GCS Balance Preview Feedback

1234568»

Comments

  • #212
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    I would also like to see the through salvage buffed with either increased speed or improved yields.
  • #213
    3 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951
    edited April 2017

    I like the idea of thorough salvage working like its Allied counterparts.

    Also, what's up with alleviating, but not fixing, the deathloop on the maxim? Is it just not possible with the modtools?

  • #214
    3 years ago
    thekingsownthekingso… Posts: 447
    edited April 2017

    Please stop going over the maxim again and again , the main problem is the British faction. What has been done so far has taken some fair improvements in the right direction but is still no where near enough.

  • #215
    3 years ago
    HowieHowie Posts: 5

    I hope KV-2 can be added a shotting range for players to see.

  • #216
    3 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289

    Fix the Comet spam. Literally thats the only unit the Brits need spam late in the game.

    A 2 pop increase wont fix it and you know it. The problem is its armor, since basically it can beat and ignore everything else but Panthers and heavy TDs, while being fast enough and spammable enough to be anywhere on the battlefield and mess everything up in seconds and get out of trouble when threatened.

    The DPS and manouvre oriented hammer semi-doctrine doesnt need a spammable supertank with heavy enough armor to just roam freely. Especially not in a faction that can basically do with basic line infantry for all the match and has the easiest tech of all.

    It needs just what it has, speed and DPS. Dont touch those but swap the armor values of the Churchill and Comet and tada! Suddenly Anvil and the Churchill makes sense for a steady breakthrough and Comet is a whole different beast thats counterable enough.

  • #217
    3 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289

    @Lazarus said:
    Grenadiers are not meant to be the solution vs unupgraded Penals. Use snipers or mortars to bleed them, use MGs to stop them from walking all over you.

    If you don't like retreating - don't upgrade your half track. Use it to reinforce instead.

    The halftrack is only a semi solution as its armor is far too low to be used as a reliable anchor. Buff the 251s armor to Allied halftruck levels and it can be the utility you describe, otherwise its just a toothless and rather slow mobile reinforcement point that can be driven away easily by infantry blob fire. All Allied factions have readily available infantry AT now. That should be perfectly enough if they would need to use it. The current armor of the 251 is just too low for the purpose its meant to do.

  • #218
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    @Kurfürst thats why it got a rotation nerf, and accuracy nerf, a range nerf and tank commander got nerfed as well as the pop increase....
  • #219
    3 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289

    Nerfs in all the wrong places. A DPS oriented doctrine receives DPS nerfs, but the main issue, which is that it cannot be reliably countered unless its a Panther is unchanged. The Comet is popular because it lives in an environment where its only natural enemy is the Panther, and its on the top of the food chain vs everything else. Whereas the Panther lives in environment where most of base units are inferior to the Allied equivalents and need special teams and spend fuel on vehicles to make up for that inferiority and gives you far, far less option to just counterspam Panthers. You simply wont have the resources while trying to support weak Grens with 222s, 251s etc. Thus you can afford a Panther far less readily than the UKF player a Comet, because the UKF player can basically rely on non-fuel solutions and be very well of still until he can start spamming Comets.

    The superiority of infantry sections and the high armor of the Comet are combined into a circle of ever growing build disadvantage for an Axis and especially for an OST player by late game. Which can be only solved reliably IMO if the Comet is more vulnerable to more standard units, and the only way to do this is reducing its armor from its ridiculus levels. Unless this is done PaKs, StuGs, Shrecked PzGrens, anything lesser than a Panther are not and wont be reliable against it, as even snares often fail against and its stays fast enough to escape even then.

    And this is what encourages spamming. Not price but that you get a unit that is great vs all and is a foolproof investment and it encourages using builds thats solely about spamming as many Comets as possible in the shortest time. There is no risk at that all. Does he have PaKs, StuGs, Panzergrens on the field? These are dedicated AT units, common sense would tell that spamming a tank in that environment shouldnt work but it does, since all of these will loose while failing to put a dent on the Comet.

  • #220
    3 years ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 696
    edited April 2017

    .> @Kurfürst said:

    @Lazarus said:
    Grenadiers are not meant to be the solution vs unupgraded Penals. Use snipers or mortars to bleed them, use MGs to stop them from walking all over you.

    If you don't like retreating - don't upgrade your half track. Use it to reinforce instead.

    The halftrack is only a semi solution as its armor is far too low to be used as a reliable anchor. Buff the 251s armor to Allied halftruck levels and it can be the utility you describe, otherwise its just a toothless and rather slow mobile reinforcement point that can be driven away easily by infantry blob fire. All Allied factions have readily available infantry AT now. That should be perfectly enough if they would need to use it. The current armor of the 251 is just too low for the purpose its meant to do.

    you seem to be forgetting that ost has a great mg if not the best for supression to stop blobs of inf and can even scare away or destroy a light vehicle. The ost mg works better then others with their mortar on supressed blobs. and their sniper imo is the best of the 3 in the game. pgrens do better now with their rearanged vet. because of this the ost halftrack should have a easier time to hide behind friendly lines and recive less fire then other half tracks.

    however i am not against a armour packge for muni on the 251. while excluding the flamers when upgraded, that would make that to good imo.

  • #221
    3 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647
    edited April 2017

    @Kurfürst The GCS comet is a whole different kettle of fish to the one in live, the range change alone did alot to really limit its power. With it having to close in further, not only do most units like stugs, pak40 and panthers have a considerable advantage engaging it, but with it being closer the chances of penetration are higher. Not too mention snaring it, or landing shrek shots is that much easier now.

    Then with its moving accuracy reduced to the standard of 0.5, it can no longer yoyo into combat, if it wants to land a shot it has to advance, stop, aim and fire, and then reverse. That makes it a whole lot more vunerable.

    My main problem with Brits currently is the f***ing firefly still be pin-point accurate, it just never misses. And if it lands those tulips, only a panther or kt really has a fair chance of escaping, anything else from a tiger 1 to a p4 is basically reduced to scrap or survives on a smidge of health only for it to lurch foward and finish with another guarrenteed shot.

  • #222
    3 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited April 2017

    V1.4 UPDATE
    SOVIETS
    Maxims
    In particular, some of the mobility changes will help mitigate the infamous “deathloop” bug (without solving it, however).

    Can we apply the same changes to the rakketen that suffer from the same issue?

  • #223
    3 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,681

    @Vipper said:
    V1.4 UPDATE
    SOVIETS
    Maxims
    In particular, some of the mobility changes will help mitigate the infamous “deathloop” bug (without solving it, however).

    Can we apply the same changes to the rakketen that suffer from the same issue?

    But they operate completely differently.
    Rakketen is still AT gun operated by 2 entities, Maxim is HMG operated by one and all other HMGs "magically teleport" to another entity when previous one is killed.

  • #224
    3 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited April 2017

    Both units have trouble retreating. Both deserve the same treatment.

  • #225
    3 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343

    @Vipper said:
    V1.4 UPDATE
    SOVIETS
    Maxims
    In particular, some of the mobility changes will help mitigate the infamous “deathloop” bug (without solving it, however).

    Can we apply the same changes to the rakketen that suffer from the same issue?

    Formations, definitely. We are thinking of improving squad formations for all weapon teams, as they suffer from the pre-WBP fallschirmjaeger formation syndrome. That won't happen during GCS though, as we want to create proper weapon-team formations, rather than copy infantry-squad formations (which will make the game look boring).

    Giving the raketenwerfer higher rotation rate is probably not a good idea. The reason we gave Maxim high rotation rate is because the cannon for MG teams is the weapon teleporting from one squad to another, and models snapping to an 180° turn the moment you give the command.

    The canon for AT guns is that they have momentum and a slowish rotation rate. On the other hand, the raketenwerfer is the only one that requires an actual setup time; removing it will make the animations look really weird. Giving the raketenwerfer the same stats of the Maxim will make it unflankable; on top of being able to stealth, have a high RoF and high alpha damage...

    Raketenwerfer already doesn't suffer penalties from traversing cover. This is what gave us the idea of applying the same principles to the Maxim. We also want to extend the same principle to Zis-3, M-42 and M1-57 which are the only guns that suffer from traversing craters and really suck for the late-game.

  • #226
    3 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited April 2017

    @Mr_Smith said:

    @Vipper said:
    V1.4 UPDATE
    SOVIETS
    Maxims
    In particular, some of the mobility changes will help mitigate the infamous “deathloop” bug (without solving it, however).

    Can we apply the same changes to the rakketen that suffer from the same issue?

    Formations, definitely. We are thinking of improving squad formations for all weapon teams, as they suffer from the pre-WBP fallschirmjaeger formation syndrome. That won't happen during GCS though, as we want to create proper weapon-team formations, rather than copy infantry-squad formations (which will make the game look boring).

    Giving the raketenwerfer higher rotation rate is probably not a good idea. The reason we gave Maxim high rotation rate is because the cannon for MG teams is the weapon teleporting from one squad to another, and models snapping to an 180° turn the moment you give the command.

    The canon for AT guns is that they have momentum and a slowish rotation rate. On the other hand, the raketenwerfer is the only one that requires an actual setup time; removing it will make the animations look really weird. Giving the raketenwerfer the same stats of the Maxim will make it unflankable; on top of being able to stealth, have a high RoF and high alpha damage...

    Raketenwerfer already doesn't suffer penalties from traversing cover. This is what gave us the idea of applying the same principles to the Maxim. We also want to extend the same principle to Zis-3, M-42 and M1-57 which are the only guns that suffer from traversing craters and really suck for the late-game.

    I was refereeing to the retreat issue not the general performance. Is possible to apply the bonuses only when the weapon is retreating?

  • #227
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    @Mr_Smith any other thoughts on lookin at the old m42 confetti cannon? Not terribly pressing by anymeans but it seems like a sweeping AT tweak would be a good place to squeak it in
  • #228
    3 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343

    @Vipper said:

    I was refereeing to the retreat issue not the general performance. Is it possible to the bonuses only when the weapon is retreating?

    That could be a good idea to include, actually.

  • #229
    3 years ago
    Soviet T1 is pretty hardcore for OKW now @Mr_Smith . Gonna revert that change faust? The upped price can stay.

    If you watched the Vonivan game you'd know.
  • #230
    3 years ago

    this download good, but why no KV tank touched? maxim good but no KV, KV good tank. also hetzer so bad, why?

  • #231
    3 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    @PotatoMArk said:
    this download good, but why no KV tank touched? maxim good but no KV, KV good tank. also hetzer so bad, why?

    Trust me, the list can go on farther than there are Red Pandas on earth

    However, At this point, I think the entire balance team for this update is just @Mr_Smith, two clones of him, and a mildly benevolent sweatshop manager.

    One man can only do so much while being tortured.

  • #232
    3 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289

    @SquishyMuffin said:
    Soviet T1 is pretty hardcore for OKW now @Mr_Smith . Gonna revert that change faust? The upped price can stay.

    If you watched the Vonivan game you'd know.

    +1

    The Faust revert is a bad call, OKW faces the same light vehicles early on as OST, there is no reason not to have the Faust just as available to them and at the same cost as OST (15 FU "upgrade", 25 muni / snare). This was one of the better changes of the WBP, I do not see why it needs to be reverted.

  • #233
    3 years ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 696
    edited April 2017
    @Kurfürst

    Okw also has t0 at gun. The kubel that can backcap and harras. Better pios and more durable main inf. Those are reasons why okw could have their faust a bit later then ost.
  • #234
    3 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647
    edited April 2017

    I'm 90% sure the changes to the faust are only temporary. They are mainly in reaction to the fact that the Soviets have little in the way of opening strategies that can actually threaten OKW.

    Currently OKW can easily shut down SOV with four volks, then rush luchs/flaktrak and its game.

    Removing the faust's early access gives SOV the breathing room to actually contest the early game, mainly by using the clown car to push of the volks and force an early Rak. This pushes back the timing of the luchs/flaktrak, and allows SOV to retain some field presence before their own light vehicles are available.

    This makes the transition into the mid-game more balanced and gives SOV a fighting chance. Until the scope expands and units like cons and volks are allowed the changes they need, the faust rework will likely remain in place.

    Anyway, OKW do not lack counters by any means. Any half decent player can use defensive mines or an early Rak to counter the clown car, just means you can't steamroll SOV so early, its a fair compromise.

  • #235
    3 years ago

    I think there is a bug or unbalanced issue related to the entering / leaving buildings by troops. Now We can easily avoid thrown grenades or irritate the opponent by entering and leaving building within second. It is very annoying and looks funny. This action should lasts a little longer.

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.