|
How many hours of gameplay does one expect for 60 dollars? What is the average amount of hours that a game typically yields?
How many for 100? If you pay 100 dollars once, how much content should you get for free, forever? I think it would be nice, and no skin off Relic's nose if they did occasionally give the people who paid the premium, perks over the years, and it does sound like the initial 100 dollar package was somewhat lackluster in the end, so maybe they can do something like that.
I haven't bought any extra content yet, but I intend to, I'm just not even close to delving into all the commanders I have access to now. The cool thing is that whether I play them or not, I get to play against them, which in itself changes my gaming experience, broadens it, gives me more things to consider, new ways to play if just in how I respond.
As for pay-to-win, that is simply a matter of balance.
I can't believe people are screaming essentially "free new content or no new content at all!" wtf
edit: peoples finance concerns are real: in the scheme of things, I don't think these commanders are very pricy, but that doesn't mean they don't actually take a bite out of students or other people who are struggling. Its certainly not the high ground to poke at somebody for these reasons. |
|
Certainly, as Inverse says, you have to play better players more frequently. I know from lots of experience sucking(and I still do, but I'm far better than I used to be) that you will pick up bad habits playing against other mediocre players, and things that you think work well won't translate at all at higher levels of play.
Pro Players also often watch the games they lose. A loss is much more informative than a win. Once I started disciplining myself into doing this, I started improving much more steadily. Its important to see a loss as some place you went wrong. Watching the replay is an attempt at pinpointing that. This used to be harder for me to do, but the more game knowledge you have from experience, the better you will get at this. Sometimes you will find that it was poor unit preservation, sometimes poor scouting or failure to press your advantage, sometimes, and this is more painful, your strategy leaves you vulnerable to cutoffs or certain units that you don't have an answer to, requiring you to make macro changes to your play-style.
|
|
Not sure about balance, but I know I dread seeing an opponent go all grens. Not sure if there's much of a downside to using 4 or 5 of these over combined arms at the moment. They do make conscripts impotent pretty quickly with 1 or 2 lmgs on the field, and they make m3s hard to capitalize on, not to mention t-70s, which have a very short window of "dominance" before a p4 arrives, but have to tread incredibly lightly in that window, or end up crawling around until getting repaired.
I like penals...their flamers do engage much faster than they used to. I use them more against pgrens(especially as support against shrekked pgrens) and they are still hilarious if they can get close enough to a cluster of set-up units and other milling squads to toss in a satchel(though these things seem to have gotten a nerf)
I thought shocks were a good answer to grens and pgrens. I don't play at a high enough level to be sure, but they always seem to eat up anything in their path,and stay on the field for a while.
I only find guards good against infantry for the grenade, but that is a big deal.
Early game I find sandbags somewhat helpful, and they will win me a fight 1 on 1 with a gren squad, or stall a conflict against an lmg'ed gren. , but of course the conscript will always lose out to the rifle-nade, which badly needs the warning timer fixed. Its kind of unfortunate that I can't feel safe to stay in the cover I built against a standard t1 unit, and instead have to rush my opponent half the time for fear of the boom. fixing this little detail might make the early game a little more favorable for russia.
Beyond that, conscripts don't scale well, but they do add some fodder, capping power, and cheap reinforcement for the squads I care about(thats' basically all I use them for in the mid and late game, that and well... AT nades).
|
|
I like the current trend of making both a winter and a summer version of the maps that are introduced, and I like that approach even better when there are resource and and vp placement adjustments for greater divergence. I like blizzards, though I don't object at all to reducing their frequency. The first one comes about the right time, but the rest could come a little later to reduce the overall number within the course of a game.
They do slow the game "some" but they don't do it in a way that is unrewarding...the play gets more methodical for a moment, and that's only if shit isn't hitting the fan when the blizzard kicks in. The best part about them is the reduced vision which makes moving around pretty tense, and could pay off for a player lying in ambush or a player who gets in behind an enemy's line.
That does suck that some people have performance issues in the blizzard though. I understand that frustration with them.
|
|
Yeah, that mg in the house on the left is far more effective at denial of that whole corner of the map than it ever was in vcoh, especially in the winter incarnation, where there is impassable terrain and no gate to walk through or hop over at the furthest left point in order to reach the fuel.
Regardless of whatever other changes occur to early game balance, I hope that house is looked into.
|
weird..I keep trying to edit my old post and it keeps making a whole new one.
T70 is a powerful unit that does absolutely murder infantry, but its not that easy to avoid a faust, not if you want to get your money's worth in the 2 minutes you have before the p4 arrives(and if somebody were inclined, the stug can do the job sooner, which in a perfect world, the fast t70 should force but doesn't), and building the t70 will mean that you may not even have a t34 fielded when the p4 pops. That's assuming you went for the fast t-70 at like 7:30 to 8 minutes.
I always thought previously that the ability was a clever way to get around the problem of fausts always getting an engine crit, taking away a lot of the utility of the t70 in its very short window of dominance. I thought it was a reasonable balance...it stalled the t70 and for twice the munitions of the faust, it could stop limping again.
That said, I've gotten much more responsible about sending one of my combat engineers to back my t70 up so that after the inevitable faust, I can get it back in the action as soon as possible.
I don't know that the ability should always repair the engine(maybe just 50 percent of the time, or maybe repairing the engine could come at the cost of some of the hp healing), but a fausted t70 is in a sorry state, basically worthless for the 30 to 40 seconds it sits, unless its lucky enough to be where the action is.
It already can't base rush without committing suicide more often than not, and assuming the opponent ISNT going up to t3, it can't beat a vet 2 scout car with any certainty either(i'm not sure actually who has the edge in that fight).
I will say though that shrekked pgrens are not scary to a t70, not unless you take that engine damage from a faust, and the repair ability is quite good at mitigating any damage taken by shreks. And I should have mentioned, that while I would like the repair to sometimes repair engines of the t70, I would also like the pak to be a more reliable counter/deterrent.
|
|
T70 is a powerful unit that does absolutely murder infantry, but its not that easy to avoid a faust, not if you want to get your money's worth in the 2 minutes you have before the p4 arrives(and if somebody were inclined, the stug can do the job sooner, which in a perfect world, the fast t70 should force but doesn't), and building the t70 will mean that you may not even have a t34 fielded when the p4 pops. That's assuming you went for the fast t-70 at like 7:30 to 8 minutes.
I always thought previously that the ability was a clever way to get around the problem of fausts always getting an engine crit, taking away a lot of the utility of the t70 in its very short window of dominance. I thought it was a reasonable balance...it stalled the t70 and for twice the munitions of the faust, it could stop limping again.
That said, I've gotten much more responsible about sending one of my combat engineers to back my t70 up so that after the inevitable faust, I can get it back in the action as soon as possible.
I don't know that the ability should always repair the engine(maybe just 50 percent of the time, or maybe repairing the engine could come at the cost of some of the hp healing), but a fausted t70 is in a sorry state, basically worthless for the 30 to 40 seconds it sits, unless its lucky enough to be where the action is.
It already can't base rush without committing suicide more often than not, and assuming the opponent ISNT going up to t3, it can't beat a vet 2 scout car with any certainty either(i'm not sure actually who has the edge in that fight).
I will say though that shrekked pgrens are not scary to a t70, not unless you take that engine damage from a faust, and the repair ability is quite good at mitigating any damage taken by shreks, though they could probably support a pak well enough. The pak though, should hit the t70 more reliably.
|
|
would definitely like green cover to prevent suppression. I'm not sure how the numbers are done, but it would be great if it could be arranged that it only takes "most" of a squad being in cover for them to receive the cover benefit as a squad(if only to thwart suppression)rather than the other way around.
Maybe oorah should provide a damage or accuracy increase at close range(or maybe a faster firing rate with lower accuracy that would have the same effect at close range?), nothing too extreme, but that would be one way to address the lackluster flanking against mg42s, and it would cost 10 munis a pop. This wouldn't really address the poor scaling of conscripts but it would give them some extra oomph in the early game against unupgraded grens and mgs, probably giving russia a slight edge in that stage of the game.
It would do nothing to address flanking against maxim's either, but sounds like people are saying those are pretty lack-luster these days, so i don't know that that's a problem. |
|
Well russian snipers don't really need another reason for being right now, and ostheer squads are all small. Sniping at the .4 percentage should still do the trick.
The ostheer sniper on the other hand, could stand to have a better percentage...maybe .6 or better, given the need to dislodge much bigger mg squads. Of course there's flanking with a flamer, and the mortar, both available in tier 1,so while I like this in principle it may not be necessary,
and I'm getting the shit kicked out of me post-patch playing russia as is(though I can't tell if all of a sudden i'm playing a much better player base or if the patch has genuinely made things harder for russian early game), so I'm not sure from my own limited understanding of the game whether any early game ostheer buff is a good idea at this point.
|
|
I definitely would like some sort of buff to the ostheer sniper, but if survivability or cost are too dangerous to fuss with, then just a drastic improvement(and edge over russian snipers) in the ability to empty buildings would be nice. Rather than a 40 percent hit chance, it would make the ostheer sniper a lot more valuable if he were somewhat effective at clearing 6 man teams out of buildings. I'd like a 60% or even 75% hit chance against garrisoned units. That's still not overly fast, and hardly nullifies the value of plopping a unit in a house to stall.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
