Login

russian armor

[Winter Balance Update] UKF Feedback

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (42)down
8 Dec 2020, 16:12 PM
#201
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1



Feel free to compare out-of-cover DPS and in-cover DPS of non-upgraded infantry sections. You might find out something interesting.

Their penalties only matter when equipped with Brens, where the cooldown and reload of the weapon is so long that the penalties actually create a difference.

The only "huge buff" they get is the 0.05 target size difference they get when in and out-of-cover.


Yeah and are the IS stuggeling vs Grens\volks to begin with? Are bolstered IS stuggeling vs them? So pretty much, right now you somewhat have to get them into cover to win the engagements consistently, while out of cover its much harder to beat volks\Grens.

This upgrade removes single disadvantage of IS (aside from lack of snare) - performance out of cover and on top of that it provides long range DPS bonus against both mainlines which are supposed to be aswell used at longer ranges and are already stuggeling vs IS at such ranges.

To put it blantly, this upgrade is buffing IS out of cover and it buffs them even more IN cover via DPS increase. If you get default is (bolstered or not) and is with new upgrade and use them identically and how they are supposed to be used, its just a plain fat buff.
8 Dec 2020, 17:32 PM
#202
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

After some initial testing:
The new sight in cover at vet bonus indicator look great.

The new "Raid Package added" seem like a recipe for disaster since it allows Piat Blobs and one has to keep in mind other bonuses available to faction like Command vehicle aura and commander auras like "assault", "Advanced Cover Combat".
8 Dec 2020, 17:37 PM
#203
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

The stacking should be removed in a quick fix with the Raid package shortly.
8 Dec 2020, 17:39 PM
#204
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 17:32 PMVipper
After some initial testing:
The new sight in cover at vet bonus indicator look great.

The new "Raid Package added" seem like a recipe for disaster since it allows Piat Blobs and one has to keep in mind other bonuses available to faction like Command vehicle aura and commander auras like "assault", "Advanced Cover Combat".


The PIAT blob isn't a big issue since weapon slot is reduce by 1. But the stacking of bouns, especially capping and sprinting can cause concerns.

8 Dec 2020, 17:42 PM
#205
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

The stacking should be removed in a quick fix with the Raid package shortly.


It should be redesigned. Event the name of the upgrade feel off. I mean, "Raid section" make me think of a assault squad, but then you give them a scope rifle with long range profile ? The scope rifle should be somewhat on a recon/light infantry squad, and there was already pyrotechnics supplies with description said that it giving "field optics". Verry overlapping and off.

An other option can be moving the sight bouns from pyrotechnics to the raid section, edit the description of pyro and allow both upgrade to be buy on one squad, with each take a weapon slot. So a section with scope rifle and arty can be set up but at the cost of no weapon upgrade.
8 Dec 2020, 17:52 PM
#206
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

The stacking should be removed in a quick fix with the Raid package shortly.

Since the Officer designed is not working very well either, why not moving the Officer to T0 , reduce power level to around 260-280 and give him any capping bonus you think it appropriate.
8 Dec 2020, 17:52 PM
#207
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



The PIAT blob isn't a big issue since weapon slot is reduce by 1. But the stacking of bouns, especially capping and sprinting can cause concerns.


So 4 IS with Piat is not an issue?
8 Dec 2020, 17:56 PM
#208
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 17:52 PMVipper

So 4 IS with Piat is not an issue?


Much less of an issue compare to 4 pusilier with up to 6 panzerscheck.

4 raid section with piat is simple not coss-effecive.

Still, i dont support the setup.
8 Dec 2020, 17:56 PM
#209
avatar of Sully

Posts: 390 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 17:52 PMVipper

So 4 IS with Piat is not an issue?


Any number of IS with PIATs is not an issue.
8 Dec 2020, 18:22 PM
#210
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 17:56 PMSully


Any number of IS with PIATs is not an issue.
The "new" raid IS have no penalties out of cover...



Much less of an issue compare to 4 pusilier with up to 6 panzerscheck.

4 raid section with piat is simple not coss-effecive.

Still, i dont support the setup.

Any idea what the AI is of 3 AT PF?

In one of the game I tested using 3 Piat Raid IS and 1 extra for healing no weapons I got around 8k damage to infatry and around 200k damage to vehicles.
Pip
8 Dec 2020, 18:52 PM
#211
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

Honestly I'd have thought this "Raid" section idea would make more sense if the squad were given an SL with a Sten of some type (Thompson/STG-style "Assault rifle" rather than SMG profile) , rather than a scoped bolt action rifle. (Could even give them two, they'd be rather similar to (Although likely superior to) volks at that stage)

It feels slightly schizophrenic to give the squad a capping bonus, and removal of their OOC penalty... while slightly improving their max range performance, and worsening their performance at closer range.

Were I making changes I'd give the Scoped rifle to Pyro Sections, as other people have suggested, and the aformentioned Sten to "Raid Sections". It certainly "feels" more appropriate, but UKF do seem to have rather a plethora of SMG units already. (And specifically it feels like it might step on Assault Sections' toes a little, though obviously they're not quite the same)
8 Dec 2020, 18:57 PM
#212
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 18:22 PMVipper
The "new" raid IS have no penalties out of cover...


Any idea what the AI is of 3 AT PF?


They are AT squad, what is the point of compare AI ?

The Raid section can only equip 1 PIAT
And a raid section with a PIAT will simply not cost effective in both AI and AT. And why go for 4 raid section with piat when a pair of sapper can carry the same amount of firepower + snare at much cheaper in both MP and MU?

Blobbing 4 raid section with Piat wont provide enough of AT, they dont have snare and dont sprint in combat so no way to chase and finish off. The alpha strike of 4 PIAT will at best scare off a P4 and at the end their AI become lackluster, leaving you with a bunch of squad who cant do anything good.


It is like setup rifle with 1 bar and 1 bazooka, no one do that because it is not effective.

But still, let not go further into this. Since, after all, the upgrade being unhealthy is something we both see.
8 Dec 2020, 19:04 PM
#213
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

The easiest way wilk be to merge raid and pyro into "recon" section with arty, the scope rifle and the old 1.25 cap rate. No further work required.

Current setup of raid section promote blobbing and create unnecessary issue.
8 Dec 2020, 19:07 PM
#214
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



They are AT squad, what is the point of compare AI ?

The Raid section can only equip 1 PIAT
And a raid section with a PIAT will simply not cost effective in both AI and AT. And why go for 4 raid section with piat when a pair of sapper can carry the same amount of firepower + snare at much cheaper in both MP and MU?

Blobbing 4 raid section with Piat wont provide enough of AT, they dont have snare and dont sprint in combat so no way to chase and finish off. The alpha strike of 4 PIAT will at best scare off a P4 and at the end their AI become lackluster, leaving you with a bunch of squad who cant do anything good.


It is like setup rifle with 1 bar and 1 bazooka, no one do that because it is not effective.

But still, let not go further into this. Since, after all, the upgrade being unhealthy is something we both see.

A blod becomes a bigger problem when it combines both AI and AT is one unit type. I suggested you test in game and we can debate it later.
8 Dec 2020, 19:11 PM
#215
avatar of Quiritz

Posts: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 18:52 PMPip
Honestly I'd have thought this "Raid" section idea would make more sense if the squad were given an SL with a Sten of some type (Thompson/STG-style "Assault rifle" rather than SMG profile) , rather than a scoped bolt action rifle. (Could even give them two, they'd be rather similar to (Although likely superior to) volks at that stage)

It feels slightly schizophrenic to give the squad a capping bonus, and removal of their OOC penalty... while slightly improving their max range performance, and worsening their performance at closer range.

Were I making changes I'd give the Scoped rifle to Pyro Sections, as other people have suggested, and the aformentioned Sten to "Raid Sections". It certainly "feels" more appropriate, but UKF do seem to have rather a plethora of SMG units already. (And specifically it feels like it might step on Assault Sections' toes a little, though obviously they're not quite the same)


+1
8 Dec 2020, 19:14 PM
#216
avatar of Unit G17

Posts: 498

Why is this whole raid package necessary? On one hand it offers too much and too early for only 30 muni, not to mention how broken it can get when combined with advanced cover combat ability.
However if the intention is to simply delay IS capping bonus that was removed in 1.0, then why not just lock it behind Platoon command post for example?
8 Dec 2020, 19:36 PM
#217
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 19:07 PMVipper

A blod becomes a bigger problem when it combines both AI and AT is one unit type. I suggested you test in game and we can debate it later.


please read the end of my post. I simply dont have anything to debate. But when you are at it, you did the test with AI or player, i wonder ?
8 Dec 2020, 20:54 PM
#218
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1


However if the intention is to simply delay IS capping bonus that was removed in 1.0, then why not just lock it behind Platoon command post for example?


+1 on that. Back capture bonuses can be even bundled with meds\pyro supplies upgrade. It honestly feels kinda over the top change, for the simple reasoning behind its justification.
8 Dec 2020, 21:09 PM
#219
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

Capping bonus make little sense it if there is a need for it should be move to the officer.

(the officer could be moved to T0 and be readjusted as 260 unit)
Pip
8 Dec 2020, 22:02 PM
#220
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 21:09 PMVipper
Capping bonus make little sense it if there is a need for it should be move to the officer.

(the officer could be moved to T0 and be readjusted as 260 unit)


This makes some sense, though I think it might be hard to make a tier 0 260mp "Assault unit" both non-oppressive, and not rather useless in the later game. The fact the unit is limited to a single one at a time likely helps avoid some balance pitfalls, however.
PAGES (42)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

567 users are online: 2 members and 565 guests
Crecer13, kajalfw10
19 posts in the last 24h
47 posts in the last week
101 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44655
Welcome our newest member, kajalfw10
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM