snip
I'm definitely in agreement. Soviet tech being more "Linear" would be a fantastic improvement, and open up a lot more strategies as it would (hopefully) mean Soviet are rather less forced to pick commanders to fill otherwise unfillable holes in their roster. I still think a major rework to Penals and a moving of (some type of Guards) to a nondoctrinal position would be nice as well.
It feels like one of those sorts of changes that Lelic would approve of, and the small group of people who REALLY hate it when improvements are made (That reduce RNG or "faction uniqueness) would likely be up in arms.
I really do like faction uniqueness, but it simply can't be at the expense of the faction's usability. OKW's not having an MG was unique, but it was an abysmal decision and was rightly reverted. |
All armies should be equipped to effectively deal with all other armies. Relic already tried doing things like releasing OKW without an HMG or a Medium Tank and it was hell to balance them because of it.
There are indeed some things "all armies" must have, I definitely agree. Over-emphasis on "faction uniqueness" has unfortunately shown that it really isn't quite realistic as a concept, not with the game in the state it currently is.
"All armies" should have an answer to both Medium and Heavy tanks, I don't really think this can be denied. In what form these answers come is what is more debatable. If someone can come up with some genuinely effective alternatives to "Medium and Heavy TDs" then I'm all for hearing it, but i haven't heard any genuinely workable alternative solutions. |
Hmmm, I had hoped the IS capping nerf might alleviate the UKF vs OKW matchup from being so....well frankly a meme unless you outskill your opponent on the order of 1k rank places. Or Hamburg/ultra urban maps. Still sounds like it'll be a pretty lousy matchup, esp if they go a triple IS BO and muscle their way through your forces.
ISG coming online earlier in theory should help but that's an experimental build atm.
Hamburg/ultra urban maps might give the Assault Officer the opportunity to really shine, I wonder if he'd be enough to keep balance in UKF's favour in these sorts of maps? Or would they need Assault Tommies as well, to keep up with Sturmpioneers? |
oorah is strong but id argue that it is so because conscripts lose long range fights to grenadiers... if grenadiers didnt have oorah then they would lose hard to grenadiers simply because grens have long range DPS and a riflenade on top...
merge`s main use is the engie flamethrower and supporting team weapons... meanwhile of the soviet teamweapons the only exceptional one around here is the zis3 while the maxim is still hot crap...
if that were true then side costs + tech costs should be comparable to any other faction... but this isnt true... soviet teching alone already costs more than any other faction... sidetechs bump up those costs even higher...
as ive said... soviet teching is already stupidly expensive... its down there with OKW as the highest teching cost ingame... (okw`s costs more fuel but SOV teching is incredibly manpower intensive)
Oorah is for more than just closing in on Grenadiers, it allows Conscripts to avoid MG arcs, escape danger more easily, get into position to throw a Molotov (Usually at a building with an MG in it), and (most pressingly) allows them to close in on vehicles for a snare. I'd argue that oorah more than makes up for the reduced range of Conscript snares.
Merging into Flamethrowers is an incredibly powerful tool, though. Their teamweapons (though often subpar, apart from the ZIS) being able to stay on the field more easily is rather strong, too. Merging into Guards is also very nice indeed, though of course they are a little squishier.
True to some degree, but It's difficult to look at raw teching costs and come to a genuinely perfect conclusion, due to differences between various armies' differences. I do think Soviet could do with a decrease in teching costs, but its not as easy to say "They should be the same as OST/USF/UKF", I don't think. A lot of balance decisions are difficult to make based merely on raw numbers, given that the way these numbers then interact with the game as a whole is very difficult to compute.
Also: I think Lelic probably don't want Soviet to not have to buy AT nades and Molotovs, due to the whole "Faction identity" thing. |
ourah goes hand and hand with molotov and "offensive" role and with PPsh, Conscripts are better of with explosive grenade.
Merge could stay with Conscripts depending on cost and target size, but if smgs penal remained at T1 merge could help mitigate some of the initial tech cost.
There's the risk of overloading this "new concept" penal squad as far as CQB performance goes if you start taking too much away from Conscripts and giving it to them. I'm envisioning them as of rather similar base performance. I could see Penals receiving the Molotov and Cons a Grenade in return, however. I'm trying to think what would be done to Conscripts in this "version" of CoH2 to cement them as the "defensive" option over Penals, other than either increased on-the-move penalties, or a small cover bonus, though. Either option feels a little unnecessary.
Regarding cost/target size concerns, my suggestion would be to normalise both units' (vet 0) RA so that one isn't strictly "better" than the other when it came to merging. The reason i'm rather set on the idea of them both having Merge is due to A: The sheer power of the ability, one unit with and one unit without would leave the unit without with a great deficit in utility, and B: I very much like it as a factional gimmick, and if Soviet were to have two "mainline" options, I feel it would be best not to lose access to this gimmick for wanting to make use of Mainline 2 over Mainline 1.
|
1. M1918
If it isn't highly rated compared to other droppable weapons. O think ot shouls be remained as 33%. for fairness.
2. M2 50cal
Don't change it. why you guys keep removing differnces btw factions?
Anyway Mg34 and Mg42 has its slow setup time cuz it has a really big cover radius, 120°. And soviet has 6 men.
But without other change just nerfing M2? If you are not happy about m2 movement cuz it is <different> from mg42, why don't you make its radius 120°?
3. packhowi.
it is 340mp, 70 more expensive than okw isg and requires more men.
Shouldn't it be powerful if it is <paired> situation?
4. Scott
It comes out at the final tech and is designed to deal with support weapons, infatries Cuz usf doesn't have non-doctrinal massive artility like panzerwerfer, stuka and katty.
Fine, I can take other changes, but why range 50?
It is damn M8A1 <Howitzer MOTAR> carrier. It is fucking motar not a assault gun like a stug G or brumbar.
if it has to be range 50, make all other mortars, mortar carrier from ost usf range 50, too.
5. jackson
vet2 pen still needs against heavy tank.
And shouldn't vetrang units can't be poweful? why are you making axis tanks can pen allies one easily but why veteran
allies tanks can't? If it isn't no longer need its vet2 penetration bonus, why can't you just leave it?.
6. Wc51
At least give him armor buff and accuracy bonus or nerf to 40, not 35
why so you erase usf traits? You nerfed its ability. why you should erase crew system?
it is worsen version of wc51 before wc51's 45 range change patches.
Remember wc51 came out with guns in that time.
3. The pack howie is powerful, the issue was that it was TOO powerful. Whether the changes were "too much" remains to be seen.
4. It might be called a mortar, but it really is an "assault gun" for most intents and purposes. It's also rather more survivable than other mortars/mortar carriers especially. I do think it should be able to autofire over obstacles, in any case.
5. Axis tanks are intentionally supposed to have armour that confounds allied guns. I'm not 100% on whether i really like that as a balance decision (due to it being rather random), but the fact that the Jackson can just ignore this advantage causes issues, especially given that other allied TDs cannot. Axis tanks pay a premium for their armour.
6.Uh, why? Wait and see how the WC51 performs with the new changes. It severely overperformed previously.
It really can't have a crew when it comes so early, it basically means you can't push it away for more than a few seconds, you do begin the game with the least task-heavy engineer unit in the game, in any case, so its not as though it is now unusable. OKW needs to heal their Kubel manually with Sturmpioneers, and UKF have to use Munitions to repair their UC given that they simply don't have an engineer for the first few minutes of the game. the WC being changed brings a little parity with other units.
The WC-51 was a very overloaded unit before this patch, and hopefully these changes bring it more into line. |
+1 I think so too! The BG changes are really good and give players a lot of flexibility. Thats exactly how well designed teching should work.
All in all the changes to OKW seem promising but Im still not sure that the faction can compete with Brits.
I would like put an idea to discussion to make OKW teching even more interesting:
Make "Thorough Salvage" a side tech option, buildable in the Hq
This could be a nice and faction fitting idea to compensate for OKW's inability to build caches. Instead of getting constant resources via cashes OKW players could double down on salvaging.
This would give the OKW tech an interesting economic dimension and would free a slot in the Scavange commander.
Scavenge, though a really nice tool, I don't think can quite replace Caches for OKW. Either it's way too strong (Particularly if there are a LOT of wrecks and abandoned team weapons hanging around) or it is far too weak (Particularly in cases where there are no team weapons to scavenge, and your opponent just goes and kills wrecks immediately)
It's too situational, and I think this causes a balance concern. Scavenge is a nice little bonus on occasion, but it's mostly good for being able to kill abandoned team weapons, as far as I can ascertain. |
conscripts are basically grenadiers that have to pay extra for molotov and AT nade... the only point when conscripts really start to shine is at vet 3 + 7 man... though the new mobilize reserves are something i have yet to test out...
Please don't discount the strength of Oorah, and especially not Merge when it comes to Conscript's power. Especially with the changes to Mobilise Reserves, and to the Soviet HT giving them on-field healing, Conscripts are looking rather nice now.
As a moderator mentioned in another thread, incidentally, I do think the idea Soviet pay for things as "side-tech" is at least slightly misleading, it apparently is intended as a factional retardation to slow the arrival of later units, rather than being an "extra cost" on top of Conscripts.
I would prefer if they just went and gave Cons their tools through regular teching though, and increased the price of certain tiers, if this is indeed the intention. It would increase linearity, but would remove confusion. |
My suggestions for Soviet stock infatry was, Penal a cheap offensive squad with molotov, ourah, ppsh and merge.
Conscripts a defensive squad with "hit the dirt" and sandbags.
Broadly similar to what I would suggest, though I would likely not take Molotov and Merge away from Conscripts (Though Penals in my ideal Soviet faction would indeed also have Merge). Conscripts leaning in a more "Defensive" direction than Penals' "Offensive" direction is absolutely what I had in mind. Penals being slightly cheaper (Or at least less bleed-y) would probably be a good shout, too. I think it will need a little more refinement.
I'm going to think a little deeper on this and see if i can drum up some actual numbers. If anyone has any glaring flaws they might like to point out with the concept as a whole, PLEASE do let me know, though. |
I like the command bunker change. Another wonderful time to suggest MG bunkers should require popcap
As much as I understand the suggestion, I'm not entirely sure I can agree with it. MG bunkers are very strong in some scenarios, but they're quite an investment for a stationary and quite vulnerable defensive structure. I think they'd be pushed out of usability were they to get a population cost, you'd be far better just using an actual MG in their place (If they had a meaningful cost, if they don't then what's the point of the change?)
Are they still considered too good? I thought the semi-recent vision nerfs to them brought them a little more into line. How are Fighting Positions considered, by comparison? I realise they're vulnerable to small arms, but they do provide quite nice utility (with RE grenades) and are featured in an army that isn't quite so reliant on "static" play. (And I don't think their MG is notably worse, is it?)
EDIT: I know it's inelegant, but if spamming MG bunkers (in Teamgames, i expect) is considered an issue, would a hard cap on the number one may possess at a single time be a better balancing method? I think in such a case you might need the ability to scuttle them. |