Discuss buffing bulletins since stacking will be removed

5 years ago

Hello Relic, after reading most comments here it seems that most are in an agreement that if you are gonna remove stacking you need to buff bulletins to make them more useful to a point were it actually can make a difference on the stuff in the game.

First of all this can probably end up with being discussed to death about balancing.

But i think the main issue is just in the end that bulletins needs to be buffed if this patch goes live.

So many of the bulletins in this game are really pointless and useless, specially the rear echelon bulletin with %1 in accuracy.

So i think you Relic needs to go through the bulletins and increase their numbers from 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8 to at least 10% and 15%

Do you other people agree with me about this? Do you think this is something Relic needs to do before posting this patch?


  • #2
    5 years ago
    PetGhostPetGhost Posts: 5

    Increasing accuracy or reload speed or cooldown by 2% seems minuscule, but it could possibly affect a match. I say possibly because it might not make any difference at all. Can Relic or someone else look at the the raw numbers and enlighten us?

    And then there is "Infantry Production I" which makes Conscripts build 10% faster. That sounds a lot more significant, but is it really?

  • #3
    5 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    I would like consistentsy

    There is a bulletin that effects grems and pgrens, ans also conscripts. Why not penals as well?
    Or rakketten reloads 3% faster but the pak 40 relaods 4% faster.
    Most vet increase bulletins are 10% (including the panther) but the one for the comet is 5% and there is one for the stug that does 5% vet AND 5% build speed....

    Riflemen vetting faster is OK but all other mainline is not?

    Some bulletins ARE better than others, and not by a small amout either...
  • #4
    5 years ago
    VellamoVellamo Posts: 10

    First off, I'm fine with the stacking of the same copy being removed. The design wasn't originally intended and sometimes led to unexpected behavior. For instance you could setup 3x T34 ramming distance for +30% extra but it only really affected the ability activation range, not the distance traveled at max speed.

    On the other hand, since we already got some similar effects on multiple bulletins (see officer training vs. veteran training, both cost 1000supply), Relic should re-adjust the prices in relation to the deemed quality. More bulletins with overlapping effects would be great, I like reading the historical tidbits so there's that.

  • #5
    5 years ago
    digital23digital23 Posts: 17

    I also wanna add that i think bulletins that has a cheaper upgrade % should be prioritized. So if are not sure how to do with bulletins that affect accuracy and armor penetration and reload and stuff, please at least buff bulletins that decrees cost of upgrade to Thompson,LMGs for Airborne troops at least to 15% or the same for any bulletin that does the same for other factions for what ever upgrade they wanna use, so please focus on upgrade bulletins and then deal with accuracy,reload,armor pen,speed

  • #6
    5 years ago
    KithKith Posts: 144

    I want to see more bulletins - a unit having at least three non-production speed or non-dispatch cooldown related bulletins should be the standard.

  • #7
    5 years ago
    OrcaOrca Posts: 74 admin

    we have some of our rationale on why we chose to do this here

  • #8
    5 years ago
    digital23digital23 Posts: 17

    @Orca sorry but i'm not trying to sound rude but where are is it addressing ''buffing bulletins'' . again im not trying to sound rude, i just dont see it

  • #9
    5 years ago
    OrcaOrca Posts: 74 admin
    edited May 2016

    My mistake. The link is explaining rationale for removing stacking. Not specifically buffing bulletins. But I think that section on Intel bulletins is still relevant to this discussion.

  • #10
    5 years ago
    digital23digital23 Posts: 17

    Ok i understand, thank you for clarifying :)

  • #11
    5 years ago
    GrandpapyGrandpapy Posts: 2

    I have been thinking about bulletin changes too. I made a comment about buffing bulletins in a way that makes them more like the passive upgrades in the Ardennes Assault single player mode, and I'd like to go into more detail here while also encouraging the discussion to continue in general.

    First of all, I have played around with every bulletin I've gotten my hands on, from sapper def to maxim suppression, mortar barrage cooldown to armor rotation. Good ideas, good start, but I think I am more a fan of the principal of bulletins than of the execution. I am happy to see bulletin stacking go, however, I cannot deny the satisfaction of seeing the effect of chosen bulletins impacting the battlefield and consequently the strategies at play. I have stacked, it felt good, but I think it would be better to only have 1 slot for a bulletin that had impact than 3 slots for bulletins that tweak numbers as little as most of them do now.

    I am fine with tweaks, I recognize the danger of getting too enthusiastic about being able to pump up combat engis with quad flamerthrower upgrades. On one end of the spectrum: I see bulletins are placebo/have no effect or very little effect. On the other end of the spectrum: I imagine bulletins could be as powerful as a commander passive, call-in or off-map spell. I would be OK with this over-powered end of that spectrum BUT let's try to all meet somewhere in the middle, eh? Closer to a tweak but still with impact.

    This is where the example of Ardennes Assault single player comes in: conditional effects. There is a specialization passive effect that improves combat when adjacent to enemy territory (Frontline Combat), or improvements to call-ins/off-map spells that also boost the cost of those abilities (Ranger - Recon Training, Target Artillery - Extended Barrage). There could be buffs to a unit's stats that balance the buff with additional cost of manpower/munitions/fuel/population/deploy time/Command Point level(for call-in units). We have seen it is possible, why not bring it to the auto-match where it becomes something that enriches the depth of play. I dream of playing in a context of double-edged bulletins that add identity and promote experimentation but also allow someone to choose to run no bulletins and not feel like they are missing out on the fun. Ever finish a game and not pick a commander? Just like that.

    Another possibility might be to associate each bulletin slot with its corresponding commander positioned above it. This would be to encourage the variety a of commander and bulletin combinations to see play. Example: My personal favourite off-map spell is 'Recon Overflight'; if it had a bulletin or two to choose from, one might be 'an additional plane approaches from the opposite side of the map, increasing area revealed, +2 CP required, +40 munitions' , while another might be 'becomes a recon pass, -20 munitions'. In this scenario, in a world that also has no stacking, I could be running 3 different commanders each with overflight (say Blitzkrieg, Joint Operations, Fortified Armor) While also running both bulletins and an empty slot, giving me 3 meaningful choices in terms or recon variety. Not convinced? What about something similar for the supply drop planes? What about bulletins that swap one command ability for another? Running Lighting War with 'Osttruppen' instead of 'Relief Infantry'? Running Festung Support with 'Mechanized Assault Group' instead of 'Mortar Half-track'?

    I am a dreamer. Am I the only one?

  • #12
    5 years ago
    KithKith Posts: 144

    What I'm hesitant to do is buff bulletins too much. I played a lot of Company of Heroes: Online when it was around, and bulletins could cause some serious shenanigans if you used them right. I remember rather clearly a time when I was crushed in the early game by a US player who used multiple Movement Speed bonuses on his AT guns - catching them was more or less impossible, which made light vehicle play impossible, and then there was no countering his machine gun setup, and so on.

    I wouldn't mind more types of bulletins, but how powerful the bulletins themselves are is something we must be very, very careful about.

  • #13
    5 years ago
    GrandpapyGrandpapy Posts: 2

    I hear you, Kith. That is why I think conditional bonuses would be best. I too remember the balance obstacles of Company of Heroes: Online and the unit swapping from Company of Heroes: Tales of Valor, some variations were ill conceived but at least there was impact and play. In your example of the AT gun movement speed, the bulletin* offered an advantage so strong a part of the counter play was removed. What if there was also a debuff to the same bulletin that reduced firing arc, increased the setup or break down time, or increased the cost of the unit?

  • #14
    5 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948
    edited May 2016

    Compromise that will please everyone:

    1) Remove stacking, but retain duplicates*;

    2) Allow players to make mods that allow stacking;

    3) Everyone wins because whatever's not in the feature, can be modded back in.

    *Preferably just to bulletins, as other items like commanders do not have stacking capability and, and the game still auto-salvages after getting more than two additional duplicate drops.

    Technically speaking this can be accomplished by Relic simply not implementing auto-salvage when it's released to live game.

  • #15
    5 years ago
    TredBobekTredBobek Posts: 7

    My favorite bulletins are the dispatch ability ones. Like, who would use a 10% AVRE dispatch bulletin?
    (at least from now on no one can use 3 of those AVRE bulletins :D )

  • #16
    5 years ago
    Doktor_SDoktor_S Posts: 134

    @TredBobek said:
    My favorite bulletins are the dispatch ability ones. Like, who would use a 10% AVRE dispatch bulletin?
    (at least from now on no one can use 3 of those AVRE bulletins :D )

    Thats kinda silly considering you can only field 1 AVRE...

  • #17
    5 years ago
    ZaatosZaatos Posts: 12
    Some bulletins definitely need to be buffed into usefulness others not so much. 10% vet on riflemen is a good buff that can help your play style without being overpowered whereas when stacked 30% was admittedly a little much. The main issue isn't making bulletins so strong that having the correct ones might counter your opponent's and their gameplay but instead tuning the game to the way you like to play.

    As many people have pointed out there are some completely pointless doctrines (jagdtiger dispatch time reduced) and others that just suffer from ineffectiveness (2%assault grenadier accuracy). On one side we have the ability to buy your own and salvage bulletins to negate the affects of the pointless ones but nothing to help the ineffective ones, so let's focus on those.

    I understand the fear of buffing some bulletins might affect gameplay too much but bulletins should have an affect on gameplay just not enough to throw off balance so can we start small and work our way up? Let's look at some examples.

    Stumtiger reloads 5% faster. If I recall correctly that means you can now take 2-3 seconds off the manual reload time. I understand it's s dangerous unit but it's vulnerable while reloading so even when you attack bulletins you have a new reload time of 6-9 seconds. In my opinion that is still a small change but it makes the bulletin more viable without making the unit op. My suggestion here would be change the 5% off reload time to something like 8-10 seconds off. That might sound a little scary but it's not game breaking and you have a useful bulletin.

    Soviet mine costs 6% less munitions. Which results in 28 munition mines instead of 30. Here is a bulletin you can directly benefit from through extra munitions still it's such a small amount. If you played a game and say but down a high number of mines... 30 mines you would have spent 840 munitions and saved 60 extra munitions, now you can put down 2 more mines or use 4 more Molotovs. Anyway you get the idea not that big a difference. What if we me made our bulletin instead to 25 munition mines, 1 less than the current max of 24 with 3 stacked bulletins. Let's do the math 25 munitions x 30 mines costs 750 munitions quite a difference leaving us with
    150 extra munitions. Now we can use maybe 1 offmap artillery in the game that we wouldn't have been able to otherwise or we could place6 more mines in the game. Keep in mind 30 mines is a lot for 1 game.

    I could go on with other bulletins but my point is tweaking them to usefulness should not be avoided for fear of being overpowered, otherwise why bother even putting on bulletins if their usefulness is so miniscule they don't affect gameplay.
  • #18
    5 years ago
    JoeyMcJoeJoeJoeyMcJoe… Posts: 63
    edited May 2016

    Now that SU-85s have much better penetration, it would make sense to change their bulletins to increased turn speed or movement speed.
    Also, it's probably worth removing/replacing all the bulletins that provide faster call-in recharge times for heavy tanks.

    Have any new bulletins been created for the USF mortar?

  • #19
    5 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,748

    Since the number of bulletin available to units and factions and the effectiveness of bulletins greatly varieties, removing stacking bulletin will not help increase balance but it will reduce balance.

    First of all a clear plan of what the role of bulletins should be made. Are they simply decorative or are they meant to have some impact. If they are simply decorative some of them should be removed and the number of bulletin available for some be reduced.

    If bulletin are to have some impact on the performance of units and they do not stuck each units should have at least 3 of them available to them and attempts should be made for bulletin to better fits units and become inline one to other.

  • #20
    5 years ago
    moremegamoremega REDWOOD CITY CA USAPosts: 229
    edited May 2016

    @Grandpapy said:
    I hear you, Kith. That is why I think conditional bonuses would be best. I too remember the balance obstacles of Company of Heroes: Online and the unit swapping from Company of Heroes: Tales of Valor, some variations were ill conceived but at least there was impact and play. In your example of the AT gun movement speed, the bulletin* offered an advantage so strong a part of the counter play was removed. What if there was also a debuff to the same bulletin that reduced firing arc, increased the setup or break down time, or increased the cost of the unit?

    Wow...I really like that idea! Relic might bite at having a slight nerf to every intel bulletins buff; provided the buff is significantly stronger than they are now, which can actually have a noticeable impact on the battle. I would also take it a step further and add that uncommon and rare bulletins reduce or remove the nerf; this will encourage longitivity in the game, so more players will get to enjoy coh2 as much as I have.


BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file

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.