DBP Balance Feedback

1252628303134

Comments

  • #812
    2 years ago

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    The reload buff to the panther is easily the most noticeable of all the changes they did to it. I still think they should've replaced the armor bonus with an accuracy bonus at vet 2, but the panther is being tweaked, not nerfed.

    OKW Panther wants to have a word with you.

  • #813
    2 years ago

    @Kurfürst said:
    OKW Panther wants to have a word with you.

    About what exactly? I was talking about the Ostheer panther, the OKW panther should not concern anyone, OKWs lategame is FAR more complete than Ostheer's.

  • #814
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,672

    @Lazarus said:

    @Katitof said:
    So, after playing EXTENSIVELY with conscripts against top 50 players, got to say they still underperform.

    They aren't able to stand up to grens, even if you oorah into CQC, they still get shredded, LMGs do not even have to be involved.

    I've tried cons and their vanila state without doctrinal kick is so sorry its not funny.

    While all other changes I do believe did achieved their goal, conscripts were shit, are shit and will continue to be shit without doctrinal upgrades as it stands now.

    Molotovs are still terrible and on top of that, now cost 20mun instead of 15, which only puts huge ammo strain on con play and you still get little reward out of it, oorah increased muni cost isn't helping here either as you're forced for huge muni dumps for no reward out of that commitment.

    I don't see shift from penal meta at all, because cons remain backbone that breaks under any breeze.

    Replays?

    Should've saved, anyway you may ask Zarok47 as it was against him in 2s.

  • #815
    2 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343
    edited December 2017

    @Katitof said:

    @Lazarus said:

    @Katitof said:
    So, after playing EXTENSIVELY with conscripts against top 50 players, got to say they still underperform.

    They aren't able to stand up to grens, even if you oorah into CQC, they still get shredded, LMGs do not even have to be involved.

    I've tried cons and their vanila state without doctrinal kick is so sorry its not funny.

    While all other changes I do believe did achieved their goal, conscripts were shit, are shit and will continue to be shit without doctrinal upgrades as it stands now.

    Molotovs are still terrible and on top of that, now cost 20mun instead of 15, which only puts huge ammo strain on con play and you still get little reward out of it, oorah increased muni cost isn't helping here either as you're forced for huge muni dumps for no reward out of that commitment.

    I don't see shift from penal meta at all, because cons remain backbone that breaks under any breeze.

    Replays?

    Should've saved, anyway you may ask Zarok47 as it was against him in 2s.

    Late-game Conscripts are meant to transition to a purely defense-oriented role in the lategame. Better performance at range means that the enemy has, for once, the necessity to close the distance to attack your conscripts. At the same time, a faster molotov throw time will deny the opponent's advance.

    The main punch in the late-game should come from snipers, Zis-gun barrages, Soviet mortar (if it hasn't been nuked out of orbit by the turbomortar), shock troops, guards, T-34's, Penals. Basically, anything that isn't Conscripts.

    Conscripts are meant to be the late-game glue holding your army together. Late-game you also have the option to start replacing losses with Maxims. Early maxim-spam rush doesn't work. However, reinforcing your late-game army composition with maxims seems to work.

    If the enemy spammed G43 Grens, late-game Conscripts will hand their asses back to them. Otherwise, if you're facing an LMG blob, stick behind cover to wear them down, and supplement your punch with something else.

  • #816
    2 years ago

    I'm not sure if this has been suggested before, but what if T3 gave Wehr infantry (Grens especially) a new toggle ability for a looser formation? That could help them against AoE attacks without having to give them more models.

  • #817
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,672

    @Mr_Smith said:

    @Katitof said:

    @Lazarus said:

    @Katitof said:
    So, after playing EXTENSIVELY with conscripts against top 50 players, got to say they still underperform.

    They aren't able to stand up to grens, even if you oorah into CQC, they still get shredded, LMGs do not even have to be involved.

    I've tried cons and their vanila state without doctrinal kick is so sorry its not funny.

    While all other changes I do believe did achieved their goal, conscripts were shit, are shit and will continue to be shit without doctrinal upgrades as it stands now.

    Molotovs are still terrible and on top of that, now cost 20mun instead of 15, which only puts huge ammo strain on con play and you still get little reward out of it, oorah increased muni cost isn't helping here either as you're forced for huge muni dumps for no reward out of that commitment.

    I don't see shift from penal meta at all, because cons remain backbone that breaks under any breeze.

    Replays?

    Should've saved, anyway you may ask Zarok47 as it was against him in 2s.

    Late-game Conscripts are meant to transition to a purely defense-oriented role in the lategame. Better performance at range means that the enemy has, for once, the necessity to close the distance to attack your conscripts. At the same time, a faster molotov throw time will deny the opponent's advance.

    The main punch in the late-game should come from snipers, Zis-gun barrages, Soviet mortar (if it hasn't been nuked out of orbit by the turbomortar), shock troops, guards, T-34's, Penals. Basically, anything that isn't Conscripts.

    Conscripts are meant to be the late-game glue holding your army together. Late-game you also have the option to start replacing losses with Maxims. Early maxim-spam rush doesn't work. However, reinforcing your late-game army composition with maxims seems to work.

    If the enemy spammed G43 Grens, late-game Conscripts will hand their asses back to them. Otherwise, if you're facing an LMG blob, stick behind cover to wear them down, and supplement your punch with something else.

    Well, that's the thing, it wasn't even late game.
    Against high skill players(which Zarok certainly is), cons don't really feel ok in early/early-mid game either.

    For late game sure, penals and call-ins are better with cons being pretty much cappers, however that playstyle is much better executed if you go for penals from get go, going more then 2 cons still puts a heavy mp bleed and unless you go ppsh, you're not able to inflict it yourself.

    Faster molotov does most certainly help here, but without using mines and demos I find myself short on ammo just from using molos and oorah to get positional advantage - before the molo goes off or before the oorah allows to get to better position, model or two are already down against grens, which snowballs into one sided victory.

    I wasn't able to engage any single squad without losing more then dealing with cons, unless I attacked builders and for that, I don't need cons specifically.

    Turbomortar does unfortunately make a short work of regular mortar and by the time it starts hitting stuff, you're going to lose half of the squad or more yet again, leaving you with 2 cons supporting maxim spam or penal spam.

    And again, I'm not even talking about upgraded grens, its the vanila ones that seem to deal unsufferable damage while cons try to close in, cons pretty much feel like osttruppen with more reliable damage, but just like osttruppen doesn't seem to stand up to anything unless its perfect condition for them.

  • #818
    2 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343

    @Katitof said:
    Well, that's the thing, it wasn't even late game.
    Against high skill players(which Zarok certainly is), cons don't really feel ok in early/early-mid game either.

    That's probably because Zarok outskills you? A more convincing argument would be having Zarok use Conscripts against you, and Conscripts also failing to achieve the desired effect.

    An OP crutch unit will allow you to overcome more skilled players, simply because its OP.

  • #819
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,672

    While there is a bit of that too, simply try to come up to grens with cons and try to win that situation, without hugging green cover all the way in(as often there isn't one around on approach to hug) or even no cover situation, where cons try to approach on grens.

    While cons were able to deal damage more consistently, they still were losing on the distances they should have not in equal cover setting due to attrition on approach.

  • #820
    2 years ago

    @Katitof said:
    While cons were able to deal damage more consistently, they still were losing on the distances they should have not in equal cover setting due to attrition on approach.

    It seems that shock troops fits your style better.

  • #821
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    I consider panther nerrfed since this patch does not fix its glaring flaws

    Panther is axis mbt but
    1.its too expensive, sure dbp made it 20-30 fu cheaper to acquire it, but it requires more mp more cp!
    2.bad moving accuracy, got even worse! Increase scatter why?
    3.worse combat blitz,worse armor vs TD that outrange and out shoot it!
    4.slight increase in reload but still have same wind up times, at best it can launch 1 shot to allies TD 2.5 while previously it is 1 to 3..
    5. A slight mg range up is padding when the pintle don't down inf much.
    6. Where is the panther spam problems that mandated this nerf?

    Sure if you put a panther n jackson within range and do a test shoot, it win

    In game chaos, if it cant reliably hit tanks still than it is worthless

    I rather relic revert it.
  • #823
    2 years ago
    Side tech in t4 to slightly reduce the reinforcment on cons (18?) Make them a little less bleedy if they are supposed to lose all matchups at that stage outside ostroppen in neg cover. Defaulting to a defensive role doesnt work if you are INTENDED to bleed more than the enemy, and if they ARE supposed to hold the line amd be transitioned AWAY from (unlike any other mainline infantry in game) they need a pop reduction later on too else they become more dead weight than defensive fodder.

    35fu and an armful of manpower in t4 to knock em down to 5 pop and 18 reinforcment (if you feel like it maybe 220mp per replacment squad too)
    If its enough of a cost to permanently ungrade all your already potent stock infantry by 25% in t0 it should be enough of a cost for to buff cons by 10% in the late game...
  • #825
    2 years ago

    Honestly, between the pfusiliers and Luchs nerfs, OKW is un-fun to play now.

  • #826
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    Exactly, luch doesn't really shred inf as before, there is no reason to further nerf it.

    If only allies players actually build AT or upgrade atnades, instead of spamming squad after squad. OKw has to rush luch is precisely due to allies meta.

    Unlike axis, we need to time an AT response for fast t70/stuart/scout/aec...
  • #827
    2 years ago
    > @mrgame2 said:
    > Exactly, luch doesn't really shred inf as before, there is no reason to further nerf it.
    >
    > If only allies players actually build AT or upgrade atnades, instead of spamming squad after squad. OKw has to rush luch is precisely due to allies meta.
    >
    > Unlike axis, we need to time an AT response for fast t70/stuart/scout/aec...

    Maye i am wrong here. If i am please educate me on this.

    As far as i know neither of the allied vehicles except the scout car, can be fielded so early with enough infantry supporting them. The luchs can.

    Going for at gun to early means less inf to push againt okw inf. Wich most likely overwelm you when you do. In my experience.

    So again if i am missing something or i am off please share with me.
  • #828
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    Yes i like to see some timings.
    Luch comes out about 5 min mark, t70 about 6min, not much a difference in window.

    When okw build luch, they have lesser inf presence and capping power decrease, so its not like a 1-1 match.
  • #829
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    I just simply cannot believe that @Katitof is requesting a buff for the Conscripts. Isn't the current sorry state of WM and OKW infantry not enough for you? I suppose not.

    @Mr_Smith I am still awaiting your answers to my previous questions. If you could provide a detailed opinion on why you think the DBP does not put WM and OKW at a disadvantage against the Allies/Soviets, I would greatly appreciate it.

  • #830
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,672
    edited December 2017

    @Reichsgarde said:
    I just simply cannot believe that @Katitof is requesting a buff for the Conscripts. Isn't the current sorry state of WM and OKW infantry not enough for you? I suppose not.

    I'm not hingie or incendiary, I'm not going to bitch and whine just because I've seen a line of text which I did not liked.
    I always was, am and will be for buffing units which underperform, regardless of faction said units belong to as I'm huge fan of variety

    I do see @Mr_Smith point and goal of cons not scaling into late game, but I'm not agreeing with it, hence I'm providing feedback as I don't agree that mainline backbone unit should not be useful at all stages of the game and wanting your mainline infantry to be killed off, losing vet and resources only to replace them late game with something that works is not something I want to do, nor should be in game about keeping your stuff alive. We're not talking about specialist short window of opportunity unit, but mainline infantry that should hold its own through the game.

    I'm not writing what I did, because "onoz evul fanboi faction wurrriurrr durrr hurrr", but because I did played with and against them in skill bracket similar to mine and above.

    Sorry, but both OKW and WM infantry performs very well against soviets, plus WM does not have problems at all if you USE team weapons/snipers, as the faction was intended from CoH2 beta. Volks, while nerfed, still perform very well, you simply can't spam them and nothing else to win the game infantry-wise.

    I did tried both, conspam strats and mixing in penals and maxims.

    The conclusion from that, as I have said previously is the same:
    Getting more then 2 conscripts hinders your ability to transition into mid and late game, getting 4 or more requires you to LOSE the squads in late game, no matter how well you play or how good you preserve the squads, if you don't have PTRS and PPSH on cons, you don't have any singular reason to have more then 1 squad at late game.

    Early game out of cover cons trade very well, however we're not noobs here and aren't playing against noobs, so cover is always a factor and when it is, cons do not feel good at all and my final verdict is:

    If I can not rely on conscripts after first 5 minutes of the game, WHY would I want to build them at all?
    Maxim spam, while weaker, still can work, penals work much better and actually deal damage.
    Cons just feed vet, unless you always have cover advantage in optimal range, which is very rare circumstance.

  • #831
    2 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343
    edited December 2017

    @Katitof said:
    While there is a bit of that too, simply try to come up to grens with cons and try to win that situation, without hugging green cover all the way in(as often there isn't one around on approach to hug) or even no cover situation, where cons try to approach on grens.

    While cons were able to deal damage more consistently, they still were losing on the distances they should have not in equal cover setting due to attrition on approach.

    Is it possible that Zarok was stacking all-grenadier-bulletins and you were using no Conscript bulletins? That makes a difference.

    What veterancy level were your conscripts when you were trying to frontally yolo-rush grenadiers?

    What kind of support did you use (smoke/light vehicles/etc) to cover the assault.

    I mean, sure. Grenadiers, as all long-range units, are significantly easier to use. However, you need to create situations that are to your advantage. E.g., try to force enemy Grenadiers to attack your conscripts behind your own Conscript-built sandbags.

    The game is not about winning 1v1 engagements. It's about map control.

  • #832
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,672

    @Mr_Smith said:

    @Katitof said:
    While there is a bit of that too, simply try to come up to grens with cons and try to win that situation, without hugging green cover all the way in(as often there isn't one around on approach to hug) or even no cover situation, where cons try to approach on grens.

    While cons were able to deal damage more consistently, they still were losing on the distances they should have not in equal cover setting due to attrition on approach.

    Is it possible that Zarok was stacking all-grenadier-bulletins and you were using no Conscript bulletins? That makes a difference.

    What veterancy level were your conscripts when you were trying to frontally yolo-rush grenadiers?

    What kind of support did you use (smoke/light vehicles/etc) to cover the assault.

    I mean, sure. Grenadiers, as all long-range units, are significantly easier to use. However, you need to create situations that are to your advantage. E.g., try to force enemy Grenadiers to attack your conscripts behind your own Conscript-built sandbags.

    The game is not about winning 1v1 engagements. It's about map control.

    He wasn't stacking(and it wasn't only against him either, we did 2v2 as well), plus I was stacking con bulletins myself.
    Vet was equal, vet0/1 to be specific as above that LMGs come into play.

    Haven't any support as that was capper vs capper 1v1 situation and not main force.
    And please, I'm playing the game since beta, I am very well aware what its about.
    I also know how to approach infantry through cover when possible and not to try to shove mosins up grens rears as its pointless.

    PPSH cons are great, PTRS cons are ok, but I sadly don't see a reason to use regular cons over other options, especially if at late game I'd rather have them killed for that better options.

  • #833
    2 years ago

    So... since conscrips got their buff I simply use them as breakthrough unit with molotov. That works until minute 8-10. After that I build T1 for penals. ^^

  • #834
    2 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343

    @Katitof said:

    @Mr_Smith said:

    @Katitof said:
    While there is a bit of that too, simply try to come up to grens with cons and try to win that situation, without hugging green cover all the way in(as often there isn't one around on approach to hug) or even no cover situation, where cons try to approach on grens.

    While cons were able to deal damage more consistently, they still were losing on the distances they should have not in equal cover setting due to attrition on approach.

    Is it possible that Zarok was stacking all-grenadier-bulletins and you were using no Conscript bulletins? That makes a difference.

    What veterancy level were your conscripts when you were trying to frontally yolo-rush grenadiers?

    What kind of support did you use (smoke/light vehicles/etc) to cover the assault.

    I mean, sure. Grenadiers, as all long-range units, are significantly easier to use. However, you need to create situations that are to your advantage. E.g., try to force enemy Grenadiers to attack your conscripts behind your own Conscript-built sandbags.

    The game is not about winning 1v1 engagements. It's about map control.

    He wasn't stacking(and it wasn't only against him either, we did 2v2 as well), plus I was stacking con bulletins myself.
    Vet was equal, vet0/1 to be specific as above that LMGs come into play.

    That was the issue, then. Conscripts weren't really bad at the early vet levels vs Grenadiers. The main issues that the balance patch addresses is Conscript scalability issues in late-game (when you have Vet2-Vet3), where slow-throwing molotovs are useless, and if Conscripts can't deal enough damage from range, they're useless defenders.

  • #835
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121
    edited December 2017

    @Katitof And you think I am not for diversity? What makes me concerned is that Conscripts and Penals already dominate the battlefield with their sheer numbers and insane number of abilities. Just how many abilities do the Conscripts have? So you think Conscripts shouldn't suffer damage when they're closing in on the Grenadiers, whose only saving grace is to excel at long-distance engagements? You're going to take away THAT as well from them?

    In my eyes, you shouldn't be arguing for a buff to the Conscripts just because you lost a few matches to this one person. In my experience, Conscripts always come out on top of Grenadiers (with or without LMGs) in most realistic combat situations. Have you tried to Oorah while using obstacles to your advantage? Obviously, if you just charge straight to the Grenadiers, they SHOULD suffer large amounts of casualties. You're not asking them to be supermen, are you?

    And try to look at the bigger picture here. Soviets are superior to WM and OKW in all stages of the game with their larger squad numbers, easily spammable tanks, and powerful units (Penals, IS-2s, T-34/85s, etc.). Soviets now have BOTH quality and quantity, whereas WM and OKW lack BOTH.

    @Mr_Smith Why do you only reply to Katitof's messages? Please respond as I would like to hear what you have to say about the current imbalance between the Axis factions and Allied/Soviet factions.

  • #836
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    Yes mrsmith,we want more info about why panther needs to nerf? It sounds dodgy that in some team games, panther spam is OP, thus it needs to be nerfed.

    I look through this forums and panther OP is the last thing even allies players complain about.
  • #838
    2 years ago
    vsrvsr Posts: 93

    There was a 4v4 tournament based on DBP, anyone know how that went? (from balance perspective)

  • #839
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,672
    edited December 2017

    While not really balance feedback, there is one quality of live change I would appreciate.
    Could you maybe change soviet quad upgrade hotkey to something further away from R?
    I end up upgrading bloody thing every single damn time in the heat of battle instead of just reinforcing.
    @Mr_Smith

    e: lolz at the crusade of spamming dislike on me regardless what I'm writing, I see how incendiary feels now

  • #840
    2 years ago
    vsrvsr Posts: 93

    Here is the real issues,

    @Mr_Smith

    Relic, why these damn raketenwerfer, why is it the only AT, which attacks and instant retreat and can easy blobbed and why the hell these stealth-ability?

    I know the vet bonuses was nerfed, but still these are not preventing it from being blobbed and their notorious stealth is OP. I am not saying that their stealth to be removed, rather restricted to friendly-territory only. They are meant to be a defensive AT unit, not super offensive.

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.