GCS Balance Preview Feedback

124678

Comments

  • #92
    2 years ago
    MakcumMakcum Posts: 75
    edited April 2017

    Someone like take flamethrower for penals, maybe give them this ability and include possibility upgrade or PTRS or flamethrower?

  • #93
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    @Make_love_not_war ok i see. I think the dozer is under preforming, BUT the high costs for t4 imo make it ok for the units to bleed a little multu purpose, like the panther and its mgs, while nobody would call it an AI vehicle i CAN contribute and even fight off an unsupported squad with no/limited AT (more than can be said about the p4..) Likewise the brum can bring SOMETHING to the fight. Its all about costs here, tech mostly. Because if the 105 was an effective AI and AT unit we would see the old t34/85 dont tech and spam call in meta back with a wfa vengeance.
  • #94
    2 years ago
    Make_love_not_warMake_love… Posts: 166
    edited April 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo: Nice to discuss with you, because you are listening to arguments actually :) sadly you can't say this about everyone around here.
    Tech cost: I'm all in for binding all light/medium tank call-ins to tech (but keep them as a call-ins). That way all call-ins will stay the same in timing across the different game modes. I'm mainly into COH2 because of 3v3/4vs4 in teamspeak teames with very long timed buddies. The big battles along my friends are the real fun, not the individual 1vs1. Sadly call-ins come way later in 3vs3 and 4vs4 than their non-doctrinal tech counterparts because of fuel inflation. So Bulldozer having no tech cost and costing CPs instead is no advantage in this game modes, you had to build T4 long before already to stay in game. In fact Bulldozer comes so late at 10CP, that it nearly makes no sense to build it at all, because there are so much non-doctrinal hardcounter on the battlefield that can kill it easily. Pouring 14 population in such a unit without any AT capabilities is just a waste of ressources. M10 as the main reason to pick this commander is to late too in big games, so there is little reason to pick this commander at all. Thats sad because it limits 3vs3/4vs4 to very few commanders.

  • #95
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,037

    @Rilakuma said:

    @Lazarus said:

    @Rilakuma said:
    so fight frontal and not flanking?

    No. Flank. Just bring a mine sweeper and don't hug your local neighbourhood grenadiers. Believe it or not you have an army to support your tanks with.

    lol u must be brit legend indeed. lets say u are going to charge inside enemy jp4 position with comet . with that 60 : 45 range can u show me how u not to get close and successfully flanking it without getting no brain faust . and sweeper are obvious theory crafting cause okw are floating 300 + ammo for mine spams late game and its soft counter will not work everytime.

    You asked me to kill a Panther with a Comet, why are you talking about the JP4? You know how I kill JP4s? Not with tanks because the JP4 is a tank destroyer so doing so would be a phenomenally astronomically stupid idea. You want to kill JP4s use AT Guns or Fireflys. That's kind of the point of the Comet nerf - you actually have to build other tanks now. You'll learn or you'll quit the game. Doesn't matter either way.

  • #96
    2 years ago
    BaálthazorBaálthazor The shoreline by the river Styx.Posts: 1,092
    edited April 2017
    Infantry kills infantry
    Tanks kill infantry
    TD's kills tanks
    Super heavies kills everything

    Has this not been the basis of coh2 balance since time immemorial or am I missing something?

    Though with that being said, the dozer, cons, ISU and UC could all do with a buff atm.
    As an axis only player, neither of these units cause me much distress. Which is really a pity.
    The UC is meant to be a good all round pusher for the brits early game, but bar the pros, it's bullcrap atm.
    The dozer could do with a rof buff or accuracy buff.
    ISU is a joke atm!! Nobody builds it atm and for a good reason.
    Cons are jusy meh and have been for the longest while. Grens got alot more viable with the last patch, now what about the poor cons?

    I always said that the grens was priority one for future patches.
    No that they have been addressed, let's not forget about the cons!!
  • #97
    2 years ago
    PastulioPastulio Posts: 2,058

    "Lategame doesn't have to be a Brits-vs-OKW thing only."

    So you just removing Brits.> @Baálthazor said:

    Infantry kills infantry
    Tanks kill infantry
    TD's kills tanks
    Super heavies kills everything

    Has this not been the basis of coh2 balance since time immemorial or am I missing something?

    Though with that being said, the dozer, cons, ISU and UC could all do with a buff atm.
    As an axis only player, neither of these units cause me much distress. Which is really a pity.
    The UC is meant to be a good all round pusher for the brits early game, but bar the pros, it's bullcrap atm.
    The dozer could do with a rof buff or accuracy buff.
    ISU is a joke atm!! Nobody builds it atm and for a good reason.
    Cons are jusy meh and have been for the longest while. Grens got alot more viable with the last patch, now what about the poor cons?

    I always said that the grens was priority one for future patches.
    No that they have been addressed, let's not forget about the cons!!

    You should try playing Allies. To get whole picture.

  • #98
    2 years ago
    maldonmaldon Posts: 34

    hi
    i have a very large number of hours of game (coh1 coh2) this precision is important. i totally agree with other player, this game is unbalanced for the 3v3 and 4v4.The Germans dominate outrageously with their tanks, the end of game ( the jag
    is totally op ).60% of the defeats I suffered with my teammates are related to the arrival of the German tanks.But relic does not listen to his faithful and old players. Those who are since the beginning. you say have fun.....with okw yes.
    sorry for my english

  • #99
    2 years ago

    @maldon said:
    hi
    i have a very large number of hours of game (coh1 coh2) this precision is important. i totally agree with other player, this game is unbalanced for the 3v3 and 4v4.The Germans dominate outrageously with their tanks, the end of game ( the jag
    is totally op ).60% of the defeats I suffered with my teammates are related to the arrival of the German tanks.But relic does not listen to his faithful and old players. Those who are since the beginning. you say have fun.....with okw yes.
    sorry for my english

    The game is balanced with 1v1 and 2v2 in mind. Therefore, the other game modes will be less balanced. Relic probably believes that the way to attract more players is to hype up Coh2 in e-sports which is only a 1v1 therefore, 3v3 and above are neglected. So if u want a more competitive game, play 1v1 or 2v2.

  • #100
    2 years ago
    capiquacapiqua Posts: 270

    GCS v1.1 Maybe Comet cost reduction?

  • #101
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @capiqua said:
    GCS v1.1 Maybe Comet cost reduction?

    Not really an objective piece of evidence, no mention of ROF differences? Scatter? AOE? Tech costs? Another rather important factor.... what is it?

    Hmm.

    Of course!

    The fact Comets can engage infantry effectively.

    So not only are they close to being on equal footing with panthers in both durability and at, but they have better utility and are completely comfortable in going toe to toe with all but the heaviest tanks, they can happily engage anything on foot all the way up to at guns.

    Panthers really, really, cannot.

    So cost wise, I understand why the comet is priced higher, as it can handle a far larger amount of roles. When the Panthers are tweaked into an acceptable platform, I could quite easily see their pop cost being raised to 18, but in terms of cost compared to performance, the comet is good value considering its currently a non-doc mini tiger.

  • #102
    2 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited April 2017

    Really good patch! love it.

    @capiqua No, why? Tankhunter vs Battletank? So maybe a cost reduction of Tiger too?


    Balance-Team, can you change some explosive effects for cosmetics? :) Can you give Pershing and Jackson same projectile explosion animation as Ost Tiger? The have all around caliber 88 too 90. They don't need this huge effect, it looks strange. Same for Firefly, can you give it same as Panther? I made a little mod for that, it looks much nicer.

  • #103
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited April 2017

    V1.1 UPDATE
    GENERAL
    Wreck Values Normalized

    Since you are normalizing the value of wreck I would suggest you also normalizing the time to salvage. OKW Thorough salvage takes around 20 sec for any type of wreck which is way to long compared to UKF/SOVIET.

  • #104
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723

    V1.1 UPDATE
    OKW
    Command Panther

    Imo part of the issue of the unit is that it perform both as support unit and as killer unit. The unit would work allot better if it perfromed worse when firing on the marked target. Maybe give it some penalties (25-50) when firing on mark target itself.

  • #105
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641
    edited April 2017

    Aaaand there goes the ONLY reason why anyone would ever pick Tank Hunters Doctrine which offered no end game and no early game.

    Why upgrade results was nerfed to the ground, but it still costs 100 muni to upgrade it?

    I completely disagree with and hate the change, because the only reason anyone would ever pick this doctrine was now removed from the game.

    What is the reasoning for it?
    No one ever asked for this change nor anyone ever complained and last of all - no one even "abused" it because of how "popular" the doctrine was.

    I thought the patch was supposed to address meta units, since when this thing is meta? Someone accidentally picked it for some tourney?

    Maybe you should now normalize "allied fuel drop" with axis supply drop too?
    I honestly can't see a singular reason why not.
    Apparently asymmetry isn't welcomed any more.

  • #106
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723

    The change to salvage is correct and it was asked from the community not for tank hunter commander so much as for UKF Tactical support regiment.

    Soviet engineer upgrade should see a cost reduction or/and buff maybe some repair speed bonus.

  • #107
    2 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343
    edited April 2017

    @Katitof said:
    Aaaand there goes the ONLY reason why anyone would ever pick Tank Hunters Doctrine which offered no end game and no early game.

    Why upgrade results was nerfed to the ground, but it still costs 100 muni to upgrade it?

    I completely disagree with and hate the change, because the only reason anyone would ever pick this doctrine was now removed from the game.

    What is the reasoning for it?
    No one ever asked for this change nor anyone ever complained and last of all - no one even "abused" it because of how "popular" the doctrine was.

    I thought the patch was supposed to address meta units, since when this thing is meta? Someone accidentally picked it for some tourney?

    Maybe you should now normalize "allied fuel drop" with axis supply drop too?
    I honestly can't see a singular reason why not.
    Apparently asymmetry isn't welcomed any more.

    Both Soviet and UKF salvage use the same values. Thus, we couldn't fix Tactical support without ruining Soviet salvage :(

    In the future, when addressing useless commander abilities enters scope, Tank Hunter salvage kits will get a generous price decrease.

  • #108
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @Mr_Smith Is it possible to rework OKW salvage into a system that acts as a decent alternative to caches? Something like for example any tank wrecks (not light vehicles like Kubels), provide a fixed bonus income of fuel for say 2-3 mins instead of the current one time instant chunk.

  • #109
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641

    @Mr_Smith said:

    @Katitof said:
    Aaaand there goes the ONLY reason why anyone would ever pick Tank Hunters Doctrine which offered no end game and no early game.

    Why upgrade results was nerfed to the ground, but it still costs 100 muni to upgrade it?

    I completely disagree with and hate the change, because the only reason anyone would ever pick this doctrine was now removed from the game.

    What is the reasoning for it?
    No one ever asked for this change nor anyone ever complained and last of all - no one even "abused" it because of how "popular" the doctrine was.

    I thought the patch was supposed to address meta units, since when this thing is meta? Someone accidentally picked it for some tourney?

    Maybe you should now normalize "allied fuel drop" with axis supply drop too?
    I honestly can't see a singular reason why not.
    Apparently asymmetry isn't welcomed any more.

    Both Soviet and UKF salvage use the same values. Thus, we couldn't fix Tactical support without ruining Soviet salvage :(

    In the future, when addressing useless commander abilities enters scope, Tank Hunter salvage kits will get a generous price decrease.

    Well, then I can only hope you'll be allowed to work on these useless commanders sooner then later, there is way too many of them.
    I hate to see changes where one faction gets changes only because it took the flak from another one :(

  • #110
    2 years ago
    Can we stop nerfing the command panther now?? Before it gets out of hand!
  • #111
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,037

    On the Command Panther, any comment on why we aren't normalizing it by putting it in a tech structure?

  • #112
    2 years ago
    javabaljavabal Posts: 88

    relic here is the proof, 1vs1, the Volks win always vs Conscript. This is not a problem only in 3vs3 or 4vs4, is a general problem:

    I write a comment for the video that I liked:

    "axis fanboi: OMG penal so OP so nerf them
    axis fanboi: OMG they using maxim tactic spam,

    Relic do something!!
    what about make conscript better?

    axis fanboi : nope they're fine. they shouldn't beat my superior cheap ass volkgrenadier community in a nutshell..."

  • #113
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Wouldn't mind seeing the command panther tied to tech, imo the biggest problem wasnt even the statsor bonuses or vet orr aura but the fact that it was a no tech panther tank...
  • #114
    2 years ago

    @Mr_Smith: Is there a chance that you will be allowed to retouch ressource inflation in 3vs3 and 4vs4 in the future to bring more balance and the timing of 1vs1 to this gamemodes?

  • #115
    2 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,140 mod

    @Lazarus said:
    On the Command Panther, any comment on why we aren't normalizing it by putting it in a tech structure?

    Not much of a tech structure with OKW to normalize it.

  • #116
    2 years ago
    capiquacapiqua Posts: 270

    Good v1.2 <3

    When fix, Hold the line ?

  • #117
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641

    I..... don't see a point or use for the new vet1 ability of maxim.

    10 sec prep time? For real? Is it THAT powerful to have longer preparation time then KV-2 deployment?

  • #118
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723

    V1.2 UPDATE
    Other units with rotation above 32 are
    T-34/76 (36)
    Valentine 38(!)

  • #119
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    I agree with @katitof. Force reload, requiring full bursts and no refund for pack up seems more than enough without a 10 second set up. I mean if a simple reload is enough to turn the mg42 into a meat ginder/maximum suppression platform and light vehicle eraser surely it would be enough for the maxim....
  • #120
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,037
    Nevermind the actual ability cost - I thought the point was to discourage Maxim spam? If I want to get the most out of this ability (not switching targets) I better get enough Maxims to match enemy infantry 1 to 1. This ability encourages Maxim spam while making use of single Maxims more difficult - which entirely defeats the purpose of the change.
  • #121
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    I REALLY like the idea of the huge bursts, but everything else is so debilitating you would be better off with an uninspired passi e buff than going the kv-2 cap territory route (as in needs to get vet 2 before it actually gets anything resembling not being a green unit)

    Fuck shitty asses vet abilities that are are moee trouble than they will ever be worth...
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.