The revamps are supposed to be unofficial, private projects of the people who made the last few patches.
The reality of those mods is particularly confused at this point, despite statements from Relic. |
If you actually had the decency to invest the 30 minutes required to playtest the mod, before storming here to pour your vitriol, you would realise what a fool you're making of yourself here.
We welcome all critical opinion. However, the critical opinion needs to be based on facts, not misrepresentation of them. The only way to get the facts right is to try the mod.
Alright, sure, but you realize you are putting the onus onto the community after the fact? I am not seeing a process to these changes. The changes come first, and then the community has to respond? The only option is to be reactionary.
Then people start to get mad too and then people's critical opinions get modded.
I mean, it cant be too hard to propose changes before implementing them into your mod. It'd help screen a lot of these discussions. |
Man there are so many changes it makes my head spin. It'd take months of dedicated and intensive testing just to make sense of them all, let alone how the affect and interact with each other. |
This version of the Jackson would be an excellent doctrinal candidate to swap with the M10. |
Look, the only reasons they are using some of these out-of-this-world ideas is because they have no other options; there are not any balance mods on the steam workshop and they are damn certain they are not willing to spend money on a professional balance designer.
So they are doing this out of desperation.
This is more what an act of desperation looks like. Kappa.
https://www.coh2.org/topic/61526/cccp-an-alternative-look-at-revamping-factions |
Can't agree more on this - besides the strategic depth suggestions - especially on the balance/mod team's missed opportunities. They are are just trying hard tuning things instead of actually improving the game.
You have to give them credit though for the volumes of QoL and bug fixes they've managed to get into the game. Say what you will of everything else they've done, but those changes are at least worth keeping in mind.
That said, there's a lot of opportunity for soviets to have global upgrades:
Conscript PPsh or SVTs or even DP-28s
Penal SVTs or DP-28s or PPsh
Demo charge unlock (and/or)
Satchel charge unlock
Cheaper upkeep
Faster vet
OKW Veterancy levels 4 and 5 could easily be unlockable through upgrades.
Ostheer has Battle Phases, but they're pretty necessary and apart of teching anyway.
At the very least USF has weapon racks and grenades. |
When I blob I actually try not to retreat in droves. I can't speak for any other blobber of course, but my reasoning is that if I already have a few squads to sustain the fight there's no point in retreating all of them when I can still push. Which is kind of why I do't see eye to eye with blobs = brainless cheese. If anything it's more because you need to coordinate other units with teammates awhile only retreating squads in danger of being wiped out.
The few times I do I find it frustrating that not everyone assembles at once so you might find yourself streaming them out as squads return to players' control. Map geography exacerbates this, and sometimes squads can NEVER return to control because a guy got stuck.
Precisely, but most discussions of blobbing tend to assume that the player is mass retreating. I am personally of the opinion that blobbing is more a result of people reaching critical mass on micro. I know when I'm trying to finesse some tank combat and I just need to get my damn forces to the front the ugly mass movements come out. Faster and easier access to healing and reinforcing just, well, heals and reinforces faster and easier.
Also, please note you have misquoted me with the last paragraph there. Bulgakov wrote that, not myself. |
Reload speed, acceleration, handling, and speed would probably round it out right? And maybe even mg dps.
Target size, turret rotation, top speed, not to mention faction teching and design as well as timing of units accompanying the cromwell, etc.
And that's just off th e top of my head. |
Panzer IV
Hit points 640
Manpower cost 350
Fuel cost 125
Armor 180
Penetration 110.00
Area distance (F/N) 1.88 / 0.75
Cromwell
Hit points 640
Manpower cost 340
Fuel cost 120
Armor 160
Penetration 120.00
Area distance (F/N) 1.50 / 0.25
I can see your point - the Cromwell is clearly superior and that extra 5 fuel for the PZ4 definitely adds another 10 minutes till you can build it.
Uh given what stats you've named, it's like saying grens are twice as good as rifles because their weapons deal 16 per hit instead of 8.
Point is, there are are a lot more relevant stats and components at work here. |
I think fixing this game will take more than adjusting some damage values and price values here and there. I think the problems in the game are due to how factions are designed. The game feels to be designed in a way to make it as easy as possible for all factions to get to late game, and making sure all factions have fairly equivalent tools for all scenarios.
Fuel is spend to tech linearly for basically all factions. The only choice of what to spend fuel on is either: more shitty vehicles, or tech to better vehicles, or wait to spend on vehicle call ins.
There are not enough options to dump fuel into upgrading existing units. All factions are designed around dumping fuel into creating new units, not making an existing army better.
I think more global upgrades would have multiple benefits:- add more strategic diversity
- help balance infantry combat
For example, for a game that has been out for 5 years, and whose developers have pushed the "we balance to increase strategic diversity" slogan, why then is the only viable soviet strategy seen amongst people who play this game seriously the same T1 + lend lease?
The only obvious option for soviets is to rush T70, and save fuel for sherman. They can be confident in the fact that their Penal squads will get stronger passively as the game goes on. There need not be any thought or decisions put into how will my infantry scale. The infantry will scale, since vet requires 0 skill to gain (just use the squad in combat, and push T when it's unsafe)
Imagine then, if say, instead of balancing conscripts usefulness as the game progresses by changing their vet and rifle damage, you added a global upgrade. Then at all stages of the game, you could have the option to invest in the performance of your units. Are your conscripts performing poorly? Maybe don't spend 80 fuel on another T34 and instead spend 80 fuel to upgrade all conscripts with SVT40s. As the game is right now, all that can be done is keep your conscripts alive, and buy more tanks.
It is so frustrating to me that this is how the game works. All the interesting fuel dump options have been removed too. Elite troops' veterency ability, CAS's fuel to munitions conversion. These were the abilities that made the game interesting. They added the choice between "okay I made a P4, do I make another, or save for Tiger" to, "do I delay my P4 for 5+ minutes to put LMG42s on all my squads".
The balance team, in my opinion, is completely missing their chance to make a mod that turns CoH2 into an interesting game. I feel as if I'm a broken record, and pretty sure I'm just repeating an opinion that's been floating around forever. But how come literally every RTS (SC2, CoH1, AoE franchise) has global upgrades for units, while CoH2 is stuck with only a few, inexpensive options.
I want more options than "build 4-5 grens, give them LMG42 or G43, and keep them alive". Where is the fun in that? Where is the decision making? All wehrmacht games are just "rush P4" or "stay alive till puma". Imagine if you had the options for more global upgrades, like CoH1 had. Veterency upgrades (basically requesting elite troops to assist your combat), global weapon upgrades, more smaller upgrades (group zeal, vet sergeant, AT nades, incendiary nades, base healing, grenades, increased squad sizes, increased veterency gain, decreased unit upkeep). So many options for play to improve an army, rather than expand it.
I feel as long as the game revolves around purchasing tanks, and having all infantry scale into late game via free veterency, and easy to buy, fuel free weapons, the game will forever be riddled with linear play, and limited strategic depth.
TL;DR: game cannot be fixed by adjusting mosin nagant damage and giving cons -50% accuracy at vet. Give the game more global upgrades to fix unit deficits, to give the player more options, open up strategic diversity, and make commanders more interesting.
I just wish this wasn't still being said in 2017 when it was bleeding obvious in 2013. |