Spring Update Balance Discussion

1246716

Comments

  • #92
    3 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,681

    @Troyd said:
    @Katitof

    A whole 60 seconds earlier.

    We both know its enough time and shock value to deal with that sniper and force retreats on flanks. You are also assuming a 222 is being rushed, when it is far more likley a 222 is built in response to a m20 rather - extending the window of opportunity.

    You have precisely ONE attempt and you need to execute it as soon as you field the unit.

    Placing a mine does not equal to destroying anything solo, 222 will wreck M20 before zookas become threatening to its massive for this stage of the game hp.

    Baiting 222s into the m20 mine, infantry/heavy cav mines, or a vet 1 rifle snare then decrewing to kill it with a zooks is a standard play for USF for the m20 vs 222 match up. Given your very extensive history as a player / forum warrioring in the coh2, you already know creating threat is just as important as killing something.

    Mines aren't reliable, rifles would have to have vet1 by that time(which they often do not).
    And sure, deterrent does work, but 222 is a deterrent for M20, not M20 bodyguards to keep desperately M20 away from 222. 222 here is a predator, not prey.

    Jackson nerf is pretty massive, shermans were not carrying games.

    Its hardly a nerf given the role of the unit, destroying mediums. A -5 range nerf does not reduce the damage output, and still allows it to out range mediums. The sighting reduction isn't really a nerf given units with 60 range are being spotted for anyway, a 55 range unit will be no worse off.

    Jacksons in the proposed form will still carry tank fights. They just can't go around solo sniping things as easily.

    Jacksons role is destroying HEAVIES and assisting mediums. Why do you think it got 240+ penetration? To fight 180 armor P4?

    shermans were not carrying games.

    Shermans do carry games when your opponents lynch pin is infantry. Your jackson spam does not compete with rakten,ober & volks spam.

    I'll say it differently - shermans will not carry you through late game, where literally all axis armor is stronger then them.
    Jackson is completely mandatory to stand up to P4s and above.

    Nowadays volks aren't exactly a problem now that their veterancy is back in line, obers will take some time before they are any threat due to vet difference and shermans aren't exactly designed to counter puppchens either.

  • #93
    3 years ago
    big_tigerbig_tiger Posts: 20
    edited April 2018

    fugg i think I accidentally'd my post, oh well

    @Troyd said:
    M20 nerd essay

    Cool or I could just never build the M20 vs Ost and have a competent, appropriately priced AI platform that doesn't get scrapped by the 222 in the AAHT. M20 is extinct in that matchup regardless, especially considering how much more often Ost players will be rushing 222.
    M20 needs a cost reduction so it can run the field for more than 40 seconds (if even 40 seconds with T1 skip) vs Ost's new 200 mp 222, and to generally be appropriately priced. 222 doesn't take 70 munis when it hits the field either.

    What nerf to USF late game? There are no changes to the primary Anti-infantry units (shermans, rifles, m8s).

    Armor is usually the main threat late game and the Jackson is getting nerfed. USF has never had issues vs. infantry.

    The .50 cal is just losing sprint.

    The fiddy is also losing early suppression. Sprint combined with fast setup is what makes it synergize well with the aggressive USF, can't agree with it losing that fundamentally. No sprint is a big snooze for sure. Hardly looks like a 7 pop hmg anymore.

    For AT everything is the same but Jacksons,

    Jackson is their only reliable non-doc AT late game.

    and the changes don't decrease damage output by any measure - just losing 5 range.

    "Not decreasing damage output, just decreasing ability to reliably deal damage"
    Its also losing vision, which is a bigger deal than the range in 1v1 and very much hurts its ability to trade effectively. It's still a solid unit, but my point was that USF won't have really good late game anymore, hence my suggestion for an early game boost...

    ree smoke

    I too remember when USF smoke was a cool feature instead of a chore

    Ostheer is getting better smoke access, especially considering the proliferation of Panzer Tactician. And they get it on the assault infantry that actually needs it to boot. bit ironic

    USF mortar was a mistake t b h

  • #94
    3 years ago
    @Eeere Smoke for Ostheer infantry is more than useless... which unit should benefit? Panzergrenadiere are mid-range units, used more defensive than active. Grens? Maybe Pios or Sturmgrens would benefit.
  • #95
    3 years ago

    @Felinewolfie said:

    @Dovahkiin said:
    7. Stugs are cheaper. But not way cheaper. The Jackson is 350 MP and 125 fuel to the Stugs 280 MP and 90 Fuel cost. But the Jackson is far superior and any nerfing to the Stug or Pop cap increase makes it so much less describable. A better decision would be to slightly buff the Stug and slightly increase the cost. It already is the only Tank Destroyer that is available to the Wehrmacht so it being inferior is very painful.

    • Jackson is 400 manpower, 145 fu, 16 pop and range 55.

      • Jackson used to do 200 dmg, now nerfed to 160 dmg.
      • Only non-doctrinal TD that USF has.
      • StuG is 280 manpower, 90 fu, 10 pop and range 55.
      • Stug has stun shot.
      • StuG has better armor (esp w Pz4C and Hulldown)
      • StuG had better ROF AND Range than Jackson w Hulldown.
      • Could have two StuG per Jackson (due to pop) :)
        (8 pop vs 16 pop). Do you still ask why StuG pop was increased?
    • PS: Jackson used to have 480 health, too.

      • Panther is also a Tank destroyer, and it now can take an extra shot. Also got acc and ROF Buff.
      • If USF has M10, then Wehr has Elefant, and Puma.
      • PzShrek just got buffed.

      Germans wanted Jackson nerfed. All they needed was to have their own TDs nerfed as well.

      Also it is almost Identical in cost to the SU76 (280 MP and 85 Fuel) but the SU76 also gets the barrage ability and I believe has slightly better range while similar in health and damage. The Stug is a little better at Anti Inf but the Soviets also have the SU85 which is pretty good, with good health, armor, damage and better range than really any Wehrmacht tank.

      • SU76 pen got lowered.
      • StuG wins any duel with SU76.
      • StuG has 480 life. Does 160 dmg. Has higher ROF has more armor. Has an MG.
        has command pz4. Has Hull down.

      • SU76 has 400 life. Does 120 dmg. Has lower pen and lower ROF. Has no MG.
        Has no command aura bonus, and no hulldown.

      StuG also has stun shot.

      • StuG had about double ROF of SU76 (and more range) with Hull down and about 200% more armor
        w Hulldown + Pz4. (Not to mention vet). Maybe 250% armor.

    Side note. SU-85 just went up to 15 pop (+3 pop!!!!!!!!!!)
    I am NOT going to feel sorry for StuG going up by +2 pop.

    My bad, must have been looking at some stats from an older patch when comparing.

  • #96
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    buff the pershing by either making it cheaper or increasing its health (the original popcap was fine where it is since you can only call in one pershing at a time). other than that the bug where all infantry units are not "holding" their weapons while firing a la the "T-pose" still persists. i can't make heads or tails whether allies or axis are getting the nerf/buff bat.

  • #97
    3 years ago
    big_tigerbig_tiger Posts: 20
    > @Widerstreit said:
    > @Eeere Smoke for Ostheer infantry is more than useless... which unit should benefit? Panzergrenadiere are mid-range units, used more defensive than active. Grens? Maybe Pios or Sturmgrens would benefit.

    PGrens are getting smoke with this patch.
  • #98
    3 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited April 2018
    @Eeere I know that, it is useless. Why are you saying it again?

    @The Big Red 1 Pershing performs better than Tiger 1 and 2. Why buffing it? xD
  • #99
    3 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    Can't say I'm looking foward to the 666 hordes returning, as of all the problems the 222 faces, cost was never what I found an issue.

    More a combo of pathing (damn relic for not letting vehicles go through strategic points) and its complete inability to chase down things its supposed to counter, like snipers and retreating infantry.

  • #100
    3 years ago

    Alright here are my humble opinions. I'm basing this off 1v1. These are just ideas to balance the game. I'm no helpinghans so maybe it could be L2P problem also lol. Flame suit on!
    USF - I would like to see a sherman change by removing the round switching from AT or AI and making it standard like P4's, t-34, cromwell where it does both. This will make it massively easier to use shermans. And cheaper fuel requirement inline with t-34's, so they can be plentiful as in history. Shermans beat germany due to sheer numbers. Also their smoke is harder to use than panzer tactician. Is it just me or is USF just harder to use in general than axis? You have to take the time to aim the smoke which can cost precious milliseconds, whereas panzer tactician you press one button and you're outta there fast. Historicaly Shermans were used only as infantry support. They used TD's for tanks. This was early on, but tech evolved quickly throughout the war and bigger guns were mounted on tanks that could penetrate armor.

    Also more heavy tank options for US in the standard lineup instead of all doctrinal. Maybe make pershing standard instead of just one commander. Or make the other sherman variants available. US late game just sucks. HMC good vs infantry but uses weak stuart chassis. Why does axis get faust (snare) standard on grens? This eliminates the shock on clown car. No allied faction has snares standard. USF cant even research it, it needs to be vetted. Brits don't even have a snare, soviet can research, but it's not standard so u can get caught off guard.

    Soviets have alot of heavy tank options but they're locked in commanders. However some are bad vs armor such as KV-1. ISU-152 is decent but I just beat one the other day with an okw P4 where I ran behind him and shot the rear. Since he has no turret he couldn't shoot me but just helplessly try to rotate super slowly LOL. IS-2 is nice and should be standard. It can balance the King tiger but the kt is still superior in 1v1 test. I've also seen T-34 85's shells bounce off many tanks.

    I just played a game vs USF as OKW and their 57mm AT gun couldn't pen my P4. And I beat his pershing with two raketenwerfers and a faust to snare he did overextend a bit but point is raketenwerfers penned his heavy pershing. KT's will bounce standard AT guns.

    Why US and Soviets cannot start with HMG? Why USF has no sniper? I think sandbangs should be standard for rifles maybe RE. Brit infantry can, CONS can, volks can, ostheer pioneer can.

    Also wish they would fix pathing.

    Alright I'll leave it at that for now. I prob wrote too much lol

  • #101
    3 years ago
    CarusoUACarusoUA Posts: 18

    @Widerstreit said:
    @CarusoUA The nerf of PTRS is one of the rare good changes. And you find it unacceptable? Why should they counter medium and heavy tanks? At that battle phase you get PaKs, tanks and multible abilities.

    It becomes difficult to handle late-game OKW? Stop researching PTRS for penals, use a commander or... build tanks! Especially soviets have enough tools.

    Thx for information. Theoretically you are absolutely right, but on practice you can’t play with tanks against OKW inf in the beginning and medium game, Soviets’ tanks are so poor and can be destroyed in very easy way. I am not so skilled like top-players but 16 lvl - it is not a newbie.

  • #102
    3 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    Hello everyone,

    In this particular post, I want to make 3 points:

    1. OKW Volksgrenadier Flame Grenades: Making this ability require a tech building seems excessive in my humble opinion. OKW units have trouble flushing out enemy units from buildings and flame grenades have been their reliable counter. This would make it very difficult for OKW players to recapture territories from their opponents.

    2. OKW FlaK Half-Track: The FlaK HT has become a vital element in the OKW arsenal as it allows the player to halt a large Allied/Soviet blob effectively. Nerfing its suppression will weaken OKW's crowd-control abilities. If the suppression nerf is to take place, the OKW player should be compensated in some other way either via a MG 34 buff or some other way. I would like to suggest improving the FlaK HT's range or accuracy to compensate for its reduced suppression. Also, the FlaK HT is easily destroyed by AT guns and other light vehicles. Making it costlier to retreat does not make much sense as it would only reduce its survivability.

    3. OKW Stun Grenades: Dealing 20 damage (current state) does not pose much of a threat to enemy infantry squads. Nerfing this damage to 5 seems quite excessive. If this nerf must take place, I suggest making the stun duration longer so that it actually DOES serve its purpose as a stun grenade.

    Thank you and I'll add more points in this thread later.

  • #103
    3 years ago
    @Felinewolfie Brits have a PaK40 clone (same stats) for range. You can choose Churchill to protect the firefly on engagement or pick Comets, small Tigers. The Firefly also has the ability to upgrade a rocket launcher.

    Please, tell me why Firefly should have 60 range? Only becaise they don't have AT-grenades?

    Also AT-nades and Faust need a overwork. Better give them something like the effect of new PaK40 stun-shot. Engine-damage if 50% health is reached etc. Damage multiplicatior for medium and heavy tanks, so the abilities stay balanced versus early vehicles. And so on...
  • #104
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    Wouldnt mind a change to snares. Making them like the pak stun could work but would be super annoying. I wonder if it can inflict certain crits if hitting front/rear. If it coukd only deal engine damage on the rear but a toss up of injured gunner/slow/1 second stun could be interesting
  • #105
    3 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,197 mod

    Cleaned up the thread again. Once more, stick to discussing the balance update and not going after each other. If you can't make a post without sniping at someone. Consider rewriting the post or not posting at all.

  • #106
    3 years ago
    LorenLoren Posts: 22
    edited April 2018

    Problem of OKW FlaK Half-Track is instant-quick smokes(+ really cheap munitions cost). Unless you make a terrible mistake in general, there is no way to remove this vehicle before 20 minutes.(See many high-level player's match. In some cases, this vehicle may survive for almost 50 minutes.)
    I think that it is too good a function that the instant smoke is in the suppression weapon. If it is not, you should give smoke to AA trucks of other faction equally (+ set up times too).
    Well, apart from that, I agree with OKW need something to keep in the middle of the game. But that does not mean it's an AA half truck that now exists.

  • #107
    3 years ago
    LorenLoren Posts: 22

    Rather, I do not understand why the Paratroopers are not mentioned. 380 manpowers, 120 munitions for weapon upgrade, and requires a commander and 3cp a top-tier infantry, exactly the same Health and evasion bonus as a conscript after 1vet, have not been mentioned too many years have passed. is it fair?

  • #108
    3 years ago
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > Wouldnt mind a change to snares. Making them like the pak stun could work but would be super annoying. I wonder if it can inflict certain crits if hitting front/rear. If it coukd only deal engine damage on the rear but a toss up of injured gunner/slow/1 second stun could be interesting.

    Yeah something like this would be great in my opinion. I always wondered why a snare causes engine damage but tank or anti tank shells do not. But of course the answer is 'the engine can't handle it'; apparently the same reason why tanks reverse at same speed as they accelerate.
  • #109
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    For all those saying nothing is being done to grens, the .9 damage modifier for mortars hitting squads in light cover has grens written all over it. Obviously it's for everyone, but as one of the least mobile squads that's prone to wiping, that will be a nice help.
  • #110
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    > @ImperialDane said:
    > Also your nerf to the USF mortar hardly counts as that and you're not touching the riflemen either. Like USF is likely going to be crazy next patch since Wehrmacht will now have no serious way of actually stopping the jacksons or even Sherman spam while Riflemen with BARs just roll the rest.

    What is this logic? So the nerfs to the Jackson and US mortar don't count all because riflemen?

    Jackson is having it's range and self-spotting nerfed. If that's not a big deal for TD then idk what is.
  • #111
    3 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,197 mod

    Because the USF mortar is essentially gaining range, so it's hardly being nerfed. And The jackson losing 5 range is hardly a big deal along with self spotting, in most cases it's just going to hang behind a wall of riflemen anyways, in particular in larger teamgames that do the spotting for it anyways.

    Overall the difference is in most cases going to be minimal. Especially with the riflemen still as strong as they are.

  • #112
    3 years ago

    Hi,
    here my 2cents. After all nice changes, and I am happy, that game is not dead.

    For me one big point is missing, I mean an overlook about stormpios. Too many tasks for one unit. At least they maybe should have the ability to always upgrade the minesweeper, despite flamethrower or shrek upgrade. Minesweeper is recommended, so I often have to leave out the other upgrades, cause storms are expensive and loose value as the game lasts.

    And my appeal to the Balance-Team: Smal steps bring you also to the goal. You now the most/hardest diskussed problems the last month, so keep an eye on them (IL-2 skillplane, sniper, smal squad size, ...)! I think, not all is adressed yet.

  • #113
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271

    @ImperialDane said:
    Because the USF mortar is essentially gaining range, so it's hardly being nerfed. And The jackson losing 5 range is hardly a big deal along with self spotting, in most cases it's just going to hang behind a wall of riflemen anyways, in particular in larger teamgames that do the spotting for it anyways.

    Overall the difference is in most cases going to be minimal. Especially with the riflemen still as strong as they are.

    It's gaining range so that its not completely useless after the reload nerf. And the Jackson losing 5 range is not nothing, it will mean tanks are more likely to escape/avoid last shots from the Jackson that could otherwise be costly.

    I have literally read you complain about the Jackson's self-spotting in the past, now its removed and you don't care.

  • #114
    3 years ago
    mrdjjag81mrdjjag81 Posts: 308
    edited April 2018

    @Howie said:
    In recent, i plan to upgrade my UK 2v2 to lv.17

    I found out most of the time, there is always an opponent build 88mm + 105mm to counter british Players

    Even though I have T3 and 2 25 pound howitzer, still can not destroy a 88mm or 105mm at once. Not mention sexton has very short range to counter those things.

    normally, they just build bunker + MG + 88mm + 105mm and then go T4 or king tiger. Probably sometimes with stug III or jagder panzer IV.

    I totally have no efficient strategy to handle this situation. I suggest that 88mm and 105mm should be cost more MP and fuel. Also please buff british long range fire power such as sexton. Over all, 88mm and 105mm has been abuse by axis players in 2v2 especially against double UK.

    8 CP, 450 MP and 450 fuel is too cheap and too powerful. Please nerf them or buff UK sexton.

    I found out most of the time, there is always an opponent build 88mm + 105mm to counter british Players

    Even though I have T3 and 2 25 pound howitzer, still can not destroy a 88mm or 105mm at once. Not mention sexton has very short range to counter those things.

    normally, they just build bunker + MG + 88mm + 105mm and then go T4 or king tiger. Probably sometimes with stug III or jagder panzer IV.

    I totally have no efficient strategy to handle this situation. I suggest that 88mm and 105mm should be cost more MP and fuel. Also please buff british long range fire power such as sexton. Over all, 88mm and 105mm has been abuse by axis players in 2v2 especially against double UK.

    8 CP, 450 MP and 450 fuel is too cheap and too powerful. Please nerf them or buff UK sexton.

    First, its commander abilities, which means they not got any other options to relay on. So why not go Advanced Emplacements commander to counter it for excample? You got the counter barage abilitie for excample, upgrade it with airburst and once they start use arty just use the counter barage with both 25 pounder and there will be hardly anything survive on the map that they counter. OR, you got probably the most nasty prission strike of all factions with that commander as well that will make short work of any 88 or 105. This is just a BIG l2p issue u stated here. All thought, i could agree in 4vs4 its more of a problem on some map, but not in 2vs2. Just need to use a bit of tactical brain ;) Good luck!

  • #115
    3 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    Greetings,

    Please correct me if I am wrong but why is the USF mortar 81 mm getting a range buff when the WM GrW 34 is not getting one.

    Can someone look into this?

    Thank you.

  • #116
    3 years ago

    @Reichsgarde said:
    Greetings,

    Please correct me if I am wrong but why is the USF mortar 81 mm getting a range buff when the WM GrW 34 is not getting one.

    Can someone look into this?

    Thank you.

    All 81/82mm mortars are getting standartized, the US mortar had shorter range but deployed and packed up faster.

  • #117
    3 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    @pioneerspam Thank you for the reply! I am finding it hard to remember all these details...

  • #120
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited April 2018
    @Lazarus Then let's wait and see if they change it more? Its the first log of the preview, and I'd like to see people actually test the 55 range Jackson before they decide it's nothing.

    I mean it literally can't be "nothing". Before the Jackson would fire at ranges 55.1-60. now it doesn't, you can't tell me that means absolutely nothing. If we just dropped 5 range of AT guns that would be a HUGE deal. Yeah they're stationary, they also don't cost 140 fuel to do nothing but threaten tanks.

    @thedarkarmadillo How does having medium tank health make you a brawler? Brawler implies being able to take and deal punishment. The Jackson's range protects it more than it's armor and that was just lowered.

    And I still disagree (respectfully!) with your assessment of Jackson v M10. I do not see the wolf pack aspect of the Jackson, as having 2 costs more than most heavies. The cost difference alone differs them enough.
  • #121
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,096

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    @Lazarus Then let's wait and see if they change it more? Its the first log of the preview, and I'd like to see people actually test the 55 range Jackson before they decide it's nothing.

    I mean it literally can't be "nothing". Before the Jackson would fire at ranges 55.1-60. now it doesn't, you can't tell me that means absolutely nothing. If we just dropped 5 range of AT guns that would be a HUGE deal. Yeah they're stationary, they also don't cost 140 fuel to do nothing but threaten tanks.

    On ATGs it's a huge deal because they're slow cumbersome easily wiped things. The Jackson is none of that. 55 range is still more range than anything Ost can bring to the fight. The only match up this remotely impacts is the JPIV vs Jackson, and OKW aren't the ones who've been getting shafted by USF for the last patch. We're literally just going back to PGren w/Schreck blobs (and I dunno... Ostwind support? So I guess that's new) vs Rifle blobs and Jackson spam.

    To put it another way - after this Jackson "nerf", how has the USF T3 dynamic changed? Why would I pick anything other than Jacksons every single time I buy armor?

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.

DeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisItalianoРусский