Login

russian armor

Balance Preview Update 09/09/2015

PAGES (13)down
10 Sep 2015, 20:57 PM
#61
avatar of Fluffi

Posts: 211



EDIT I'm also worried that Volks Incendiary Grenades will be OP against emplacements since for a small amount of Muni you can hard counter an Emplacement (especially with a long Cooldown on Brace) 2 Grenades Spaced out a bit = GG Emplacements.


then why not give the incendiary to Sturmpios? They are more expensive, thus more seldom, thus more reaction time between using 'brace'. Also, it would encouraged more okw start builds (against brits, at least)

Also, it just suits them better, goddamnit >:(
10 Sep 2015, 20:58 PM
#62
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

Pls lower Infantry section costs :snfBarton:


They are appropriately priced for a squad with .8 received accuracy
10 Sep 2015, 21:00 PM
#63
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

Thank you for your ongoing responses in these threads Brad.

Do you plan to fix the USF .50 MG? Currently the USF .50 MG is suffering from two distinct problems.

The first problem is that the weapon itself has no MP cost so the crew costs an inordinate amount of MP (35) to reinforce. All other MGs and set-up weapons have an MP cost associated with the weapon that reduces the reinforcement cost of the crew.

The second problem is that the weapon team for the USF .50 MG has 25% more received accuracy than any other weapon team. This makes the .50 MG the easiest MG in the game to decrew.

These two problems combined cause the USF .50 to bleed horrendous amounts of MP to the point it is practically impossible to use.

Edit: Looks like the 25% received accuracy was fixed so only the high reinforce as a result of the weapon having no MP cost needs to be fixed.
bC_
5 of 5 Relic postsRelic 10 Sep 2015, 21:07 PM
#64
avatar of bC_
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 102 | Subs: 22

sorry for the delay on but the partiasian perma camo is fixed now, really weird issue had to just juggle the data into different spots but now it works 10/10 no kappa
10 Sep 2015, 21:13 PM
#65
avatar of Nabarxos

Posts: 392

any more USF changes?
10 Sep 2015, 21:17 PM
#66
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Sep 2015, 21:00 PMCabreza
Thank you for your ongoing responses in these threads Brad.

Do you plan to fix the USF .50 MG? Currently the USF .50 MG is suffering from two distinct problems.

The first problem is that the weapon itself has no MP cost so the crew costs an inordinate amount of MP (35) to reinforce. All other MGs and set-up weapons have an MP cost associated with the weapon that reduces the reinforcement cost of the crew.

The second problem is that the weapon team for the USF .50 MG has 25% more received accuracy than any other weapon team. This makes the .50 MG the easiest MG in the game to decrew.

These two problems combined cause the USF .50 to bleed horrendous amounts of MP to the point it is practically impossible to use.


The .50 doesn't have more received accuracy than any other weapons team
10 Sep 2015, 21:23 PM
#67
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



They are appropriately priced for a squad with .8 received accuracy

.80 accuracy is not the same as actual hp. It does make a different but there are ways around it (namely explosive).

right now the stg44 panzergrenadier cost less to reinforce (34) than the tommies(35).

10 Sep 2015, 21:25 PM
#68
avatar of 5trategos

Posts: 449

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Sep 2015, 19:17 PMdbmb

I would guess a change to the Brace mechanic is required - make it reduce damage only from indirect fire. Once this is made, I see no problem with the Brit player shutting down the functionality of the (very high upkeep) unit in exchange for surviving ISG / mortar bombardment. Once functionality is disabled, ground forces can move in and clean it up. That to me is tactics.


I think this wouldn't work because it leaves emplacements extremely vulnerable to ground alpha strikes. A couple of focused shreks would be enough to instantly remove a 400mp investment with minimal losses. There'd be minimal counter-play involved there as well.

It seems to me like the main problem here is brace functions too much like a hard-counter. If it's not active, your investment disappears too fast. If it's active, nothing can scratch it. If both the structure health and the dmg reduction bonus of brace are normalized, I think we can end up with a much better situation for everyone. The Brace bonus should be reduced, the base health (and armor?) increased so a concentrated attack that isn't repelled can take out the emplacement in a reasonable amount of time while also allowing ample amount of time to counter prolonged indirect fire from a single source.

In short, I think emplacements should function more like OKW structures. They're durable enough to sustain prolonged indirect fire but not enough to be careless about leaving them undefended for too long.
10 Sep 2015, 21:29 PM
#69
avatar of Zansibar

Posts: 158 | Subs: 2



They are appropriately priced for a squad with .8 received accuracy


35 mp per skull and an additional 300 mp for the upgrades is not appropiate pricing for a squad thats worse than Riflemen in almost every way.
10 Sep 2015, 21:37 PM
#70
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656



The .50 doesn't have more received accuracy than any other weapons team


Ah, I'm glad that got fixed. Then the only problem with the .50 HMG is the insane reinforce cost of the crew due to the weapon having no MP cost.
10 Sep 2015, 21:48 PM
#71
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned


35 mp per skull and an additional 300 mp for the upgrades is not appropiate pricing for a squad thats worse than Riflemen in almost every way.


Thats debatable

10 Sep 2015, 21:49 PM
#72
avatar of FestiveLongJohns
Patrion 15

Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Sep 2015, 21:07 PMbC_
sorry for the delay on but the partiasian perma camo is fixed now, really weird issue had to just juggle the data into different spots but now it works 10/10 no kappa


You're sorry for the 45 minute delay? HAH! Oh how times have changed, you guys are awesome. We all love this. Keep it up!
10 Sep 2015, 22:42 PM
#73
avatar of Horasu

Posts: 279

Now these are the changes I like to see. We'll see if Cromwells come too early or not, but overall I like how the fuel cost for Company Command Post was diverted to specializations. I felt like the 3 tanks in the CCP were largely cast aside for rushing both Comets and Churchills.

I take back what I said last thread, very well done. Could still use some fine tuning in the way of slight nerfs and buffs to certain UKF units, but we'll see what Relic has in store for us another day.
10 Sep 2015, 22:57 PM
#74
avatar of Horasu

Posts: 279

Oh, can anyone confirm if vet 2 tigers still have 55 or 56 range? I recall the 9/8 patch only reduces their sight range bonus from 10 to 5, not their firing range. Because if so, that shit still needs to get changed, hard.
10 Sep 2015, 23:01 PM
#75
avatar of Retaliation
Donator 11

Posts: 97

Is it possible to make brace apply it's benefits to only specific classes of weapons (i.e. flamers and explosives)?
10 Sep 2015, 23:04 PM
#76
avatar of Flying Dustbin

Posts: 270 | Subs: 1

Also I think it would make sense to give any unit with camouflage a hold fire ability, especially a 4 man mp-40 squad. You could get some really really good use out of the AT partisans by laying a mine, camo'ing and waiting for a good opportunity to open fire on a vehicle.


This +1.

Commandos and Snipers can hold fire which makes sense but I don't want my Partisans breaking camo trying to plink at some grenadier squad that is far out of the MP-40s effective range.
10 Sep 2015, 23:45 PM
#77
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

have brace work similar to the war speed, requiring a sapper repair after everytime you use it.

This way killing emplacement is basically a matter of chasing off any nearby sapper. Without any sapper nearby the british cannot brace and the emplacement become vulnerable.
11 Sep 2015, 02:56 AM
#78
avatar of ClassyDavid

Posts: 424 | Subs: 2

Any news on the Grenadier bug fix? With it they can go toe to toe with IS even if they are in cover. (The adding recieved accuracy and accuracy bonus twice.
11 Sep 2015, 03:09 AM
#79
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 967

In 3vs3 and 4vs4 their is no real solution to emplacement viability as ways to destroy them are too common.

Maybe for mortar pit, increasing their range by 15% could make them useful?

The rest is unplayable as they cost too much just to be obliterated by walking stukas, Cas, Arty,ht mortar fire or shreck blob e.t.c.


Maybe making them «very hard to destroy» but easily decrew and capturable... could be an option...

My 2 cents

Ps: Brace would add protection to the crew...
11 Sep 2015, 03:47 AM
#80
avatar of Hambone

Posts: 58

Any chance we could see the KV-1 turn into a real meatshield tank like the Churchill? Both were ultimately outdated early war infantry tanks with similar guns and armor. While the KV1 is cheaper, the two tanks aren't even in the same realm of survivability.

I'd like to see it get a fuel increase and become a real single-call in heavy to make the Church, particularly considering how alike the vehicles were.

Plus now that the B4 lost both precision strike and the majority of it's far radius aoe damage, it'd complete the commander a bit more.
PAGES (13)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

490 users are online: 1 member and 489 guests
Grim
10 posts in the last 24h
36 posts in the last week
148 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45049
Welcome our newest member, godrejsunriseestate
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM