[OST] Ostwind's Role

#1
8 months ago
Farra13Farra13 Posts: 625
edited February 11 in Balance Feedback

Its been a long time since any threads or discussions about the Ostwind were opened, now with the WBP in its final testing and soon to be released within the next month, I thought it would be interesting to see where the community feels the Ostwind should fall in its role in the OST roster.

Each of the Wehr tanks have a specific defined role; the stug being a medium TD, the P4 a stock medium, the Brumbar an AI specialist (blob buster) and the Panther a TD alternative. The Ostwind i find almost overlaps in its place as an AI vehicle that is quickly set aside for the much more effective brumbar, even if it were fixed to perform as many expect, i feel despite its cheaper cost and availability, most would prefer the P4 just for the fact that is AI is already good even before the pintle whilst being able to also contend with other mediums.

The one area that Ost lacks, setting aside the mg-42 as it has awful mobility, is a mobile supression platform. Giving the Ostwind the ability to supress infantry would give OST an excellent tool to counter blobs, as currently its far too easy for say a rifle blob to simply smoke/melt a well emplaced mg. It would also help distinguish the Ostwind from the Brumbar, giving players more options and solidifying seperate roles for each vehicle.

Now that is my personal opinion, i am curious as too what other think the Ostwind's role is, whether a cost-effective AI specialist, supression platform, support tan etc.. i would create a poll, but i admit I have no idea how to do so.

«1

Comments

  • #2
    8 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,420
    edited February 11

    Ostwind (Osw) is not a cost efficient unit and number of changes can help it:
    1) remove minimum range
    2) give suppression to the hull mg
    3) reduce target size
    4) reduce Pop
    5) reduce cost

    On the other hand it can be used to to partially fix the Ostheer T4 tech by giving players the option to skip T3. One could switch OsW with Brumbar, while buffing the first and nerfing the second. That would allow a T4 giving players a cheap AI vehicle to support panthers.

    Brumbar can be changes either to indirect fire support with slow fire rate and toned down AOE or a heavy breakthrough tank with lots of frontal armor and weaker gun (maybe with bonus vs emplacements).

  • #3
    8 months ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 426
    edited February 11

    Now that is my personal opinion

    A lot of us share the same opinion actually, we would like to see an enhancement to it's current performance. This in-game machine needs some fine tuning without making it to powerful. Subtle changes are needed, and perhaps even the suppression mechanic should be added by default instead of as a bulletin.

    I agree with the path vipper is on except for the cost and pop...you dont want people spamming this vehicle.

  • #4
    8 months ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 541
    edited February 11

    Actually there was an Ostwind thread about 2 mths ago. But this patch doesn't include medium armor. Everyone knows the Ostwind is UP. A good suggestion was to modify the gun to act like the one on the luchs which is less affected by terrain features between it and the enemy inf. As well the accuracy is rather lacking when stationary. But it will give you rare spurts of overperforming accuracy. The consistency of the Ostwind is also something frustrating to both allied and axis players. It's simply not dependable and suffers the most from RNG.

    (removed)

  • #5
    8 months ago
    ElSlayerElSlayer Posts: 228

    It seems like everyone forget one of Ostwind's roles: AA.

  • #6
    8 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,420
    edited February 13

    @eonfigure said:
    I agree with the path vipper is on except for the cost and pop...you dont want people spamming this vehicle.

    The reason why I suggested their should be a Pop and cost reduction is that Ostwind is a specialized vehicle and specialized vehicle should have lower pop and cost then main battle tanks.

    T34/76 is a MBT yet it has the same Pop and less cost.

    The same about pop goes for Centaur.

  • #7
    8 months ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 584
    edited February 13
    The t34 is the worst medium mbt but its price and pop are fine for the unit preformance. It is that cheap for a reason.

    Ostwind is quite durable not as durable as the centaur mind you but faster. for an aa unit that is not bad at all plus has a hull mg.

    I feel that generalist are jack off all trades but master at none, that is why imo specialist should cost around the minimaly the same or more imo because they excel greatly at one thing.
    Just look at the infantree in the game shocks pgrens obers all specialized and cost a lot more because of their effectiveness in their area.

    But this is just thought on the subject.
  • #8
    8 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,420
    edited February 13

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    The t34 is the worst medium mbt but its price and pop are fine for the unit preformance. It is that cheap for a reason.

    Ostwind is quite durable not as durable as the centaur mind you but faster. for an aa unit that is not bad at all plus has a hull mg.

    I feel that generalist are jack off all trades but master at none, that is why **imo specialist should cost around the minimaly the same or more imo because they excel greatly at one thing. **
    Just look at the infantree in the game shocks pgrens obers all specialized and cost a lot more because of their effectiveness in their area.

    But this is just thought on the subject.

    Check the prices of stugs/su-76 vs PZIV/T34/76. Check the Price of Comet and firefly.

  • #9
    8 months ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 584
    edited February 13

    yeah i got that wrong was thinking to much about the infantrie bit, but the su76 and t34 are in different tiers.

    still comparing the price and pop of ostwind to the t34 the shittiest medium in the game and wonder why the ostwind is more expensive fuel wise i dont get that and it requires full tech on top of that. The ostwind can actualy somewhat fight a t34 as i remember.

  • #10
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 4,860
    Ostwind has 45/40/35 for pen, which is actually higher than the 35/35/35 of the 105 dozer and the 222 as well. Might be worth bumping that up kinda generalize the unit a bit.

    Maybe have ost t3 as a blend of generalist flavours and t4 as hard specialists type deal instead of the "everything kinda sorta does a bit everything and does a really meh job on all accounts" design we have now
  • #11
    8 months ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 625

    I agree with dark, pushing t3 (Ostwind included) into a more generalist set of vehicles and t4 into premium specialists seems like the best way to keep the faction design intact, now if only we could fix resource inflation on team games.. then OST might actually be allowed decent tanks without a massive backlash from teamgame players.

  • #12
    8 months ago

    Imo the premium tier working in team games would also require something like making the t34/85 easy8 is2 pershing available non doc. Even if the resources are hamperd the premium units will emerge, and it wil take massive evert to take them out. The stock at options and tanks from sov and usf will stand no chance.

    Team games of 3s and up always favored the axis, now not as much as in the past but they still are. And with the premuim tier it will go back to the good old days most defenetly.

    I can see the premium tier working but only in 1v1.

  • #13
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 4,860
    @TheLeveler83 it facoured axis much more before massive allied pen increases. A pair of su85/jackson will easily force off or kill a pair of more expensive panthers. But that aside, t4 as a premium needs to work in 1s, anything will work in team games but thats not the focal point for competitive MP. Team games *could* be adjusted by altering points, but no amount of manipulation will help 1s because every point of MP, every drop of fuel every bit of munitions is on you, you lose your tank there isnt 6 on the other side of the map waiting to sweep over...
  • #14
    8 months ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 625
    edited February 13

    now if only we could fix resource inflation on team games..

    That's the only reason the Axis factions (more OST than OKW) are able to keep up/dominate (when well coordinated) in team games, between the 3-4 players you have ele, JT and KT coming out your ears and that's really difficult to deal with (as there were never supposed to be more than a single super heavy on the field), even with the curently insane cost-effectiveness of allied tds being massed can't stop them.

    Premium specialists would be an investment of significant resources in a vehicle that is very powerful at a single role, such as Brumbar being an excellent ai/anti building unit, or Panther being the top-tier non-doc at. You counter them just by building either tanks or at infantry depending on what they specialize against. OST T4 is supposed to be their unique advantage, like USF with their incredible flexibility and stand-alone rifles or OKW having a non-doc superheavy. Currently is completely unviable due to tech cost/unit cost and crap unit performance. Nerfing resource income on team games would stop both the super heavy spam and balance the more powerful but limited tanks.

    There is absoloutly no logic in your idea of giving allies all their doctrinal units... Axis is already being stomped on currently, OST specifically, you don't buff them and then buff the allied factions as well otherwise we end up right back to where we are now.

    When I pay what I pay for a panther, I expect it too perform for everything i invested in it. You know... like the Comet, who definitely performs as expected and then some extra on top of that. At the moment the OST panther is, well... its pretty damn useless.

    And back to the topic, Ostwind definitly needs to be pushed into a role that seperates it from the Brumbar, OST's lack of infantry should be made up for in versatile roster of vehicles, the Oswind (apart from AA) needs to distinguish itself from a cheap and cheerful version of the Brumbar.

  • #15
    8 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,703
    Not really. Allied TDs will still easily counter T4 even as premium specialist vehicles. It wouldnt need any additions to the Allied roster at all.
  • #16
    8 months ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 584
    edited February 13
    If they were made more premuim will this be a flat buff across the units? If yes that will not massivly effect team games?

    It depends on the buff t4 gets i fear a massive overbuff of the current stats, and that will ruin team games yet again with almost unstoppable blobs of axis tanks like the old days.

    At least allies can fight back now and win instead off auto loose after x minutes.
    Axis being stomped in 3s and 4s now? Yes they can actualy loose in the late game now instead off easy wins.

    As for the topic the ostwind could get a timed activated vet ability to supress with a speed reduction while active. Any thoughts on this?
  • #17
    8 months ago

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    The ostwind can actualy somewhat fight a t34 as i remember.

    Well then you remember quite wrong. The Ostwind can slightly damage a t34 on its rear armor before needing to retreat. Or if a crippled T34 is just sitting there you can finish it off with an Ostwind if your desperate. And also when you say Ostwind is faster then Centaur so basically it shouldn't be as lethal as a Centaur, name one allied medium tank that doesn't have the speed to chase down an Ostwind.

  • #18
    8 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 4,860
    edited February 15
    @1ncendiary_Rounds churchill is pretty slow (i know its a "heavy" but it also reeeeaaaalllly isnt...)
  • #19
    8 months ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @1ncendiary_Rounds churchill is pretty slow (i know its a "heavy" but it also reeeeaaaalllly isnt...)

    You're trying too hard man.

  • #20
    8 months ago
    Incindiary

    My point is the ostwind has a different role then t34, that alone is no reason for it to be as cheap or cheaper as a t34 the shittiest unit of its class.

    And for your question yes every medium can chase it, and by somewhat fight it i dont mean it can take it on from the front.

    Because somthing is faster it shoudnt be as lethal. The ostwind needs to stop to truly shine vs inf and can kite them just fine. The centuar cant kite infantry because of that it should threaten inf more including at inf.
  • #21
    8 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,040

    @Vipper said:

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    The t34 is the worst medium mbt but its price and pop are fine for the unit preformance. It is that cheap for a reason.

    Ostwind is quite durable not as durable as the centaur mind you but faster. for an aa unit that is not bad at all plus has a hull mg.

    I feel that generalist are jack off all trades but master at none, that is why **imo specialist should cost around the minimaly the same or more imo because they excel greatly at one thing. **
    Just look at the infantree in the game shocks pgrens obers all specialized and cost a lot more because of their effectiveness in their area.

    But this is just thought on the subject.

    Check the prices of stugs/su-76 vs PZIV/T34/76. Check the Price of Comet and firefly.

    Su-76 isn't even the same tier as p4/t34 and neither is firefly and comet.

    StuG vs T34 meets the criteria of specialist performing much better then generalist in a given role for comparable cost, you have that dependency also against P4, where the extra cost goes into superior survivability and additional firepower vs AI.

  • #22
    8 months ago
    Give it same pen/damage as Bofors. Why not?
  • #23
    8 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,420

    @Katitof said:
    Su-76 isn't even the same tier as p4/t34 and neither is firefly and comet.

    StuG vs T34 meets the criteria of specialist performing much better then generalist in a given role for comparable cost, you have that dependency also against P4, where the extra cost goes into superior survivability and additional firepower vs AI.

    The SU-76 is in the same tier as PZIV the T3.

    Specialized vehicles are generally cheaper than multi role vehicles so I no idea what your points is.

  • #24
    8 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,040
    edited February 15

    @Vipper said:

    @Katitof said:
    Su-76 isn't even the same tier as p4/t34 and neither is firefly and comet.

    StuG vs T34 meets the criteria of specialist performing much better then generalist in a given role for comparable cost, you have that dependency also against P4, where the extra cost goes into superior survivability and additional firepower vs AI.

    The SU-76 is in the same tier as PZIV the T3.

    Seriously?
    Are you for real here?

    Alright then.
    In this case, lets compare Comet and Puma.
    They are both in T2.

    Or Sherman and Panther.
    They both come from T3.

  • #25
    8 months ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 625

    @Vipper said:

    The SU-76 is in the same tier as PZIV the T3.

    Katitof is right Vipper, the SU-76 isn't in the same same tier. For SOV their t1 is technically both the rifle command and support weapon kampaneya, the Battalion command is t2 and the armour kampaneya is t3. Same goes for the USF with their t2 being both the captain and lieutenant and the major t3. OST is the only faction with four linear tech buildings.

  • #26
    8 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,420
    edited February 15

    @Katitof said:
    Seriously?
    Are you for real here?

    Alright then.
    In this case, lets compare Comet and Puma.
    They are both in T2.

    Or Sherman and Panther.
    They both come from T3.

    Ok then, Su-76 a T2 should should have much lower penetration because it costs nearly the same as the Stug that is a Tier3 unit and should have around 20% chance of penetrating the Panther which is a T4 unit.

    In addition the Ostwind should cost lower (or even the same) than t-34/76 since they are both T3 units and T-34/76 is a MBT while Ostwind a AI tank.

  • #27
    8 months ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,147 mod
    edited February 15

    [Moderator Input] Please keep the SU76s balance discussions for the relevant threads. I cleaned up the thread a bit :]

  • #28
    8 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,420
    edited February 15

    @Katitof said:
    Su-76 isn't even the same tier as p4/t34 and neither is firefly and comet.

    StuG vs T34 meets the criteria of specialist performing much better then generalist in a given role for comparable cost, you have that dependency also against P4, where the extra cost goes into superior survivability and additional firepower vs AI.

    This thread is about Ostwind and balance.
    If you think unit performance can be talked in the void, without considering its performance and implications of alterations against the units it actually goes against, then we can cross the "balance" part and insert "dreamland" part in its place.

    Oswind should cost the same or lower than T34/76 it does not "meet the criteria of specialist performing much better then generalist in a given role for comparable cost."

  • #29
    8 months ago
    RiCERiCE Posts: 1,586
    edited February 15

    @Farra13 said:

    @Vipper said:

    The SU-76 is in the same tier as PZIV the T3.

    Katitof is right Vipper, the SU-76 isn't in the same same tier. For SOV their t1 is technically both the rifle command and support weapon kampaneya, the Battalion command is t2 and the armour kampaneya is t3. Same goes for the USF with their t2 being both the captain and lieutenant and the major t3. OST is the only faction with four linear tech buildings.

    Actually everyone refers at non-linear teching levels as T1/T2/T3/T4 (like those were linear) just because its easier to understand like this. Also its price and timing wise more or less balanced.

  • #30
    8 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,893
    edited February 15

    It would already be a big relief if the Ostwinds role was changed to not sucking. Its performance against infantry is too random and overall too weak for an AI tank.

  • #31
    8 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,694

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    And also when you say Ostwind is faster then Centaur so basically it shouldn't be as lethal as a Centaur, name one allied medium tank that doesn't have the speed to chase down an Ostwind.

    Don't solo your ostwind. If you have any AT nearby, that allied medium can't do anything.

    That said, it could be a little better at hitting things on the move. Not much, since like the SU85 part of the units strength is its power while standing still, however the SU85 shoots things 60 range away. A slight buff to the ostwinds moving accuracy would help things.

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.

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.