3 and the SU sniper. Again, once the changes to Penals are implemented, the current situation would still remain the same.
-Are penals worth getting or not? You won't think about combining your army composition with M3 and snipers (you get sometimes a single one depending map and opponent and still not worth the cost/risk/reward).
I know there are some ideas roaming around on how to bring T1 as a whole into the late game, but this means it's just a stop gap patch till the other changes are on the scope of been implemented.
"What do PTRS Penals do, that Guards don't? And the answer is really nothing..." That's the problem. We are not getting T1 because we want snipers and M3, we are getting it because LIVE Penals with Flamers are OP.
The whole point of high risk/high reward on T1 was when either M3 and/or snipers were OP. Every noob can just blob around a ball of Penals with flamers and Guards and be effective. That's not the case with utilizing either snipers or clowncars. That's why live T1 is low-medium risk/high reward.
-Less relevant but i won't think PTRS penals will make Shocktroops return.
-IMO, the key to bring T1 into play is not having a single unit been viable/OP rather than the whole tier been balanced. I think with PTRS or not we are going in the direction of making Penals balanced but again making T1 been dead. Why not play Cons/T2 instead (quoting Jesulin/Hans) and with that, why not play USF/UKF competitively.
1- Penal: I do think that the AT Satchel is really a great idea. Why? Cause it would be too easy to bully/push around the unit if that wouldn't be the case. Guards have button to avoid this.
2- M3: same with other light vehicles (Kubel) why not start by reducing veterancy requirements.
Better veterancy? Utility? Faster unload/load of troops?
3- Sniper. Since we have to embrace the whole 2 man snipers concept why not:
-Make flare vet 0 again. Flare (same with mortar/trip wire) reveals cloaked units. Flare are shot by the spotter only.
-Sniper model has same sight range as infantry units (35)
-Spotter models has current sight plus 5 (45>50). You will have same sight range as shoot range.
-Vet1: increase spotter sight range by +10
-Spotter and sniper model can independently die. Spotter is cheaper to reinforce than sniper model (45vs90).
Train thought:
I really like your Ideas.
To compensate T0, reduce Molotov animation to throw it faster, increase cost to 30 ammo (OKW Style).
Make AT satchel unlock on T0 AT Nade research.
Decrease number of rockets fired per salvo on Calliope.
Add 1 more salvo to calliope to compensate.
That will prevent frustrating wipes on the first barrange.
I would like to post an idea about balance that I think it's not being addressed on this winter balance patches.
Lets talk about the Calliope:
While it may not be a key unit in 1v1, it is in 2v2 or higher. And I consider it one of the most frustrating weapon regarding wiping squads.
I know it is on a commander, but it is a good commander.
The main problem here is that there is no chance on avoiding wipes. The first barrage is powerful enough to wipe squads with high chance even if you hit retreat. What I think it could fix that, is to increase the number of barrages by 1, and reduce the nº of rockets fired per barrage so that, the power vs static units/buildings will remain the same, but it will give a chance to hit retreat and don't get wiped by a high probability RNG.
In 1v1, building a first calliope is a high fuel invest for a faction with weak AT guns and a commander without mines, so it is risky to call in a calliope when it can be flanked by a medium tank. But in 2v2 or higher games, the sinergies with other factions makes the calliope unflankable, and even if you reach to him, his high survability (which is fine) will make your flanking tank be in risk of not surviving and not killing the calliope when there is a high chance to loose your tank, dooming the game. (2v2 players will understand).
So in summary, what I propose is to keep the calliope the best arty unit in game but low the RNG to wipe squads on the first burst.
As a rule of thumb, if the map in question existed in the map-pool of CoH1 (e.g., Montargis, Red Balls, Hill 331), just veto it. This is because these maps:
- Lack cover (which is needed for snipers, mgs, etc)
- Have a completely different resource allocation system
- Most of them are too crowded, even by 3v3 standards
- Were never designed with Forward-Retreat-Points or JT/Elefant in mind
Let those ghosts hang back in the closet. If you want to play these maps, just fire up CoH1 and experience them the way they were meant to be.
Good maps are:
- Wide enough to allow for flanks (and prevent MG lockdown)
- Short enough to make FRP rince-repeat cheese less powerful
- Allow the players to utilise almost the entire available territory (e.g,. Lienne forest is notorious for the often-neglected forest region)
- Have reasonably-well contestible resource points (Steppes - good. Lorch - baaaad)
- Don't have all resources clumped up together (Montargis, wtf?)
- Don't have mud everywhere, just for the express purpose of advertising the mud mechanic
e.g., Hill 400 would have been a perfect map, if not for the inclusion of the maphack watchtowers (and the prominence of mortar pits/Walking stuka)
Yeppers.
At first I read "best", my head tilted, and then I read your message properly.
Steel pact from Coh1 was my favourite map. Short enough, wider, it was funny to play on it.