Fall Balance Preview Feedback

1235716

Comments

  • #122
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    Except that ALL indirect fire has been nerfed, pit, calliope, isg, stuka....

    "Seems a fair compromise" lolololollolol

    Yes, because the stuka and ISG have such a massive impact on preventing allied medium wolf-packs from rushing an entrenched super-heavy.... oh wait, they have little real bearing when it comes to that match-up.

    Perhaps if you weren't so sore over OKW getting a nerf, you could remove the tin-foil hat and notice that toning down the over-the-top calliope, the mortar pits insane range and people massing priests by exploiting the crews population, means that there is alot less chance of every axis weapon team, mainline and mine between the allied mediums and the super-heavy td being vaporised in huge alpha strike barrages.

  • #123
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    @SAY_MY_NAME while i disagree about requiring 40+ kills to vet them (i know you meant it as hyperbole but in this case accuracy is important) i wouldnt be opposed to a vet rework, a smoke nade perhaps? (Maube the poison nade but grant them immunity at vet 1 instead of build speed?) Slightly more accessible vet is almost always something i can get behind (especially for the okw whom have many levels of rarely seen vet..) But something like THAT i think would need a toning down of sturms first (as in not able to wipe starting units on an ambush) maybe starting with g43s and upgrading to STGs? Or 2 stgs and somethin else?

    Anyways they TRULY are great units, if a bit micro heavy, but as ive said, im not by anymeans a pro and i frequently vet them relatively high...so its not undoable, its just a bit of work (well worth it imo)
  • #124
    2 years ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 693
    > @SAY_MY_NAME
    > Oorah does not make cons effective on open maps by default. There effective dps is even shorter ranged with ppsh's. Oorah doesnt negate supression and cons wont fire while sprinting. And only at vet 3 do cons have favorable recieved accuracy for this to be effective on open maps imho.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > This is what the game lacked, cheap infantry running and gunning with smg from 10 muni, ignoring suppression.
    > I used cons so much times i think i know how those works perfectly.
    >
    > They can cover distances in seconds----->are useless on open maps ?!?!?

    Did i suggest that they should be able to do that? And did i say they are useless with smg's? I didnt, i was talking about them being mostly situational on open maps with those smg's.

    Soviets are my main faction. Cons reley heavy on rng and doctrines to actualy shine. They are an rng mess in combat, all 6 models have almost 50% chance to miss at close range before vet 2. Sometimes they amaze me and decimate a squad in a volley but this is very very rare. Cons are okish at best without doctrines in combat. Sprint and merge almost cover for this.

    Its very hard to make a con heavy play work esp without doctrines.
  • #125
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    > @Farra13 ha detto:
    > @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    >
    > Except that ALL indirect fire has been nerfed, pit, calliope, isg, stuka....
    >
    > "Seems a fair compromise" lolololollolol
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Yes, because the stuka and ISG have such a massive impact on preventing allied medium wolf-packs from rushing an entrenched super-heavy.... oh wait, they have little real bearing when it comes to that match-up.
    >
    > Perhaps if you weren't so sore over OKW getting a nerf, you could remove the tin-foil hat and notice that toning down the over-the-top calliope, the mortar pits insane range and people massing priests by exploiting the crews population, means that there is alot less chance of every axis weapon team, mainline and mine between the allied mediums and the super-heavy td being vaporised in huge alpha strike barrages.
    Pit will still be over the top if any indirect fire from mortars to howies gets proportionally nerfed in range and barrage range.

    The general barrage range nerf is completely nonsense, I think nobody here asked fpr this except 2 modders.

    This has nothing to do with okw, alpha strike and team weapons...

    Making indirect fire unreliable is simply wrong.

    What people were asking for was less cheesy autofire for indirect fire to require effective microing.

    How nerfing pit, isg.. would increase team weapons durability ?
    If the problem was huge alpha strike why didn't they simply increase cooldowns/nerf stuff with potent alpha strike like pw/katy/land/calliOP...

    And how fixing a pop cap abuse is a nerf, or a matter of balance ?
    Pop cap abuse shouldn't even exist.

    If you weren't so happy to see broken td's in changelog you would see that, REGARDLESS of what happens to TD's, they are breaking down 80000 things that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with tank destroyers and team weapons.
  • #126
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    The general barrage range nerf is completely nonsense, I think nobody here asked fpr this except 2 modders.

    The barrage ranges were adjusted to follow the same curve as the autofire. Brit players will be building their pits further foward to make use of its autofire, putting them at further risk, the barrage nerf prevents units, like the ISG, from being able to basically sit at the headquarters sector and bomb them from relative safety.

    This has nothing to do with okw, alpha strike and team weapons...

    It has everything to do with team weapons. Reducing the autofire range of the brit mortar means it won't be bombing the crews from halfway across the map. Axis players won't have to be forced to endure such a high microtax every game, with having to move their support weapons continuously to avoid being wiped by a unit their UKF opponent isn't even adding any input to.

    Making indirect fire unreliable is simply wrong.

    They aren't making indirect unreliable.... they are returning it to its original role, area denial. Its supposed to force units to reposition or risk being severly wounded/killed, not a tool for cleaning a 10x10 square of the map of everything without a minimum of 30mm of steel between them and the shells/rockets.

    What people were asking for was less cheesy autofire for indirect fire to require effective microing.

    Which is what they have, both the ISG and Pit were a ball ache as they could be sat inside a safezone - Bofors/med-truck. and use their massive range autofire to just constantly barrage the enemy. Now both will require player input to be effective, either through careful positioning to take advantage of their shorter range autofire, or by constant adjustments of barrages from a safer distance.

    How nerfing pit, isg.. would increase team weapons durability ?

    As explained, they won't constantly being wiping vetted crews with continous autofire. Its obscene to expect even the best players to keep their weapon teams constantly moving to avoid indirect at all times of the game.

    If the problem was huge alpha strike why didn't they simply increase cooldowns/nerf stuff with potent alpha strike like pw/katy/land/calliOP...

    They did.... P-werfer lost its supression, so infantry could escape the bombardment easier. Calliope had its initial barrage toned way down, Katy is absolutely fine and can only alpha strike if its driven up face to face with its target and LM has already been succesfully nerfed.

    And how fixing a pop cap abuse is a nerf, or a matter of balance ?
    Pop cap abuse shouldn't even exist.

    Your right, it shouldn't. But a big thing in teamgames was stacking priests, purchasing them and then disembarking the crews while the barrage was on cd, since the crew is only something like 5 pop? You could end up with 5-6 priests and a full army.

    If you weren't so happy to see broken td's in changelog you would see that, REGARDLESS of what happens to TD's, they are breaking down 80000 things that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with tank destroyers and team weapons.

    I have zero idea what your implying here, the patch isn't solely dedicated to handling the td balance. And nerfs to indirect fire units have a massive knock on effect when it come to team weapons. As that is their damn counter!

  • #127
    2 years ago
    newshatterhandnewshatte… Posts: 278
    edited July 2017

    Sturmpioneer veterancy

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    The vet requirements are totally off, it asks like 40+ kills or something to get vet 2 to the first combat bonuses, absolutely not viable.

    While this is a bit of a hyperbole, I too think that sturm vetting takes a bit too much effort. Their requirements to vet up should be decreased slightly.
    Apart from the requirements another thing that makes sturms hard to vet, is that sturms get a lot of tasks that do not provide them veterancy. Maybe repairing could also provide vet? Could be done for the other factions too.

    Hetzer nerf unjustified
    I think there is no justification to make the hetzer more expensive, it is pretty bad already. Also hetzers vet is really hard to obtain, it must vet faster.

  • #128
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798

    Hey Relic, when are you guys going to consider looking at the disparity of unit efficiency between EFA and WFA armies. And nerfing WFA repair times. I think that would be a higher priority than looking at marginal units that only team games use such as super heavy TDs. Or the fact that WFA teching is hassle free and doesn't require much clicking. And doesn't occupy a builder squad for every goddamn time you need to build a base building. And the fact that EFA mainlines are borderline unusable or cost inefficient.

  • #129
    2 years ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468
    edited July 2017

    There's no point in this possible update if major issues we've been discussing in the balance section are going to be left completely ignored.

    Best example, giving the jackson more health and a MINUSCULE decrease in range. It's not a tank. Stop trying to turn a golf ball into a soccer ball. The game is set. I'm convinced you're not trying to balance the game...you're trying to make it more CONVENIENT for people to play easy-mode and bash through anything.

    Also
    Lowering the potency of mega fixed TD's like the elephant isnt a balance change. It's hand-holding; which removes tension and excitement from a game. They do not one shot tanks, they never have. Their speed and low rof justifies the units performance. They are currently easily flanked and destroyed. YOU ARE CATERING to low level players who sit in large games and STARE at each while selecting only one unit at a time to move forward, and you know it.

    Giving the tiger more speed??? No...stop trying to fix things that arent broken. The tiger has a built in speed boost. You could just adjust the is2 and pershing. The IS2 overperforms in armor and the persh in damage. These are units whos stats levels need to be adjusted, not the tiger.

    Furthermore sticky satchels are nukes to the nth degree. They reduce p4's to nearly half-health in one press of a button, its suppose to be unreliable. Making them sound auto lock-on, is an extremely overperforming ability.

  • #130
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798

    +1 to eonfigure's post . This game is turning allies into easymode ever since the introduction of the USF mortar which by the way was hardly nerfed. It still has the best stock accuracy at vet 0 and still snipes infantry and team weapons alike more frequently than any other mortar in the game. So can USF lose the rifle smoke if it gets mortar smoke? USF has always been the favorite of beginners as its the least punishing faction to play as. Caught in an mg, don't worry throw smoke. Didn't have a flanking unit? Throw smoke. What is the point of an mg if a single unit can just walk into into arc of fire and just render it useless? A carefully placed mg rendered useless by a braindead riflemen maneuver. The whole point of nerfing the USF mortar range is so that counter mgs acutally requires you to pay attention to whether or not you keep the mortar within supporting range. But if riflesmoke is still in the game then USF can just overpower any defensive position in the early game with smoke spam.

    And about the jackson getting those changes, news flash, the jackson is already "easy mode" tank destroyer. It already has self spot without speed penalty. Where is my stug self-spot? Even the doctrinal spotting scopes require it to be stationary. Self spot was made avaliable for the jackson due to its fragility and that everyone knows USF players have difficulty with the term "glass cannon" and "infantry screen required"

    Then the penal buffs basically told all soviet players: hey guys, you can forget conscripts, just use penals as mainlines and now you can play like usf but with more variety of support weapons and armor.

    Meanwhile Relic nerfs several skill units into the ground. The sniper is too easy to kill now. I've had zero problems with them. Just some random small arms fire and the sniper drops like a fly and I heard the re-enter camoflage nerf was just due to one person having a grudge against a player who was very good at using them, I believe it was because the player, Captain S Price was too good with the sniper and so it was nerfed. Sounds pathetic but its true. 222 is now only cost effective vs the m20 and universal carrier. After nerfing its near AOE, it's useless vs infantry. It'll take forever to kill a squad, and you can just ignore the 222. The only way to make it effective is to try to erase units on retreat and even that is a long chase sometimes. And now the Stug is getting a pop increase to 10?! It's one of the hardest pieces of medium armor to use in the game due to its severe limitations. You need a pair for it to be effective and it can't do anything vs infantry.

  • #131
    2 years ago
    SquishyMuffinSquishyMu… Posts: 434
    edited July 2017
    At the risk of this thread being a general affairs balance thread, can more people give opinions on specific units in this current iteration?

    For example, thoughts on new KV1? I don't think it needs to double buff the extra health and hulldown - with current Wehr Panther it does too good a job soaking up time and effort imo. Hulldown alone should be enough? For authenticity sake? There's a reason why T-34's replaced them.
  • #132
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257

    @eonfigure ha detto:
    There's no point in this possible update if major issues we've been discussing in the balance section are going to be left completely ignored.

    Best example, giving the jackson more health and a MINUSCULE decrease in range. It's not a tank. Stop trying to turn a golf ball into a soccer ball. The game is set. I'm convinced you're not trying to balance the game...you're trying to make it more CONVENIENT for people to play easy-mode and bash through anything.

    Also
    Lowering the potency of mega fixed TD's like the elephant isnt a balance change. It's hand-holding; which removes tension and excitement from a game. They do not one shot tanks, they never have. Their speed and low rof justifies the units performance. They are currently easily flanked and destroyed. YOU ARE CATERING to low level players who sit in large games and STARE at each while selecting only one unit at a time to move forward, and you know it.

    Giving the tiger more speed??? No...stop trying to fix things that arent broken. The tiger has a built in speed boost. You could just adjust the is2 and pershing. The IS2 overperforms in armor and the persh in damage. These are units whos stats levels need to be adjusted, not the tiger.

    Furthermore sticky satchels are nukes to the nth degree. They reduce p4's to nearly half-health in one press of a button, its suppose to be unreliable. Making them sound auto lock-on, is an extremely overperforming ability.

    This is soooooo true, all you said.
    They are watering down the gameplay, this is pretty much clear.

    The Satchel problem is strange.
    Penals were supposed to get something to counter the luchs/222 tier 1 dominancy.
    Instead they have a satchel they will hardly manage to ever use against light vehicles, while being extremely powerful against axis slow mediums.

  • #133
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    @1ncendiary_Rounds the bit about penals saying "forget about conscripts" bit i strongly disagree with. Conscripts say forget about conscripts. For 10mp less than volks you get ~1/2 the unit + requirement of mp heavy side teching to make them even that 1/2. Against wehr they were viable but they have no hope against OKW. Since the begining of the faction cons have been a joke, thats why maxim spam, thats why no elite troop doctrines were worthless, thats why we now have penal spam... They are a utility troop whos utility is extra, they are a "mainline troop" who can only compete with doctrinal assistance....cons are what keep the soviet from doing ANYTHING they can to not use them (seriously, every meta for the soviet since the dawn of time was cheese based on avoiding them like the plague...)
  • #134
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    @SAY_MY_NAME while i disagree about requiring 40+ kills to vet them (i know you meant it as hyperbole but in this case accuracy is important) i wouldnt be opposed to a vet rework, a smoke nade perhaps? (Maube the poison nade but grant them immunity at vet 1 instead of build speed?) Slightly more accessible vet is almost always something i can get behind (especially for the okw whom have many levels of rarely seen vet..) But something like THAT i think would need a toning down of sturms first (as in not able to wipe starting units on an ambush) maybe starting with g43s and upgrading to STGs? Or 2 stgs and somethin else?

    Anyways they TRULY are great units, if a bit micro heavy, but as ive said, im not by anymeans a pro and i frequently vet them relatively high...so its not undoable, its just a bit of work (well worth it imo)

    Honestly, one thing is vetting them with shrecks, and i think you are referring in vetting them easily with those.
    As much as it's true 40+ it's hyperbole, i went to 30-34 kills and still were vet1.
    At some point in that match, perfectly ambushed rifles with 1 bar and vet1 could force them off trading IN POSITIVE with one models lost for three models killed.

    Why nerfing them like that, they are supposed to be CQ units, it's about adjusting vet requirements, not buffing them...?
    Early game without sturm...sturming ??!?

    Being micro heavy is not a problem, generally early game sturm and all game panzergrens can d a great job if well used in combination with mainlines.

  • #135
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @Farra13 ha detto:

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    The general barrage range nerf is completely nonsense, I think nobody here asked fpr this except 2 modders.

    The barrage ranges were adjusted to follow the same curve as the autofire. Brit players will be building their pits further foward to make use of its autofire, putting them at further risk, the barrage nerf prevents units, like the ISG, from being able to basically sit at the headquarters sector and bomb them from relative safety.

    This has nothing to do with okw, alpha strike and team weapons...

    It has everything to do with team weapons. Reducing the autofire range of the brit mortar means it won't be bombing the crews from halfway across the map. Axis players won't have to be forced to endure such a high microtax every game, with having to move their support weapons continuously to avoid being wiped by a unit their UKF opponent isn't even adding any input to.

    Making indirect fire unreliable is simply wrong.

    They aren't making indirect unreliable.... they are returning it to its original role, area denial. Its supposed to force units to reposition or risk being severly wounded/killed, not a tool for cleaning a 10x10 square of the map of everything without a minimum of 30mm of steel between them and the shells/rockets.

    What people were asking for was less cheesy autofire for indirect fire to require effective microing.

    Which is what they have, both the ISG and Pit were a ball ache as they could be sat inside a safezone - Bofors/med-truck. and use their massive range autofire to just constantly barrage the enemy. Now both will require player input to be effective, either through careful positioning to take advantage of their shorter range autofire, or by constant adjustments of barrages from a safer distance.

    How nerfing pit, isg.. would increase team weapons durability ?

    As explained, they won't constantly being wiping vetted crews with continous autofire. Its obscene to expect even the best players to keep their weapon teams constantly moving to avoid indirect at all times of the game.

    If the problem was huge alpha strike why didn't they simply increase cooldowns/nerf stuff with potent alpha strike like pw/katy/land/calliOP...

    They did.... P-werfer lost its supression, so infantry could escape the bombardment easier. Calliope had its initial barrage toned way down, Katy is absolutely fine and can only alpha strike if its driven up face to face with its target and LM has already been succesfully nerfed.

    And how fixing a pop cap abuse is a nerf, or a matter of balance ?
    Pop cap abuse shouldn't even exist.

    Your right, it shouldn't. But a big thing in teamgames was stacking priests, purchasing them and then disembarking the crews while the barrage was on cd, since the crew is only something like 5 pop? You could end up with 5-6 priests and a full army.

    If you weren't so happy to see broken td's in changelog you would see that, REGARDLESS of what happens to TD's, they are breaking down 80000 things that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with tank destroyers and team weapons.

    I have zero idea what your implying here, the patch isn't solely dedicated to handling the td balance. And nerfs to indirect fire units have a massive knock on effect when it come to team weapons. As that is their damn counter!

    "As explained, they won't constantly being wiping vetted crews with continous autofire. Its obscene to expect even the best players to keep their weapon teams constantly moving to avoid indirect at all times of the game."

    "It has everything to do with team weapons. Reducing the autofire range of the brit mortar means it won't be bombing the crews from halfway across the map. Axis players won't have to be forced to endure such a high microtax every game, with having to move their support weapons continuously to avoid being wiped by a unit their UKF opponent isn't even adding any input to."

    Fine, but what's the problem of the barrage ?
    The barrage requires micro, hit a specific position and a caring player can honestly always move away his team weapons before wipe.
    The autofire could target everywhere troops moving around, that was the problem...barrage have nothing to do.

    "I have zero idea what your implying here, the patch isn't solely dedicated to handling the td balance. And nerfs to indirect fire units have a massive knock on effect when it come to team weapons. As that is their damn counter!

    YEP, sooo team weapons spam new meta ?
    They are playing with fire, if they don't nail well the indirect fire/tea weapons balance (and they won't...), game balance will go back to the stone age.

  • #136
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @newshatterhand ha detto:
    Sturmpioneer veterancy

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    The vet requirements are totally off, it asks like 40+ kills or something to get vet 2 to the first combat bonuses, absolutely not viable.

    While this is a bit of a hyperbole, I too think that sturm vetting takes a bit too much effort. Their requirements to vet up should be decreased slightly.
    Apart from the requirements another thing that makes sturms hard to vet, is that sturms get a lot of tasks that do not provide them veterancy. Maybe repairing could also provide vet? Could be done for the other factions too.

    Hetzer nerf unjustified
    I think there is no justification to make the hetzer more expensive, it is pretty bad already. Also hetzers vet is really hard to obtain, it must vet faster.

    I think this way would be too OP.
    It's ok if they fix stg kills vetting, so if you invest on sturm early game AND USE THEM RIGHT, those can be your panzergrens even for mid lategame.
    Thing is, they just need help reaching vetting bonuses that will make already sturm pretty good in CQB.
    And maybe nerf shreck xp nerf, so they won't become generals because they scratched the paint of a sherman.

  • #137
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257

    @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    @1ncendiary_Rounds the bit about penals saying "forget about conscripts" bit i strongly disagree with. Conscripts say forget about conscripts. For 10mp less than volks you get ~1/2 the unit + requirement of mp heavy side teching to make them even that 1/2. Against wehr they were viable but they have no hope against OKW. Since the begining of the faction cons have been a joke, thats why maxim spam, thats why no elite troop doctrines were worthless, thats why we now have penal spam... They are a utility troop whos utility is extra, they are a "mainline troop" who can only compete with doctrinal assistance....cons are what keep the soviet from doing ANYTHING they can to not use them (seriously, every meta for the soviet since the dawn of time was cheese based on avoiding them like the plague...)

    Cons are perfectly fine, they get a whole tier of team weapons that perfectly work with their utilities, a ppsh upgrade (yeah doctrinal but so much doctrines have it...) that eat stg volks in cqb, vet 3 bonuses extremely solid compared to basically IS, volks and rifles, like 40%+ accuracy (which basically fix the dps of ppsh and mosin nagant) and -40%RA.

    Most people spam penals just because it's the easiest way, they counter everything with a rifle with basically no moving accuracy penalty and an handheld sticky nuke.

    As i said, SU has that much doctrines with cons upgrades that we can't even consider doctrinal ppsh.

  • #138
    2 years ago
    Selvy289Selvy289 Posts: 172
    edited July 2017
    So...how many people have actually played this balance patch yet? I don't think really anyone has here, it's getting very close to be just borderline whinging.

    Ostheer

    The tiger

    Speed boost is very nice, blitz makes it go almost to fast on roads but I'll say considering the Is2 (being it's counterpart) vet change it's fine.

    Elefant

    I hate fighting this in team games but also love it (when I'm using it) I do have my worries through. This come from the potency of the stug, considering the damage nerf and the price premium, stugs come out earlier alloeing them to vet that can out dps the elefant. Elefant needs a little help (maby give it some more rotation and acceleration/deceleration, allow it to have a better chance to respond to flanks like the tiger).

    StugG

    Still be spammed, still going to out shine panther and now the elefant. I know the obvious issue about the performance and availability of the panther but the stug is another obvious issue.

    StugE

    More or less, I don't really care about this change (Considering it's already an anti infantry vehicle).

    Ostwind

    Is a beast against infantry and demolish aircraft. I don't know if it's too effective through but I do lean that way.

    Soviet

    Is2

    Like the new vet one ability, I would like it's accuracy improves lightly through, at lease on the move but overall it's alright.

    ISU

    Maybe it's just me but the scatter is quite large and considering this is only for he rounds I can understand to avoid squad wipes (if it's get a hit through, yeah especially with the decreased scatter vet). Concrete rounds are finely good, just wish it had some deflection damage with so rounds (not to the extent of the unofficial mod through).

    Kv2

    So having really seen much improvement (or none at all).
    What can be done is removing the sight penalty when entering/exiting siege mode and give it the vet one bonus in the unofficial mod to enter/exit siege mode faster. Personally I would love a vet 3 reload speed bonus of siege mode (I feel that's a fitting reward, one can dream).

    Kv8

    Not much to say here

    Kv1

    This is an interesting one. The kv1 needed a health buff and it's vet change (also being fitting) I like it, but that does give the kv1 a butload of health.

    M4C

    Errr....im not sure about this. Its not as good as the T3485 yet cost more. Having a little mount to tackle aircraft dose not do it any justice. I would prefer the t3476.

    Penals

    Good nerf. Not to harsh and not to gental iver. Overall good change.

    Maxim

    IT'S ALIVE! A decent support weapon now. Good job.

    That's it, I having tried the Duska yet but I here it's traceing speed is too low. I having tried anything else.

    P.s about the jagtiger, being almost immovable should be it's disadvantage. Granted it's range was way to much but should retain having the most of any vehicle so if a flack is pulled of should be rewarded.

    One last thing and I said this on the .org (might effect team games) but the expert AI was able to build M4C shermans BEFOR mechanized was built. I don't have the replay.
  • #139
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    Really, the only obvious thing I find might need an adjustment is the Ostwind. Its gone from being a rng beast to an automated infantry killing machine, I think it might need some adjustments to scatter as currently it just murders anything on foot obscenely quick.

  • #140
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited July 2017

    @Farra13 said:
    ...
    The Calliope and the Priest have both been effectively nerfed.

    Actually Priest and ML20 received a massive buff at mid AOE and currently have around x125% larger kill radius than LeFH.

  • #141
    2 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343
    edited July 2017

    @Vipper said:

    @Farra13 said:
    ...
    The Calliope and the Priest have both been effectively nerfed.

    Actually Priest and ML20 received a massive buff at mid AOE and currently have around x125 larger kill radius than LeFH.

    Can you show us how you calculated this number?

    Could you also repeat the same calculation steps for live-version ML-20 vs LeFH?

    Are you also aware that the LeFH fires 10 shells compared to 8 shells from ML-20, and faster?

  • #142
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited July 2017

    Can you show us how you calculated this number?

    Could you also repeat the same calculation steps for live-version ML-20 vs LeFH?

    Are you also aware that the LeFH fires 10 shells compared to 8 shells from ML-20, and faster?

    Priest and ML-20 do 200 damage while LeFH does 160 both since they have the same AOE near mid far values and to the same damage at mid range Priest and Ml20 have a bigger radius where they do 80 damage and kill full health infantries. Kill radius is more important than mid damage. One could reduce the close range to that ML20 and Priest to do 160 at AOE range 2. Then that gun would be more similar.

    In addition ML-20 get 2 extra shell for vet 1 (and has more range and damage).

    ML-20 is quite an effective unit in live if one's opponent does not have an off map counter.

  • #143
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @Vipper said:

    The Calliope and the Priest have both been effectively nerfed.

    Being unable to stack priests by abusing the crew population is a significant nerf for teamgames.

  • #145
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257

    @Farra13 ha detto:

    @Vipper said:

    The Calliope and the Priest have both been effectively nerfed.

    Being unable to stack priests by abusing the crew population is a significant nerf for teamgames.

    It's not a nerf, it's a fix.

  • #146
    2 years ago
    TheFalconTheFalcon Posts: 10
    edited July 2017

    17 Pounder has too much utility to lower pop on it.
    It's crew is immune to being killed like sniping and artillery, it can brace, it can fire Concrete Piercing rounds at Vet 1. It should stay where it is.

  • #147
    2 years ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    > @TheFalcon ha detto:
    > 17 Pounder has too much utility to lower pop on it.
    > It's crew is immune to being killed like sniping and artillery, it can brace, it can fire Concrete Piercing rounds at Vet 1. It should stay where it is.

    For some reason pak 43 is still decrewable tho......
  • #148
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,640

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    > @TheFalcon ha detto:
    > 17 Pounder has too much utility to lower pop on it.
    > It's crew is immune to being killed like sniping and artillery, it can brace, it can fire Concrete Piercing rounds at Vet 1. It should stay where it is.

    For some reason pak 43 is still decrewable tho......

    I wonder if its because 17 Pounder costs massive amount of fuel AND menpower while PaK43 is MP only and there is no armored non arty unit that outranges it.

  • #149
    2 years ago

    The pack howitzer can still use some love like reducing pop and improving vet that increases salvos.
    11 is too much, hell 3+ and it turns into a artillery. Althought vet 3 decreases the ability cooldown 3 salvos is a bit low compared to others.

  • #150
    2 years ago
    company14u2company14… Posts: 572

    @Farra13 said:
    Really, the only obvious thing I find might need an adjustment is the Ostwind. Its gone from being a rng beast to an automated infantry killing machine, I think it might need some adjustments to scatter as currently it just murders anything on foot obscenely quick.

    Hmmm...
    The ostwind might be too good against infantry clumped up in yellow cover, but it performs just a tiny bit better than the mg upgraded panzer 4(I guess people forget how much of a beast the p4 is against infantry). I would still pay an extra 25 fuel to have a p4, unless they have a lot of air abilities. I did my comparison while both tanks were standing completely still. I have no idea if the ostwind is better on the move, and I did not test the vet stats of either tanks vs infantry. Before the fbp change, the p4 was better in both anti-infantry and ant-vehicle.

  • #151
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited July 2017

    @Mr_Smith said:

    0.28 * 200 (ML-20) = 0.35 * 160 (LeFH)

    You are actually mistaken, the damage at radius 4 (mid) might be the same but kill radius (80+) is actually bigger.

    The radius that ML-20 does above 80 damage in the FBP (if mid aoe is radius is 4 not home and can not check) is 3.66 while for the LeFH 3.3.

    Even if kill radius was exactly same, fact that most axis units are smaller that makes ML-20 far better at wiping out squads than LeFH.

    If one wants to actually make the AOE more equal, one has to reduce near AOE also so that both guns to 160 damage at radius 2.

    Both guns are die easilly to off maps, ML-20 does more damage, has more range and by vet 1 it fires 2 more shells. LeFH is heardly more cost efficient that ML-20 in live.

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.