Fall Balance Preview Feedback

18911131416

Comments

  • #302
    2 years ago
    mrdjjag81mrdjjag81 Posts: 255
    edited July 2017

    While the Panther dont need to worry about snares against brits (when u compare it to Comet) means that the Panther can safetly run in fighting a Comet by standing still and run back when it get low on health, try do the same with the comet tank and u get fausted within seconds and being easy pray for any at units in range. Before the patch it at least had its turnspeed and warspeed on its uperhand to prevent snares, now its just ends up mostly sitting docks for pretty much anything if you forced to flank something. It become a frontal Tank instead of a flanking tank, which we all know how usless that be in the long run when paks, jagd and elephants start poping up. Give brit a no-commander-snare also and i wouldent complain a bit about giving panther a bit better accuracy

  • #304
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @mrdjjag81 ha detto:
    While the Panther dont need to worry about snares against brits (when u compare it to Comet) means that the Panther can safetly run in fighting a Comet by standing still and run back when it get low on health, try do the same with the comet tank and u get fausted within seconds and being easy pray for any at units in range. Before the patch it at least had its turnspeed and warspeed on its uperhand to prevent snares, now its just ends up mostly sitting docks for pretty much anything if you forced to flank something. It become a frontal Tank instead of a flanking tank, which we all know how usless that be in the long run when paks, jagd and elephants start poping up. Give brit a no-commander-snare also and i wouldent complain a bit about giving panther a bit better accuracy

    Not an excuse for poor performances......especially when it cost that much.
    It's not only about brits...and gammon is non doc and cause engine damage.
    Regardless of snares...the Panther moving accuracy penalty is huge, and the tank itself already MISS STATIONARY.

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    Panther misses frequently WHILE stationary, THATS the problem. Also, at least it can fight a comet without worrying about snares, to bad thats only 1/3 of the factions it will be facing...

    Exactly.

  • #305
    2 years ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,306 mod
    edited July 2017

    {Moderator Input) There has been many pages about discussing the Panther, and it's great to see that. Can you guys open a separate thread to talk about the unit? It'd be good to discuss the Fall Balance Mod. :)

  • #306
    2 years ago
    oRi0noRi0n Posts: 63

    I would love to see some discussion of my post #303 regarding how the FRP affects the Battlegroup HQ being a viable Tier 1 Bldg. After giving it more thought, I really like my 3rd option a lot - allowing it to be packed back up in the truck and moved. This should not be a quick process - it should take just as long to re-deploy as to build the first time, though maybe it could pack up a bit faster. This solves the problem though of having to place it forward really early on with no FRP capability. You can build it in your base for the Tier 1 tech access at the beginning, then in the spirit of the balance patch move it up to be a FRP in mid-late game as intended. You should not be able to build units from it during pack-up, moving or re-deploying, though it's tech unlocks (e.g. MG-34, King Tiger) should remain (as they currently do if it's destroyed). I think that's the most elegant solution to the problem of being forced to build the Tier 1 tech structure near the front without the defenses it was originally designed to have.

    On another note, I spent 2 games (2v2s with hard comps) last night focused entirely on playing with the le.IG. Conclusion: I generally like the changes, but it now DEFINITELY needs a retreat button (due to significantly shorter range pulling it closer to the front) and vet requirements need to be lowered. The retreat I think is self-explanatory. The vet requirements need to be lowered because it's just much harder to get kills now.

    Previously, even against human players, it was easy to rack up 20-30+ kills on a single le.IG in a game. And fairly quickly at that. Last night I set up a wall of machine guns, backed by a raketen and some pumas, and had 2 le.IGs just bombard the computer's infantry and vehicles as they smashed into the wall. For the entire game. I think the highest vet I achieved on either of them was 3, maybe 4 stars. And that was with near constant targets to feed on. It's just a LOT harder to get kills than it used to be. I think it's mostly just that the guns don't do as much damage, though the projectile also feels a lot slower to target so units are more likely to move (that's just how it FEELS, I'm not sure if it's mathematically true). It's probably also related to having reduced range so they don't autofire as much.

    Now I do LIKE that it's harder to get kills. Having a full squad wiped by a single artillery shot (especially early-mid game) is not fun gameplay. I can't even count how many times I've lost a vet volks squad at full health to a single random volley from a Brit mortar pit. I LIKE that the le.IG isn't quite so destructive as it was before. I LIKE giving it slight anti-vehicle utility, and I LOVE the smoke addition (there's finally a viable way to attack early bofors emplacements). I just think it now needs a retreat button (cause it's much more vulnerable being closer to the front) and lowered vet requirements (cause it's much harder to build the required xp).

    On that note, I guess my only major remaining artillery concern is the lack of any net cost increase or damage reduction on the advanced mortar pit. It's still a 400 mp unit, and it's still possible that the first you learn of its existence is an instantaneous full squad wipe while you're capping a point. Forcing you off a point because your squad will be wiped with 1 more shot is fine. Wiping your squad while you were also taking damage in an infantry fight is fine. Having your squad wiped out of the blue in a single shot (well, 1 shot from each of the 2 mortars in the pit) - NOT OKAY. And if pairs of le.IGs were doing that, you can bet there would be endless complaints. I mean look at the Stuka nerfs - that's was a 390 mp 100 fuel unit with no autofire and a stupidly long cooldown that just got SPECIFICALLY nerfed with the STATED GOAL that it should NOT be wiping squads in a single volley. And it takes FOREVER to build veterancy on a Stuka. Now you're going to tell me a 400 mp mortar pit available early in the game SHOULD be able to wipe squads in a single volley with less warning?

  • #307
    2 years ago

    My problem is the huge nerf to the Stug G.

    You wanna decrease their mid and far penetration by 25 and 20. So is it supposed to be fulfill its tank hunter role from up close? This is the tank that takes 2-3 hits to destroy and is clumsy and slow; and since you want me to use it close up, it will easily get circled strafed or eaten up by anti tank infantry. How is it supposed to do anything effective against the stuff its supposed to kill? Its awful against infantry, and the little bonus to the machine gun is nothing special. I mean its not going to be an anti-infantry tank all of a sudden. Its huge weakness is its lack of a turret and being slow at everything else. How do these things help it engage tanks up close (rhetorical question, they don't)?

    When I use this unit, I don't only build one. If it has any chance at taking down a tank you need at least 2. And babysitting these dumb boats is tricky... I gotta be wary of flanks... enemy tanks that rush them... infantry that rush them... and now they're less effective from far too... what's the point of them? If you want to do anything to them, that's fine... but taking away their effectiveness at range (and mid) makes them useless. Engaging up close with them will end up in dead Stugs.

    And as another kick in the bum, their TWA is being nerfed too... ugghh... Can't say I can really complain about this one. As I said, forcing it to fight up close sucks just total balls for this unit. It'll get eaten alive.

  • #308
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,821
    edited August 2017
    @Roof Shingles it still has the pen to more than reliably pen allied mediums (like mid 90s)
    Also its health is high enough that it will take just as many hits from regular AT sources as any medium tank, it is however more vulnerable to sub standard damage than other mediums.

    Essentially its AT performance vs mediums is being lowered only ever so slightly, arguably unnoticeably (it WILL bounce now, but rarely, at max btw) but it will be less reliable vs heavy armour which was the goal
  • #309
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017

    The whole problem is the idea of restricting tank destroyers to specific targets by hammering the performances..so what? OST will need a stug AND a panther EVERY GAME to deal with heavies or mediums ? and the factions that have only one TD'S ?

  • #310
    2 years ago
    > @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    > The whole problem is the idea of restricting tank destroyers to specific targets by hammering the performances..so what? OST will need a stug AND a panther EVERY GAME to deal with heavies or mediums ? and the factions that have only one TD'S ?

    Soviet will need two tds every game. Su76 for p4s and stugs. Su85 for panthers tigers and king tigers.
    Okw essentialy has three tds jagdpz 4 and panthers, even the puma counts as at support.

    My point being that every unit should have a role and be usefull. look at the old su76 and the 270mp penals. Both were never used.
  • #311
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,821
    @SAY_MY_NAME those poor factions with only 1 TD are also the only 2 factions that can pick ANY infantry squad and make it an AT platform so i mean, i guess being able to turn ANY INFANTRY SQUAD THEY FIELD into an AT platform could count as a medium armour counter, but for the factions that cant go to a weapon rack with ANY SINGLE INFANTRY SQUAD INCLUDING ONES THEY GET FOR FREE and slapping some AT on they have a lighter TD in the su76, puma/jp4 (whom i think should find its way back into med truck somehow) and the stug.

    The idea is to make it so players cant just mass low tier TDs and counter high tier armour. Why would i EVER tech for a panther when 3 stugs is cheaper AND better? Why waste fuel on the su85 when i could build 5 su76, tear apart all armour AND barrage static infantry? Roles are important for the flow of the game
  • #312
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017

    Soviets can use su 85 against everything, and it's quite cheap and affordable...

    Even su 85, has to be buffed to be a proper td capable of countering anything.

    Su76 will have it's artillery and anti medium role nontheless.
    Technically it isn't even a tank destroyer, but a puma without mobility and turret, that can use barrages.

    So usf should use stuart to counter mediums ?

    Making td's (stug/jadg/su85..) designed against specific target is nonsense....it simply doesnt work like that.. because some factions will have the advantage of needing a singpe td..

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:...

    su76 isn't reliable..SU always tech to tier 4 for su85 unless some call in spam.
    Nontheless su has it's role of anti infantry, anti light and SCALE like puma, stuart, aec.... into late game as anti vehicle.
    This absolutely doesn't mean SU can skip tier 4.
    Their late game su85, that should be effective against mediums and heavies, to justify teching.

    Stug is in a different spot, and you know that.
    SU tier 4 doesn't suck, OST DO.
    The stug was the perfect workhorse for OST such a long time, but it is clear that if Panther gets adjustments, the stug price has to increase.

    There is no point in keeping it like that, it creates the HEAVY TD meta, as it has only 50 range, it dominates smaller games because of it's cost efficiency.
    No point in considering it the equivalent of su 76 rather than su 85 because panther will never be balanced with the 60 range ost desperately need.

    Giving it a drastic price increase and 1 second more of reload and 60 range fix it, plain and simple.

    The panther, unlike su85, wasn't meant to be a tank destroyer, especially a tank sniper.
    As long as the Panther stays like that, with low accuracy and moving accuracy, rather than putting some common sense and finally giving both okw and ost an offensive vehicle with high moving accuracy, REGARDLESS of damage, stug (even fbp nerfed stug) would be better, and if not stug pak/raketen wll deal more efficiently with heavies.

    A premium generalist is MORE than an incentive into teching, but unlike mr. Smith revamp, if fore some reason OST players can't tech because of lacking fuel, their stugs (which aren't the broken jamaican gunners manned vehicles for 90 fuel anymore, can actually defend from all vehicles).

    The point is...it can't be massed like that, if stug is 135 fuel, and can't be that effective with a 1 second longer reload.
    It can become SU su85, just like actual jadgpanzer 4 is for okw, jackson for usf, firefly for brits.

    The idea of giving Panther the role of stationary tank sniper, despite that is the stug role, that doomed tier 4 itself.
    Giving it the heavy sniper role won't work.

    We all know zooks and piats aren't reliable anti mediums.

    Stuff like m10, puma su 76... with limitations regarding pen will be used to counter light and vehicles, but stug and jadgpanzer 4, firefly and jackson, should be versatile and target any armor AS AN INCENTIVE into teching.
    Because if jackson will be worse than m10 against mediums but better against heavies...i will NEVER get it as heavies are quite rare.

  • #313
    2 years ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,306 mod
    (moderator input) keep the panther discussions to the panther thread please.
  • #314
    2 years ago

    For a change in OKW description for the Kubelwagen: say that it can capture territory points.

    I'm also thinking for the Wehrmacht Tiger, Elefant, and Panzer IV Command tank: has price premium but returns to normal price if a Support Armor Korps or Heavy Panzer Korps is built.

  • #315
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798
    edited August 2017
    The thing is even if these stug nerf come to fruition, 3 stugs will still be far better than a panther vs heavies. I know I won't be changing my build. I'd probably just get more creative with my stugs. I have triple maneuver bulletins for stugs and now they are nimble as Shermans. If the whole point of the Stug nerfs are to convince Ost players to use a panther, well I think Relic has already failed to do that. Usually I get a pair of stugs vs a heavy but if that doesn't cut it, I'd get a third. It's likely that Ost players will spam even harder to make up for the nerf.
  • #316
    2 years ago

    @1ncendiary_Rounds ha detto:
    The thing is even if these stug nerf come to fruition, 3 stugs will still be far better than a panther vs heavies. I know I won't be changing my build. I'd probably just get more creative with my stugs. I have triple maneuver bulletins for stugs and now they are nimble as Sherman's

    Exactly.
    They will ALWAYS overlaps if the Panther doesn't focus in mobility...
    This is what makes me laugh, people proposing to give Panthers buffs if stationary lol.

  • #318
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017

    People are acting like this nerf of 20 max range pen to the Stug is the end of the world. The unit was massively overperforming for its cost before. The panther needs a buff and most people here agree with that so its current status should have no bearing on what we think should happen to the Stug.

    I'm thrilled with the Ost t3 changes, the Stug needed to be brought down a peg and the Ostwind needed to go up. Ost has never really had a problem killing vehicles, it's the infantry hordes that trouble them. Can't understand why people are so hung-up on this Stug change, it will still be great against medium armor, just not as good against heavies. Like it should of been all along...

  • #319
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017

    @SkysTheLimit ha detto:
    People are acting like this nerf of 20 max range pen to the Stug is the end of the world. The unit was massively overperforming for its cost before. The panther needs a buff and most people here agree with that so its current status should have no bearing on what we think should happen to the Stug.

    I'm thrilled with the Ost t3 changes, the Stug needed to be brought down a peg and the Ostwind needed to go up. Ost has never really had a problem killing vehicles, it's the infantry hordes that trouble them. Can't understand why people are so hung-up on this Stug change, it will still be great against medium armor, just not as good against heavies. Like it should of been all along...

    People acting like Panther has alreadyt been buffed...
    It isn't in the scope (goddam scope..).
    It would need another patch to change it, so the stug can't be properly changed, as modders try to find some kind of compromise between the changes they wish and the changes they can do to stug.
    It will result in a huge mess.

    Nontheless, if anything, stug reload has to be toned down of half a second to jadgpanzer 4 level and price increased, but range has to be increaed to 60, as right now OST has no stock TD that can actually counter sniper allies TD's, ESPECIALLY after heavy td nerf.

  • #320
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited August 2017

    Su-76 need to has to follow stugs path (lower penetration higher XP value ) and FF and Su-85 have to follow JT path (lower accuracy).

    Apart from that the vet bonuses need to looked at since most TD should be getting penetration and not accuracy.

    For instance Stug could change reload bonus for penetration bonus and target size for armor bonus.

  • #321
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,621

    @Vipper said:
    Su-76 need to has to follow stugs path (lower penetration higher XP value ) and FF and Su-85 have to follow JT path (lower accuracy).

    SU-76 already went that path, by having lower damage then StuG.
    They have performance not even close to each other.

  • #322
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017

    Wow i'm shocked, I tought that the lower damage was because it costed 75 fuel, basically only 5 more fuel than puma (that has same 120 damage but no free ai barrage and only 50 range).

  • #323
    2 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    @SentinelZero said:
    Having played several games with the FBP I wanted to ask what people think of the changes to the FRP's. I think the intent was ok but the execution leaves something to be desired. The time limits seem rather drastic/too long. I think that applying a blanket adjustment was the wrong way to go. OKW and Brits FRP are stationary while USF Major is a manuever unit. USF forward retreat point has to be supported with either and ambulance or halftrack to function. I just personally found the times too long overall on all FRP's and with the Major is just seems to detract so much that I stopped using it for FRP.

    I agree, shortening the time would make it much more bearable. I personally never toggle in on and off every several seconds though, that honestly sounds like something a 2v2 match would do. 60 seconds is a long time even in large maps; it's almost like Relic still is looking at this supposedly large teamgame patch from the perspective of a 1v1.

    As for execution, I don't think they need to be made "in line" with USF, in the same way you don't make kiddie wagons in line with SUV design and production. As you say, USF has the benefit of a T0 healing and reinforcement unit....plus doctrinal halftracks (two of them, I should say), and getting USF major isn't a side tech the way OKW and UKF's research are. If there's a problem with FRP, it's biggest culprit is USF, not the others- sure they come later, but they get the most benefit.
    On the UKF side I don't mind it requiring T4 to unlock, the British are a emplacement faction, and their usage of infantry will be rather small and not running forth in droves the way you expect from USF rifle blobs.
    OKW side, I don't agree with requiring another HQ truck first as it is too linear: IMO it would be better off if the FRP research simply costed fuel, so while you still have the fuel and strategic costs to consider, it does not require an HQ truck that you'd eventually have to deploy; with a fuel cost, you can either ignore it and try to tech up, or try for an FRP strategy but lose out on an early T4 truck, a strategy any smart opponent will figure out and try to exploit. In other words, my idea promotes diverse tactics and change in strategy that relies on finding out what your opponent is doing, whereas the current FBP implementation does not.

  • #324
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    I am glad to see that many people in the forums are beginning to see the sense that Panthers, Stugs and many other German units are constantly being bombed with nerfs.

    I sincerely support Orion's idea about giving OKW's sWS Half-tracks the ability to pack up and relocate (while I admit that I had this idea myself for many months). It simply does not make any sense for these half-tracks to remain stationary in one location for the entire duration of the game.

    Moreover, I cannot stop stressing the fact that German tanks were famous for their accuracy. For Panther tanks, they had both accuracy AND high rate of fire. The Panther needs a buff to its accuracy when stationary and its rate of fire. This of course should apply to both OKW and Wehrmacht Panthers.

  • #325
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121
    edited August 2017

    Also, I have one urgent fix request for the Fall Balance Preview Mod patch:

    • The Sd.Kfz.250 does NOT allow players to direct the infantry squad inside to attack specific targets. What I mean is, try putting a LMG Grenadier squad or a Panzergrenadier squad inside a SdKfz 250 half-track. Then when you have multiple enemies in sight, order the squad inside to attack a target of your choosing. It simply won't carry out your orders as it is busy attacking a target of its OWN choosing. Please look into this and allow us to control squads inside directly.

    (Needless to say, I lost many golden opportunities to destroy retreating enemy infantry units and vehicles.)

    Thank you.

  • #326
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017

    @Reichsgarde said:
    It simply does not make any sense for these half-tracks to remain stationary in one location for the entire duration of the game.

    Why? That removes any punishment for placing them aggressively. The meta for OWK needs to be moved away from relying on their trucks, not towards it.

    The cheesiest part of their meta is how much the rely on their FRP and Flak HQ (coming from a 2v2 perspective). Using them aggressively has a risk and reward, and tough break if you picked a bad spot.

  • #327
    2 years ago

    @SkysTheLimit ha detto:

    @Reichsgarde said:
    It simply does not make any sense for these half-tracks to remain stationary in one location for the entire duration of the game.

    Why? That removes any punishment for placing them aggressively. The meta for OWK needs to be moved away from relying on their trucks, not towards it.

    The cheesiest part of their meta is how much the rely on their FRP and Flak HQ (coming from a 2v2 perspective). Using them aggressively has a risk and reward, and tough break if you picked a bad spot.

    How is it cheese if it brings risks like losing tiers, can't choose targets and you can use tanks to draw fire since it does minimal damage even to t34 ?

  • #328
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited August 2017

    @Katitof said:

    @Vipper said:
    Su-76 need to has to follow stugs path (lower penetration higher XP value ) and FF and Su-85 have to follow JT path (lower accuracy).

    SU-76 already went that path, by having lower damage then StuG.
    They have performance not even close to each other.

    The Stug III's penetration went down in this patch while the SU-76 with longer range and higher penetration was not touched, so no, it did not go down that path.

    A SU-76 by vet 2 has allot more DPs than what you think.

  • #329
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    I also want to bring attention to how OP the US .50 cal machine gun is. Please look at tightrope's replay video here:

    Go to 15:10 and see how insanely quickly it sets up the 50 cal and have a very wide angle of fire. Plus, it has the Sprint ability. If this isn't OP, then I don't know what is.

    Also to people who disliked my post about the SdKfz 250 half-track, why are you disliking my post? I am pointing out a part of the game that requires an obvious fix. Just because you don't use the unit doesn't mean that it should remain broken.

  • #330
    2 years ago
    RiCERiCE Posts: 1,588
    edited August 2017

    @Katitof said:
    SU-76 already went that path, by having lower damage then StuG.
    They have performance not even close to each other.

    Sure. SU-75 is way better.

  • #331
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,621

    @Vipper said:

    @Katitof said:

    @Vipper said:
    Su-76 need to has to follow stugs path (lower penetration higher XP value ) and FF and Su-85 have to follow JT path (lower accuracy).

    SU-76 already went that path, by having lower damage then StuG.
    They have performance not even close to each other.

    The Stug III's penetration went down in this patch while the SU-76 with longer range and higher penetration was not touched, so no, it did not go down that path.

    A SU-76 by vet 2 has allot more DPs than what you think.

    StuG III was spammed to hell and back to counter all allied armor, SU-76 doesn't have that kind of presence in late game.

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.