There are a few Items that would be nice in NKVD over the horrible Rapid Conscription:
DShK Heavy MG
KV-1 Heavy Tank
Irregulars
Booby Trap
For Mother Russia
PPSH
All of these but PPSH are minimally represented in other commanders and I think they could all warrant a spot.
Cruzz's fantasy patch thread
1 May 2014, 19:01 PM
#41
7 
Posts: 1664
1 May 2014, 19:35 PM
#42
4 
Posts: 117
What about making Rapid Conscription a passive ability that worked like American infantry doctrine from vCOH (faster infantry spawn/reinforcement)?
1 May 2014, 19:36 PM
#43
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
Why about making Rapid Conscription a passive ability that worked like American infantry doctrine from vCOH (faster infantry spawn/reinforcement)?
great idea
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
1 May 2014, 19:42 PM
#44
Posts: 1701
Be carefull Heini, make a mistake again and you will have everyone biting your neck xD
Blaue Division - The best corp
BPX - Black Phoenix, Clan leader.
BPX - Black Phoenix, Clan leader.
Posts: 117 | Subs: 5
Cruzz,
thx for the map feedback. I'll look into your comments shortly.
cheers
Matt
1 May 2014, 20:08 PM
#46
Posts: 1734
Permanently Bannedgood changes, agree about 8/10 of them, but those like how to make defensive commanders useless, i agree tank traps should be non doctrinal, but then those commanders are useless. (it is useless atm btw) Anyway next time I hope community commanders wont be created by noobs. 
"I don't need a helmet"
-The guy who really needed a helmet
-The guy who really needed a helmet
1 May 2014, 20:12 PM
#47
Posts: 381
These are the final adjustments that need to be done for the current game to be balanced for sure. Really like the part about kv1 front armor increase. I think the ISU needs a damage nerf, something more than a range decrease, it is way too powerful atm.
1 May 2014, 20:30 PM
#48
Posts: 875 | Subs: 6
Looks great!
1 May 2014, 20:40 PM
#49
Posts: 476
This sounds fucking reasonable!
No overnerfs/overbuffs, the reactions to this patchnotes would not be "oh wow, look how much changed" but rather: "well, this is all good and understandable. what a nice way to slowly balance a game."
No overnerfs/overbuffs, the reactions to this patchnotes would not be "oh wow, look how much changed" but rather: "well, this is all good and understandable. what a nice way to slowly balance a game."
I play mostly 1v1 and my post are with 1v1 in mind.
1 May 2014, 20:48 PM
#50
Posts: 17887 | Subs: 8
I'd have cost decrease only to fear propaganda and penetration buff only to M-42 but rest sounds reasonable.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
1 May 2014, 20:57 PM
#51
5 Posts: 1157 | Subs: 2
Interesting changes, I especially like the map suggestions, and the rework of the german infantry commander. I think a fuel > munis ability could actually turn that commander around quite a bit, and would fit the theme of an infantry based commander quite well.
Also, great suggestion!
What about making Rapid Conscription a passive ability that worked like American infantry doctrine from vCOH (faster infantry spawn/reinforcement)?
Also, great suggestion!
2 May 2014, 00:21 AM
#52
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
While it would be nice, I seriously doubt they'd create new abilities or even adapt singleplayer ones for these old commanders.
We finally got reasonable counters to bunker spam that would kinda die off again, and one side doesn't even have a defensive structure that would need health except for tank traps while other one has two (bunkers & trenches), bit too unfair to the soviet version.
1- It´s already somehow worked on TOW and on the commander which show up "No retreat" or something like that.
2-Bunkers got their hp nerf so it would be barely as before. Regarding the disparity between Soviet/German regarding static defenses, while German could gain HP on bunkers/trenches (btw tank traps should have their HP increase on bothsides) Soviets could gain a build time buff. This would allow them to get sandbags, barbwire, mines, faster.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
2 May 2014, 01:54 AM
#53
Posts: 379
I like all of it.
2 May 2014, 02:09 AM
#54
Posts: 878
Since we're discussing map bugs, I noticed a new one on Semoisky - after the church was destroyed, my MG on the north side of it could not get LOS on a conscript even though it was basically on the road (just next to the ruined outline of the building). Probably same bug as the hedges I suspect...
2 May 2014, 02:49 AM
#55
Posts: 2779
Since we're discussing map bugs, I noticed a new one on Semoisky - after the church was destroyed, my MG on the north side of it could not get LOS on a conscript even though it was basically on the road (just next to the ruined outline of the building). Probably same bug as the hedges I suspect...
and the left corner of the graveyard, some ghosts still grabbing someone's feet making them stuck forever
2 May 2014, 03:00 AM
#56
Posts: 2053
A crazy idea, but i think a weapon type should do different damage to infantry than to tanks. Having damage dealt the same to the both causes too many problems in balance. Tanks need to deal lots of damage to combat other tanks, but since some have high AoE, they wreck infantry. Decreasing damage fixes their effectiveness at fighting infantry from its stupid previous position, but then its tank fighting capabilities get decreased. Either that, or damage and health gets scaled VERY carefully.
Currently, every shell is the same. If tank firing was advanced enough to have AP and HE shells, then we could easily adjust a tank's AI or AT ability without so much argument.
Currently, every shell is the same. If tank firing was advanced enough to have AP and HE shells, then we could easily adjust a tank's AI or AT ability without so much argument.
2 May 2014, 09:10 AM
#57
1 
Posts: 4559 | Subs: 2
I agree with pretty much all the changes and I'd like to add a small bit about MGs that I think you would agree with:
- When the MG of either factions is retreating, if the gunner is killed the MG is automatically given to another member while the squad keeps retreating (like in COH1) instead of having the squad stop and one member going to get the MG, which usually causes every single member of the MG crew to die in the attempt to grab the MG.
- When the MG of either factions is retreating, if the gunner is killed the MG is automatically given to another member while the squad keeps retreating (like in COH1) instead of having the squad stop and one member going to get the MG, which usually causes every single member of the MG crew to die in the attempt to grab the MG.
 | Playercard of Marcus2389 | |||||||||||||||||||
|
2 May 2014, 10:08 AM
#58
Posts: 85
I agree with the heavy tanks (especially the ISU and elefant) requiring phase 2/3 tech or T3/T4 building.
It's ridiculous that as Ostheer it's often better and easier to save up for an elefant just in case the soviets decide to get an ISU, than getting panzers or panthers. Combined arms against ISUs take much more effort and loss to kill the ISU, since it can just 1 shot a lot of things.
Basically u can get elefants at similar times and cost as getting a panther...
Heavy tanks can arrive too early now...
It's ridiculous that as Ostheer it's often better and easier to save up for an elefant just in case the soviets decide to get an ISU, than getting panzers or panthers. Combined arms against ISUs take much more effort and loss to kill the ISU, since it can just 1 shot a lot of things.
Basically u can get elefants at similar times and cost as getting a panther...
Heavy tanks can arrive too early now...
2 May 2014, 10:18 AM
#59
4 Posts: 111
I agree with the heavy tanks (especially the ISU and elefant) requiring phase 2/3 tech or T3/T4 building.
[...]
Basically u can get elefants at similar times and cost as getting a panther...
Heavy tanks can arrive too early now...
In my opinion its in general a problem with all call in tanks. In comparison to teching its easier (for example your pios don´t have to stay in your base to build), sometimes faster and more favourable ( you can save up fuel and use your manpower instead of teching for more untis).
2 May 2014, 10:38 AM
#60
Posts: 85
At least with other callins u use, if the opponent decides to tech it's usually fine.
The other callins like T34/85s, puma, tigers, stug E and is2 are counter-able by combined arms reliably (no 1 shot bs).
Getting an elefent will destroy the ISU as a VERY hard counter. It's the only easy/effective option for Ostheer if this occurs. On the other hand, if you dont get the elefent, you will have a very difficult time in comparison. This is too one sided.
The other callins like T34/85s, puma, tigers, stug E and is2 are counter-able by combined arms reliably (no 1 shot bs).
Getting an elefent will destroy the ISU as a VERY hard counter. It's the only easy/effective option for Ostheer if this occurs. On the other hand, if you dont get the elefent, you will have a very difficult time in comparison. This is too one sided.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
69 | ||
 |
|
|
33 | ||
 |
|
|
198 | ||
|
|
|
|
34 | ||
 |
|
|
28 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.29446.865-1
- 4.275110.714+13
- 5.259143.644+3
- 6.250150.625+11
- 7.22491.711+11
- 8.19265.747+5
- 9.672425.613+1
- 10.5611.836+3
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
744
Board Info
633 users are online:
633 guests
7 posts in the last 24h
22 posts in the last week
136 posts in the last month
22 posts in the last week
136 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45032
Welcome our newest member, lanawatt
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, lanawatt
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM