DBP Balance Feedback

2456734

Comments

  • #32
    1 year ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798
    edited October 2017

    I think the house jumping nerf is a terrible idea as mgs will basically be sentenced to death if they decide to enter a building and the opponent has grenades. They already have long packup times. Maybe the mgs should not be subject to this house jumping nerf at least.

  • #33
    1 year ago
    mrdjjag81mrdjjag81 Posts: 264

    Its not realy a problem with ONE okw panther overperforme, its when they spamed in team games they become a seriously problem. Its as close to a heavy tank as it gets. Theres a reason why they nerfed the comet tank, it was clearly OP when spamed, not so much as just one. Otherwise im glad with the changes and think most of the changed will fit in good.

  • #35
    1 year ago
    TroydTroyd Posts: 24
    edited October 2017

    Thank you relic for continuing to support this game. I welcome the upcoming update and hope it improves gameplay.

    I also wanted to express that I am a HUGE fan of the garrison changes (some tuning required), squad behaviour efforts (one day you'll win) and standardization with respect to field constructions; I hope my fellow players agree.

    My biggest concern for the future: continuing to balance the game at the global level - rather than at the game mode level - will perpetuate the nerfing/buffing cycle indefinitely. For example, having stat tables specific to game modes (1v1 stats differ from 2v2) would allow tweaks where certain units are being a problem in certain game modes. Such a process would be started by having the global unit stats copied into all game mode tables - then tweaked in future balance updates. I understand this may never be possible, but I feel it would allow the satisfaction all of the various gameplay "factions".

    Nerfing something like the elephant might be welcomed (and make sense) in the 4v4 arena where up to 4 can exist at once; can ultimately make the unit undesirable in a 1v1 or 2v2 environment.

  • #36
    1 year ago

    Speaking strictly as an AI skirmish player, I'm not sure what the FRP problem is, but I'd rather see changes that don't affect manpower costs and cooldown. Cooldown like this just seems to me to be interfering with people trying to play the game. Increased manpower costs just seems to be punishing people who use FRPs.

    Instead of increasing manpower costs, how about thinking of something else like slowing the reinforcement rate, with further slowing of reinforcement for units in combat? Perhaps scale whatever the penalty is based on the distance from base, compared to the overall map size. Sure, it's still a punishment for people using FRPs, but seems a bit more realistic to me.

    At some point I'd rather not play a game where part of my strategy involves trying to decide where I should retreat based on manpower costs. I already have to do that based on if I think I'll get killed at an FRP. I can use the same logic for reinforcement speed. I'm not trying to perform in-game calculus.

  • #38
    1 year ago
    EeereEeere Posts: 18

    Instead of gutting WFA FRPs with the +20% reinforce cost, why not bring the EFAs closer to their level?

    Here's a simple solution: EFA units retreat to the closest base building. They can reinforce from all base buildings currently, so it's not too big a stretch. Maybe lock this ability behind tech or time, but with the relatively short range that might be unnecessary. I say simple, but of course a few adjustments would be in order to fully implement this.

    In the case of the Soviets, when there are no wounded in or near the base sector, the medics would prefer to idle at the most recently retreat pathed base building instead of running back and forth from the HQ. In the case of Ostheer, make it so they prefer to retreat to a med bunker if it's in the base sector. Alternatively, and I personally think this is the better solution, if the med bunker is within the base sector, make the German meds copy the Soviet meds in function, preferring to wait at the most relevant building instead of their bunker. Base buildings would need to be able to toggle their not-so-forward retreat points in order to further prevent base clumping issues.

    This also adds some extra meaning to base building placement, which currently is a bit incidental, though it has been rectified somewhat with the spawn location change. Maybe it's a stopgap measure, but it makes sense in the context of a faction that places its base buildings. I think it would be a great way to make a currently archaic base system work well.

  • #39
    1 year ago
    OberOber Posts: 102
    edited November 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo You know very well that vs good players kubel spam is a suicide, every faction can handle with this, if the 5 extra fuel is the problem.. i prefer pay cost 15 fuel + 300MP but the old kubel without change, how to supposed OKW to fight vs mass riffles without mg and FRP at the start? with volks? really? relic alway drive the game to be easy for noob players... what about the bren carrier tell me more??

  • #40
    1 year ago

    @Ober said:
    @thedarkarmadillo You know very well that vs good players kubel spam is a suicide, every faction can handle with this, if the 5 extra fuel is the problem.. i prefer pay cost 15 fuel + 300MP but the old kubel without change, how to supposed OKW to fight vs mass riffles without mg and FRP at the start? with volks? really? relic alway drive the game to be easy for noob players... what about the bren carrier tell me more??

    Top ten players in 3v3s and 4v4s often open with 2 kubels. Even top 1v1 players are doing it.

  • #41
    1 year ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    @Ober said:
    @thedarkarmadillo You know very well that vs good players kubel spam is a suicide,

    Except that PaulAD pioneered triple Kubel into fusiliers for a reason

  • #42
    1 year ago
    KiethSomataw99KiethSoma… Posts: 62
    edited November 2017

    A few ideas for the December Balance Patch:
    Soviet Penal Battalions: they can either upgrade with 2x anti-tank rifles or a flamethrower. The anti-tank rifles are available initially but the flamethrower requires a Support Weapons Structure.

    Soviet T-34/76 and T-34/85 Ramming: At Veterancy 1, ramming causes heavy engine damage instead of immobilization. At Veterancy 2, ramming has a 25% chance of not destroying the turret. At Veterancy 3, ramming has a chance to cause engine damage instead of heavy engine damage.

    OKW Obersoldaten: give them a rifle smoke grenade ability that costs 25 munitions. It is a long range grenade that causes no damage but creates a small cloud of smoke upon impact, blocking line of sight. This ability does not reveal the Obersoldaten squad, even if the cloud covers an enemy squad.

    Ostheer Wehrmacht Price Premium: cost of Tiger, Elefant, and Panzer IV Command Tank is reduced once either a Support Armor Korps or Heavy Panzer Korps is built.

    Fuel & Munitions caches: the first cache you build costs 200 manpower, but any after that will cost 250 manpower. This makes it so you should find a strategic point to set up your initial cache.

  • #43
    1 year ago

    "Elephant from two-shotting most Allied tanks"

    That, does not happen...even at vet 3...maybe with a Stewart. But not a tank. That change is completely unjustified. You are again catering to newbie players. The elephant and Jadtiger already have inherent crippling weaknesses. If a player cannot exploit them...it's their own fault.

    You want to talk about two shotting tanks? Very well, let's go there....
    Sticky satchels....THAT two-shots tanks. The fact that this ability is in the game proves something is wrong with our system and community...I cant even wrap my head around how allied fan boys think this is a balanced ability....You want proof? Give this ability to a axis faction. I guarantee youll see it blacklisted in a hurry.

    If any other professional gaming community were to see what you guys did with the sticky satchel, Overwatch, Dota2, CS, Halo...they would definately laugh at us for allowing it. It's too powerful and you know it. The soviets already have a fast paced tank cripple in the form of ATnades, this satchel is farce and insult.

  • #44
    1 year ago
    @eonfigure

    You think these are fine?
    The teller mine is still one shotting all lights. The bundle nade still any weapon teams bane. Twp on a at gun. The anti tank strafe wich can kill 2 tanks on the first pass. and attack when target is beyond the circle.

    Axis have enough toys of their own in this regard.

    The at satchal has a short range. Can cause casualties of your own army. Wich other snare/at grenade does that?
    Penals dont sprint no more. The ptrs is a warning sign for at satchal in the patch.

    Having it requiering ptrs is fine. It having the shorter(st) range is fine. That it can backfire on you is fine.
    Now that it will track the target even after it left the range we will see if its fine.
  • #48
    1 year ago
    thekingsownthekingso… Posts: 447
    edited November 2017

    Here are my issues with the patch:

    OKW

    Kubelwagon
    To decrease the manpower bleed the Kubelwagon can inflict in the early game (primarily vs USF), we have made the following changes:

    Decrease rear armor from 4.5 to 1.6
    Decrease front armor from 4.5 to 3.5
    Increase health form 190 to 240

    Why on earth would you do this? The soviets have their early truck and the british have the bren carrier which are both far superior to a kubelwagon. Even 2 kubels would not be able to come close to the bleed of the other units.

    Jagdtiger
    To decrease the on field dominance of the Jagdtiger against Allied tanks, the unit has received the following changes. To help keep the unit useful vs infantry, the Supporting Fire ability has received some performance enhancements.

    Damage reduced from 320 to 300
    Accuracy reduced from 0.06/0.05/0.04 to 0.055/0.045/0.03
    Range reduced from 85 to 80
    Supporting Fire range reduced from 125 to 95
    Engine upgrade rotation bonus removed
    Pop-cap increased from 21 to 23
    Supporting Fire ability now available at Vet 0
    Vet 1 replaced with Supporting Fire Barrage shells increased from 3 to 5
    Supporting fire changes:

    You are taking to much away from the Jagdtiger all at one time. This is a common mistake you regularly make. This unit has major weaknesses which are not being taken into account. Why not just reduce the damage slightly?

    Panther V
    As arguably the best non-doctrinal heavy tank in COH2, we felt that the unit offered too much benefit to spam and was increasingly dominate when produced in numbers. To encourage players to diversify their late game tech, we have made the following changes:

    Pop-cap increased from 16 to 18
    Decreased moving accuracy from 0.65 to 0.5
    Increased moving scatter from 1.7 to 2
    Vet 2 +10 % armor bonus removed (also affects command Panther)

    The Panther is not a tank in this game , it is an armoured , reduced range tank destroyer that will lose to a well microed cheaper tank destroyer every time. The panther is terrible against soft targets. Removing the vet 2 bonus is just the icing on the cake .

    Sturmtiger

    • Abandon critical now only occurs from ballistic weapons
    • The Sturmtiger Abandon Critical while reloading chance reduced from 50% to 25%
    • Damage reduced from 640 to 580
    • Manpower cost increased from 560 to 620
    • Fuel cost increased from 160 to 180
    • Population cost increased from 18 to 20
    • All random critical types removed except for vehicle stun

    Aside from the abandonment fixes the other changes make no sense. This unit was intended to be high risk high reward. There is no reason to overnerf this with increased cost and reduced damage.

    WEHRMACHT

    Panther V
    Unlike the OKW Panther, we feel the OST Panther is more or less in a good spot. However, to make it somewhat more reliable in combat, the variable reload time of the main gun has been reduced.

    Pop-cap increased from 16 to 18
    Vet 2 +10 % armor bonus removed
    Reload time decreased from 5.8 - 6.7 to 5.2 - 5.6 (reload time does not include wind-up)

    The Ost Panther is not in a good spot at all . This is why the majority of the community has been complaining about it for years. Why on earth would you remove its armor bonus and increase pop cap? This unit currently has just 1 purpose which is often negated by much cheaper tank destroyers. It would be best to give Panther good AI as to at least give players an incentive to upgrade to tier 4 because at the moment there isn't one.

    SOVIET

    Maxim
    To make some slight performance improvements to the Maxim HMG, the following changes have been made:

    Suppression from 0.00006 to 0.000065.
    Nearby suppression from 1.25 to 1.
    Ready-Aim Time to 0.125.
    Fire-Aim Time to 0.125.
    Fire-Aim Time multipliers standardized to 0.5.
    Maxim Suppression Intel Bulletin

    Suppression bonus reduced from +5% to +1%

    No "Slight performance improvements are necessary this unit is a beast with a whopping big crew to boot

    Conscript
    To make Conscript squads scale better into the mid to late game, as well as, be able to trade better vs comparable Axis squads such as Volksgrenadiers, the following changes have been made:

    Damage from 16 to 12
    Accuracy from 0.541/0.495/0.334 to 0.7182821/0.6598548/0.55654425
    Near range increased from 0 to 10
    PPSH accuracy from reduced from 0.621/0.43/0.2 to 0.5645455/0.3909091/0.181818
    Molotov upgrade has been merged with the Anti-tank upgrade at the HQ

    Conscripts are one of the most versatile early game infantry units with more abilities than any other.

    Orah! - Merge - Build Sandbag - Molotov cocktail - RPG-43 Anti-Tank Grenades , Hit the Dirt! , Trip Wire Flares. The volksgrenadiers you mention have nothing like these. So conscripts now have all those abilities with the added benefit of being on a similar level to volks and grens. All conscripts need are an incremental accuracy increase

    Additional--- There has been no mention of partisans. Partisans. Still far to strong for only 210 manpower and the anti tank partisans need to research shrek not just instant pop out of building then destroy a unit in friendly territory.

    Additional 2--- Field HQ - Only cap in territory and only by an engineer. There is nothing more ridiculous, unfair and cheesy then a lone conscript squad running into a massive building surrounded by enemies in hostile territory and set up a base with bonuses to all friendly units. Why has this been missed out?

    USF

    Jackson
    The Jackson has received a slight buff to its health to allow players to be a bit more aggressive and utilize its speed to perform more hit and run tactics. Cost increased to match performance.

    Health increased from 480 to 640
    Fuel increased from 125 to 140
    Manpower increased from 350 to 400

    Health increase is to much , Jackson already has the range to counter far more expensive tanks . The last thing it needs is a big health buff.

    BRITISH

    Mortar Pit

    • Now has access to smoke barrage at Vet 0
    • Vet 1 reduces smoke barrage cooldown

    The British emplacements and brace are one of the worst culprits in balance issues and astonishingly are left not only untouched but with increased utility. The british mortar pit only costs 400 manpower for 2 mortars and already has a smoke ability along with brace

    Additional--- The bofors has not been mentioned despite only costing 280manpower and 30 fuel . This emplacement desperately needs a cost increase as it is far to cost effective.

    Addional 2 and alternative, Why not have Brace reduce manpower when used as to prevent spamming brace ?

  • #49
    1 year ago
    vsrvsr Posts: 93

    The British emplacements and brace are one of the worst culprits in balance issues and astonishingly are left not only untouched but with increased utility. The british mortar pit only costs 400 manpower for 2 mortars and already has a smoke ability along with brace

    Additional--- The bofors has not been mentioned despite only costing 280manpower and 30 fuel . This emplacement desperately needs a cost increase as it is far to cost effective.

    Addional 2 and alternative, Why not have Brace reduce manpower when used as to prevent spamming brace ?

    ****Agree with the emplacements issues. ****

  • #50
    1 year ago
    KurkinKurkin РоссияPosts: 30

    Since you have tied Sherman Land Leas to T4, you can then tie T 34/76 to T3. After all, the Wehrmacht has access to Panzer 4 from T3.

  • #51
    1 year ago

    Great patch! you came back with Fall Balance Preview Changelog, excellent! There are only one problem, you forgot change the Jagdtiger like the Fall Balance Preview Changelog did it. Because you changed the elephant, but no the Jagdtiger.

  • #52
    1 year ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951
    edited November 2017

    @eonfigure said:
    "Elephant from two-shotting most Allied tanks"

    That, does not happen...even at vet 3...

    Elephant does 320 damage per shot. Medium tanks have 640 HP. The math isn't that hard to work out.

  • #53
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited November 2017

    Conscript
    To make Conscript squads scale better into the mid to late game, as well as, be able to trade better vs comparable Axis squads such as Volksgrenadiers, the following changes have been made:
    Damage from 16 to 12
    Accuracy from 0.541/0.495/0.334 to 0.7182821/0.6598548/0.55654425
    Near range increased from 0 to 10
    PPSH accuracy from reduced from 0.621/0.43/0.2 to 0.5645455/0.3909091/0.181818
    Molotov upgrade has been merged with the Anti-tank upgrade at the HQ

    Changes to DPS in translate in numbers
    New mosin around x100% (range 0) x136% (range 10) x108% (range 20) x90% (range 30)
    New PPsh around x91% all ranges.

    That roughly translates for a PPsh conscript
    x93% (range 0) x99% (range 10) x101.94% (range 20) x90% (range 30).

    Although the changes in Mosin other ranges are not problematic at range 10 things become very very problematic.
    At range 10-15 a conscripts squad out DPS VG, Grenadier and even pioneers while continuing to have more EHP. Combined with ourah it will create many problems. If Conscripts are to become a close quarter unit they should change weapon type and lose or have ourah redesigned.

    Although moving near range to 10 is a step in the correct direction and should be implement to all bolt action/ semi auto weapons giving a bigger advantage to CQ weapons the DPS value at range 10 is simply too high.

    The PPSH on the other hand should follow the exact opposite root and have its near range moved from 10 to 0.

    Ideal the conscript should not have to mix weapon with different optimum ranges like ppsh and bolt action and have the dotrinal ability either give them 6 ppsh or a number SVTs.

    The merge of the abilities at the same cost and time to research is totally uncalled for and will make human wave tactics even more effective. Soviet have cheap teching, flexible teching and a the widest viriety of doctrinal solution. If this change makes to game it should be countered weight by step like:
    Increasing research time
    and/or increasing cost of T1
    and/or adding a tech cost to Penal satchel
    and/or adding a cost to PTRS and AT satchel (soviet seem to the only faction that get stock AT weapons with no tech cost).

    ISU-152
    Pls remove minimum range or make smaller to 2.

    Lower price for "Concrete-Piercing" shot and maybe replace the mechanic to be similar to Pershing/FF tulips.

    USF
    Calliope
    To bring the Calliope more in line with other mobile artillery and less dominant at mid to short range, the following changes have been made:
    Near AOE increased from 0.5 to 0.75

    I don't really see how buffing the damage of each rocket will make the unit less dominant at mid and sort range.

    If one actually want to make less dominant, one should increase minimum range so the weapon can not be used at point blank ranges.

    Priest
    The Priest has received the following changes to make it less abusive and spammable in team games.
    Mid AOE from 0.15 to 0.28

    Again I dont really see how alsmot doubling mid range and increasing the entity kill AOE will make the units less abusive.

    Priest is one of the hardest artillery piece to counter and it can easily dual with the LeFH, it really does not need more damage potential.

    Rear- Echelons / Riflemen
    To improve Rear Echelons as a support unit and improve their usefulness at different stages of a match, the following changes have been made:
    Smoke moved from Riflemen to Rear Echelon (Lieutenant retains smoke)
    Rear Echelon now have access to the Light M7 mine at a cost of 15 Munitions per mine

    There is no reason why rack weapon should be better in RE with the vet 1 bonus. The bonus should work similar to Ro.E and affect only the carbines.

    RE could become even more useful if the "volley fire" ability become more usable by scaling with veterancy or even being move to vet 1.

    Instead to m7 light mine I would suggest moving the doctrinal sandbags and mines to RE.

    BRITISH
    British Trench

    Consider moving trench and sandbags to RO.E.

    PLS include a firing angle indicator similar to bunkers for the trenches

    Firefly
    Due to the Firefly's range and accuracy, when combined with the Comet or when multiple Firefly's are fielded, this combination of tank power can prove to be overly dominate (primarily in team games). To compensate, the following changes have been made:
    Accuracy from 0.08/0.07/0.05 to 0.06/0.05/0.4

    You probably mean 0.04. That is simply not enough because tank commander increases accuracy and get a veterancy bonus.

    A FF with a commander has 97% chance to hit a PZ4 at range 60 and by vet 3 it can hit everything accept kubel with 100%.

    In addition FF the furthest mid range than any other TD including JT and Elephant at 45 that should be lowered to 30.

    BUG FIXES & Quality of Life Changes
    Fixed an issue where OKW starting weapon crew stats were superior to other faction weapon crews, and on-par with mainline infantry

    This is not actually a bug but a major nerf especially to hmg34 that get more DPS from its crew at range 35 than from the gun itself. The DPS of gun is so low that a squad can stay under fire for minutes before it start to take casualties.

    With change the unit will be extremely difficult to vet when fighting infantry.

    If one consider this a "bug" fix one should also fix the other "bugs" plugging this unit like lower buy price but higher reinforcement cost, extremely low far DPS.

  • #54
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited November 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @Ober kuble costs less than a con squad but was: faster, more durable, caps faster, can contribute to a fight, no bleed, no fuel cost, but can GIVE 5 fuel when killed, NO BLEED, caps faster, didnt bleed and of course the obvious fact that its a t0 car and doesnt bleed all while being able to inflict bleed.

    <3

    Very happy with the con changes, but the Ost panther should get a little more than just that reload buff. I think it should get the .65 moving accuracy multiplier at vet 2 if not in the vanilla form (same multiplier the OKW one is losing). OKW has the JP4 to play with against late game armor, Ost needs the panther a lot more for that role. It should get that or a general accuracy buff with vet as it currently has neither.

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    I don't know why USF deserve mines. They already have access to mines in 4 out of 8 doctrines and demos in 2 of 8 commanders. Has Relic any notion of asymmetrical factions?

    Do you? Because the M7 Light AT mine is nothing like any of the mines on any of the other factions (stock or otherwise) and is decidedly the worst. It is the molotov of mines, its cheapness is its most redeeming quality.

  • #55
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    Why Panther gets nerf? Unbelievable!?

    All this while we are asking for a Panther buff because for the price, it is slow reloading and inaccuracy on the move, makes it too weak against tanks. It worthless pintle cannot take out inf blobs.

    Now without the 10% armor makes no sense against buffed Allies TD. Panther already hard to get vet2? I never see Panther spam? I see M4C spam, i see T34 spam, i see Cromwell spam, but Panther spam??

    And wow Jackson get buff? A TD that is fast and accurate and always penetrate armor, now can skirt in and out?

    Bad patch man, it may work in 4v4 but 1v1 and 2v2, Axis late tanks give them more chance, now all get nerfed? Wtf? I rather Relic not waste time do this patch.

  • #56
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    Relic have you watch latest game cast? Allies are winning more often than Axis.

    OKW late armor dont even have much effect against Allies meta. Jackson and SU85 is going to dominate more the weaken panther. Sit back in a line and snipe Axis tank with penetrative shots. yawn.

  • #57
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    Aqua said:

    @eonfigure said:
    "Elephant from two-shotting most Allied tanks"

    That, does not happen...even at vet 3...

    Elephant does 320 damage per shot. Medium tanks have 640 HP. The math isn't that hard to work out.

    Same can be said wit SU85, Jackson and Firefly. Spam them, sit in a line, push forward slowly.

    At least with Elephant, it is a single slow ass sniper unit. So unless your tanks sit around for it to 2-shot. lol. You just rush it with 3-4 cheap Allies tanks, and you can do mark target, penal satchet, lots of easy snares.

  • #58
    1 year ago

    i feel like you guys ignoring me because of my previous discussions but i dont care im gonna voice my opinion anyway
    rear echelon smoke sounds a like good idea i can always squeeze a mortar for dispensing smoke on hard points
    but of course allow me to vent a little bit here
    rifleman right now performs so awful their M1 garands deal 7.99 dps with medicore accuracy sure they can have the fastest rate of fire of 0.48(if you use the veteran training bulletin) but to be honest even with that they simply underwehlming at best for me USF rifleman needs one of the 3 things

    1-cost reduction to 260 This to prevent rifleman form being too costly to maintain against cheaper and arguably better infantry germans have
    OR
    2- have their damage max raised to 10 and DPS of 10.99 at close distance so they would actually threaten german infantry at close distance
    OR
    3- have their accuracy raised to 0.61/0.80 again same reason as the 2nd

    even when equipped with double BARs rifleman simply underwehlming

    i dont know about you but current rifleman is even weaker then getting punched by a lightweight boxer

  • #59
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited November 2017

    @mrgame2 said:
    At least with Elephant, it is a single slow ass sniper unit. So unless your tanks sit around for it to 2-shot. lol. You just rush it with 3-4 cheap Allies tanks, and you can do mark target, penal satchet, lots of easy snares.

    You do realize being a single unit is what makes it unfair in team games, right? It's the fact that axis players can buy these single uber AT units that then require the allied players to micro a crazy amount of things at once just to kill a single unit. In the already intense cluster**** that is anything above 1v1, that's simply unfair.

    1v1 it's very easy to sneak around the map and get behind these things, and it's also way harder for an axis player to even purchase one. Once you add another player its very hard to pull off any kind of surprise flank that is essentially necessary to kill them. The micro tax they create in team games is insanely unfair, given that their cost is far less punishing because of resource float.

  • #60
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,642

    @Eeere said:
    Instead of gutting WFA FRPs with the +20% reinforce cost, why not bring the EFAs closer to their level?

    That's because EFA do not have FRP?
    Ever considered that option?

    FRPs are cancer to the meta and extremely unfair, free advantage against EFA factions who always had inferior field presence because of that and because of inferior repair speed.

    Now its going to be leveled towards balanced EFA armies instead of OP WFA ones.

  • #61
    1 year ago
    EeereEeere Posts: 18
    edited November 2017

    @Katitof said:

    That's because EFA do not have FRP?
    Ever considered that option?

    Yes I did consider that, did you read the rest of my post? lol :p

    They still don't have true FRPs in what I described. Regardless of how I feel about the actual FRPs on the WFA, I don't think gutting or removing them this late into the games life is a good option. I'd rather Relic try to make the EFA base building more modern and less incidental

    I should add that I do like the cooldown and timing changes (though its a bit clunky for OKW). I think the reinforcing premium is excessive

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.