Fall Balance Preview Feedback

13468916

Comments

  • #152
    1 year ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 684
    > @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    > 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.

    Penals will get fire on the move adjustments in the fall patch. And their hand nuke gives plenty time to react unlike the bundle grenade.

    If cons were perfectly fine and viable or only with the support of team weapons they would be used a lot more would they not?

    Cons lack dps,range,non doc upgrade, require specific side tech for basic utilities. Only merge,oraah, and 80hp extra (with worst rec acc) give them some use.
    They get 40% acc bonus. It just allows cons to get close to the basic vet0 stats from other min 1 squads while those squads get the same acc buffs or more and all of them have a non doc upgrade. This in turn makes the 40% rec bonus a neccecity. The fact that they require doctrines just to compete should tell you that they are not perfectly fine.
  • #153
    1 year ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343
    edited July 2017

    @Vipper said:

    @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.

    1. I know it's bigger, but you're just blowing it out of proportion by making claims that "it's 125%" bigger. So, that's why I asked for the number.

    So, once again, the comparison between LeFH and ML-20 are:

    LeFH advantages:

    • Always wins in an ML-20 vs LeFH fight
    • Fires faster
    • Fires more shots (10 v 8)
    • Gets counterbarrage

    ML-20 advantages:

    • Deals more damage (200 vs 160) on a direct hit
    • Slighly bigger one-hit-kill radius (in the mod; not in live)
    1. If you disagree with the value we put for the mid AoE (0.28), what value would you pick for the AoE to make ML-20 fair towards LeFH?
  • #154
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    @SAY_MY_NAME they are useful if you pick the right doctrine is a bad line of reasoning. They are supposed to be the backbone of your army, if they can only be that by picking 1 of 4(?) Commanders out of something like 20...well thats just not acceptable. Imagine how grens would do if they didnt have the lmg42? If they HAD to pick a g43 commander to stand up to the guaranteed mulit equiped rifles/tommies that already beat the snot out of them without upgrades? Would that be acceptable? Absolutely not.

    Also i can tell you for fact my vetting up sturms has nothing to do with the shrek because i dont use shreks on the regular, its actually very rare that i do. They are more useful to me without them
  • #155
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited July 2017

    @Mr_Smith said:
    1. I know it's bigger, but you're just blowing it out of proportion by making claims that "it's 125%" bigger. So, that's why I asked for the number.

    Ok its x111% better while firing at smaller squads...(as I said I am not home I dont have full access to data).

    So, once again, the comparison between LeFH and ML-20 are:

    LeFH advantages:

    • Always wins in an ML-20 vs LeFH fight

    While the Priest who receives a similar buff always win vs LeFH

    • Fires faster
    • Fires more shots (10 v 8)

    By vet 1 ML-20 also get 10 shots. Number of shots is rather situational since only the first 2-3 rounds are affective against targets that can move or emplacements that can brace. On static targets barrage from both gun will do the same damage if the land within 2 unis of the target.

    • Gets counterbarrage

    That is simply a bit less micro any player can use the gun to counter barrage since it is identical to normal barrage (if remember correctly maybe it does more damage?)

    ML-20 advantages:

    • Deals more damage (200 vs 160) on a direct hit

    Deal more damage up to range 3.99 (in FBP)

    • Slighly bigger one-hit-kill radius (in the mod; not in live)

    111% more kill radius while firing on smaller squads. In live the ML-20 kill radius is actually bigger the LeFH at 3.41.

    1. If you disagree with the value we put for the mid AoE (0.28), what value would you pick for the AoE to make ML-20 fair towards LeFH?

    Depends what you want. Imo Kill radius it far more important that mid range damage. You should try to much kill radius and not mid damage. As I have explained that can be achieved by changing near radius, mid AOE or both. You should probably adjust both.

    Anyway in this stage of balance a change of 15->28 (x186%) seems huge. I would probably start from 120%-130% (wouldn't try above x150% unless I was sure).

    (some numbers might be off since I don't have access to data now)

  • #156
    1 year ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    If you are going to increase the population cost for the Stug III G from 8 to 10, please do the same for the SU-76. The SU-76 (a dual AT/Artillery gun) is very flexible while the Stug III G is just a tank destroyer. Unless the Stug III G got a buff (artillery mode for instance + general stats boost), I don't know why you should increase the pop cost to 10.

  • #157
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778

    @Vipper said:

    • Gets counterbarrage

    That is simply a bit less micro any player can use the gun to counter barrage since it is identical to normal barrage (if remeber correctly)

    iirc counter battery gives increased range (and so if its already in range would grant tighter scatter.) additionally, i think counter batt is somewhat under rated, especially for ost who (i feel) due to their small squad sizes and underwhelming armour need all the micro they can spare..

    perhaps buffing the cooldown on counter batt so its ready to fire more often than a regular barrage might be a neat buff

  • #158
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited July 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    iirc counter battery gives increased range (and so if its already in range would grant tighter scatter.) additionally, i think counter batt is somewhat under rated, especially for ost who (i feel) due to their small squad sizes and underwhelming armour need all the micro they can spare..

    perhaps buffing the cooldown on counter batt so its ready to fire more often than a regular barrage might be a neat buff

    Ranges is the same for LeFH (it increases for moratr and wefer). Range forthe LeFH increases only from officer barrage.

    It might increase damage but it a bit dificult to check now.

    If I was to touch counter barrage I would reduce number of shots and then reduce the cooldown.

  • #159
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778

    @Vipper said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    iirc counter battery gives increased range (and so if its already in range would grant tighter scatter.) additionally, i think counter batt is somewhat under rated, especially for ost who (i feel) due to their small squad sizes and underwhelming armour need all the micro they can spare..

    perhaps buffing the cooldown on counter batt so its ready to fire more often than a regular barrage might be a neat buff

    Ranges is the same. Ranges increases only from officer barrage.

    It might increase damage but it a bit dificult to check now.

    If I was t touch counter barrage I would reduce number of shots and then reduce the cooldown.

    REALLY?!?
    everything i know is wrong....

    tighter scatter, fewer shells, smaller cooldown, longer range but maybe require facing it in a direction first (instead of auto rotate?) to keep it balanced might be aight

  • #160
    1 year ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    @Vipper said:
    If I was t touch counter barrage I would reduce number of shots and then reduce the cooldown.

    I was about to suggest the same thing. You could probably apply it to the werfer and the normal mortar as well

  • #161
    1 year ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 417
    edited July 2017

    @Vipper said:

    @Mr_Smith said:
    1. I know it's bigger, but you're just blowing it out of proportion by making claims that "it's 125%" bigger. So, that's why I asked for the number.

    Ok its x111% better while firing at smaller squads...(as I said I am not home I dont have full access to data).

    @Vipper said:

    • Slighly bigger one-hit-kill radius (in the mod; not in live)

    111% more kill radius while firing on smaller squads. In live the ML-20 kill radius is actually bigger the LeFH at 3.41.

    Just to say it's not 111%, just ~11% (3.3+((3.3*11)/100)=3.3x1.11=~3.66 or the other way ((3.66/3.3)-1)=~0.11 ) for the second quote whereas the first quote is correct but a bit misleading putted this way.

  • #162
    1 year ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @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...)

    I agree 100% with what you said but the solution is not giving soviets master of hipfire penals but nerfing volks. I'm sick of everything on the allies being measured up to OKW standards and completely forgetting that there is another axis faction. Just like how all allied TDs are given the penentration with KT as benchmarks. Axis mediums' (especially Ost mediums) armor might as well be swiss cheese. Grens are just as trash as cons but where is Ostheer's tier 1 300mp pgrens? Especially when Ost faces up against riflemen and IS which are vastly superior, now penals are far more commonly used, it means ost has the worst infantry and has to deal with superior infantry from all 3 factions which is a huge liability. Yes there is an mg42 but it can't be everywhere.

  • #163
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    @1ncendiary_Rounds i fully agree. Vanillan EFA werw balanced (penals left alot to be desired, but a munitons cost to be what they ARE or just the ptrs would have been nice (@vipper you were right, penals are too strong, i see that now and im not afraid to admit you are right)) but without penals AND current cons, soviet are at the mercy of the okw. Unfortunately brits even out match okw so relic needs to move away from "its new, it costs money so it has to be the best!" And return to trade offs and counters like EFA had...

    Basicly i agree penals need a nerf, but cons need a viability buff that isnt just "hey lets make them bulletproof at bet 3 so people stop bitching" want a gpod direction (they can buy success with their deaths so lets make them not die!)
  • #164
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited July 2017

    @vipper you were right, penals are too strong, i see that now and im not afraid to admit you are right
    One being able to admit his mistakes is a true virtue.

    Penal have been nerfed in every patch since June 21 patch but that has not proven enough due to the fact that original problem with them has not been fixed.

    They are simply too strong for their time frame. In addition they weapon fire very fast and are quite accurate and thus they can kill retreating squads very easily.

    If one to keep them as they in their current roles I would suggest lowering price to 280-260 and have them spawn with worse weapons but have weapon upgrades available to them. That would lower their initial punch but allow them to keep up.

    Basicly i agree penals need a nerf, but cons need a viability buff that isnt just "hey lets make them bulletproof at bet 3 so people stop bitching" want a gpod direction (they can buy success with their deaths so lets make them not die!)

    I would start by nerfing VG and their ST44 upgrade since the problem since to derive from OKW and less from cons themselves.

  • #165
    1 year ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 684
    @thedarkarmadillo @1ncendiary_Rounds
    In the fall patch the penals are again in scope. The on the move rof is being toned down, i hope this patch will do it. I cant remember wich patch it was but the su76 seems to become less effective vs heavies as well. Giving it a defined role.

    I could counter argue where is soviets non doc upgrade for cons or t0 mg. But i wont factions need to be different in some ways. I agree the grens are in a simaler sitiuation as cons. However at least grens can always look down on cons. It appears gren spam can beat early rifleplay esp when supported with a halftrack. Cons cannot hope to do the same vs okw even with a halftrack. The effective range/dps of cons is just to low to pull it off.

    I agree that wf inf are to good and need a nerf. However okw and brits can either bolster the their sqauds or have more/better non doc inf in the line up also with acces to upgrades. Since rifles have to carry the faction unlike the rest imo they should be left mostly as is.
  • #166
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited July 2017

    17 Pounder ATG Nest
    The population of the 17 Pounder has been adjusted to better reflect its value and match its counterpart, the Pak 43.
    • Population from 20 to 14.

    Imo Pak43 should not be considered as benchmark for 17p for a number of reasons.

    Having that said lowering population is a good change as long as there are other measures taken to prevent people from spamming this emplacement.

    Imo the unit comes way to early even before medium tanks hit the field. Its arrival should be delayed locking behind anvil/hammer or even giving it separated tech cost.

    I would even go so far at to have 17p available exclusively for anvil and tulips or tank commanders exclusively to hammer.

    Centaur AA Tank
    Cover changes seem in the right direction (have not been able to test them) but with changes maybe the unit could receive some improvement to mobility and especially to acceleration (maybe top speed to 5?)

    Maybe reduce damage vs puma or penetration.

    Ostwind
    • Projectile no longer collides with landscape or terrain.

    This is a great change but if I remember correctly other units suffer from the same affect like Sherman HE, Sherman Dozer and OKW flak emplacements.

  • #167
    1 year ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 684
    edited July 2017
    > @Vipper said:
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    >
    > Penal have been nerfed in every patch since June 21 patch but that has not proven enough due to the fact that original problem with them has not been fixed.
    >
    > They are simply too strong for their time frame. In addition they weapon fire very fast and are quite accurate and thus they can kill retreating squads very easily.
    >
    > If one to keep them as they in their current roles I would suggest lowering price to 280-260 and have them spawn with worse weapons but have weapon upgrades available to them. That would lower their initial punch but allow them to keep up.

    I like that. Its the redeeming factor to wich they have at vet 0 now. They should get the upgrades through vet or muni based with tech. Either 6xsvt as now for agressive play or 2 dp-28s for stand off engagements with the button ability blocking out or sharing cd with satchels. This last bit depends if one can choose these or only one upgrade will bevailable.

    > Basicly i agree penals need a nerf, but cons need a viability buff that isnt just "hey lets make them bulletproof at bet 3 so people stop bitching" want a gpod direction (they can buy success with their deaths so lets make them not die!)
    >
    > I would start by nerfing VG and their ST44 upgrade since the problem since to derive from OKW and less from cons themselves.

    I would try take aim as the cons vet ability at vet 2 instead of trip wire. To give them some timed longe range fire power with vet. This would go well with their sandbags and compensate the lack of non doc upgrades.
  • #168
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017
    > @TheLeveler83 ha detto:
    > > @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    > > 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.
    >
    > Penals will get fire on the move adjustments in the fall patch. And their hand nuke gives plenty time to react unlike the bundle grenade.
    >
    > If cons were perfectly fine and viable or only with the support of team weapons they would be used a lot more would they not?
    >
    > Cons lack dps,range,non doc upgrade, require specific side tech for basic utilities. Only merge,oraah, and 80hp extra (with worst rec acc) give them some use.
    > They get 40% acc bonus. It just allows cons to get close to the basic vet0 stats from other min 1 squads while those squads get the same acc buffs or more and all of them have a non doc upgrade. This in turn makes the 40% rec bonus a neccecity. The fact that they require doctrines just to compete should tell you that they are not perfectly fine.

    And again when half or so of SU doctrines have ppsh upgrades....how can being doctrinal be such a problem for the cons upgrade ?

    The reason cons are not that picked is the same u said.
    Moving accuracy of penals is insane and it's getting a nerf, and they allow to skip any kind of extra teching cost, like sidetech, trucks or battlephases (which is unfair is we want to say it all).

    The "their bonuses barely get them in line with other mainlines stock" is simply wrong.

    Vet 3 cons have 0.6 RA,roughly same as IS/rifles, better than volks

    Their rifles have 16 damage, same as obers, but suffer from poor accuracy.
    The 40% accuracy bonus fix this.

    There are so much doctrines with su ppsh that it's basically like the ppsh isn't doctrinal at all.
    Same for g43.
  • #169
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    > @thedarkarmadillo ha detto:
    > @SAY_MY_NAME they are useful if you pick the right doctrine is a bad line of reasoning. They are supposed to be the backbone of your army, if they can only be that by picking 1 of 4(?) Commanders out of something like 20...well thats just not acceptable. Imagine how grens would do if they didnt have the lmg42? If they HAD to pick a g43 commander to stand up to the guaranteed mulit equiped rifles/tommies that already beat the snot out of them without upgrades? Would that be acceptable? Absolutely not.
    >
    > Also i can tell you for fact my vetting up sturms has nothing to do with the shrek because i dont use shreks on the regular, its actually very rare that i do. They are more useful to me without them

    I never said that I wouldn't appreciate a non doc upgrade.

    From a realistic point of view, only 8 doctrines are viable in competitive as su.
    2 of them have cheese partisans, fun but useless against proper player.
    At the end of the day the doctrines are divided into ppsh cons ones and penals/shocks.

    But yep a non doc upgrade would be nice.
    This absolutely doesn't mean that cobs ppsh in terms of performances aren't viable, especially when they get 0.6 RA and good 40%+ accuracy on their mosin and ppsh.

    For their price can be overwhelming, and UNLIKE penals, aren't countered by lightvehicles strategies.
  • #170
    1 year ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121
    edited July 2017

    It is simply ridiculous to see how many people on the forums are crying out for additional nerfs to both the Wehrmacht and the OKW. How much further do you want to weaken them? Do you want to weaken them to the point that you can overwhelm two Grenadier squads with a single Penal squad or a Riflemen squad? Do you want to render German tank destroyers that put fear into the hearts of the enemy into laughing stocks?

    There are already so many nonsensical disadvantages for the Wehrmacht and the OKW. First, OKW doesn't even have a proper half-track for reinforcement and now the Forward Retreat Point is getting nerfed. Second, Elefant and the Jagdtiger are getting nerfed because they hold such dominant positions in team games and make allied players sweat? For the love of God, that's the whole point! These tank destroyers (controlled by well-experienced players who have to keep these things alive with proper ancillary support) are meant to hold the line and make allied players have second thoughts before charging in. If these tank destroyers got to Vet 3 or Vet 5, have you ever considered the possibility that the allied players fed tank after tank to the German players? I see no discussions of nerfing the ISU-152 and yet both the Elefant and the Jagdtiger are getting the short edge of the stick. Third, NERF the Kubelwagen's armour??? Are you serious? That vehicle has no armour to begin with and you want to reduce its armour even further? I have no idea whose idea this was but if there is one thing that the Kubelwagen needs, it's a buff, NOT a nerf.

    I'll stop here for now even though there are still a lot of points to make.

  • #171
    1 year ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,017

    The TDs will still make Allied players sweat. 2 shots will deal 560 damage, meaning that literally a panzerfaust will kill mediums. It just won't be something that can solo multiple armored targets.

    ISU was nerfed ages ago. It's mostly okay now as its AT performance is nowhere near that of the Axis TDs., and is not a common enough pick to demonstrate any problems if they exist with the unit.

    If the Kubel change is anything, it's a soft buff - not a nerf. It has more HP now, and instead of depending on armor RNG to save it, I now can use the extra HP pool to save it. This is good for everybody, as it is now not up to RNG whether the Kubel lives or dies. It is up to me the player, knowing when and how to use it and when to retreat it that will determine whether the Kubel lives or dies.

    Nobody is talking about nerfing grens so don't know why that came up, and Volks have been overperforming ever since they got the STG upgrade so... don't know what you're complaining about there either. Penals are continuously being nerfed to bring their AI down to finally find the groove they belong in so making life easy for them isn't the objective either. Overall, you've mentioned a whole bunch of stuff that's non-issue material.

  • #172
    1 year ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:

    @company14u2 said:
    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.

    It was more catching squads as they retreat, it seems a little over-the-top at finishing infantry units. Its not quite a pre-nerf centuar, but from my experience just seemed a little too reliable at scoring those hits, and then coupled with the high burst damage that its always had, I was wiping penals and rifles left, right and centre.

    That said, I'm also not quite on board with the Jackson changes, the durability upgrade that places it as more of a slugger are great, the accuracy buff though seems to be a little much. I understand that puts it in line with the firefly, but when coupled with its ability to chase, through that potent combination of high base sight, mobility and moving accuracy, its seems far to efficient at destroying lights and mediums.

    The awkward part of the USF having only one dedicated at vehicle means balancing it is difficult, as they can't seperate the roles like the stug and panther hold. However the current FBP version now handles light and mediums tanks even more efficiently, as well as taking on heavies, meaning it effectively counters any mechanical unit and once unlocked, basically overshadows any other USF at source. The high-cost does somewhat deter players from spamming them when first available, but eventually as the games progresses into the later stages and fuel get stockpiled, it boils down to the winning combination for USF being once again, the BAR rifle-jackson horde.

    I would much prefer more emphasis on the zooks, stuart and at gun for handling Axis lights and mediums, leaving the jackson the answer to heavies and premium tanks like the Brumbar or Panther.

  • #173
    1 year ago
    SquishyMuffinSquishyMu… Posts: 434

    I'd rather the STG upgrade on Volks was removed than nerfed (dps wise), for the sake of authenticy and not looking bizarre. It would be silly having the first Assault Rifle fire blanks while 'murica riflemen with double WW1 Bars shoot on the move one handed. It's not like a Volks squad completely destroys a double barred up riflemen squad. I know there's a cost difference.

    None of the Volks talk is in this scope anyway. But, when and if it does, change the veterancy (that doesn't mean make it garbage though).

  • #174
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    @Lazarus ha detto:
    The TDs will still make Allied players sweat. 2 shots will deal 560 damage, meaning that literally a panzerfaust will kill mediums. It just won't be something that can solo multiple armored targets.

    ISU was nerfed ages ago. It's mostly okay now as its AT performance is nowhere near that of the Axis TDs., and is not a common enough pick to demonstrate any problems if they exist with the unit.

    If the Kubel change is anything, it's a soft buff - not a nerf. It has more HP now, and instead of depending on armor RNG to save it, I now can use the extra HP pool to save it. This is good for everybody, as it is now not up to RNG whether the Kubel lives or dies. It is up to me the player, knowing when and how to use it and when to retreat it that will determine whether the Kubel lives or dies.

    Nobody is talking about nerfing grens so don't know why that came up, and Volks have been overperforming ever since they got the STG upgrade so... don't know what you're complaining about there either. Penals are continuously being nerfed to bring their AI down to finally find the groove they belong in so making life easy for them isn't the objective either. Overall, you've mentioned a whole bunch of stuff that's non-issue material.

    And again, the problem was td's 2 shot.
    Than why td's didn't get any compensating buff, but even more nerfs like a stupid stun hit and popcap nerfs.

    Isu is okey as td and okey at sniping infantry, unlike axis td can do both.
    Lol patches like this did it.., you may not like it doing both, so not as good at at as axis ones...it doesn't mean that is UP for its price or that doesn't do its job.
    Putting up it's td performances to smokescreen huge td nerf is nonsense.

    Volks overperform simply because of their cost and are spammed because generally unreliable in a 1vs1 against allies mainline.
    The stg was simply rushed out, it's more expensive than g43 and much weaker.

    Just like td "rework", if mr'smith and it's mod making companion actually properly played axis as much as they play allies (or even half) they would realize that messing with vet like that is totally off and an incentive into spamming volks more.
    Delaying RA bonus will make volks even weaker and players will get even more volks.

    If cost efficiency was an issue they could just increase the price of reinforce AND intial price, than make stg more expensive but actually powerful, not subpar upgrades with barely half point of dps more than garand at all ranges.

    Okw players wouldn't need 4-5 squads to keep 3 double bar away and early losses would make volks actually bleed because of the higher price.

    Mod makers wants to force the players to be more reliant on an elite unit by late game.

    Even excluding that obers are completely useless against specific arty heavy playstyles, and that they already have a late game capping role and anti elite they fill perfectly (but again to know it you need to play something else rather than allies teamgames), they are reducing the price of obers.
    Post patch people will complain how cheap are obers and they will nerf them---->grens 2.0

    All because a 250 mp unit can't have a fighting chance against 280 mp units, no you need 400-340 mp units.

    Than we get to Panther and Jadgpanzer 4/stug changes that modders would like to implement and luckily aren't in actual changelog right now.
    Any axis player knows that Stug and Jadg are favored over Panther for the simple reason that there's no difference except price.

    One has a turret, it should mean it's an offensive oriented Td, than you use it and notice that Panther miss upclose while moving, fire slower and it's mg are quite useless at anything but justify additional nerfs because those who never use it apparently keep calling it generalist or premium tank (lol) while it has zero anti infantry except for quite mediocre 60 muni pintle even compared to t34 mg's performances.

    As much as i think allies td SHOULD reliably pen it, why should i use it with such mediocre accuracy, rof and high cost.

    Again kind modders are fixing it by shoving it down axis players throat, rather than make it more viable in terms of accuracy and general performances, making it live up to its cost.

    Completely ingoring the lack of turret, now unturretted medium will be balanced to only pen mediums.

    Meanwhile Panthers get a further accuracy nerf at the price of 185 fuel.
    Now it will have same accuracy as mediums but typical moving accuracy of axis tanks aka blind gunner.
    Ost panther will get 200 damage to balance.
    OKW nothing cause mg's. (XD)

    All this while the WHOLE COMMUNITY was yelling out how weak are Panther performances, especially top players.

    Than indirect fire BARRAGE nerfed, than stuka rockets nerfed to katyusha rockets level, than flame hetzer require tier 3 to be built without additional costs.....and emplacements brace lasting less, that amount of time to hold an off map, than it becomes operative so flamepios and shreck CAN'T DESTROY IT (but again smokescreen even there so it seems they are actually nerfing emplacements while getting rid of their biggest weakness).

    They didn't nail a single thing.
    That's my feedback.

    It's clear that asking relic to let community handle balance didn't pay off at all, and the more we go on the more it become worse.

  • #175
    1 year ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,284 mod
    edited July 2017

    (moderator input) This thread allows you guys to play the FBP mod, and to return your valuable feedback about the current changes back to us. We want you to help us achieve a better balance in the game, and to fine tune the units within the scope of the play - and perhaps even expand the scope if things go well. It's a long winded iterative process which takes loads of time, with all helping hands on board. And you guys are an important cog in this massive balance machine!

    In this thread, I want you to go ahead and to play the mod, to post some replays in our replay mod section, to provide some feedback. Patch notes are not final, and in the upcoming weeks, there will be loads of changes!

    To whom this may concern, I would like to re-iterate to you that this thread is not meant for posts that aggressively target the balance team in one way or another. So far, I keep moderating more and more inappropriate and off-topic negatives about the chosen balance process and team than reading game feedback about the mod. Please create a thread to discuss the goods or bad of this community led balance process. This thread is also not meant as a place to point out that units/factions should have been either been nerved, buffed or untouched whilst casually browsing the patch-notes. Please, don't just should this or should that, we welcome people playing the mod who bring some actual action to the table - of course no balance process is perfect, that's why this patch wants to include you and your game feedback as much as possible!

    You guys are part of this balance cycle, make the most out of it! Don't get things slip in the wrong direction. This post is meant to kindly nudge things back on track.

  • #176
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited July 2017

    Nice, you automatically came to the conclusion i didn't play the mod, thing that is not true.

    Where did i rant for nerf or changes to one or another faction ?
    I said to be aware of imbalance problems like volks cost efficiency and td.
    What i did, was questioning the changes modders are doing to fix those problems, which is the point of giving feedbacks, rather than questioning if those changes are needed.

    I have never offended/insulted the balance team, and i wasn't "aggressive" with them in any way.
    Questioning their ability of giving the right direction to the balance is key part of the feedback, and giving general feedback regarding the modders balance mod is also important since those changes may get into the fall patch.

    If i play the mod, and i get no positive impression from it, i can't just get over it.
    If you ask for feedback for community, you can't simply claim people don't play the mod and/or are factions fanboys ranting just because the feedback isn't positive.

    Now i'm the axis fanboy, when balance community was hard nerfing with their hatchet of doom maxim into uselessness i was the soviet fanboy, now they are buffing maxim again.

    Same will happen with those changes, so if actually more people started questioning the general balance direction (which doesn't exist at all, the community balance team target stuff according to mood and metas) maybe changes would heve been made more carefully, without going backward at any balance patch.

  • #177
    1 year ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798

    @Reichsgarde said:
    If you are going to increase the population cost for the Stug III G from 8 to 10, please do the same for the SU-76. The SU-76 (a dual AT/Artillery gun) is very flexible while the Stug III G is just a tank destroyer. Unless the Stug III G got a buff (artillery mode for instance + general stats boost), I don't know why you should increase the pop cost to 10.

    Totally agree. Stugs are great in only one circumstance. When there is an allied medium that is unsupported by infantry and/or at guns and on an open map with few shotblockers. That is quite a rare scenario. Its utility is rather limited in less than ideal situations. Specialist vehicles should take less pop cap than generalist tanks. For 10 pop cap, you can get a t34-76 which has far more utility and doesn't depend on whether the map is open or urban. Yes a Stug can beat the t34, but the opposite is also true. It all comes down to micro. But then the t34 is excellent vs infantry and I'd say after the mg buffs, its on par with the HE sherman.

    Su76 on the other hand has 60 range and better pen which is excellent vs heavies with better speed and rotation and barrage ability. A pair of them can take on everything short of a KT. And the pen bonus from vet is easily earned as they vet insanely quickly. The stug may have better dps, but its shorter range and inferior pen means that it struggles to scale well into the late game when allied heavies may arrive. Both comet and pershing have 50 range which allow them to return fire on the stug. While the heavy always pens the stug, the stug only pens a bit over half the time. However, the Su76 has longer range so it doesn't have to take damage vs Tiger or panther. It's sufficiently fast enough to kite both tanks. Like the stug, the su76 also works best in pairs which is why both these vehicles should have their pop cap remain at 8.

  • #179
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    An issue i have with the panther getting 200 damage is continuity. The panthers for both factions are the same models iirc, something like a bit better moving accuracy or better mgs is quite a bit different than more main gun damage, in a team game it might be harder to assess proper threats not being able to quickly tell which panther is going to slam you for an extra 40 damage. Something like a panther and a JT or a panther and an elefant now. Getting hit by a JT and managing to escape it but being chased down by an okw panther would take 2 shots from the panther AND some other source of damage to take down vs just the elefant and 2 shots from ost panther. I think if this is the direction to be taken there needs to be a stronger visual que as well as text info to allow the players to know there is additonal damage being dealt from one and not the other.
  • #180
    1 year ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121
    edited July 2017

    Please excuse me if I seem to be repeating myself but I have this chronic concern that Wehrmacht and the OKW might turn into Panzer Elite from CoH 1. What I mean is that I do not wish these two factions to become weaker than the Allies and the Soviets that it takes twice as much effort to stay competitive in ranked multiplayer matches.

    Here are a few suggestions for the upcoming patch pertaining to the Stug III G for the Wehrmacht:

    • Improve the Stug III G's stats (fire rate, range bonus, mobility, damage, etc.) all across the board.
    • Give the Stug III G a "siege mode" like ability in which it sacrifices its mobility for higher rate of fire and defence.
    • Do NOT reduce the damage and duration for the "Target Weak Point" but make sure we can use it while on the move.

    I thought about giving the Stug III G an artillery barrage ability but that would make the Stug III E quite useless so I think a siege mode should suffice. Only with these stats boosts and general improvements can the Stug III G cost 10 pop points.

    Also one more thing that I noticed was how on average, Allied and Soviet units tend to have more abilities and upgrade options than their Axis counterparts. I have always considered it strange how British tanks have access to tank commanders whereas German tanks, whose tank commanders were FAR MORE famous and talented, do not. Yes, OKW can have Panzer Commanders through the Elite Armour Doctrine but it seems to me that this upgrade should be a default option.

    I will post more suggestions later for other specific units e.g. Panther (for both OKW and Wehrmacht).

  • #181
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    Ooh an even more potent stug. THAT will fix the team game cheese this patch aims to do. I suggest we just make it a Ferdinand tank destroyer at the same price point/timing (elefant without the hull MG, so we retain the desire for the elefant and lets be serious, a hull mg THAT early would be a bit strong)
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.