DBP Balance Feedback

1141517192034

Comments

  • #482
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited November 2017

    I agree Wehr late game is non-existence even after this patch. Relic should come clean about late game faction and asymmetrical gameplay is no longer the goal of Coh2.

    As spoken, the allies TD buffer moons ago have negated Wehr slight tank advantage. Despite many still think this way.

    I like the Ostwind buff, but Panther seriously needs an accuracy buff. It madness Relic remove the Vet2 armor boost instead. Why nerf Panzerwafer? It is least effective of all the arty without going up to Vet2..

    Give Grens a choice of G43 and LMG, without need of doctrine. Wehr needs G43 available to all.

    Wehr has nothing late game against Allie inf. At least OKW have Volks spam + Luch + Sturm, even though these are expensive. Yet Relic did some nerf to them...

  • #483
    2 years ago

    @Hesky85 написал:

    • Grens die too fast because of 4 men squads even on Vet 3
    • Pgrens have to run close into the enemy to do any damage but its impossible vs 5-men-double-weapon allies squads. On the way to get close maybe 1 model arrive the optimal range do to some damage....

    Wehrmacht needs an 400mp elite squad (like Obersoldaten) more than every other faction!!

    This is why brummbar is designed as non-doc. Long-range armored howie that kill half of allied terminator-squad so pgrens can easily go closer and kill what remains.
    Problem is that brum can be too easily killed what is fixed in someway with new ostheer tech (when swaggbar comes earlier) and allied TD's are "nerfed".
    And, actually, only murrican or soviet infantry survives in late game: USF has majoritý of infantry anyway and focus on upgrades and saving veteraned squads not on vehicle teching and soviets simply do not have any late game terminators after penal nerf, so get ur veteraned pgrens on line and kill them, if infantry is your main late-game problem. In case of freedom blobs GrenLMGs+Mehwind or Swaggbar will give all required support.
    Axis infantry die in late game from arty, and this is the reason why obers are really rare, OKW prefer pfusies if volks are not good enough.

  • #484
    2 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited November 2017
    It would be interesting to give Ost-bunker same stats as trench. Normally it shouldn't be a big deal, because there are enough weapon-types with high aoe that counter it.

    E.g. Soviets have non-doc Molotov, Penal-bomb, demo-charge, Mortar, Zis-barrage, SU76-barrage, T34.

    But you can't snipe them anymore with every normal PaK and tank-destroyer.
  • #485
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    I like to see knight cross return!
    Make it T4, but give us those leather clad commando nazis!

  • #486
    2 years ago

    @Katitof said:
    Then get more of them.
    2 builders for any faction but OKW is the bare minimum.

    I feel like brit engineers are over performing in that regard. A 5 man royal engineer squad builds a mortar emplacement in 18 seconds, compare that to rear echelon or wehr pios building a firing position/bunker in 15 seconds.
    5 RE can also build a bofors in 24 seconds (or 4 in 30secs). A OKW flak built by way more expensive sturmpios takes 30 seconds.

  • #487
    2 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited November 2017

    @mrgame2 schrieb:
    leather clad commando

    It isn't possible to use blueprints of CoH1, I am sorry.

    The only unit that has similarities and has a leather jacket (only in winter) is the german officer.

    Summer:

    Winter:

  • #488
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,674

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Sand bags are over used, they used to be unique, i was against pios getting them myself because of that, but bunkers are neat and WAAAY under used aside from their abilities (probably because unlike the cheaper brit trench that recently lacked restrictions the bunker seems to be built with magnets designed so no shot,shell or mortar ever misses it)
    In theory a bunker would be a good way to reduce the wipe potential of the ever fragile ost infantry as well (cause again, unlike their British counterparts they cant just poof now we hit harder and are more durable)

    Completely agree on that here.
    To point out the extend how how overused sandbags are, look at UKF trenches, they cost 50mp and most people STILL prefer to get free sandbag over trench and UKF trenches are THE best in game.

    And not only ost bunkers, but USF fighting positions should get that kind of treatment, when fighting positions were introduced for the first time, I remember being convinced its something you'd build up quickly and garrison temporarily for the skirmish, yet they ended up being ost MG bunker, but not immune to small arms, because reasons.

  • #489
    2 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited November 2017

    @Katitof
    @thedarkarmadillo
    The people prefer the sand-bags because you stay mobile with them. you can dodge and run around and with some micro you will never get hit by mortars, grenades or flames. For me it would be better if you remove the trenches and all other emplacements instead. It depends how you want that your buildings influence the battlefield.

    Bring in Tank-traps, sandbags, wire, decent bunkers for every fraction. NO Emplacements.

    Why? Because they don't produces way-blockers. Also it was more fair, because every fraction was able to build any kind of defensives.

    I really liked how Vanilla-CoH1 worked. The bunkers were really decent, for my opinion. You build sand-bags and tank-traps for your infantry instead. (then brits arrived and destroyed the principle with their trench). It was more fun to build thing. Every game was individual because of the design how you was able to build this small defensive position.

    Now we have British cancer, spaming German bunkers and way-blocking trenches. Genius. :s

  • #490
    2 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited November 2017

    Beside, why you not play around with different Animation stats to simulate "Fox_Holes", different bunkers and trenches?


    If you make two tipes of trench you could make a more decent british one with mortar, to change it with the Emplacement. (this huge model and the syn-mortars can't be get balanced)

  • #491
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    @Glitshy said:

    @Katitof said:
    Then get more of them.
    2 builders for any faction but OKW is the bare minimum.

    I feel like brit engineers are over performing in that regard. A 5 man royal engineer squad builds a mortar emplacement in 18 seconds, compare that to rear echelon or wehr pios building a firing position/bunker in 15 seconds.
    5 RE can also build a bofors in 24 seconds (or 4 in 30secs). A OKW flak built by way more expensive sturmpios takes 30 seconds.

    I agree.

    You can attack while engineers are building, once brit complete a mortar, it take ages to kill it whereas axis bunker at half life can easily be destroyed.

    bofors are even more ridiculous, complete build = forced retreat.

    i am glad brit emplacements got nerf.

  • #492
    2 years ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Commander changes looking tight
    HOWEVER
    Ml-20 now awards only +1 shell...whats the point? Why not just have a cooldown increase? Or more pen so it can be better used against armour? Or flares? Or cap territory? I feel like its a wasted slot at this point..

    Would like to second this.
    Interesting doc changes, but just 1 extra shell as a vet bonus is, well, hardly a bonus at all, in my opinion.

    Conscripts

    • Oorah ability cost increased from 10MU to 15MU

    sadconscript.jpeg
    Can we maybe get a cost reduction to molly then? Since I have a feeling this nerf is possibly due to Oorah -> AT nade.

    In light of the recent changes made to Conscripts, to prevent them from scaling too well at higher veterancy with picked up weapon upgrades, the following change has been made:

    • Max number of slot weapons reduced from 2 to 1

    Not sure how big of an impact this will have on the game, but since, from what I gather, this change is mainly due to a single british commander, isn't it a bit unfair to effectively nerf cons not only because of a different faction, but also a different game mode? This doesn't apply to 1v1 after all. But hey, maybe it's not that big of a deal.

  • #493
    2 years ago

    Have a question for patch designers here:
    After penals got their AT-satchel removed only to PTRS-penal duty, will it remain if squad lose both PTRS-rifles by bad RNG?

  • #495
    2 years ago
    capiquacapiqua Posts: 270

    Good, I've seen part of the last matches of the 4v4 tournament:

    -Super heavy, are the units that tilt the balance.
    -Artillery also tilt the balance...

    ...and now with black Friday (Recoin loiter ability costs reduced from 80 to 60), this presents a huge advantage that favors arty in team games.

    IMO should revert the changues in cost recon and standardize costs in all and fix inconsistencies (50 recon pass Major,
    35 recon pass CAS, Cooldown ArtyflareOKW, etc).

  • #496
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    Bundled Grenades

    People seem to be forgetting that Wehrmacht does not only fight the UKF and the USF. WM also fights Soviet Union who has immensely large squads that are already hard to wipe to begin with. Revert the damage output changes for the bundled grenades and keep the AOE buff. Just because a grenade in USF and UKF got nerfed does not mean that WM's grenades should be nerfed too. Do the USF and UKF fight Soviets? I didn't think so.

    WM Panthers

    Panthers get swarmed by Allied/Soviet TDs and mediums all the time. Given their high pop and resource cost, a WM player cannot realistically produce enough Panthers to hold the line even with PaK 40 and infantry support. Why? Because PaK 40s get insta-wipied by mortar shells and Wehrmacht infantry are so squishy that they need to retreat even before the first wave of the attack ends. It's really almost comical to see WM's highest non-doctrinal tank getting slapped around by other tanks or getting ignored by infantry units. Give the Panther a DPS and accuracy boost so that it can hold off enemy tanks better. Restore its Vet 2 Armour bonus because flanking a Panther for me at least has never been a difficult thing. Also, improve its vet bonuses overall so that it scales better towards the late-game.

    WM/OKW Panzer IVs

    Seriously, the WM and OKW Panzer IV need another ability. T-34/76 has 2 non-doctrinal abilities i.e. Ramming and Secure Territory Mode. M4A3 Shermans have 4 non-doctrinal abilities i.e. HE shells, AP shells, Smoke, and Radio Net (Passive). Whereas the poor Panzer IV only has the mediocre Blitzkrieg Tactics, which have been nerfed over the years in its only bonus of a temporary speed boost. For the love of God, give the Panzer IV some special ability that aligns with actual German military practices. Maybe a passive boost that encourages players to adopt a more combined arms approach (e.g. nearby infantry squad presence boosts its rate of fire by 10%). If not, then boost its base stats or improve the Blitzkrieg Tactics ability so that it boosts not just speed but also rate of fire.

    Soviet M4C Shermans

    This tank's rate of fire seriously needs to be looked into. Its insane rate of fire decimates infantry, vehicles, and tanks alike. Enough said.

    WM Grenadiers and Panzergrenadiers

    I don't think buffing the Grenadiers' received accuracy will discourage players from producing Panzergrenadiers. Both of these units specialize in quite different fields of expertise with the former specializing in long-range combat (or at least supposed to) and the latter specializing in close-quarters assault. Grenadiers are so squishy that even the lowly Soviet engineer squad can damage it even when it is behind green cover whereas British Tommies still go about relatively unscathed even in no cover. Grenadiers need be more durable and reliable so that they don't get insta-wiped by a mortar shell or an HMG.

    WM SdKfz 250

    Please try putting a Panzergrenadier squad in one and order it to shoot a specific enemy squad when there are other infantry units nearby. The Panzergrenadier squad will not follow my orders. This needs to be fixed ASAP as it is quite frustrating to see a low HP target escape. Also, this is one of the most useless units in the game I have ever seen. No vet bonuses, no weapons, costs 5 pop and 30 fuel. This unit needs an overhaul.

  • #497
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited November 2017

    @Reichsgarde said:
    Revert the damage output changes for the bundled grenades and keep the AOE buff.

    Wait so you think it needs to be better than it already is? Seriously? I don't even understand how you can possibly have that position, it's easily one of the best grenades in the game. Also I genuinely question anyone who thinks grenades need to be able to wipe squads in order to be useful. By the way, it'll still be capable of that.....

    Trading 30-50 muni for a squad wipe is cheesy, no matter what units are involved. You deserve it if you're being inattentive, but the bundle grenade does not need 120 damage to be effective.

    @Reichsgarde said:
    I don't think buffing the Grenadiers' received accuracy will discourage players from producing Panzergrenadiers
    Grenadiers need be more durable and reliable so that they don't get insta-wiped by a mortar shell or an HMG.

    Target size changes won't effect their tendency to be mortar wiped (that would be squad spacing), and I would love a replay of your grens getting insta-wiped by an HMG. Red cover against a .50 is the only way I see that happening.

    @Reichsgarde said:
    Seriously, the WM and OKW Panzer IV need another ability. T-34/76 has 2 non-doctrinal abilities i.e. Ramming and Secure Territory Mode. M4A3 Shermans have 4 non-doctrinal abilities i.e. HE shells, AP shells, Smoke, and Radio Net (Passive).

    Are you really counting the shell toggle as 2 different abilities? Also why did you even bring up secure mode and ram? Neither one of those is as good as blitzkreig, which you are also wrong about.

    It was not nerfed to be just a temporary speed boost, it also grants -25% received accuracy to any vehicle that uses it, making it much harder to hit. That bonus used to be -50% which it was nerfed from since that is beyond absurd (I believe the OKWs combat blitz still gets -50% because that's just how they roll)

  • #498
    2 years ago
    RoastinGhostRoastinGh… Posts: 27
    edited November 2017

    I think that the cost of resource caches should be looked at.

    In 1v1s, they're not that useful, but as the number of players on your team increases, the amount of resources they produce is multiplied. This is what makes them so much more valuable in 4v4 games.
    Players, cost (cost per player)
    1, 250mp (250)
    2, 250mp (125)
    3, 250mp (83~)
    4, 250mp (62.5)

    So, my recommendation is to increase the cost with your team's player count.
    1, 175mp (175)
    2, 300mp (150)
    3, 375mp (125)
    4, 450mp (112.5)

    The numbers in my example still have the cache becoming more efficient with a higher player count, but on a smoother, less pronounced curve than in the DBP or vanilla game. This change would hopefully restore part of the risk-reward consideration in building resource caches which is very much lacking in current high-player-count games.

  • #499
    2 years ago

    @Reichsgarde said:
    WM SdKfz 250

    Please try putting a Panzergrenadier squad in one and order it to shoot a specific enemy squad when there are other infantry units nearby. The Panzergrenadier squad will not follow my orders. This needs to be fixed ASAP as it is quite frustrating to see a low HP target escape. Also, this is one of the most useless units in the game I have ever seen. No vet bonuses, no weapons, costs 5 pop and 30 fuel. This unit needs an overhaul.

    I agree that the SdKfz 250 needs some changes, especially the part about the garrisoned squad not taking orders. Also, a shared veterancy system with bonuses increasing the accuracy of the squad inside would be nice.

  • #500
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121
    edited November 2017

    All right, seriously. Just had two matches against Soviet Union and I couldn't believe what was happening before my eyes. Grenadiers do NOT stand a chance against Penal Battalions because Grenadiers literally melt away like butter. Same thing happens for Panzergrenadiers (I consistently lose one or two unit models when charging towards a Vet 0 Penals across a short distance with Vet 1 Pzgrens).

    Did Relic make Grenadiers even more vulnerable or make the Penals even stronger? Can someone please corroborate this by doing a test of their own? It seems Grenadiers simply cannot stand even a brief encounter with Penals or even Conscripts. I sincerely hope I am wrong or RNG Jesus simply wasn't there for me on those two matches.

    Also, there seems to be a bug for Stormtroopers as upgrading Panzerschrecks does not allow them to upgrade G43s. Please fix this.

  • #501
    2 years ago
    Kyle_REKyle_RE Posts: 484 admin
    edited November 2017

    Hey everyone,

    We would love to get your feedback on the following DBP pending change: USF Smoke Grenade. Click the link to answer the poll question.

  • #502
    2 years ago
    > @Kyle_RE said:
    > Hey everyone,
    >
    > We would love to get your feedback on the following DBP pending change: USF Smoke Grenade. Click the link to answer the poll question.

    I wonder if the results of this poll apply to this patch. If not, I want to know when it is applicable.
  • #503
    2 years ago
    thekingsownthekingso… Posts: 447
    edited November 2017

    The M36 jackson is too powerful and far to cost effective.

    I liked the soviet field hq changes but the price reduction is too much

  • #505
    2 years ago

    @ImperialDane said:
    The Jackson certainly didn't need those changes, certainly not if you ask veteran USF players like Dave. It's already pretty spammable in teamgames and only becomes more so now that it is harder to kill, i mean they didn't exactly improve the wehrmacht lategame to compensate, or the OKW lategame.

    Maybe that's cause US late-game is by far the worst? Which changes did the Jackson not need exactly? How about instead of just saying "this player says its a bad idea" you explain your own thought process for those of us who don't watch your casts and videos?

    And since when does being harder to kill increase spammability? Cost is the main feature of something that allows it to be spammed, the Stug and SU-76 get spammed into oblivion, but both of those are far easier to kill than a Jackson.

  • #506
    2 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,197 mod
    edited November 2017

    The Panther was supposedly spammable and that one is more expensive and harder to get than the jackson. And no, there is more to cost than spammability, it also needs to be worthwhile spamming. Again, they are essentially nerfing the panther, giving it no real advantage in return for it, because a 0.5 second increase in RoF is not really going to make it viable since it will still be bad at dealing with armour unless you have an advantage at which point you could go for more cost effective tanks, like the Panzer IV, whereas with the jackson a lot more actual improvements where given, while the thing it's basically already dealing with got weaker without being able to deal with it in return.

    For a claim of increasing strategic diversity they are so far only doing the opposite really, especially when it comes to the Germans, this will not in any real way make the Panther more viable because it will still be a bad choice compared to just sticking to Tier 3.

    Barely any players ever go for T4 in 1v1, unless they are massively ahead, otherwise it's pretty much handing the win to your opponent. Tier 4 is such a massive cost resource and time wise it's just not worth it. You will not be getting your money's worth out of a Panther or Sturmpanzer IV or a Panzerwerfer.

    And these changes will not remotely change that, if anything only make that stand out more as allied early game is buffed, meaning it is even less practical to even consider going for it because if you try, you are only going to get snowballed harder by the allies.

  • #507
    2 years ago
    Schwere_PanzerSchwere_P… Berlin, GermanyPosts: 23

    This is precisely what I am talking about. Relic either seems to be misunderstanding the current state of the game (mistaking superior WM/OKW player skills as evidence of the factions' OPness) or just dislikes Axis factions and wants to make a mockery out of them.

    Sure, if you play only USF or UKF or SU, then you would be welcoming these changes. I mean, what's there not to like about, right? Your early units were already so OP in terms of DPS and headcount. Overwhelm Grenadiers by simply ignoring their mediocre DPS and ridiculing their low numbers. Volksgrenadiers are now nerfed so the only fall-back option for OKW is now effectively null. Luchs will handle vehicles even worse now thanks to the nerf. 0.5 seconds boost? This has to be a joke, right? Do you honestly think this makes any tangible difference when you're still getting swarmed by 3 Cromwells/T-34s/Shermans/M10s/Jacksons? Also, do you really think giving this 0.5 second boost justifies the removal of the Vet 2 armour bonus? It's like if we give 1 to Axis, we need to take away 2 or even 3 from them.

    I really had high hopes that this DBP would set things right for WM and OKW so that Axis players can feel that they can at least look to the late-game to reward their efforts for staying alive long enough. Now I am just even more convinced that DBP should simply not happen.

  • #508
    2 years ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 121

    I mean, is it so hard to buff the Grenadiers? Buff their received accuracy so that they don't get killed by the slightest sneeze of enemy infantry units! I tested a Vet 3 LMG Grenadier squad vs a Vet 0 Soviet Engineer squad today. Both are out in the open with no cover and these Grenadiers lost 1/4 of their health before finally eliminating the engineer squad.

    This is the current sorry state of the Wehrmacht infantry. Grenadiers, Snipers, GrW34s, MG42s, Panzergrenadiers, PaK 40s all need some buff to be able to compete effectively with the Allies/Soviets.

  • #509
    2 years ago

    @ImperialDane said:
    The Panther was supposedly spammable and that one is more expensive and harder to get than the jackson. And no, there is more to cost than spammability, it also needs to be worthwhile spamming.

    In team games it is spammable, but so is everything. You get into a 45+ minute match, KTs are getting replaced minutes after they go down. My question is what about the Jackson changes make you think its going to be spammed more than currently? It is more reliable now, so if anything I should need fewer of them, hence why the cost was increased. There's less RNG in their new performance.

    I'm plenty aware of how much of waste T4 is in 1v1s. But that changes so drastically the moment you add one other player. It is plenty viable in 2v2s and up and my question is how can you say things like "Ost T4 needs their own version of Obers" just because its not good enough in 1/4 gametypes?

    @ImperialDane said:
    And these changes will not remotely change that, if anything only make that stand out more as allied early game is buffed, meaning it is even less practical to even consider going for it because if you try, you are only going to get snowballed harder by the allies.

    I do not comprehend this. How are you drawing a buff to entire allied early game out of the patchnotes? Cons get buffed and that means allied early game is only changing positively? Penals, Infantry Sections, Sappers, Rifleman smoke all receiving nerfs.

  • #510
    2 years ago

    @ImperialDane said:
    The Panther was supposedly spammable and that one is more expensive and harder to get than the jackson. And no, there is more to cost than spammability, it also needs to be worthwhile spamming. Again, they are essentially nerfing the panther, giving it no real advantage in return for it, because a 0.5 second increase in RoF is not really going to make it viable since it will still be bad at dealing with armour unless you have an advantage at which point you could go for more cost effective tanks, like the Panzer IV, whereas with the jackson a lot more actual improvements where given, while the thing it's basically already dealing with got weaker without being able to deal with it in return.

    For a claim of increasing strategic diversity they are so far only doing the opposite really, especially when it comes to the Germans, this will not in any real way make the Panther more viable because it will still be a bad choice compared to just sticking to Tier 3.

    Barely any players ever go for T4 in 1v1, unless they are massively ahead, otherwise it's pretty much handing the win to your opponent. Tier 4 is such a massive cost resource and time wise it's just not worth it. You will not be getting your money's worth out of a Panther or Sturmpanzer IV or a Panzerwerfer.

    And these changes will not remotely change that, if anything only make that stand out more as allied early game is buffed, meaning it is even less practical to even consider going for it because if you try, you are only going to get snowballed harder by the allies.

    Well said.

  • #511
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,674
    edited November 2017

    @Reichsgarde said:
    I mean, is it so hard to buff the Grenadiers? Buff their received accuracy so that they don't get killed by the slightest sneeze of enemy infantry units! I tested a Vet 3 LMG Grenadier squad vs a Vet 0 Soviet Engineer squad today. Both are out in the open with no cover and these Grenadiers lost 1/4 of their health before finally eliminating the engineer squad.

    This is the current sorry state of the Wehrmacht infantry. Grenadiers, Snipers, GrW34s, MG42s, Panzergrenadiers, PaK 40s all need some buff to be able to compete effectively with the Allies/Soviets.

    Have it ever occurred to you for a single moment that grens aren't getting changes, because they don't need any?

    They were never meant to work completely independently of support weapons and they never will.
    That's why HMG42 is in T0, that's why pios have longer sight range, that's why 251 and 222 were buffed, that's why PGs were made much more affordable and sustainable.

    And why vet3 squad wouldn't take damage from vet0 one? You're not supposed to be obliterating everything at vet3 without loses or damage.

    March deployment grens were biggest mistake relic ever made, not way to go for the unit-it will live in your memory, but it'll never come back to the game.

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.