Login

russian armor

Future Balance Items by Relic

PAGES (22)down
16 Nov 2013, 01:32 AM
#1
avatar of nigo
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15

community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/coh-2-balance-feedback/commander-balance/4292-future-balance-items


Soviet Industry no longer grants a build time decrease to structures
We with the build time decrease to building it gave players little time to react to incoming units and was a bit jarring to players to see their buildings built almost instantly. We hope with this change it gives some time for players that are playing against the industry tree.

Tiger Ace Command Point increase from 7 to 8
The increase CP change would allow players to prepare more for the incoming Tiger Ace. The unit overall is very good and feels fun and would like to maintain that but we understand it does come out a little to early for players to deal with it accordingly

Moving Vehicles now receive a 2x scatter penalty in addition to the 0.5 accuracy penality
Moving accuracy on vehicles has very little impact on their lethality vs. infantry; this is primarily evident on units such as the T-70 or Ostwind which have very low scatter on their main guns. In order to better align the moving penalty with intended consequences, vehicles now receive a scatter penalty while moving. This will reduce the lethality of all vehicles that move and shoot, with a major impact on vehicles vs. infantry and a minor impact on vehicles vs. vehicles.
16 Nov 2013, 01:49 AM
#2
avatar of rofltehcat

Posts: 604

I like that they are releasing notes prior to implementing them now, even if I don't like some of the changes.
However, I think fixing the messed up commanders should be a priority over implementing (potentially good but ultimatelly giant) changes like build time/starting MP and moving vehicle scatter penalty. These two changes alone have the potential to change the game a lot and with the current commander chaos they can't possibly be tested and balanced adequately.
16 Nov 2013, 01:52 AM
#3
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293

no im pretty sure they want to hear peoples opinions on them. none of those necessary make it into the final game.
16 Nov 2013, 02:03 AM
#4
avatar of akula

Posts: 589

sounds reasonable. anything to delay the soviet industry spam and the tiger ace change is positive.
16 Nov 2013, 02:10 AM
#5
avatar of Lichtbringer

Posts: 476

I still don't understand how the scatter affects the ostwind much?

Because the Ostwind has a huge ass Aoe it doesnt matter if the shots are a bit off or? In addition if his scatter is already low a multiplier will do less to him than the the P4 for example.

(Not that I think the Ostwind needs nerfing like the T70 :D)
16 Nov 2013, 02:51 AM
#6
avatar of sir muffin

Posts: 531

they are testing out solutions to the balance problems of this update on the beta test, i assure you relic is really trying to make sure that these commanders balanced!
the solution for industry being overpowered is very cool!
16 Nov 2013, 02:54 AM
#7
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Building things slower doesn't actually increase the timing of a T-70 hitting the field. It only reduces the amount of time that the combat engineers have to spend in base building, which still isn't very long. I'd much rather see some form of a change that would delay the initial T-70. Currently they can be chasing off your gren squads before Schrecks or PaKs are even out.
16 Nov 2013, 03:24 AM
#8
avatar of sevenfour

Posts: 222

Not sure about scatter. I agree with the proposed changes to tiger ace and soviet industry. The soviet industry however needs to be hit with the nerfhammer a bit harder imo.

EDIT:
they are testing out solutions to the balance problems of this update on the beta test, i assure you relic is really trying to make sure that these commanders balanced!
the solution for industry being overpowered is very cool!


1. I hope you are correct.
2. Relic shouldn`t have released these commanders in their current state in the first place. They overshadowed otherwise well done patch.
16 Nov 2013, 03:46 AM
#9
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

Wouldn't it be more prudent to remove the two commanders that clearly contradict the design of the game and to refund people who purchased them?

Redesigning the way tanks work just to balance one commander seems like an odd decision.

If we take into account that the t34/76's only at role is by flanking other tanks, a change like that might have an unanticipated effect on a unit that doesn't get any survivability or penetration bonuses with vet but max speed and acceleration. It's designed for hit and run tactics and will die just as quickly at vet 3 as it does at vet 2. Increasing the already bad accuracy of the t34 might cause a lot more problem then it will solve things.

If a change like this has to be implemented it might be more feasible to restrict it to the t70 itself.
16 Nov 2013, 03:49 AM
#10
avatar of sevenfour

Posts: 222

Good point by sherlock. I agree.

And sorry for spamming this thread, I`m gonna gtfo now.
16 Nov 2013, 03:52 AM
#11
avatar of blitz1337

Posts: 184

I think the movement penalty is a GREAT change. If it means t70's, t34's, ostwinds, 222's can no longer wipe squads on retreat then this is truely a needed change.

@sherlock - the scatter won't effect the t34 against tanks from what i understand. It will however help the pak from being flanked by t34's which normally die to 3-4 shots from a t34.

This will reduce the lethality of all vehicles that move and shoot, with a major impact on vehicles vs. infantry and a minor impact on vehicles vs. vehicles.
16 Nov 2013, 04:25 AM
#12
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

I think the movement penalty is a GREAT change. If it means t70's, t34's, ostwinds, 222's can no longer wipe squads on retreat then this is truely a needed change.

@sherlock - the scatter won't effect the t34 against tanks from what i understand. It will however help the pak from being flanked by t34's which normally die to 3-4 shots from a t34.

This will reduce the lethality of all vehicles that move and shoot, with a major impact on vehicles vs. infantry and a minor impact on vehicles vs. vehicles.


You're partially right: http://www.twitch.tv/pqumsieh/c/2662960

Scatter max distance doesn't affect the probability to hit a tank, however if scatter max angle is increased it will have a negative effect on tank battles. Furthermore the accuracy itself is decreased (0.5 accuracy penalty) this makes hitting a tank with a moving tank harder. This will mainly negatively affect units that are intended or designed around the concept of flanking, like the t34.

Due to the fact that they write scatter in general, I assume that it will affect scatter max distance and scatter max angle.
16 Nov 2013, 04:32 AM
#13
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

sorry, reply and edit shouldn't be right next to each other ;)
16 Nov 2013, 04:36 AM
#14
avatar of Turtle

Posts: 401

Yep, it'll lead to a more realistic shoot and scoot gameplay with tanks if they want to be more accurate (or scatter closer to infantry targets).

Scatter misses rarely hit the vehicles and vehicles aren't affected by HE explosions as much, so this won't affect vehicle on vehicle fights.

This will definitely tone down the T-70, but the T-70 will still be as useful as it was when sitting still. Not to mention it was already pretty accurate and this change only affects what happens when cannons miss.
16 Nov 2013, 06:34 AM
#15
avatar of JohanSchwarz

Posts: 409

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Nov 2013, 04:36 AMTurtle
This will definitely tone down the T-70, but the T-70 will still be as useful as it was when sitting still. Not to mention it was already pretty accurate and this change only affects what happens when cannons miss.


Generally cannons do not ever "hit" infantry, since they only have a target size of 1. The killing happens due to scatter at least 95% of the time.
16 Nov 2013, 06:43 AM
#16
avatar of Turtle

Posts: 401

Yeah, I know. However, it does seem that tanks like the T-70 does seems to directly hit quite often. What is its scatter size anyway?

Its scatter size may have been set to a very small amount due to its HE being small, and role as an infantry and light vehicle killing light tank. So, that 2x scatter on misses will be huge nerf for a cannon with such a small blast radius. Making the T-70 sit still to really cause damage makes it much more vulnerable.

I keep saying this, but it's work like this that barely keeps me in the game and community. I just don't know why they didn't include these before, and also take a bit more time to balance the DLC commanders.
16 Nov 2013, 07:16 AM
#17
avatar of nwglfls

Posts: 240

T70 is the issue here, no way to counter it when you spam 3 or more of them, just like brit Stag in Vcoh
16 Nov 2013, 07:41 AM
#18
avatar of Brick Top

Posts: 1159

They had already tried to nerf moving accuracy for vehicles (before these new commanders).

This is just step further becauce they have found their 1st nerf was not quite strong enough.. thats all.
16 Nov 2013, 07:42 AM
#19
avatar of Stoffa

Posts: 333

Relic really has to stop implementing changes to the live version after every brainfart. This, again, sounds like a very hasty fix to issues that should have never occurred in the first place.

Increasing build time of buildings will not delay the first T70, and it will certainly not reduce the spam of this unit. Changing the effectiveness of tanks vs infantry just because of Soviet Industry is a horrible idea and affects to game in many more ways than just the thing they're trying to fix.

Relic, if you're reading along: please get some help balancing your game from some of the top players. There's a couple people playing your game that can help you with balance, time to start listening to them cause my god: you're doing an awful job yourself!
16 Nov 2013, 07:53 AM
#20
avatar of MoerserKarL
Donator 22

Posts: 1108

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Nov 2013, 02:54 AMCieZ
Building things slower doesn't actually increase the timing of a T-70 hitting the field. It only reduces the amount of time that the combat engineers have to spend in base building, which still isn't very long. I'd much rather see some form of a change that would delay the initial T-70. Currently they can be chasing off your gren squads before Schrecks or PaKs are even out.


this! Good point CieZ
PAGES (22)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Russian Federation 19
Peru 7
unknown 5
United States 2

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

557 users are online: 557 guests
11 posts in the last 24h
35 posts in the last week
147 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45042
Welcome our newest member, benstahl
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM