Profile of Hannibal

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

General Information


Thread: WINTER PATCH v1.17 Feb 2020, 21:46 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Feb 2020, 20:31 PMVipper The current patch just makes commando strength units available available 2 CP earlier. And this is just a typical example. More and more powerful units become available early in the game. That imo is step in the wrong direction. What do you mean by "Commando Strength units"? The airlanding officer? Sorry I'm a bit confused here, but that's the only thing I could find on a quick search. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: WINTER PATCH v1.17 Feb 2020, 19:10 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Feb 2020, 11:26 AMVipper Again it does not matter if their are power spikes in faction by design. If one use the grenadier as benchmark one might choose to say that other infatry should be 15% more cost efficient than grenadier since grenadier are support by 15% more cost efficient support weapons. Trying to balance this with a faction can be equally problematic since unit might be equally balanced but other factor have a major impact like tech cost and timing. My point is simply if all mainlines infantries are buffed then one is not solving the balance issue on the same power level but one is creating a power creep. At this point I actually think that we mostly agree but had phrasing differences. One note on the mainline infantry: If all (or at least most) mainlines are buffed it could also mean that they are too weak vs mainline counters. To the point though: I think I also agreed on the general sentiment of mainline power creep. However thinking more about it there's probably not too much to it. The buffed units (correct me if I'm wrong) are Riflemen, Conscripts (which were UP at the time and now get nerfed again, so that's alright) and Grens (late game buff because they were weak late game). Then Panzerfüsiliere, Assault pioneers (the latter in an quite old patch; both were basically never used before that) which were also pretty UP at the time and are now in an okayish state. On the other hand IS got quite a nerf (they were OP, now apparently slightly UP and get a small buff). Volks got a mini nerf. Penals did not get touched. Now while I do not agree with all of the choices made, I think infantry vs support weapons (early game) is in a better state than basically ever and will even improve with the slight changes for IS, Grens and Cons. Infantry vs light vehicles (early-mid) is also in a good state and infantry vs tanks (mid onwards) is also probably in it's best state for a long time if not ever. Heavy AI capabilities is the only thing that might need to be looked at but is not in a completely broken state. Apart from some minor tweaking all current mainlines are doing fairly well in terms of balance. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: WINTER PATCH v1.17 Feb 2020, 11:21 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Feb 2020, 00:59 AMVipper Think you are still missing the point: 1) Any faction can used as the benchmark 2) If that faction is wins more game vs other you buff the other faction 3) If that faction loses more games vs other you nerf the other faction Finally the just because a faction is balanced it does not mean that some of components can not be up or op if it part of the design of the faction. And this is how ostheer were designed. Less cost efficient infatry more cost efficient support weapon. Weaker light vehicles more powerful medium tanks. Again it does not matter what you use as your benchmark as long at it stay the same. What I actually tried to explain is that using a faction as benchmark is the wrong approach. It multiplies workload, cannot account for non-comparable units and also hardly for skill gaps. I agree with your second part, ehich also feeds into my point about benchmark factions: it does not work very well. If a faction is supposed to have certain power spikes. How do you balance for that since you cannot directly compare unit stats to make them roughly equal? What do we do if MGs work well against mid and close range squads but get frontally wiped by a single long range squad while all long range squads are roughly similarly strong? Benchmarking this would find no issue at all, since similar units perform similarly. That's why I said that you need to balance according to their available counters. Of course you can balance and compare to similar units, but for this you assume that the other unit is decently balanced and that you can take this unit's performance out of faction context. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: WINTER PATCH v1.16 Feb 2020, 18:54 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Feb 2020, 14:31 PMVipper My point is quite simple if grenadier require another buff after years of being fine, it mean that the power level has been increased and now they are up. And IS are UP also (I would say conscripts were also UP until they received the OP SVT and & men upgrade). Actually Ostheer is the more complete faction including most units type thus the better candidate for a benchmark and thus Relic choose it, it was not me who made that choice. You actually brought that up with Croc example. In addition which faction is the benchmark is quite irrelevant. Its like saying I prefer to call my length units meter over feet. Actually the easiest way, is to revert some of the changes that make other units OP compared to Grenadier instead of buffing grenadier. It much easier to identify the right spot for other units since it is between their pre buff and current state. Buffing grenadier further is moving into uncharted waters. And grenadier are not the only UP unit so are IS and even conscripts that had to received OP abilities to leave up to new power level. I agree on the line infantry part. You have been arguing for OST as a benchmark a lot. In some parts it makes sense IF the whole concept of a benchmark makes sense, which I briefly remarked that this is often not the case. Also your benchmark faction must be balanced within itself. What do you do if you have good line infantry but the cost/performance for an AI vehicle of zhe benchmark faction is absolutely shitty? Give every faction usable line infantry and nerf the shit out of their AI vehicle? In the current state of the game, it does not make much sense to have a benchmark faction. The best thing is to cluster units that perform well for their cost and potential counters, and then balance other units according to them. In one situation we can nerf the IS2 because the Tiger is decently balanced. But this does not mean that the 251 has to be nerfed until people don't really use it anymore like the M5 (just exemplary) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Winter balance (1/2020) feedback - Ostheer6 Feb 2020, 17:31 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Feb 2020, 15:18 PMVipper I agree but I made different proposal, the duration is increased but the ability provides "new" with target size 1 that can merge but not reinforce. This make them ideal to provide in reinforcement to the front and re crew support weapons. I remember that, but that would require a new type of squad which will likely cause multiple new bugs and issues. Also it's probably quite fiddly to use and requires even more micro. I'm not saying it is a completely bad or thematically illogical idea, but I think there are better solutions. In: Lobby
Thread: Winter balance (1/2020) feedback - Ostheer6 Feb 2020, 17:29 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Feb 2020, 15:57 PMZeuskl I don't agree with the tech cost change. More expensive T3 delays Stug E and Puma by 15 fuel, and the T4 change will delay Tiger by 10 fuel. Skipping medium tanks for Tiger will cost 25 more fuel. Because I think the Tiger is by far the best T4 unit, the tech change will probably be an overall nerf. The Tiger part is intended to impede the current heavy-only meta. OST and SOV pay the least teching cost for their heavies compared to the other three factions, so they need some price increase on their heavies. If other units can be slightly rebalanced by that, that's a win-win. But yes, StuG E and Puma are left in the dust a little bit. In: Lobby
Thread: COH2 winter balance mod - discussion6 Feb 2020, 14:03 PM Go back to the topic guys and for once don't feel insulted by some bullshit since most of this is based on incorrect perception of the other user's post and then completely sticking with it instead of just leaning back and rereading it. There are many non-native speakers here so don't always jump to conclusions. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: WINTER PATCH v1.16 Feb 2020, 14:00 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Feb 2020, 13:48 PMVipper Do you continue to increase the power with patch or have you decide what is an optimum power level and adjust units according? And IS are currently UP also. This honestly does not make much sense. It is a valid approach to declare one faction's units as benchmark and then balance everything else according to it, but: 1. All factions have to be designed roughly equally, which in CoH2 works for many standard units (mediums and for the most part also main line infantry) but not for many non-standard units (for example there is not unit for the Crocodile if OST is the benchmark as you often said). 2. You always try to push OST as benchmark, although there is little reason for it. If the current state of the game is all in all doing well (which I think we can agree on that it is), then take the easiest route to balance because it will cause less side effects. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Winter balance (1/2020) feedback - Ostheer6 Feb 2020, 13:44 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 15:53 PMIncendiaryRounds Yeah the relief infantry and conscription abilities are absolutely worthless trash. They've both been nerfed to the ground. I have to agree. While the original idea was nice, it just does not work that well in the game. If you max it out, you exchange MUN for MP at a rate of 1:~4, which is usually a good deal. But often you do not want two additional infantry units, because they will just block your build. And since loosing units is a big deal, you cannot sacrifice units the already vetted units (for example in order to surprise your opponent with a quick second wave). I suggest reworking this ability (if possible) to reduce reinforcement costs. For example, if we say in a bigger fight usually 10-15 infantry models die (4-5 Gren/Pio squads lose 3 models each plus maybe some support unit models) then the reinforcement cost would be a bit more than 300 MP. If the ability would give a 50% cost reduction (just an example) it would save ~150 MP which would suggest a price of about 35-50 MUN. Make the ability last for a minute or so, that's enough to limit it to usually one fight only per squad. Adjust the CD accordingly, so that it cannot be spammed. Advantages: You can activate it when you need it and don't need to remember to click the button when you get overrun. Unit preservation is still promoted, you don't get squads that you might not need. It helps you from the mid game onwards to save some MP and could help bleed heavy factions like OST to reduce that. There are side effects from this (for example it would not work that well with Osttruppen or Conscript builds) and a lot of other stuff, but all in all it could be a nice idea. As of now, the ability is not used anyways, so unless it goes super OP, there's nothing to lose. In: Lobby
Thread: Tank Destroyer Poll4 Feb 2020, 19:33 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Feb 2020, 19:14 PMVipper The USF have tools vs PzIV there is simply little reason to invest in them since one can get m36 instead. Then please tell me which ones. I just discussed the AT options they have and they are not reliable. They also don't have easy access to standard mines to snare. The overall tank defense of USF is EXTREMELY micro intensive unless you get a Jackson. Jump back to quoted post4 Feb 2020, 19:14 PMVipper Imo the "advantage" ostheer are designed have in medium tank play is crucial in debating and balancing the TDs. Current medium tank play is almost non existent and that forces the MOD team to increase T4 availability (once more) to compensate. That imo is a step in the wrong direction. (and that makes another medium TD thread running because without medium tanks there is little reason for medium TDs) Simply increase the window of opportunity of units to pay off for the investment instead of buffing thing thru the roof to compensate for the limit window of opportunity... The P4 is a very efficient tank for its cost. I'd say the heavy tank meta should be fixed, because everyone is saving for a heavy instead of getting a medium. Pushing heavies back and creating a longer gap IS a good start. I'm not sure why you think increasing T4 availability was done to compensate for a limited time frame for the units. T4 provides end game units. This will obviously not help to prolong medium play, but since T4 was rarely used in smaller modes it is good in general that this issue is addressed. I think fixing the heavy tanks will do more for the game than many suspect. TDs will become less prevalent in the mid game. At the moment heavies come so early that getting a medium will only cause problems, because you don't have enough fuel to get a TD when the heavy comes. Conversely, getting a TD instantly is a safe bet because the heavy will come anyway. If this gets fixed than players have to decide if they really want to get a TD to shut down a single medium. Which is fine, because they then lack AI capabilities and it comes down again to positioning and micro if that choice was worth it or not. Otherwise they could just go medium as well which again emphasizes micro and positioning. Time will tell if balance team pulls the right levers with this patch, but I think their idea is clear and concise. In: COH2 Balance