Profile of Doomlord52

You are continuosly not hearing the community

I think that its important to note the difference between "hearing", "acknowledging" and "acting on".

You can see, near the bottom of the page, who is looking at what thread; and I've seen "Sander93", "Andy_RE", and others pop up in a lot of threads. They're clearly going through community feedback, suggestions, and other posts on a fairly regular basis.

With that said, they're not going to act on (or even acknowledge) every suggestion. A significant portion of the community suggestions are either not entirely thought-out (ex. makes sense in 4v4, bricks 1v1), impossible to implement (ex. game-mode resource scaling, SturmTiger rocket arc, etc.), or would cause further imbalances (ex. buffing already strong units).

Considering the number of these suggestions, they're not going to be able to reply to every single idea/comment/thread with a detailed response; and simply replying "no" wouldn't go over well with many forum members. As a result, staying silent is the best response in a lot of cases.

However, I think its becoming apparent that there is some degree of communication breakdown between devs, the balance team, and the community. There are several "hot button" issues within the community that have been coming up repeatedly, for months on end, that simply aren't being addressed, or even commented on.

Let's take the M36 for example; some say its drastically over-performing, some say its just a bit too good, some say its completely fine, and I've even seen some say it could use a slight buff. Regardless of opinion, its clear that a large section of the community has issues with this unit - so what is the balance teams stance on it? Even if the next patch isn't changing the unit, a statement would be nice. Something like:

We've seen that the community has been talking a lot about the state of the M36 lately. We wanted to chime in and let everyone know that while the upcoming patch doesn't have changes directly aimed at this unit, we have been discussing it internally. While we think that the USF needs a strong late-game TD to counter Axis heavies and super heavies, we've seen that the M36 is performing a bit too well against medium tanks. In a future patch, we're hoping to test a few changes to lower its performance against medium tanks, while keeping its performance against heavies.

*The above comment isn't real, and is only meant as an example of what a statement on 'hot button' issues could look like*

It would likely be beneficial to everyone if the balance team picked several of these issues, and wrote a "Q&A" type post covering their thoughts on them, even if it was only at a 'high level' like the above example (i.e. no detailed stats or promised stat changes).

Similarly, some of the more recent changes don't have an explanation, but also don't seem to be based on common community complaints; such as the On-Map artillery pop decrease, or the reason for not adjusting the Pershing's AoE along with the other Heavies (in the 1.2 patch). And, of course, a comment on (possibly) unsuccessful trial-changes (i.e. OKW's IRHT) would also be beneficial.

TL;DR - The patch team is fine, but better communication would be nice. Maybe bring on someone (or give the roll to someone already on the team) to do community FAQ/Q&A posts?

A few things that I've recently remembered, that were discussed ages ago:

1. Any chance of making the Sov Repair Station either cost more, or take up pop? The current 125mp/45muni makes it cheaper than OST's bunker (after upgrading), but its arguably much more powerful, since multiple repair posts can repair a single tank. This is particularly a problem in larger games, where I've seen 6+ stations in a small area, essentially instantly repairing vehicles.

2. Any chance of making Sov Forward HQ have a setup time, or making it possible to neutralize? This ability is extremely powerful on certain maps with large, high-HP buildings in key locations (train stations, usually), and there are essentially no early-game counter.

1. No, fix panzer tac instead of adding new things. Panzer tac should just work like USF-Sherman smoke - i.e. an aimed ability.

2. Yes, but only for SPs. Right now, picking sweeper is the better choice due to the increased repair speed. Giving it a "Schreck+" might make that option more viable.

3. No, that's just far too much on the SP. They should be able to pickup a schreck, though.

4. Yes, engies should get shared vet, especially from clearing mines. They're incredibly hard to vet late-game, which is sort of needed, since they gain repair bonuses.

5. Yes, USF Capt/LT are very good infantry units. No need to gain shared vet. Major doesn't have the combat power to vet by itself, so it makes sense there.

All I don't understand is why the mg42 and Maxim are same price

6 models vs 4 models - and also anything to prevent the return of maxim spam.

Really though, because of the 'death loop' (which is tied to animations - so it can't be fixed) as well as the resistance to changing lowering its model count, balancing it is really, really hard.

If its cheaper, then its too spammable.
If it does more damage, then the 6 models make it too powerful when not being 'death looped'.
If it deals more suppression, OKW becomes unplayable until T1/T2.

L2p problem

I have not seen professional players complaining about the M36. This is done by noobs, the same people, the same nicknames on this forum over and over again. Including you too. Just use smoke and flank, and the M36 will not be a problem

If you go through this thread there's a lot of top-100 players saying that the M36 is over-performing. I'm not sure what your skill level is, but I wouldn't consider top-100 to be 'noobs'.

In addition, I'm not sure how you flank the 2nd fastest tank in the entire game - it can just drive away (with 75% moving accuracy).