Profile of Imagelessbean

Jump back to quoted post1 Apr 2014, 16:16 PMcoffee111

I agree that fuel requirements would be a major point in balancing an idea like this. That said, I understand the design theory behind the soviets is to make tradeoffs, but I just do not believe it makes for compelling gameplay. The reason the germans are so popular and fun to play is because of their consistency and ability to bring the tactical concept of combined arms to the battlefield at every stage of the game. It's thoroughly satisfying and feels like how the game should be played. With that, soviets and their either/or tech system really fails to capture that element of play.

To me the soviets feel like a poor mix of coh1 PE and Brits. The either/or nature of the PE tech, and the lack of proper combined arms from Brits. It's just a bad place, and while soviets can do quite well in early and mid game, the lack of a full arsenal for combined tactics in the mid to late game is why they seem to come up short, and why they are so heavily reliant on their commander call-ins. These shortcomings could easily be fixed by moving the SU76 and T34 and adjusting tech costs.

Look at it this way, why build a T70 when you can save a little more and get a T34? Why build an SU76 when you can save a little more and get an SU85? The either/or nature not only limits their ability to react to an battle but it also directly lowers the value of units like the T70 and SU76 when their superior equivalent is available in the same building for only a little more fuel. Imagine if the germans had the P4 and Panther in T4; no one would build the P4 if they have they can afford to wait for a Panther, nor would they want to, because by the time you get T4 the match is reaching a stage where the P4 is less effective. This is similar to the stage at which the T70 and SU76 become available, there is only a very small window of time during which these unit can play a role on the battlefield, and you might as well just wait that time for a T34 or SU85.

Jump back to quoted post31 Mar 2014, 15:29 PMcoffee111

There is a recurring suggested fix for the Soviets that would greatly help with their mid game problems. It is to swap the SU76 to T3 and the T34 to T4, greatly reduce the fuel costs for T3 and increase the fuel costs of T4 (might also need a slight increase to T1 and T2 to slow down T3, without overpricing T4 tho). This way, T3 comes a little earlier, Soviets have a halftrack to reinforce from a little sooner, the T70 and SU75 come earlier to deal with the light and medium vehicles of the germans, and give them some breakthrough capabilities vs turtling germans a little earlier as well. While the T4 then has a synergy between the T34 and SU85. It's the perfect fix, which after some balancing, will provide the soviets with a healthy mid to late game and also improve their combined arms tactics.

EDIT: such a change would also allow for better call-in oriented tactics, like stalling at T3 for your call in tanks; or for a more infantry oriented commander, skip T3 and stall for T4 vehicles. The key here is that both T3 and T4 would provide a mix of units which compliment one another at different stages of the game, instead of the current all "offense" of T3 or all "defense" of T4.

Here is a Reddit thread detailing the suggested changes:
http://www.reddit.com/r/CompanyOfHeroes/comments/21jmvg/so_regardless_of_the_early_game_which_has_reach_a/

Jump back to quoted post29 Mar 2014, 16:05 PMHansGoneInsane

How do you want combat engineers then to be? So far, you only talk about Pios and that you are happy they can join combat. Combat engineers need a strong buff then so that they can enter combat as well. Do you see where that leads to? You kind of introduce new combat infantry. That is not what these units are made for. In vCOH things were good in this regard. There is one thing though I really like about how pioneers work right now: they can actually achieve vet without using a Pay to Win commander that can purchase veterancy.