Its not a point I was making. Lets take any heavy\med tank as an example. Does vet improves perfomance of the unit? It does. Does veterancy have to be obtained before unit can be more or less normally used? Most of the time it doesnt.
ST starts as an objectively weak unit, when compaired to his direct counterpart (being AVRE) or to pretty much any late game heavy call-in in terms of its raw perfomance and value.
In other words, lets say you get an Elephant\ISU or even AVRE. Does thouse units require vet to be used effectively and without pain in the dick? No. Veterancy provide utility and perfomance buffs on top of what they already offer to you. I'm not implying that vet 0 ST is un-usable, but as I said it requare deep game knowlage or luck to be used effectively.
ST case is different. It feels like it starts nerfed, then with vet it start getting its perfomance back. Pretty much like cons PPSH works, vet3 + reserves PPSH cons are great, without it ppsh pretty much gives them nothing that usefull.
Again I'm not implying that this approach to the unit design is bad, but at the same time its only good when its fair. Without AVRE in the game ST as it is would have been fine, but with AVRE and the fact that it feels and plays normally, being pretty much the same unit, makes ST design just unfair.
Indeed but i think the problem is that the ST has a higher potential. Making it be overall closer in performance to the AVRE will probable lower down how good it can be with vet probable.
Also, since both units are unique to one commander, is worth considering the value of the commander as a whole rather than the units on themselves as well.
Overall, between the choice of nerfing the AVRE or buffing the ST, i'll rather buff the ST (removing abandon is a beginning) but in either case, i don't want either commander to ever be first pick meta material (at least in regards to thiese units, not the commander abilities) |
It's unit kill/loss stats that are bugged, not Damage stats, isnt it? I still don't think they're relevant for a balance discussion, but as far as I was aware, the Damage statistics weren't inaccurate, just completely misleading due to how "damage" and "health" are so different in meaning between Infantry and Vehicles.
https://www.coh2.org/topic/107338/improved-postmatch-stats/post/848620
A dash "-" represents a different shot while a bar "/" represents a quick update on value on the same shot.
Pak: 550 - 826/1376 - 2203 - 3029
Zis: 550 - 1376 - 2203 - 3029
Pounder: 275/826 - 1376 - 1927 - 2478
Rak: 550 - 826/1376 - 1652/2203 - 2478/3029
57mm: 550 - 826/1376 - 1652/2203 - 2478/3029
Basically i made a test in cheatcommands v2 and watched the replay at half speed while taking a look at how the graphs were been updated live. |
From my expirience of using it, I was able to reach hight vet with it, when I was killing or shooting tanks with it. It still takes painfully long to vet it up only by killing inf.
That applies to ALL high cost vehicles when shooting against infantry, specially ones which have any sort of AT. Vehicles which are purely AI, can be balanced by giving them low xp requirements but that can't be the case for those who have AT.
Not sure if there's a modifier available that let's units gain more xp when fighting a specific type of unit.
I'd personally prefer both units (And all units) to be viable and generally utility based rather than any being strictly "meme units", but obviously that takes a lot more work.
I REALLY don't want to see the rest of Elite Armoured get a nerf if the Sturmtiger is buffed/changed though. It's one of my favourite OKW docs to use, particularly when the enemy appears to be going mass heavy tanks.
It's a simple matter of design. Some units are only healthy to have them as meme units as long as their retain some part of it's original design (1 shot 1 kill or heavy cheese).
Demos, goliaths, B4, AVRE, ST, Radio silence/Spy network, Air supremacy, Artillery Cover, FHQ, Close the pocket, M8 Canister shell have always fall in this group.
|
|
It looks like packet loss.
Which country and ISP do you have. It could also be some problems between your PC and the router/modem either through cable/WIFI. |
|
Don't bother with dmg stats. They are bugged beyond fix.
Zis gun is fine. I do think that the barrage should be priced accordingly but any nerf should be paired with buffs towards other areas. For ex: i think mortars are due to have a vet improvement and slight cost adjustments. |
snip
I gave you the information that is relevant for AT guns.
AoE Pen is mostly irrelevant and the difference is 5.
You NEVER take in isolation RELOAD values, because it's only 1 component of the shooting cycle. IIRC it should be Ready aim + Fire aim + Wind up >> Shoot >> Wind down + Cooldown + Reload
Which is why i listed ROF and TTS.
Vertical rotation is also irrelevant.
The differences are minimal. The fact that the Zis have access to vet 0 barrage and +2 crew offsets the 1s difference in Rof, the 2 rotation speed difference (which was added to help the faction against light vehicles) and the 10 difference in penetration.
To make it complete, vet wise:
https://www.coh2.org/guides/29892/the-company-of-heroes-2-veterancy-guide#1220
Zis:
Unlocks the "Tracking" ability.
+30% rotation speed.
+30% reload speed.
+20% reload speed.
+30% penetration.
+6.25% range of the "Light Artillery Barrage" ability.
Pak40:
Unlocks the "Target Weak Point" ability.
+30% rotation speed.
+30% reload speed.
+10% reload speed.
+30% penetration.
Pounder:
Unlocks the "Rapid Maneuvers" ability.
+100% rotation speed.
+30% reload speed.
+30% accuracy.
+30% penetration. |
Don't give me wrong; I do know that Zis-3 is a good towed gun in the game. But its AT performance is quite shabby. Compare to the other 320 MP counterparts, according to data from the modding tool, it has the lowest reload rate, lowest pen, lowest horizontal and vertical tracing speed (also highest wind-up and down, but I don't quite understand how it works. ) It does have six members crew, but it has to compensate with the fact that the soviet do not have any non- doc forward healing(not reinforce) option.
So, since Zis barrage is receiving a nerf next patch. It would be nice to see some alters to its AT performance.
For quick reference:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1H5z6szCfhmAAnDprmgwLzc-viZg4HPhKZshNLErvnck/edit#gid=1638665511
https://i.serealia.ca/files/coh2dps.html#76
Pen
Pak40: 210/200/190
Zis: 200/190/180
57mm: 150/140/130
57mm HVAP: 225/210195
Rak: 200/190/180
Pounder: 210/200/190
RoF = Reload + Wind up + Wind down + Ready aim + Fire aim
Winds are delays that are generally tied to animation sequences. If i get it right, wind up plus aim times are required before firing while wind down is performed after shooting.
So, let's say time to shoot.
TTS
Pak40: 0.57
Zis: 0.445
57mm: 0.56
Rak: 0.445
Pound: 0.57
ROF:
Pak40: 4.87
Zis: 5.875
57mm: 4.31
Rak: 4.995
Pound: 4.87
Tracking
Rotation speed/Arc
Pak: 14/30°
Zis: 12/30
57mm: 18/40
Rak: 12/35
Pound: 12/30 |
I ain't implying that. I'm implying that why focus on balancing 1v1 when balancing 2v2 would achieve in my view, a better result as it is the "perfect" (subjective) mixture of teamgame and solo game. And 1v1 is the least played mode. It's probably the easiest to balance 1v1 as you can literally put units in a vacuum (the current preview patch has proven it) and call it a day. I can accept that. 1v1 is a clear-cut balance problem. No extra variables or anything like that.
"OH is OP while using meta"... yeah, if you use those meta commanders in team games, you'll have a bad time, but OH is nowhere near UP in teamgames. USF as well. USF does rely on soviets/UKF for some stuff but it has it's merits in teamgames.
All in all. 1v1 is easy balance but the higher the mode goes, the bigger the disparity. 2v2 would be a perfect mixture for balancing. That's my point.
And it's the way it's been done since the last 3/4 years. You balance around 1v1 and look at the outliers which affect teamgames, which in most of the cases, are doctrinal units and abilities.
The problem is that this patch was supposed to fix core root problems within factions and the only one which seems to be done in a decent way was OKW. SU was a bit underwhelming and UKF accomplished nothing.
UKF is gonna be slightly the same on teamgames while it looks like trash in 1v1 at the moment. |
That too. Out of all allied factions, UKF has objectively the best end game with comets or churchills. And again it's a 1v1 perspective which the mod team is adamant about forcing. It's not surprising that the patches revolve around 1v1 but that mode will never be balanced, if you do not want OP factions in teamgames ofc, where there is a multiplier on each unit.
You are implying as if trying to balance team games isn't harder than 1v1. You can have OP factions on 1v1 but UP in teamgames and viceversa.
OH is OP while using meta on 1v1 not so much in teamgames.
USF is OP when using mechanized on 1v1, not so much in teamgames. |
...
The problem is how different 1v1 and teamgames operate. First of all, you need to control a smaller part of the map and you can get away with teching decisions which would be an auto loss in 1v1. Sheer amount of unit volume makes some units more viable than others and fight flow tends to be more static, with clearly defined frontlines.
Most of the nerfs in the patch affect 1v1 mostly. Timing, healing, capping and sandbags. UKF doesn't have many options to recover lost ground or launch a counter attack cause most of their tools are awkward (mortar pit/Bofor barrage, artillery barrage and doctrinal Suxton/LM).
This leaves you with mostly brute forcing your way out.
UKF wins if they can hold into territory, don't get cheesed hard by snipers and sneak in all of their upgrades without getting overrun.
They have poor blob control units while they do more than fine blobbing on their own. I would say that UKF late game peaks other factions if they can get towards 2x Comet, 5 IS with Brens + Grenades and medic/pyro upgrades.
Teamgame wise i would say they are in a better position, specially for the average player.
|
Chukonoku
Ballrok
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
