Well, I think it's both...I don't keep up with the forums much. Is there agreement that lethality is higher, wipes happen more, and retreat wipes are much worse than three years ago? I might be wrong about the patch that really did me in, feel like it was 2016 though. If I remember correctly a lot of people complained about cons and volks being able to trade for 3-4 minutes at a time if in cover, so they started jiggling back then. If two squads are trading in green cover, it's still like at release and you can literally go to the bathroom and come back and have lost only a model.
The retreat wipes are what really bother me the most honestly, it's just stupid, stupid brutal gameplay, falls into that "quality of life" category for me, since infantry are going to use roads on retreat per the pathfinding but that makes them much more likely to get killed on retreat. I just don't think they struck the right balance here...It's just too easy to get those wipes, it seems like any model under 75% health can be killed pretty easily by 2 or more chasing squads (note talking model not unit). I don't know what tests would show, but it just doesn't feel right to me at all. Again this is part of what has pushed the game into rewarding caution too much (and the dominance of indirect fire), because the REALLY good players know they can't always choose their retreat path, so they play even more cautiously and take even fewer chances to avoid the dreaded retreat wipe...If there's any chance of getting flanked you just can't engage for more than an instant because you will get wiped on retreat because even fairly high health doesn't protect your squad, so just don't engage, right?
Anyhoo.
I haven't even gotten started on snares and how lame tanks are now, but I'll say my design challenge for Relic for COH3 would be to re-design the game without snares, and see how to balance it. Then you could add some snares back in in unique ways. The only reason I even get tanks is because you need something to chase down the opponent's snared and wounded tank, otherwise you're much better off getting some good anti-infantry units (shocks, Obers, etc or indirect fire.) because their DPS is more reliable than tanks (because they rate of fire is high, the RNG matters less and you get the expected result, but RNG on tanks mean you may miss 3 shots in a row and have no other chance to get any damage in). Plus they are less likely to get wiped from an ambush or the at-gun/snare/chase combo. Tigers and T34-85s are kind of the exception, but T34-85s are too expensive to do anything daring with either until you have 3 or 4 of them.
Retreat wipes have been a thing since vCoh day1. Cant see a real difference, besides ppl simply got better at it with time.
Looking at tournaments and my own games cant say it has become a more defensive game. To the contrary, sim city barely works. I see many smoke plays and lots of offensive actions. Theres nothing like double brits arty & emplacements like in Coh1.
And what you say about the value of tanks is just miles away from the current meta. Tanks are extremely versatile from the glasscannon Jackson/Firefly game, aggressive panther flanks or beast KT for VP lockdown. Besides the E8, i find almost any tank in the game somehow usefull.
I am sry mate, but content wise I basically disagree with everything you say. If you still like the game, I recommend to get some mates and throw in some 3s or 4s. Best way to get back in.
|
As I said, its "rarely" seen beyond minute 5... but not imposible.
I love you man 
[code][/code]Non doctrinal Kubel flammenwerfer upgrade when?
Kübel with mounted Raketenwerfer on a 360 degree platform. Raketenkübel. When.
|
...since the Kubel is a unit that is rarely seen beyond minute 5...
Late game Kübel spam is real! See replay for proof |
Not sure if original poster is truely regretting the development of the game or mourning aging in general. No offense my friend 
COH in general was and is never a high APM game. Just compare that to starcraft. From mere playability, the series is currently at its best in my opinion.
People for whatever reason can't stop looking at coh1 through pink glasses of nostalgia, it was a complete and utter balance mess at all points in time.
Well said. Roos spam, Double Staghounds, PG Spam, Sniper Meta, Wehrmacht vetting, Zombie Bunkers...... if you look were we are now, cant see how not to be truely grateful for a great decently balanced RTS. |
|
Ye, Pak Howie is insanely strong. Not sure if a balance issue though since one can deal with it. |
|
Not sure why nobody answered but I truely like this doctrine too. But I am speaking rather from a teamgame perspective. In addition to what you already mentioned, the incendiary also make grenade tech not as urgent anymore.
My only trouble with it is the lack of dedicated anti armor abilities. Besides the Buldozer, which is ok-ish as a meatshield, there is nothing in it to help the late game against Axis heavies. Zooked Rangers are very costly.
I would say in a 1v1 the lack of mines would bother me the most. Does it not?
|
Very interesting and highly proficient read guys, thank you for sharing your insights. I also find it a pitty that the E8s (and therefore Rifle Commander) has no real spot in the current meta, and feel it would be easy to fix.
... increase moving accuracy due to its special HVSS suspension from 0.75 to 0.9. Give it flanking speed ability...
This direction i find most reasonable. Gives the E8 a dedicated purpose and the USF some potential versatility in late game, i.e. aggressive flanking. Right now US tank meta is extremely defensive, since rushing with the Jacksons is Kamikaze. Sometimes worth it but still.. somebody will have to explain that to the tank crews family..
|
Thread: Comet16 Jun 2020, 11:58 AM
Comet is fine as it is. If you have good RNG it wipes squads but that doesn't happen too often unless you leave your units AFK.
It is very good if you get it out relatively early and Axis invested into P4s. But don't forget it has medium tank range, relatively bad far range penetration and only 800HP and costs 175 fuel. Once Axis have Panthers, Tigers or Elefants the armour quickly becomes less meaningful and then the Comet becomes somewhat limited in what it can do.
It's one of the units the balance team did a good job on IMO. Nothing much to complain about.
Exactly what I was thinking. Comet gets capped by the Axis Big F***ers, but still has a place in late game due to its reliable versatility. Great well-balanced tank. |
Will be on Steam released at 2pm CEST
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN3W2y5G4tw
thank you! |
L2P exists in all ranks, that's why tournaments exist. If everybody knew how to play everything, what's the point? Only thing that tournaments actually can tell you is the new tactics. Most of the top players need to no-life game and live around gaming and that's their life, so the old tactics are redundant and new ones spring up (been there, done that scenario). That's where the OP this or OP that comes into existence. You have a game with a ton of factors and the randomness so if individual units are really OP, then you'd know, 100% that they are OP. Furthermore, there is the game mode element. 1v1 games are drastically different than 2v2 or 3v3 games. A premade team of 3 players can synergize so well that you will lose 90%.
Eg. for axis: Jaeger doctrine reconnaissance plane + elefant synergize with OKW stuka and LeFH/arty commanders...etc. You can have a pro player any time and they will lose vs a well coordinated team.
IMHO, balance should revolve around 2v2 and 3v3 modes as 1v1 mode seems nonsensical in a game that has asymmetrical balance as one of it's foundation pillars.
I feel like you make a lot of valid points I did not consider too much before. Thank you for sharing.
I still believe though that balance discussions should be revolving around the best players, since the L2P factor can be at least reduced to the max - though not eliminated as you point out correctly. The mindset of a top player is mostly making use of the best means available to win the game. This shows us if a unit is too strong under "competitive" conditions or not.
I also agree that 2v2, 3v3 etc. are an important part of balancing - as relic has learned throughout the years. But I disagree to exclude 1v1 from balance discussions. Any mode in this game is "assymetrical", and 1v1 is the most "clean" state to see units perform.
I think relic is actually doing a brilliant job by engaging the "pro" community and focusing on all game modes for balance changes. After 7 years I feel like we have quite a balanced game. Which is an achievement looking at 5 (!) completely different factions. As i said before, in RTS History this level has only been achieved by Blizzard. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
