Login

russian armor

What is up with M8A1(Scott) change?

31 Aug 2021, 03:56 AM
#41
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 959

This is wrong on many levels. Assuming both parties are of equal skill Panzer IV should come out before Sherman does or at about the same time. If they choose to go M8 Scott first then they leave themselves open to get dived by my tanks. If the Whermacht player has no tanks out on the field before USF can manage to get Double M8 Scotts then he probably already lost well before that point. I personally have never lost to any USF player who made M8 Scots pre-nerf or not. Are they annoying as hell? Sure but so were Soviet Clown Cars back in the day with Snipers in them and people cried nonstop about how overpowered it was yet it never stopped me from winning. It was a L2P issue. After nerf M8 Scott just tickles my units and is nothing but a glorious smoke thrower.


The issue wasn't USF rushing M8s, it was them getting them later, especially in team games. By mid/late game the dual scotts could be defended by M36s, SU85s, Fireflies, etc. at which point they were untouchable via tank rushes (at least, with favorable econ outcomes). The obvious counter to that defensive tank line was Schrecks and Paks, but double Scotts countered those very well when used correctly. The game needs to be balanced (to some degree, anyway) in all modes, and double scotts were a serious problem in team games.

As for your experience, or sov clown cars; that's fine. However, many other players at both higher and lower levels had problems with it, and more importantly, it was incredibly 'un-fun' to play against; "This is miserably oppressive but I can still win against it" simply isn't good game design.

Second why are people making LMG Grens vs USF without grabbing Ambush Camo, G43 or Veteran Squad Leaders? These are significantly more useful vs USF as they can protect your MG from flanks all game while also being significantly more mobile than LMG Grenadiers. If they are spamming LMG Grenadiers and getting owned by M8 Scotts then they deserve to lose. Different commanders are good/better vs different factions (shocker). Even pre-nerf M8 Scotts were never scary because of the timing that they come into play when you are (should be) shifting to tanks at that point. Mortar Halftrack, Regular Mortar, or even Pak Howitzers are more dangerous than M8 Scotts due to the timing that they arrive.


CoH2 is balanced around stock roster vs. stock roster, with the doctrine abilities adding flavor or countering other doctrine abilities. The goal has always been to make it possible for the game to be played without specific doctrines being 'required' vs. certain factions. This hasn't always been the case, as we've seen with various units and abilities, but it has been the goal; "the basic mainline unit isn't viable, you must use a doc locked unit" isn't a solution.

As for the comparison to MHTs, Mortars and Paks, the difference there is that all of them require being setup, and react to moving units quite slowly (via rotation). The Scott could fire fairly accurately on the move, and could easily react to moving units.

The over-all result was that static units, such as the MG42, Pak and LMG-gren were destroyed extremely quickly by the scott, and moving wasn't viable, as none of them can shoot on the move. Yes, there were other choices such as Pgrens and Doc-locked choices, but having effectively the entire default hard-countered by a stock unit just wasn't good game design.

As a counter example, imagine the impact on USF if the Ostwind did significantly more damage to moving units, to the point where it could wipe a vet 3 squad in less than a second. You'd be safe if you remained stationary, but then could be easily beaten by long-range units such as OST's LMG Grens or Mortars. This would be effectively the same thing in terms of design; horrible, as USF relies heavily on mobility.

Also remember when USF had double LMG and could throw smoke? (Also pre nerf M8 Scott Period) that never really changed Axis win rates as more experienced players just adapted (and made use of mines for the incoming smoke that would eventually come and Panzer Grenadiers)


Double LMG rifles were annoying, but as you said, could be dealt with; however, their existence also didn't counter an entire factions starting roster. In any event, this was also nerfed because it just wasn't fun to play against; blobs aren't interesting.

Everything you mentioned is basically people who are bad at the game and don't know or want to adapt. The fact of the matter is that M8 Scott is a trash unit in a faction that is poorly designed with an arsenal of extremely sub par units held together by bandaids and no amount of stat adjustments will fix it unless they address the root of the problem which is the poor faction design.


Just about every balance issue can be boiled down to "L2P" if you really want to, but it's not good for the game long-term. If the game isn't fun, people stop playing; so over-performing units get nerfed - especially if that performance requires very little user input to attain.

Does USF need a stock arty unit, and some late-game blob control? Sure; but not a form that can delete squads instantly with effectively no cooldown (or user input).
31 Aug 2021, 06:11 AM
#42
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 772



Are you sure you are not mistake Priest from Scott?

it does have over 100 range, but you need vet 3 for it.

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 03:05 AMMMX



As usual, you seem to be willfully oblivious to the fact that despite the hefty nerf to the AoE the Scott received major buffs to barrage scatter, reload and shell count to make up for the loss in raw damage...

this. I tried "new" Scott on Ostruppen and it hardly oneshots. I think Scott still needs something. It may be alright vs HMG, but AT guns are able just to move away. Perhaps move "-40% recharge time" to vet 1 and smoke to vet 2, or increase ROF a bit to increase its dps
31 Aug 2021, 06:22 AM
#43
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 03:05 AMMMX



As usual, you seem to be willfully oblivious to the fact that despite the hefty nerf to the AoE the Scott received major buffs to barrage scatter, reload and shell count to make up for the loss in raw damage. The problem with the revised AoE back then was that the shells were no longer able to one-shot full-health models, which arguable made the barrage less valuable overall. However, the "small for nothing" buff in the beta aims to fix exactly this by giving the Scott at least some OHK potential back. That may not look like much but is actually a significant performance boost, even though I personally think the unit deserves better than TD-level OHK radius (maybe at least 0.5 to 0.75 m). If that alone will be enough to make the Scott viable remains to be seen I guess.


And yet the barrage does nothing relevant. Balance team trashed the unit because it annoyed them on team game but with no clue to what to do with and how to articulate it around USF gameplay.
Vaz
31 Aug 2021, 07:02 AM
#44
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158



The issue wasn't USF rushing M8s, it was them getting them later, especially in team games. By mid/late game the dual scotts could be defended by M36s, SU85s, Fireflies, etc. at which point they were untouchable via tank rushes (at least, with favorable econ outcomes). The obvious counter to that defensive tank line was Schrecks and Paks, but double Scotts countered those very well when used correctly. The game needs to be balanced (to some degree, anyway) in all modes, and double scotts were a serious problem in team games.

As for your experience, or sov clown cars; that's fine. However, many other players at both higher and lower levels had problems with it, and more importantly, it was incredibly 'un-fun' to play against; "This is miserably oppressive but I can still win against it" simply isn't good game design.



CoH2 is balanced around stock roster vs. stock roster, with the doctrine abilities adding flavor or countering other doctrine abilities. The goal has always been to make it possible for the game to be played without specific doctrines being 'required' vs. certain factions. This hasn't always been the case, as we've seen with various units and abilities, but it has been the goal; "the basic mainline unit isn't viable, you must use a doc locked unit" isn't a solution.

As for the comparison to MHTs, Mortars and Paks, the difference there is that all of them require being setup, and react to moving units quite slowly (via rotation). The Scott could fire fairly accurately on the move, and could easily react to moving units.

The over-all result was that static units, such as the MG42, Pak and LMG-gren were destroyed extremely quickly by the scott, and moving wasn't viable, as none of them can shoot on the move. Yes, there were other choices such as Pgrens and Doc-locked choices, but having effectively the entire default hard-countered by a stock unit just wasn't good game design.

As a counter example, imagine the impact on USF if the Ostwind did significantly more damage to moving units, to the point where it could wipe a vet 3 squad in less than a second. You'd be safe if you remained stationary, but then could be easily beaten by long-range units such as OST's LMG Grens or Mortars. This would be effectively the same thing in terms of design; horrible, as USF relies heavily on mobility.



Double LMG rifles were annoying, but as you said, could be dealt with; however, their existence also didn't counter an entire factions starting roster. In any event, this was also nerfed because it just wasn't fun to play against; blobs aren't interesting.



Just about every balance issue can be boiled down to "L2P" if you really want to, but it's not good for the game long-term. If the game isn't fun, people stop playing; so over-performing units get nerfed - especially if that performance requires very little user input to attain.

Does USF need a stock arty unit, and some late-game blob control? Sure; but not a form that can delete squads instantly with effectively no cooldown (or user input).


USF is never untouchable by tank rushes
31 Aug 2021, 09:45 AM
#45
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3106 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 03:05 AMMMX
As usual, you seem to be willfully oblivious to the fact that despite the hefty nerf to the AoE the Scott received major buffs to barrage scatter, reload and shell count to make up for the loss in raw damage. The problem with the revised AoE back then was that the shells were no longer able to one-shot full-health models, which arguable made the barrage less valuable overall. However, the "small for nothing" buff in the beta aims to fix exactly this by giving the Scott at least some OHK potential back. That may not look like much but is actually a significant performance boost, even though I personally think the unit deserves better than TD-level OHK radius (maybe at least 0.5 to 0.75 m). If that alone will be enough to make the Scott viable remains to be seen I guess.

The more I look at it, the more the changes failed.
The scatter was the only thing out of this list ending up to be a real buff. The other buff was the barrage CD, but that was traded for autofire reload.
The barrage reload buff is about 90% of the previous reload, which is decent. But what does it do? AoE has been changed from 'one hit does very good damage' to 'one hit barely matters' (at least for healthy squads). This means you absolutely need a second hit to get something out of it. The scatter buff increases the chances to do so, the reload as well but overall very little. You have about 4.5 seconds to move out of the barrage, so I assume in most cases the second shot will have a chance to hit the team weapon again. The 4.5 s delay is obviously better than a 5 s delay, but overall not THAT much. To repeat myself, especially since the second shot changed from 'bonus damage' to almost mandatory to achieve actual damage.
This leaves us with the shell count buff. The barrage got a 5th shell instead of previously 4. Against infantry, this does not matter since they will be long gone when the fifth shell is fired anyway. It also does not contribute much to area denial since it comes only about 2 seconds later than old barrage due to the reload buff. The fifth shell is only good against static emplacements. However, damage got nerfed at the same time, giving both new and old barrage a max damage of 400 if all shells hit. With the better scatter, I'd say it is a minor buff against emplacements, but nothing more.
MMX
31 Aug 2021, 10:24 AM
#46
avatar of MMX

Posts: 999 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 06:22 AMEsxile


And yet the barrage does nothing relevant. Balance team trashed the unit because it annoyed them on team game but with no clue to what to do with and how to articulate it around USF gameplay.


The more I look at it, the more the changes failed.
The scatter was the only thing out of this list ending up to be a real buff. The other buff was the barrage CD, but that was traded for autofire reload.
The barrage reload buff is about 10% of the previous reload, which is decent. But what does it do? AoE has been changed from 'one hit does very good damage' to 'one hit barely matters' (at least for healthy squads). This means you absolutely need a second hit to get something out of it. The scatter buff increases the chances to do so, the reload as well but overall very little. You have about 4.5 seconds to move out of the barrage, so I assume in most cases the second shot will have a chance to hit the team weapon again. The 4.5 s delay is obviously better than a 5 s delay, but overall not THAT much. To repeat myself, especially since the second shot changed from 'bonus damage' to almost mandatory to achieve actual damage.
This leaves us with the shell count buff. The barrage got a 5th shell instead of previously 4. Against infantry, this does not matter since they will be long gone when the fifth shell is fired anyway. It also does not contribute much to area denial since it comes only about 2 seconds later than old barrage due to the reload buff. The fifth shell is only good against static emplacements. However, damage got nerfed at the same time, giving both new and old barrage a max damage of 400 if all shells hit. With the better scatter, I'd say it is a minor buff against emplacements, but nothing more.


I don't disagree tbh, especially with the 'one hit barely matters' part. Thus raising the max AoE damage back to 80 seems like a good call for me, though in conjunction with the now tiny max AoE radius this is arguably not gonna do all too much.
Overall I guess the intention of the changes was to transform the barrage from an inaccurate but deadly anti-blob tool into a dedicated counter for team weapons. In this role the higher accuracy and slightly faster payload delivery does indeed matter, plus weapon teams are usually less likely to move out of harms way right after the 1st shell hits. In that respect I think the changes could work quite well, at least if the OHK radius were to go back up a bit again. OTOH, is of course questionable if USF really needed a unit for this specific purpose instead of a non-doc anti-blob tool in the first place.
31 Aug 2021, 10:55 AM
#47
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243



Are you sure you are not mistake Priest from Scott?


since you cant read: i talked about the non nerfed scott.
31 Aug 2021, 10:56 AM
#48
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243



If you only would read the posts a litte bit above your post, you could avoid such silly mistakes. I'll repost the february patch notes I posted here just for you:

Old patch note (february):
Auto-fire range from 60 to 50
HE Barrage scatter max from 10 to 7
HE Barrage Damage from 100 to 80
HE Barrage AOE damage from 1/0.25/0.1 to 0.75/0.4/0.2
HE Barrage AOE distance from 1/2/3 to 0.75/2/4
HE Barrage Angle scatter from 7 to 6
HE Barrage shell count from 4 to 5
HE Barrage reload from 2.75/2.9 to 1.75/2.9


In addition, since we were talking about HE Barrage all the time, it is not about no micro at all. Autofire at range 80 to 100 would be no micro from a relative safe distance. Shooting at moving units with a barrage is even more difficult, it needs skill/foresight.
The current autofire is pretty defensively on the other side, if you want to use it aggressively you have to move your squishy small tank into a dangerous area where it can get caught by a push or some unseen AT.





since you cant read: i talked about the non nerfed scott.
31 Aug 2021, 16:03 PM
#49
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658




Does USF need a stock arty unit, and some late-game blob control? Sure; but not a form that can delete squads instantly with effectively no cooldown (or user input).



The M8 Scott never deleted full squads though at any point in COH2's history, you are exaggerating its effectiveness and making it seem like it was a Sturmtiger with no cooldown that deletes the entire Whermacht roster when that is false. Even if it was true (its not) how is that any different from Dual Panzerwerfers which can make it almost impossible to capture anything without getting squads deleted and are far deadlier as well as being able to damage vehicles.

Why is it ok for Whermacht to have the ability to delete squads with Panzerwerfers but its outrageous for USF to have that same ability? That mentality of yours is exactly why Axis have almost 60% win rate in team games because of bias like this that exists. If one faction has the ability to delete full squads then either all factions should have a similar level to do so or none of them should.

Every Faction should have the same access to tools in their stock roster no if and or buts about it. As long as Panzerwerfer/Stuka exist then the M8 Scott should be in a similar realm to those units not vastly sub-par that the Stock Whermacht mortar out performs it.
31 Aug 2021, 16:39 PM
#50
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515




The M8 Scott never deleted full squads though at any point in COH2's history, you are exaggerating its effectiveness and making it seem like it was a Sturmtiger with no cooldown that deletes the entire Whermacht roster when that is false. Even if it was true (its not) how is that any different from Dual Panzerwerfers which can make it almost impossible to capture anything without getting squads deleted and are far deadlier as well as being able to damage vehicles.

Why is it ok for Whermacht to have the ability to delete squads with Panzerwerfers but its outrageous for USF to have that same ability? That mentality of yours is exactly why Axis have almost 60% win rate in team games because of bias like this that exists. If one faction has the ability to delete full squads then either all factions should have a similar level to do so or none of them should.

Every Faction should have the same access to tools in their stock roster no if and or buts about it. As long as Panzerwerfer/Stuka exist then the M8 Scott should be in a similar realm to those units not vastly sub-par that the Stock Whermacht mortar out performs it.


It's called wehrabooism. Mentality of such people is non-negotiable and therefore, any attempt at reasoning should be met with extreme caution, as engaging with infected individuals can lead to the loss of brain cells (due to cell suicide), time and patience. You have been warned
31 Aug 2021, 16:44 PM
#51
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 682

Dunno what you're remembering but the Scott wrecked some shit before it was nerfed. It was borderline op.
31 Aug 2021, 17:14 PM
#52
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 16:44 PMKoRneY
Dunno what you're remembering but the Scott wrecked some shit before it was nerfed. It was borderline op.


As in close to being op? Jokes aside nerfing it into almost nothing valuable isent the solution. Esp without cost decrease to match new much lower preformance.
31 Aug 2021, 17:43 PM
#53
avatar of RintFosk

Posts: 56



The issue wasn't USF rushing M8s, it was them getting them later, especially in team games. By mid/late game the dual scotts could be defended by M36s, SU85s, Fireflies, etc. at which point they were untouchable via tank rushes (at least, with favorable econ outcomes). The obvious counter to that defensive tank line was Schrecks and Paks, but double Scotts countered those very well when used correctly. The game needs to be balanced (to some degree, anyway) in all modes, and double scotts were a serious problem in team games.

As for your experience, or sov clown cars; that's fine. However, many other players at both higher and lower levels had problems with it, and more importantly, it was incredibly 'un-fun' to play against; "This is miserably oppressive but I can still win against it" simply isn't good game design.



CoH2 is balanced around stock roster vs. stock roster, with the doctrine abilities adding flavor or countering other doctrine abilities. The goal has always been to make it possible for the game to be played without specific doctrines being 'required' vs. certain factions. This hasn't always been the case, as we've seen with various units and abilities, but it has been the goal; "the basic mainline unit isn't viable, you must use a doc locked unit" isn't a solution.

As for the comparison to MHTs, Mortars and Paks, the difference there is that all of them require being setup, and react to moving units quite slowly (via rotation). The Scott could fire fairly accurately on the move, and could easily react to moving units.

The over-all result was that static units, such as the MG42, Pak and LMG-gren were destroyed extremely quickly by the scott, and moving wasn't viable, as none of them can shoot on the move. Yes, there were other choices such as Pgrens and Doc-locked choices, but having effectively the entire default hard-countered by a stock unit just wasn't good game design.

As a counter example, imagine the impact on USF if the Ostwind did significantly more damage to moving units, to the point where it could wipe a vet 3 squad in less than a second. You'd be safe if you remained stationary, but then could be easily beaten by long-range units such as OST's LMG Grens or Mortars. This would be effectively the same thing in terms of design; horrible, as USF relies heavily on mobility.



Double LMG rifles were annoying, but as you said, could be dealt with; however, their existence also didn't counter an entire factions starting roster. In any event, this was also nerfed because it just wasn't fun to play against; blobs aren't interesting.



Just about every balance issue can be boiled down to "L2P" if you really want to, but it's not good for the game long-term. If the game isn't fun, people stop playing; so over-performing units get nerfed - especially if that performance requires very little user input to attain.

Does USF need a stock arty unit, and some late-game blob control? Sure; but not a form that can delete squads instantly with effectively no cooldown (or user input).


Currently the scott's barrage scatter and AoE profile makes it highly unlikely to one-shot-kill any infantry or team weapon when shooting from safe range, even when the target formation is extremely clumped up. Against moving infantry blob then the player need to invest heavily in ground attack micro to even have a chance to deal damage to the targets. Additionally the ability cooldown is pretty long, the default attack range is pretty small, axis AT gun and panther can easily take them down if scotts are spotted and dived when it is shooting at frontline.

Axis player when getting barraged by scott can easily evade by moving the units when the first couple shots drops, scotts causes nuisances but its power level had been decreased severely, being only partially effective versus team weapons (also requires opponent player unable to correctly micro their unit), this unit is balanced, it does not need anymore nerf.

About the "long-term-game-fun" issue, axis dominating 3v3 and 4v4 (60-65% winrate) for already half a year with their faction design's systematic power superiority is what really destroying player's enjoyment to the game.

This might be irrelevant but current balance state can already being reflected by how long you would need to find a 3v3 4v4 match when searching as axis and allies. It would take usually 8-15 minutes to find an axis game while when searching as allies the time needed won't surpass 5 minutes, 60%:40% to even 70%:30% axis versus allies searching player ratio happens almost all the time.
31 Aug 2021, 17:49 PM
#54
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658



It's called wehrabooism. Mentality of such people is non-negotiable and therefore, any attempt at reasoning should be met with extreme caution, as engaging with infected individuals can lead to the loss of brain cells (due to cell suicide), time and patience. You have been warned


Agreed. Seems like a Pandemic that is holding the game back from reaching its full potential. Its like American Politics, people rather root for their team (Democrats/Republicans) than do what's best for the country. In this case we have faction warriors that could care less about balance as long as their side is better.



jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 16:44 PMKoRneY
Dunno what you're remembering but the Scott wrecked some shit before it was nerfed. It was borderline op.


You mean an Allied unit was actually effective at the role it was designed to do (shocker since every effective Allied Unit gets crippled into the ground). How is that any different from Brumbar deleting squads and deleting the entire USF roster (Including AT Guns which the Brumbar can face tank no issue) minus Sherman/Jackson. Please take off the Bias Goggles.

Ask yourself why is it ok for one faction to have the ability to delete units but it becomes a huge problem if another faction can do it? Especially when that faction has significantly less commander options, unit options and stock options and sight options in its arsenal.

And people wonder how we got to this point where Axis have almost 60% win rate. If I wanted to play a Tower Defense game then I would hop on Warcraft 3/Dota 2 Custom Maps or by one of the many Tower Defense games on steam. It seems like Axis players want to make only MGs while USF spam hordes of Rifleman. While Tower Defense games can be fun, I want to play Company of Heroes not a Tower Defense Game which is currently how the game is heading towards with all these nerfs every single patch to indirect fire units.


The fact that the Balance Team even thought the current SturmTiger was ok to be released in its current state makes me question their competency and if I will even bother buying COH 3, especially if they will be continuing to work on Balance for COH 3.

Patch after Patch since they started we have had to deal with Game Breaking Axis nonsense Such as Sector Assault that deleted entire Armies, JLI and Fallshirmjaegers which could delete anything and ignored cover, and SturmTiger yet very rarely if ever is something on Allies made into such a state (B4 being the exception).

Look at how meager the Easy 8 is. I am sure if it was an OKW unit though the Easy 8 would have been Panther level strength while costing as much as a Stug and moving at Mach-3 speeds across the map but because its USF they get Mediocre Sub-Par Things.

I am not asking for the M8 Scott to be broken like many other things the balance team has broken the game with I just want balance and better faction design. They remade USF into the feces it is now so now they need to fix it. The M8 Scott sucks Donkey Meat anyone who has said otherwise either hasn't played USF against good enemies or are simply trolling. I would like to see it come to the equal
level of Panzerwerfer/Stuka/Katyusha. Not a unreasonable request. Let USF Delete Squads like almost every faction in the game can Stock so that we can pick something besides Calliope every game.



31 Aug 2021, 18:18 PM
#55
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243




The M8 Scott never deleted full squads though at any point in COH2's history, you are exaggerating its effectiveness and making it seem like it was a Sturmtiger with no cooldown that deletes the entire Whermacht roster when that is false. Even if it was true (its not) how is that any different from Dual Panzerwerfers which can make it almost impossible to capture anything without getting squads deleted and are far deadlier as well as being able to damage vehicles.

Why is it ok for Whermacht to have the ability to delete squads with Panzerwerfers but its outrageous for USF to have that same ability? That mentality of yours is exactly why Axis have almost 60% win rate in team games because of bias like this that exists. If one faction has the ability to delete full squads then either all factions should have a similar level to do so or none of them should.

Every Faction should have the same access to tools in their stock roster no if and or buts about it. As long as Panzerwerfer/Stuka exist then the M8 Scott should be in a similar realm to those units not vastly sub-par that the Stock Whermacht mortar out performs it.


AT FIRST LOOK AT THE PRICETAG.

than u should grab your mind and remember pw has a cd. means you mostly can shot 3 minute. (back to save position..go forward...search after good target..shoot next barrage...wonder why the enemy models only get pined)
while old scotts behind the 3 line and shot every 5secound a shell over 100 range and denied every standing squad or teamweapon

31 Aug 2021, 18:42 PM
#56
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1



AT FIRST LOOK AT THE PRICETAG.

than u should grab your mind and remember pw has a cd. means you mostly can shot 3 minute. (back to save position..go forward...search after good target..shoot next barrage...wonder why the enemy models only get pined)
while old scotts behind the 3 line and shot every 5secound a shell over 100 range and denied every standing squad or teamweapon



Here is the thing, you are the one that seems to think the only choice is old Scott or new worthless Scott. We can definitely have buffs to the current vehicle to make its power focused in the barrage, so it becomes a useable unit again, without returning to the old passively OP Scott.

---

The fact that the Katy and Pwerfer exist show us that the Scott can be made into a barrage focused unit that can punish squads and teamweapons without being "OP." Since only really the first two shells matter in the barrage (anyone with a brain will move before the third), I think a good start would be to increase the shell lethality AoE even more than the current patch notes are doing, so it can actually punish groupings of infantry. It still won't be as good as either of the rocket pieces, but it does have the utility of smoke to compensate. We could also go the other way and give it bigger AoE at the edges so it hits infantry across the area a bit more evenly.

I would also think about adding a WP barrage with Veterancy to aid it against blobs.
31 Aug 2021, 18:55 PM
#57
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3106 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 10:24 AMMMX
I don't disagree tbh, especially with the 'one hit barely matters' part. Thus raising the max AoE damage back to 80 seems like a good call for me, though in conjunction with the now tiny max AoE radius this is arguably not gonna do all too much.

I assume you mean the OHK radius?

I agree, but I am not sure it is really enough.

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 10:24 AMMMX

Overall I guess the intention of the changes was to transform the barrage from an inaccurate but deadly anti-blob tool into a dedicated counter for team weapons. In this role the higher accuracy and slightly faster payload delivery does indeed matter, plus weapon teams are usually less likely to move out of harms way right after the 1st shell hits. In that respect I think the changes could work quite well, at least if the OHK radius were to go back up a bit again. OTOH, is of course questionable if USF really needed a unit for this specific purpose instead of a non-doc anti-blob tool in the first place.

In my eyes, balance team changes all USF indirect to slow over-time barrage damage dealers that are good vs immobile units. They virtually all serve similar if not the same purpose. The Scott is just more mobile than the others, that's it. The faction has no anti blob at all left apart from maybe the HE Sherman, but this one needs to expose itself quite a bit for the purpose.
For that purpose, I think a buff to the auto fire AoE is needed, with a nerf to mobility. Or just lower the POP cost to allow for squeezing in another unit, but in the end this would not solve the root issue: the lack of blob control.
31 Aug 2021, 21:46 PM
#58
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Fuel costing unit barrages should have supression. This would really help things like the Scott and other conventional arty delivery systems be more meaningful without having to be a full on wipe machine.
31 Aug 2021, 21:56 PM
#59
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 682



As in close to being op? Jokes aside nerfing it into almost nothing valuable isent the solution. Esp without cost decrease to match new much lower preformance.


Not saying it's fine. But it was very, very difficult to deal with before.
31 Aug 2021, 22:29 PM
#60
avatar of Geblobt

Posts: 213

Rework the unit into some cheap but weaker rocket arty with lower cd or let it die in the current stage. The unit is either useless cause it doesnt do anything or broken cause it does something while being almost impossible to counter.

If you want to buff USF indirect start with the pak howie. Thta thing can get dealt with atleast even if its killing shit left and right.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Russian Federation 23
Peru 14
United Kingdom 49
unknown 5
United States 2
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

418 users are online: 418 guests
1 post in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
146 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44938
Welcome our newest member, unicomposite
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM