Login

russian armor

Heavy balance

18 Sep 2022, 15:13 PM
#21
avatar of DonnieChan

Posts: 2269 | Subs: 1




It would be easier to balance the Heavy Tanks if they were all available as Stock units and were available as super end game units like the super units in Dawn of War 2.



One of the biggest problems with COH2 in regards to heavy tanks was always the timing. It just didn't feel good getting a T-34/Panzer 4 and then like 2 minutes later your enemy who skipped out on making vehicles can call in Heavy Tanks.


Like the Pershing for example which was nerfed into the ground, I had no issue with it being great at killing Infantry, the problem was that it would come out way too soon, and then rather than fixing the core issue units will often get hit with triple or quadruple nerfs making them worthless.


So by having all Heavy Tanks stock, making them all available at 12-14CP and having them balanced against each other (Like IS-2 vs Tiger) would go a long way to creating a healthier Meta.

Now lets say we add in Ammo Switching to all Heavy Tanks like the Sherman, you can then adjust the range of the AP/HE rounds to further tweak the units as well.

A tiger for example could have 60 range while using AP rounds, (which would help break up the tank destroyer spam meta) but then being extremely exposed with HE rounds and being limited to 40 range creating strengths and weaknesses for each Heavy instead of the Generic attack move kill everything low risk high reward beasts that they were before.




stock heavy tanks would lead to a tech rush gameplay and who gets heavy first and we would see heavies literally every single game.

look at suprem commander for example
18 Sep 2022, 15:28 PM
#22
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658



stock heavy tanks would lead to a tech rush gameplay and who gets heavy first and we would see heavies literally every single game.

look at suprem commander for example



How would it be rushed if you need 12-14 CP before you could make them?
18 Sep 2022, 15:47 PM
#23
avatar of rumartinez89

Posts: 599



A tiger for example could have 60 range while using AP rounds, (which would help break up the tank destroyer spam meta) but then being extremely exposed with HE rounds and being limited to 40 range creating strengths and weaknesses for each Heavy instead of the Generic attack move kill everything low risk high reward beasts that they were before.


I don't think you thought this part completely through. Giving the tiger 60 AT rounds wouldn't change to much for Soviets as SU85 also has 60 range, if you know the stall is coming you get 2 which should be about the same price. Not only can the SU85 take pot shots with self spotting, you can now rush in with Penals/Cons with little to no worry of possible wipe on the way in.

But any changes should be mirrored so lets look at what OST would be facing. As it stands now, OST need T3 building but BP3 researched. That means all OST tanks would be outranged by the 60 range IS2, literally one tank invalidates an entire building. With the high armor of the IS2 the 2 P4s will be dominated or 3 Stugs would get crushed as IS2 picks on one and the Soviet army bullies the others. If you got Tier 4 you are even further behind unless you stall for the Tiger also.
18 Sep 2022, 15:49 PM
#24
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

The problem is the way commander abilities are unlocked, Coh1 had it much better designed. But the game doesn't need more heavies, I can imagine Ostheer going 5men gren + tiger all the way long.

Anyway, Heavies were much better balanced some years ago before the modding decided to buff them because crybabies couldn't use them in 4vs4 as one army unit.

19 Sep 2022, 04:35 AM
#25
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

At least if the IS-2 remains in two commanders, then the IS-2 should be an analogue of the King Tiger and not the Tiger, which is in a huge number of commanders.
19 Sep 2022, 11:11 AM
#26
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658



But any changes should be mirrored


If that was the case you would see exact 1 to 1 copies of stuff in the game which you do not see at all.

The Units should be based on faction needs.

Whermacht lacks 60 range TD - Tiger


Soviets - Needs a Meat Shield and strong anti infantry tank- IS - 2 (UKF have Churchills and Fireflys)


USF - Pershing non doctrinal could be the Utility based heavy tank (high speed, acts as a scout so Pathfinders are not needed)


These are just examples, it would take some tweaking but would be an improvement over the system we have in place now.





19 Sep 2022, 11:39 AM
#27
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197

Still shocked tht this thread even exists. Gotta be crazy to want heavy tank buffs after their history in this game lol


Heavy tanks are not at all recommended nowadays and I do no really like that since I cannot properly micro 2 panthers for example or one panther one pziv.

19 Sep 2022, 11:40 AM
#28
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197



stock heavy tanks would lead to a tech rush gameplay and who gets heavy first and we would see heavies literally every single game.

look at suprem commander for example


That's true I remember something similiar happening in my AOE2 days...

Rush Castle Age build castle to secure ground

Most of us would rush Imperial Age and make tier 3 cavalry to literally rape everyone and everythnig.
19 Sep 2022, 11:44 AM
#29
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197

Imho the problem with heavy tanks boil down to not every faction having the same abilities as the other one.

Let's see one simple example: Panzer Commander OKW Tiger (I am not even getting started on kongigstgiger with pzcommander it's way out of everyone's league) against say a Pershing or a KV2.

Clearly there's no need to talk about "Heavy v Heavy" battle as their case is concerned simply because the extra sight for OKW Tiger makes every battle uneven. Throw in a free atg remover for 80 muni and it's unstoppable.

OR make the case with KV2 vs Elefant.

Sure elefant wins in most high range battles but it's a casemate and cannot move the turret whilst KV2 can have full rotation. Same with Pershing.

Bottom line as I see it: Not every heavy has the same specs and as such cannot be """balanced""".
19 Sep 2022, 11:54 AM
#30
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 786 | Subs: 1

Imho the problem with heavy tanks boil down to not every faction having the same abilities as the other one.

Let's see one simple example: Panzer Commander OKW Tiger (I am not even getting started on kongigstgiger with pzcommander it's way out of everyone's league) against say a Pershing or a KV2.

Clearly there's no need to talk about "Heavy v Heavy" battle as their case is concerned simply because the extra sight for OKW Tiger makes every battle uneven. Throw in a free atg remover for 80 muni and it's unstoppable.

OR make the case with KV2 vs Elefant.

Sure elefant wins in most high range battles but it's a casemate and cannot move the turret whilst KV2 can have full rotation. Same with Pershing.

Bottom line as I see it: Not every heavy has the same specs and as such cannot be """balanced""".



why the fuck are you comparing the ELEFANT with the fucking KV2? they are completely different units with different specializations
19 Sep 2022, 12:18 PM
#31
avatar of rumartinez89

Posts: 599



If that was the case you would see exact 1 to 1 copies of stuff in the game which you do not see at all.

The Units should be based on faction needs.

Whermacht lacks 60 range TD - Tiger


Soviets - Needs a Meat Shield and strong anti infantry tank- IS - 2 (UKF have Churchills and Fireflys)


USF - Pershing non doctrinal could be the Utility based heavy tank (high speed, acts as a scout so Pathfinders are not needed)


These are just examples, it would take some tweaking but would be an improvement over the system we have in place now.



But they do have everything you say, they are just unlocked differently. OST/SOV have literally been an inversed mirror of each other since the start.
KV1/KV8 were the meatshield strong AI was just doctrinal were as Brumbar was stock.
OST had cheaper/faster ROF/less range with STUG however you could get up to about 60 range with hull down, same with Panther.
Tiger/IS2 have literally been balanced around each others performance from the start of the game. With either similar timings or IS2 coming one CP later, on paper their guns had similar performance with the differences being IS2 slower but better armored.

In all I do like your idea about the heavies filling in for factional needs however soviets don't really need a stronger AI tank as they have the easiest access to rocket arty. IF the IS2 was made stock and consistent that is more POP available to just spam SU85 as the T34/Katy is no longer needed. As for the Tiger it almost sounds like you want a turreted ISU152, with none of the drawback aside from switchable ammo.
19 Sep 2022, 12:40 PM
#32
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2022, 11:54 AMKatukov



why the fuck are you comparing the ELEFANT with the fucking KV2? they are completely different units with different specializations


they both classified as heavy tanks bro
19 Sep 2022, 12:53 PM
#33
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 786 | Subs: 1



they both classified as heavy tanks bro


So? their usage and purpose is completely different



one is an assault gun and the other is a casemate heavy TD

19 Sep 2022, 12:54 PM
#34
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2022, 12:53 PMKatukov


So? their usage and purpose is completely different



one is an assault gun and the other is a casemate heavy TD



you just proved my point.

i specifically talked about how heavy tanks lack the homogenuity of medium tanks (generalists in ai and at power) and as such cannot be properly balanced.

19 Sep 2022, 16:10 PM
#35
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1331

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2022, 11:54 AMKatukov
they are completely different units with different specializations


......that was the whole point of the post, dude.:facepalm:
19 Sep 2022, 16:49 PM
#36
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



If that was the case you would see exact 1 to 1 copies of stuff in the game which you do not see at all.

The Units should be based on faction needs.

Whermacht lacks 60 range TD - Tiger


Soviets - Needs a Meat Shield and strong anti infantry tank- IS - 2 (UKF have Churchills and Fireflys)


USF - Pershing non doctrinal could be the Utility based heavy tank (high speed, acts as a scout so Pathfinders are not needed)


These are just examples, it would take some tweaking but would be an improvement over the system we have in place now.







A bunch of bad ideas.
19 Sep 2022, 21:02 PM
#37
avatar of Willy Pete

Posts: 340


Heavy tanks are not at all recommended nowadays and I do no really like that since I cannot properly micro 2 panthers for example or one panther one pziv.

KT is definitely still viable, especially with doc boosts such as heat shells or cmdr upgrade w/ spearhead. Pershing can be pretty good too thx to its mobility

But im curious how u play at all if u have trouble microing multiple tanks. Genuinly not trying to offend, but thats a pretty vital component of the game. Specially for allies, but for axis too

2x JP4s for example can be quite "based" as u would say (in team games)

19 Sep 2022, 21:11 PM
#38
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 772




How would it be rushed if you need 12-14 CP before you could make them?

AFAIK stock units locked behind tech only, when doctrinal units are locked behind CPs and/or tech. So Donnie is actually spot on about this.
21 Sep 2022, 08:56 AM
#39
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 786 | Subs: 1



......that was the whole point of the post, dude.:facepalm:
\


oh shit, my bad


21 Sep 2022, 09:57 AM
#40
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1197


KT is definitely still viable, especially with doc boosts such as heat shells or cmdr upgrade w/ spearhead. Pershing can be pretty good too thx to its mobility

But im curious how u play at all if u have trouble microing multiple tanks. Genuinly not trying to offend, but thats a pretty vital component of the game. Specially for allies, but for axis too

2x JP4s for example can be quite "based" as u would say (in team games)



What can I say I just have trouble microing a two-prong attack on enemies' tanks since they are supported 1-2 snare-cappable infantry plus I have to call in my army too to cover.

I am not saying I am not good at it I just do not find it enjoyable. To my eyes it's way more entertaining seeing a Tiger mettle out with an SU85 or 2 T34s/85 rather than the opposite.

Just personal taste.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

South Africa 1
Russian Federation 19
Sweden 13
unknown 6
unknown 4

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

362 users are online: 362 guests
5 posts in the last 24h
23 posts in the last week
60 posts in the last month
Registered members: 46221
Welcome our newest member, Tooktg06
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM