Spring Update Balance Discussion

13468916

Comments

  • #152
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,773
    Well, if the Katy's rocket salvos arnt giving enough time to respond i cant imagine anything they can do to the B4 that will be "balanced" im atill waiting for the werfer and stuka nerfs to come out fallowing that one.
  • #153
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,586

    Aqua said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    **changing the B4 into the ml20 is a bad change imo. The reasom the ml20 was put into tankhunter was to give the enemy a reason to dive into ambush, the b4 isnt that threat because the b4 id an absolute joke that might hit a cache if when you target the base sector.

    In its current form, yes, but I imagine the intention is to give the B4 a buff in a future iteration. If not though, then yeah, its going to suck to play Tank Hunters.

    I don't think its possible to balance B4.

    Its either going to be wipe cannon or largest firecracker in the world.
    I don't believe modders can come with a reasonable middle ground here now, that B4 lost all of its abilities it could be moderated with.

  • #154
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,773
    @Katitof smaller kill radius HUGE damage area and supression. Think pwerfer but instead of killing everything in its area it only kills like 1 rocket and hurts alot for the rest? Could be made more accurate then (as in... Will land IN the targeting circle instead of outside it) and for the LOVE OF GOD fix direct fire. A 90mu vet ability that can miss if it fires at all... Fucking trash
  • #155
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,586

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @Katitof smaller kill radius HUGE damage area and supression. Think pwerfer but instead of killing everything in its area it only kills like 1 rocket and hurts alot for the rest? Could be made more accurate then (as in... Will land IN the targeting circle instead of outside it) and for the LOVE OF GOD fix direct fire. A 90mu vet ability that can miss if it fires at all... Fucking trash

    I'm actually surprised the direct fire still exists on it.
    But yea, no one is going to drop 90 mun on something that isn't even reliable.

  • #156
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,773
    The whole unit is a joke, its a shame they are going to kill a commander they just redid by adding it in
  • #157
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited April 2018

    I am worried about the 222. It obviously needs buffs, but if we get anything remotely close to the double scout car rush of old then there's a problem. I think 200mp is awfully cheap, even with the 30fuel tag. The m20 is 320mp and 20fu and a much riskier decision given its much narrower role. If you're getting one then you wont have AT guns anytime (maybe not at all) soon to fight off a scout car.

  • #158
    1 year ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    @Katitof make it relatively precise with flares as a warning and slower travel time perhaps? Keeps the one-shot wonder reliable while also adding reasonable counterplay.

  • #159
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited April 2018

    With the CP4 aura nerf, i hope relic look into USF clear skies bulletin. I had a match where my 2 vet1 Jackson and 1 ATG took down a full health tiger ace, from the front, in double quick time and no sweat. I wasn't doing anything special, just minding my lines, sure it was simple 4v4 and the TA over extended.

    Frankly i felt dirty.

    +5% sight and +4% was needed when Jackson's role was a paper tank howling pack, stugs with rotary turrets....

    The current Jackson make no sense for such boost. Sniping Axis armor before they could react, and continued sniping when they try to escape with its high speed chase down.

  • #161
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    Yes that was it. TA is supposedly the best tank with hefty resource penalty. The speed and helplessness it got taken is unsettling and too EZ. By over-extended, it was not supported just scouting. I managed to get 3 pen shot without it even realising from the FOW. When he tried to reverse, i moved my jacksons abit and continue penning, while ATG took another shot thanks to its ROF.

    It was too EZ. Never in Coh1/2 tanks go down so effortlessly. Clear skies need to remove the 5% sight.

    The point is USF is winning head-to head engagement too easy nowadays. My rifles just shred Wehr, and make a short retreat to my ambulance for free healing while staying vet2-3.

  • #162
    1 year ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798
    edited April 2018

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    I am worried about the 222. It obviously needs buffs, but if we get anything remotely close to the double scout car rush of old then there's a problem. I think 200mp is awfully cheap, even with the 30fuel tag. The m20 is 320mp and 20fu and a much riskier decision given its much narrower role. If you're getting one then you wont have AT guns anytime (maybe not at all) soon to fight off a scout car.

    Sick of people think the 222 spam will be back. As long as it costs 30 f, there will be no 222 spam. Fuel is the limiting factor. Correction: the m20 and the zook repair squad is 320 & 20. Makes a difference if you swap out the crew with RE. Or to back off a pursuing 222 by decrewing. You don't need at guns vs 222. Not sure why allies are so scared of 222s when they have fully armored lights. If Axis can deal with allied lights, why can't allied players deal with axis lights especially ones that aren't bulletproof? 222 deserved the buff it gets, especially seeing the nerfs to Stug.

  • #163
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited April 2018

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    Sick of people think the 222 spam will be back. As long as it costs 30 f, there will be no 222 spam. Fuel is the limiting factor. Correction: the m20 and the zook repair squad is 320 & 20.

    Chill. I said it obviously needs buffs, I'm just making sure we don't overdo it. And who are you correcting? Those are exactly the numbers I gave.

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    Not sure why allies are so scared of 222s when they have fully armored lights. If Axis can deal with allied lights, why can't allied players deal with axis lights especially ones that aren't bulletproof? 222 deserved the buff it gets, especially seeing the nerfs to Stug.

    Wanna know what I'm tired of? You going into a "allies ______" rant everytime somebody posts something that isn't 100% in favor of Axis. I am not an "ally", nor am I "afraid of axis lights". I am a coh2 player who is talking about the 222 and the M20. The m20 has been overpriced and underused for ages (you'd think people who complain about rifle spam would want alternatives buffed) while the double 222 used to be a very real and serious problem.

    The "armored lights" you're talking about cost more than twice fuel of the 222, and arrive later. I don't know why you're even including them in the conversation.

  • #164
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,586

    .> @1ncendiary_Rounds said:

    @thekingsown said:
    I would like to point out that the soviet T70 needs toning down.

    It kills infantry better than an Ostwind for cheaper and comes earlier. Add the increased damage to the sniper and you have an already extremely overpowered unit even stronger.

    T70 is fine. The Ostwind needs a buff (which the balance team fucked up). I just hope this patch fixes the ostwind buff PROPERLY.

    Considering the fact that they have just nerfed Centaur, I wouldn't count on any ostwind buffs outside of AA performance.

  • #165
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,773
    > @_Aqua_ said:
    > @Katitof make it relatively precise with flares as a warning and slower travel time perhaps? Keeps the one-shot wonder reliable while also adding reasonable counterplay.

    I always thought with its long travel time something like a sturmtiger sound when it fires and railway sound as it travels would be enough. Audio cues are under utilized
  • #166
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited April 2018
    Back to my experience, i wonder if faction was reversed, a vet3 pershing/is2 walks into my line of 2xpanther + 1xATG, will they have survived? I say yes. There is enough distance for allies heavies to avoid the sniped penned shots.

    As such, i don't think panther armour should be nerf in SBP. Besides surviving allies now immba TD, a med sherman/Cromwell/t3485 will kill a low health panther.

    2xjackson and 1xATG is nothing exotic composition, you still have enough for 3xrifles, RE, capt, lt, ambulance, 3 support weapons and a Pershing! At least that's what i made.

    This USF inf + armor composition is top of their class, most times coming out top regardless of versus wehr or okw. A 2 pop nerf to Jackson at most you lose the RE, but remember USF have free repairs PER armor! You don't need RE!

    Imo the original design team of coh2 had good ideas for unique flavors, just needed fine tuning. Once you have the community mod team revamp a whole but still closed off portion of the game, you are left with the likes of immba range TD, that speeds in and out of battles to freely health renerate
  • #167
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,773
    Also worth pointing out that while your armour is "regenerating" as you put it, its also generating additional manpower because of the lowered pop cap
  • #168
    1 year ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited April 2018
    Hull-down is now completely useless. Only the offense-bonus was worth it... without the extra range, what is the sense of immobility? The defense-bonus is minimal.

    Also the hull-down bug will still exist, if the squad will be completely killed while using the ability, the tank will have the blue-print of hull-down permanently while being mobile. You can't delete it and you can't set it again into hull-down.

    With the hull-down nerf, the tank should be able to do it by itself.
  • #169
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    @mrgame2 Except it would be astronomically easier to kill off one of the Jackson's than one of the Panthers if you had ANY OTHER SUPPORT instead of soloing them a heavy.

    Why do you think the Pershing would survive that scenario? It has 2 shots fewer health and the exact same armor as the tiger 1...You also say that scenario like the pak40 isn't massively better than the M1, especially at fighting heavies. Getting 2x AT gun as Ost or Brits can just be nasty.
  • #170
    1 year ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @mrgame2 said:
    Yes that was it. TA is supposedly the best tank with hefty resource penalty. The speed and helplessness it got taken is unsettling and too EZ. By over-extended, it was not supported just scouting. I managed to get 3 pen shot without it even realising from the FOW. When he tried to reverse, i moved my jacksons abit and continue penning, while ATG took another shot thanks to its ROF.

    I'm not sure I understand this, how did you score three hits from out of the fog of war on a TA? It has a massive sight radius, off the top of my head its 50. Even vetted jacksons only have 45, so it would have spotted your units first and fired.

    Then your opponent (who is already an idiot for sending in a TA unsupported) didn't pop PT smoke when your jacksons scored their first hits and proceeded to chase?

    Finally, considering that a tiger 640mp/230 fuel, and two jacksons are 760mp/280 fuel, not too mention the very dedicated counter to heavies like the tiger, I'm not really sure why your suprised that in that situation it is quickly reduced to molten slag.

    I am of the mind that the Jackson is currently god-tier in terms of at and does need a slight tune down, however its not their performance against heavies that really concerns me, I expect them to excel againt them. But I do find that they are far too effective against mediums/lights, leaving USF in a position where rifles and jacksons are all they need to field, as their td handles all vehicles regardless of size and class.

    I'm almost of the position that placing the easy eight/76mm mechanized sherman as a stock t3 choice, by placing emphasis on either of them being the units more suited to tackling axis mediums , the jackson is no longer in the awkward spot of shouldering all anti-tank roles and can be balanced accordingly.

  • #171
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,586

    @Widerstreit said:
    Hull-down is now completely useless. Only the offense-bonus was worth it... without the extra range, what is the sense of immobility? The defense-bonus is minimal.

    Also the hull-down bug will still exist, if the squad will be completely killed while using the ability, the tank will have the blue-print of hull-down permanently while being mobile. You can't delete it and you can't set it again into hull-down.

    With the hull-down nerf, the tank should be able to do it by itself.

    Range bonus stays.

    Only cooldown and reload are removed, because it turned Ostwind into murderous wipe machine according to Mr.Smith.

  • #172
    1 year ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,980
    Mr Smith also said that Grenadiers are the Gold standart of Infantry Squads so excuse me if I don't really consider his words to be in any way meaningful. Many things were said. Few things have happened that correlate with the words spoken beforehand.
  • #173
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,586
    edited April 2018

    @Hingie said:
    Mr Smith also said that Grenadiers are the Gold standart of Infantry Squads so excuse me if I don't really consider his words to be in any way meaningful. Many things were said. Few things have happened that correlate with the words spoken beforehand.

    Gold standard does not translate directly into nerfing every single infantry in game to their level, regardless of faction support weapons viability and squads base price and scaling.

    It simply means that equal resource investment of same type of infantry should not be overpowering one way or another.

    If you think you should be able to go against 3 tommie sections with dual weapons and 5th man with just 3 LMG grens, you're delusional. To equal out the investment, you'd have to throw at the very least 2 additional LMG grens.

    This is also why grens will never get raw stat changes(or any buff you so desperately cling for) and instead others will be tweaked, like rifles ages ago, cons last patch and tommies this patch.

  • #174
    1 year ago
    DucatiDucati Posts: 2

    I have serious concerns about the soviet sniper squad size reduction. I do not want a repeat of CoH1 sniper battles where every 1v1 devolved into counter sniping and the main infantry play was secondary. Its not interesting or fun. Its the reason I stopped playing CoH1.

    I am also concerned about the OKW's flame nade being locked behind tech. The OKW already struggles to clear garrisons with the flame nade.

  • #175
    1 year ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 2,992 mod

    How does soviet sniper squads go towards that ? IF anything those nerfs along with the other sniper nerfs makes it easier for infantry and other elements to counter snipers in general ensuring that you don't require only a sniper to counter a sniper. Which was essentially the problem before, especially vs soviet snipers.

  • #176
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,586

    @ImperialDane said:
    How does soviet sniper squads go towards that ? IF anything those nerfs along with the other sniper nerfs makes it easier for infantry and other elements to counter snipers in general ensuring that you don't require only a sniper to counter a sniper. Which was essentially the problem before, especially vs soviet snipers.

    Giving them a higher receieved accuracy would achieve the exact same goal without stripping asymmetry and mirroring yet another unique unit.

    Rec acc changes can be modulated to mirror survivability against small arms the exact same way as reducing health/model count to end up with same TTK for both without stripping unique strength(surviving countersnipe without incendiary) while maintaining unique weaknesses(massive bleed if under fire, risk of being OHK'd by mortar).

  • #177
    1 year ago
    alptekinalptekin Posts: 5

    Who is creating this balance,it s clear not community.They are breaking some units with all balance patches.And still they don t care community ,they think they are better know what is good for coh 2 ....And they think just balancing=nerf,there are more ways to balance,u can buff underpowered units for example.

  • #178
    1 year ago
    NapoqeNapoqe Posts: 47
    edited April 2018

    Panzergrenadiers with smoke grenade, I think would make it unbalanced. They already have good damage for medium to short range, one of the most powerful grenades in the game. And that would make it easier to get into the ideal combat distance, being good against non-elite long distance units. And thus devaluing a very important action of the mortars.

    I liked alterations of the Soviet Sniper to have only one unit in the squad. But I wish their ability be changed, they have a skill just like the mortar I think. And Sniper has great vision and stealth, I think this skill is not much used solely for the benefit of the Sniper.

    I wish you read the posts of this topic: https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/244159/wehrmacht-automatch-sdkfz-250-half-track

  • #179
    1 year ago
    I dont play much as SOV so i wont mention their sniper. But, as an UKF player, i really concern about the additional fuel cost and armor neft of the UC. I'm still new with the game and have bad micro, so i think i will hardly use the UC anymore for its price. If they can make UC capable or allow infantry to shoot from inside, it will be a different story.
  • #180
    1 year ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited April 2018

    @DarjeelingMK7 said:
    I dont play much as SOV so i wont mention their sniper. But, as an UKF player, i really concern about the additional fuel cost and armor neft of the UC. I'm still new with the game and have bad micro, so i think i will hardly use the UC anymore for its price. If they can make UC capable or allow infantry to shoot from inside, it will be a different story.

    The game really does not need yet another cheesy clown car. The armor nerf is nice because it gives infantry actually a fair chance to damage it. Cost nerf might be a bit over the top tho.

  • #181
    1 year ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,980
    edited April 2018

    @Katitof said:
    It simply means that equal resource investment of same type of infantry should not be overpowering one way or another.

    Right, thats why Grenadiers are completely outclassed from the word go by Rifles and Sectoids for a mere 16% difference in base cost. Upgrades only aggravate this problem. Totally justified by the immense ressource difference.

    But thats currently irrelevant. Whatver the ultimate goal of Mr_Smith and his balance cronies might be, judging by the patch notes the future of the Wehrmacht looks bleak indeed. For 3 Patches now I am waiting for considerable change in favour of Wehr, none which has appeared. T4 is getting even less appealing (if that was in any way possible) and the crutch that is the Stug is going to get nerfed by the picture of it. Nihil novi sub sole et felix qui rerum causas cognoscere potuit.

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.