Relic Balance Preview Mod Feedback

1235

Comments

  • #122
    4 years ago
    WunderKatzeWunderKat… Posts: 731
    edited May 2016

    @Detto4102 said:
    # REVERT CHANGES

    STURMPIONEERS PANZERSHRECK

    I think adding to sturmpios shrecks is the worst thing you have done. The problem of OKW is blobbing and if you move shrek to a starter unit to another the blob problem is not solved. You should add it to Obersoldaten, so OKW players must have a micromanagement for manpower for calling anti tank infantry. Because if you put shrecks in a starter unit ALL OKW players have one tactic: spam infantry at the begin and when shrecks are unlocked equp them. So you have to contrast at least 5 units with shrecks in 10 minutes of the game, making light vehicles almost useless.

    IMO the shreck+STGs should be locked behind a tech cost.

    Now USF is forced to upgrade BARs/zooks every game against OKW if they ever hope to win a firefight. Once the volks upgrade STGs riflemen become easy prey without BARs.

    I disagree with you about sturms. I think that even with shrecks they are soo much more manageable then volks. First they cant spam flame grenades which gives them huge problems against MGs/other inf. Second they come in a 4-man squad which is far more vulnerable to fire then the volks 5 man squads. Finally players will need to buy both volks and sturms meaning no single unit win-blobs.

    And don't try to argue that they could win with only building sturms. Sturms do not replace mainline inf. They have large target size, no early grenades, easy-wipe 4 man squad, TERRIBLE on the move accuracy (which people don't seem to exploit enough), no weapon upgrades and have worse combat veterancy which allows them to be outscaled. They are really poor front-line troops.

    Putting the Shreck on the obers is out of the question really. They have a stupidly high reinforce cost, a built-in weakness to explosives (they take increased explosive damage) and they are available at the final tech which is far too late for what they would be needed for.

  • #123
    4 years ago
    TheBorgTheBorg Posts: 3

    @WunderKatze said:

    @Detto4102 said:
    # REVERT CHANGES

    STURMPIONEERS PANZERSHRECK

    I think adding to sturmpios shrecks is the worst thing you have done. The problem of OKW is blobbing and if you move shrek to a starter unit to another the blob problem is not solved. You should add it to Obersoldaten, so OKW players must have a micromanagement for manpower for calling anti tank infantry. Because if you put shrecks in a starter unit ALL OKW players have one tactic: spam infantry at the begin and when shrecks are unlocked equp them. So you have to contrast at least 5 units with shrecks in 10 minutes of the game, making light vehicles almost useless.

    IMO the shreck+STGs should be locked behind a tech cost.

    Now USF is forced to upgrade BARs/zooks every game against OKW if they ever hope to win a firefight. Once the volks upgrade STGs riflemen become easy prey without BARs.

    I disagree with you about sturms. I think that they are soo much more manageable then volks. First they cant spam flame grenades which gives them huge problems against MGs/other inf. Second they come in a 4-man squad which is far more vulnerable to fire then the volks 5 man squads. Finally players will need to buy both volks and sturms meaning no single unit win-blobs.

    And don't try to argue that they could win with only building sturms. Sturms do not replace mainline inf. They have large target size, no early grenades, easy-wipe 4 man squad, TERRIBLE on the move accuracy (which people don't seem to exploit enough), no weapon upgrades and have worse combat veterancy which allows them to be outscaled. They are really poor front-line troops.

    Putting the Shreck on the obers is out of the question really. They have a stupidly high reinforce cost, a built-in weakness to explosives (they take increased explosive damage) and they are available at the final tech which is far too late for what they would be needed for.

    Have to agree on removing the shreks all together from OKW, they get the best AT gun in the game as I've said before. If it is absolutely necessary for the OKW to have a handheld AT then give them a nerfed shrek without the STG package or panzerfaust. See how everyone likes it when the unit is completely useless after that.

    Of coarse better alternatives exist, like learning to play the game (Mines, Faust, Strongest AT gun in the game, fastest tech to light tank, ect ect) instead of using starcraft 2 tactics of "Build lots of the same unit and make them run at the enemy" that volks with shreks technically are.

    This is company of heroes, if you want an easy RTS you can go back to the kiddie corner blizzard has over there.

  • #124
    4 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343

    @WunderKatze said:

    I disagree with you about sturms. I think that they are soo much more manageable then volks. First they cant spam flame grenades which gives them huge problems against MGs/other inf. Second they come in a 4-man squad which is far more vulnerable to fire then the volks 5 man squads. Finally players will need to buy both volks and sturms meaning no single unit win-blobs.

    The Schreck will enable Sturms to amass Veterancy at INSANE rates. This will give them access to the entire repertoire of Vet5 bonuses (which were fine for an AI unit, but OP for an AT unit).

    It will also give them access to a cheap Stun grenades, which are bugged. Stun nades will allow SPio blobs to stunlock enemy squads. The (bugged) stun nade is infinitely nastier than the flame nade.

    Finally, if you look at Sturmpioneer Veterancy bonuses:
    -48% received accuracy (by Vet4; including their Vet0 Target Size)
    +68% accuracy (by Vet5)

    You will see that:

    • SPios will bleed MP slower than Volks to small-arms fire (due to the relative reinforcement cost * received accuracy bonuses).
    • SPio Panzerschreck will be 100% accurate vs Medium tanks (traget size = 20) or above (3% base accuracy * 1.68 * 20 > 100%).

    I don't know what the early game will look like. However, by the late-game I will be replacing all my infantry with Sturms. (Vet0 Volks won't get you far in the the late-game. Vet0 Panzerschreck Sturms with repairs will always be useful).

    Actually, I made a thread here about Sturms (before I spotted the sticky :( ):
    https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/241606/may-preview-sturmpioneer-veterancy-schrecks#latest

  • #125
    4 years ago
    solowingsolowing Posts: 50

    Kinda sucks that they're removing crushing. I always felt it was a suitably risky tactic, even on fast medium tanks.

    Veternacy is fine flare are not. They have more range than grenades

    They're not grenades, so that doesn't matter.

  • #126
    4 years ago

    Hello gents!

    Penals need a vet increase(this messes with the flow of the game because in early and mid game barely any unit can take it on), since now they are very effective they stack up kills in no time. Also maybe consider reducing accuracy from far. As they lose men the accuracy gets buff, making them excellent in all ranges. Soviets already have long range specialist like cons and guards. No need to add another one. I think they are meant to fill the roll of mid range since that is the only one missing in this army.

  • #127
    4 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723

    @solowing said:
    They're not grenades, so that doesn't matter.

    They can serve the same role. On one hand the nerf the range of the grenades when suppressed so that infantry can not take out HMG when suppressed. On the other IS can take out HMG even if pinned without even spending fuel to unlock grenades using flares and base arty...

  • #128
    4 years ago
    solowingsolowing Posts: 50

    @Vipper said:

    @solowing said:
    They're not grenades, so that doesn't matter.

    They can serve the same role.

    No, they can't. Not even close. Now, I want you to take a moment and think about the scenario you just cooked up. A suppressed IS squad actually using flares as a countermeasure against an attacking HMG squad? Yeah, go ahead and run that through in your head. Hell, run some simulations using cheatmod, tell me how it works out for you. Maybe eventually you'll realize how absurd that notion is.

  • #129
    4 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited May 2016

    Week 3 changes

    I really like the changes in "crush human". As a tactic to fight infatry it deducted from the game imo. Although their could be other solution to it.

    Croms new size might be abit too much 22 sound like a better number.

    Churchill new price seem a step in the correct direction.

    Bundle grenades seem a bit Op ATM.

    @solowing said:
    No, they can't. Not even close....

    "Coordinated fire" substitutes to grenades as counter to HMG easily. First of all "pyrotechnics supplies" increase the sight range of IS allowing the unit to spot enemy HMG before they can spot them. Contrary to grenades that lose half range when the infantry is suppressed this ability retains full range even when the squad is suppressed...

    Since this is off topic I will debate it anymore here. Pls start another thread if you want to debate it further...

  • #130
    4 years ago
    ofieldofield Posts: 630
    edited May 2016

    Highly dislike the removed of human crush for medium tanks.

    1. it is a reward for proper tank micro
    2. can be totally avoided by retreating
    3. Except for brits every core infantry has snares.
    4. Is actually realistic. As far as i know tank crews were told to rather "road kill" infantry than wasting ammo.

    I personally had never issues with tanks rolling over my infantry in a way that i consider it a frustrating game mechanic.

  • #131
    4 years ago
    NiradNirad Posts: 206
    Instead of reducing price of Churchill, please revert it's only stats and keep higher price. No one will build that garbage even at its' reduced price. Polishing a turd doesn't make it stink less.
  • #132
    4 years ago

    @ColonelRadec a dit :
    Hello gents!

    Penals need a vet increase(this messes with the flow of the game because in early and mid game barely any unit can take it on), since now they are very effective they stack up kills in no time. Also maybe consider reducing accuracy from far. As they lose men the accuracy gets buff, making them excellent in all ranges. Soviets already have long range specialist like cons and guards. No need to add another one. I think they are meant to fill the roll of mid range since that is the only one missing in this army.

    Cons are no specialist in far range, they are in close range.

  • #133
    4 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,197 mod

    I have to disagree with removing medium crush as well. For the most part it was no real issue. The only spot where it was problematic was the M10. So rather just remove crush from that one if there must be anything done.

  • #134
    4 years ago

    @ImperialDane said:
    I have to disagree with removing medium crush as well. For the most part it was no real issue. The only spot where it was problematic was the M10. So rather just remove crush from that one if there must be anything done.

    I fully support this, crush should stay on mediums. It was such a great way to punish blobs and I feel like it limits anti-infanty medium tank usage (which is already very unpopular, nobody builds P4s, T34s or Shermans).

    M10 GTA drive-by was over the top, yes, I see crush being removed from it and none of the other mediums.

  • #135
    4 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,197 mod

    Kindly only provide feedback to actual changes made in the balance preview. Anything else, make a thread for it.

  • #136
    4 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    I too dislike the removal of human crush for the same reason I advocate for a rear armour nerf on Heavys- if you are risking your tank to kill, it should be rewarded. On the flip side if you are falling victim to crush....why? There are a multitude of ways to slow armour and or deter crushy dives. Using Mines will make crushers much more cautious and having AT assets near the front is pretty fundamental...
  • #137
    4 years ago
    KnighterKnighter Posts: 396

    Tank crush change is stupid in my opinion, it was not that frustrating and is a nice feature.

  • #138
    4 years ago
    Xutryn_X7Xutryn_X7 Posts: 204

    Now that volks have stg 44,why anyone else would make obersoldaten??

  • #139
    4 years ago
    moremegamoremega REDWOOD CITY CA USAPosts: 229
    edited May 2016

    it adds long range firepower. this is probably good because ill nvr need to make more than one.> @Xutryn_X7 said:

    Now that volks have stg 44,why anyone else would make obersoldaten??

    it adds long range firepower. this is probably good because ill nvr need to make more than one.

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    I too dislike the removal of human crush for the same reason I advocate for a rear armour nerf on Heavys- if you are risking your tank to kill, it should be rewarded. On the flip side if you are falling victim to crush....why? There are a multitude of ways to slow armour and or deter crushy dives. Using Mines will make crushers much more cautious and having AT assets near the front is pretty fundamental...

    The biggest problem with med crush is that this is not a balanced feature. German tanks do not, or really poorly have med crush.

    @Mr_Smith said:

    » show previous quotes
    The Schreck will enable Sturms to amass Veterancy at INSANE rates. This will give them access to the entire repertoire of Vet5 bonuses (which were fine for an AI unit, but OP for an AT unit).

    It will also give them access to a cheap Stun grenades, which are bugged. Stun nades will allow SPio blobs to stunlock enemy squads. The (bugged) stun nade is infinitely nastier than the flame nade.

    Finally, if you look at Sturmpioneer Veterancy bonuses:
    -48% received accuracy (by Vet4; including their Vet0 Target Size)
    +68% accuracy (by Vet5)

    You will see that:

    • SPios will bleed MP slower than Volks to small-arms fire (due to the relative reinforcement cost * received accuracy bonuses).
    • SPio Panzerschreck will be 100% accurate vs Medium tanks (traget size = 20) or above (3% base accuracy * 1.68 * 20 > 100%).

    I don't know what the early game will look like. However, by the late-game I will be replacing all my infantry with Sturms. (Vet0 Volks won't get you far in the the late-game. Vet0 Panzerschreck Sturms with repairs will always be useful).

    Actually, I made a thread here about Sturms (before I spotted the sticky :( ):
    https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/241606/may-preview-sturmpioneer-veterancy-schrecks#latest

    I agree with Mr. smith that sturms are an ideal unit to substitute a panzershrek, but I would like to add that a panzershrek upgrade should not lock out minesweepers and flamethrower upgrades. I was playing the balance preview with feur sturm doctrine when I noticed you have to make a choice between a flammenwerfer, a mine sweeper, and a panzershrek. Sturms will be the only units upgradable to AT weapons (besides snares and AT gun) in the OKW arsenal, so its only fair that they have easy access to a panzershrek without sacrificing their core ability, which is to remove and detect mines. Let me add that OKW currently does not have to choose between a flame thrower and minesweepers, so why change something that is not broken?!

  • #140
    4 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,197 mod

    Kindly refrain from doubleposting. Make all your comments in one post or don't post at all.

  • #141
    4 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824

    @raulmagana121707 said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    I too dislike the removal of human crush for the same reason I advocate for a rear armour nerf on Heavys- if you are risking your tank to kill, it should be rewarded. On the flip side if you are falling victim to crush....why? There are a multitude of ways to slow armour and or deter crushy dives. Using Mines will make crushers much more cautious and having AT assets near the front is pretty fundamental...

    The biggest problem with med crush is that this is not a balanced feature. German tanks do not, or really poorly have med crush.

    adjustment and removal are 2 very VERY separate things
    and while that is an issue, german factions have other things, things like escape smoke, things like blits (which does allow for crush, somewhere there is a .gif of a panther crushing a column of shock troops)

    and the game IS balanced around asymmetrical balance, this is why you have things like panzer grens having TWO of the BEST AT weapons on one squad in their teching, and the soviet have the worst handheld AT in game, and its locked behind commanders

    to look at a feature and say "theirs is better so its imba" and ignoring the other boons is ignorant of the asymmetric nature of coh2
    the only problem with crush is that the m10 could do it, that and no one ever lays bloody mines...

  • #142
    4 years ago
    UeshibaUeshiba Posts: 3
    To me it would be cool to have some other changes to OKW since right now would be a bit unbalanced as faction

    Remove the Shriek from Strums, they do not need em, too many changes are needed for that upgrade otherwise.

    Nerf Volks STGs just a little bit, it's a nice upgrade but overperforming sometimes, or just lock it to the first truck building. Panzerfaust are OK and needed for tank counters.

    Swap Stuka-Panzer 4 in tech tiers, so t2 would be more viable and ppls will not suffer early axis tank rushes, and can avoid okw to map contol by early Flak on map Key points. How? Making t2 more appetible. Stuka need to be late game imho.

    OKW has a lot of AT tanks for late game, this change will make the Puma more viable as midgame/mobile powerful AT, as is the SU-76

    Reduce t3 (Obersoldaten tier) fuel cost by little and let the Flak Cannon to be upgradable, as is right now on t1/t2 techs.

    I like the other changes made to other factions, liked the remove of PPsh from Penals, nice to see Penals buffed but not taking shocks role
  • #143
    4 years ago
    UeshibaUeshiba Posts: 3
    Sorry for double post, but please leave medium tank crush damage, just remove it from M10 if abused
  • #144
    4 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    @raulmagana121707 said:
    I agree with Mr. smith that sturms are an ideal unit to substitute a panzershrek, but I would like to add that a panzershrek upgrade should not lock out minesweepers and flamethrower upgrades. I was playing the balance preview with feur sturm doctrine when I noticed you have to make a choice between a flammenwerfer, a mine sweeper, and a panzershrek. Sturms will be the only units upgradable to AT weapons (besides snares and AT gun) in the OKW arsenal, so its only fair that they have easy access to a panzershrek without sacrificing their core ability, which is to remove and detect mines. Let me add that OKW currently does not have to choose between a flame thrower and minesweepers, so why change something that is not broken?!

    I believe this may be a bug, at least between panzerschreck and minesweeper. I say this because consistently you can upgrade to both (you select both upgrades at once, the game does not block the other upgrade when it is complete); but if you let one upgrade complete, it takes away the others' upgrade button.
    Of course this requires you to have munitions for both upgrades.

  • #145
    4 years ago
    omar_empomar_emp United Arab EmiratesPosts: 531

    as i see the churchill needs a buff as you choose not to use comet to get churchill and its 200MP and 50F and its under performing as it need anvil tactics too.

  • #146
    4 years ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,333 mod

    Moderator Input: Gentle reminder: Your feedback must be directly related to the units outlined in the Balance Preview Mod Release Notes. For example, requests for additional changes to units, commanders or abilities not mentioned in this mod fall outside of the scope of this balance patch and will be automatically moved or deleted from the thread.

  • #147
    4 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited May 2016

    Reduced heavy tanks rear armor is fine on paper, but 4 of 5 affected are Axis tanks.
    Allies tanks are cheaper, faster, better turret rotation and more accurate firing on the move, Allies infantry (blob) also have sprint. I have trouble defending my heavy tanks now, and Axis tanks cost a ton to build, it is heartache and cheese.

    I like to suggest a slight boost in heavy tank HP. So you get satisfaction in successfully flanking and dealing extra damage, but heavy tanks are still able to withstand another 2-3 rounds of AT shots.

    Please give shrek back to Volks, they should choose strategically between STG AI or Shrek AT.
    Sturm are pioneers..engineers, they shouldn't deal with tanks, it looks lazy to shift the ability to some unit just because of design flaw.

  • #148
    4 years ago
    NiradNirad Posts: 206

    @mrgame2 said:
    Reduced heavy tanks rear armor is fine on paper, but 4 of 5 affected are Axis tanks.
    Allies tanks are cheaper, faster, better turret rotation and more accurate firing on the move, Allies infantry (blob) also have sprint. I have trouble defending my heavy tanks now, and Axis tanks cost a ton to build, it is heartache and cheese.

    I like to suggest a slight boost in heavy tank HP. So you get satisfaction in successfully flanking and dealing extra damage, but heavy tanks are still able to withstand another 2-3 rounds of AT shots.

    Please give shrek back to Volks, they should choose strategically between STG AI or Shrek AT.
    Sturm are pioneers..engineers, they shouldn't deal with tanks, it looks lazy to shift the ability to some unit just because of design flaw.

    Lol yea right, so we can have chrek and STG Volk blobs? Haha you're funny! Never going to happen. Chreks are gone from Volks for good. Should have happened a long time ago!

  • #149
    4 years ago

    Soooooo... Any chance of a Hotfix to make Churchill cost what it says in the Changelog? It's still been 540 Manpower and 180 Fuel since the last release. :/

  • #150
    4 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited May 2016
    What's wrong with giving shreks back to volks? The allies can field combined arms infantry blob already .

    One shrek per squad is not as threatening,it never was but OkW had limited opening and low fuel income hence they had to blob volks shrek. Now that relic has stopped the shrek snipping, it should reduce the shrek cheese
  • #151
    4 years ago
    ColonelRadecColonelRa… Posts: 52
    edited May 2016
    Mrgame 2 has a really good point. Sturms dont really feel like they should wield the shreck. They are squishy and are ment for assault, adding the shreck reduces the role. Leave the package with the volks, but it requires the set up of two trucks and eliminates the snare. As mrgame2 said, the reduce damage of AT vs inf prevents the volks from beign effective agaisnt everything. Which was one of the problems. Maybe even revert to the old nades when you upgrade, to downgrade there effectiveness vs inf. Also the nerf of the LM seems a bit harsh. Now they will come in late and will have a lot of cons and no pros. I dont mind the nerf its just why not give it another strenght in some were like else. Like giving it increase range or bring down the CP to 6 or 7. Gotta take care when you nerf units, since people will throw em aside when its to much. Like the calliope, the reduce size in missile was good but why reduce the amount launched, now you need 2 which are expensive and take unnecassay pop cap. Same goes with the churchill, even with the price reduction its still not a viable option.
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

DeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisItalianoРусский