Login

russian armor

How to fix: OKW

23 Nov 2016, 02:01 AM
#81
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742



Those ideas are beyond being considerable for two reasons:

1.: The side tech would be entirely pointless, because every OKW player had to go for it anyway. No grenades on their main infantry? No easy access to an alternative? That's the reason why USF got their ridiculous mortar and why everyone wants to keep it in the game, despite it working against anything the faction was designed for, which in term makes it completely unbalanceable...


Fair point. What I meant with having the nades be sidetech was for them to be quick and cheap allowing for a player to stick with t0 units a bit longer to deal with garrisons before choosing which truck to tech to. Ten fuel for incendiary nades into T2 luchs can be preferable to being pigeonholed into medic truck to deal with, say, garrisoned maxims.

2.: The costs you want to redistribute to other things would be extremely pointless, because these things are already fucking expensive. Sure, that would make healing and repairing (which is kind of stupid on OKW anyway, if we compare repair speeds with, say Soviets or Ostheer) more accessible, but at the same time nobody would ever again go for the retreat point, because it is on the verge of being unobtainable in anything but 4v4 already. At the same time, the cheaper USF tech gets their retreat point for free by the way, combined with cheaper healing. Something doesn't add up here.


I think you misunderstand, (edit, also, my wording sucked so I apologize for that). I mean to REDUCE teching costs, not redistribute the side techs. Medics would still cost the same, but Forward retreat point would be 100 manpower cheaper, and the medic truck would cost a bit less to set up. Similar for repair squads and as well as the previously mentioned side tech for incendiary nades.

If you want to lock things behind side techs, the teching itself has to become cheaper - that's the reasoning behind Brit teching being so bloody cheap. Alas, that adjustment never properly took place when it came to OKW and their healing (yes, there was an adjustment, but we can easily see now that it wasn't even close to being enough).


This is exactly what I am suggesting.
23 Nov 2016, 03:17 AM
#82
avatar of The Red Zaku

Posts: 31

Does anyone else think that returning to OKW's old tech system would fix the current issues that OKW has? I feel like the underlying problems with the faction stem from the decision to change the trucks from being timer based to being purchasable units in combination with shuffling the placement of various units in each of the trucks.

The OKW used to have this structure:
  • Base Truck
    • Volks
    • Kubel
    • Sturms
    • Rakketten
    • King Tiger (when all other trucks had been built)

  • Medic Truck
    • Leig
    • IR Half track
    • Jagdtiger
    • Free Heals and up-gradable retreat point.

  • Mech Truck
    • Flack HT
    • Puma
    • Stuka
    • Free Repair and resource conversion

  • Flack HQ
    • Obers
    • Luchs
    • Panther
    • Panzer 4 (although earlier OKW didn't even have that)
    • The BFG on the truck itself



No matter what building you went for, you gained both AI and AT options. The disproportionate price of some of these vehicles made more sense as well. The luchs was cheaper because it came out later in the game when you had the Flack HQ built. The Flack HT costing (iirc) 55 fuel also made sense, because by limiting your munitions, you could compensate for your lack of AI that you would of been able to get by going for the medic truck. It was also possible to risk your trucks more, as you weren't fined as harshly for losing an individual truck, and your other trucks could compensate for what you had lost. Say (for example) that you have all 3 trucks in the late game, but lose the flack HT before a tank finished (either the panther or the Pz4). In current OKW you would just flat out lose because you no longer have an endgame. Although you might be able to save up for a KT, you will be crippled against the opponents tanks in the meantime. In old OKW, you would be able to compensate with the ability to buy a Jagdpz 4 from your medic truck. Although it is practically unable to deal with infantry, you don't automatically lose the game as you would of now.
Since the rework, OKW has had a hard time dealing with light vehicles. Players were able to mass volks with shreks as a crutch, but that is no longer possible. This means that the only real counter to the stuart and t70 is to go for the puma, or try to survive to a point where they can pull out either an ostwind or P4. Current OKW doesn't really have that many options to play (for average play, I'm only ranked around 450 for most factions). OKW is forced to play reactivity to what ever the opponent decides to do. You can't go for a medic truck, because then you are crippled against light vehicle play. If you go mech truck, you don't automatically win against other light vehicles and are quite vulnerable to support weapons. I feel like many units were never adjusted to fit the new tech structure, and were consequently nerfed when they over performed in their new role (or were not effective at all). Examples of this include the Flack HT, leig, the buildings themselves (losing their abilites for free), the stuka, and volks themselves.

Does this mean that new OKW is completely useless? Not really, but to me playing OKW feels like I'm playing an abandoned faction mod for wher, where the faction kind of works, but is very easy to exploit when played against.

This is not to say that old OKW was perfect, or that all of the problems would be instantly fixed by rolling back to an older patch save for some bugfixes. OKW has several units that just don't work, and right now there are some borderline over performing Allied units that exacerbate the problem. I don't think that just adding some call-in tank-hunters, buffing bad units, or giving OKW an mg will "fix" okw. I think the the revised tech structure of OKW is a serious problem and many previous unit tweaks (both official and proposed) only serve as a patchwork solution. I admit, I am not nearly as good at the game as some here, and it may also be true that my perception of old okw is warped by the amount of time I have spent playing them compared to other factions, or by my frustration with the current OKW. Either way, I still think that OKW needs its tech line reworked to what it used to be, and to build from there.
23 Nov 2016, 04:58 AM
#83
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Oh no doubt. The problems with OKW has always been a design issue. Whether it's from the most recent changes, the unit swapping from doctrines, the overhaul redesign, or the OTHER overhaul redesign that apparently took place during beta... It's never worked quite right.

Quite frankly the biggest problem with both OKW and USF has been their constricted tech structure.

They have one less tier building that Soviets and Ostheer. Their ability to pace their units is severely compromised. They have to fit into three tiers:

Support weapons (MGs, mortars, and most importantly ATGs. ATGs are almost their own category of importance.)
Light Vehicles (222s, halftracks, scout cars, kubelwagen)
Light Tanks (Luchs, Stuarts, T70s)
Medium Tanks (P4s, Shermans, T-34s)
Tank Destroyers (SU-85s, StuGs)
Artillery (Rocket arti, ISGs)

Then there's the gambit of infantry that are supposed to fit in there in various roles. Heavy Tanks don't quite count because they're all call-in units. But again: all that is crammed into three tiers. Trying to pace it all out is almost doomed to be clunky.

Although as I write this, I wonder how it would work if OKW's P4 had the stubby gun of the command tank and came earlier and cheaper...
23 Nov 2016, 05:12 AM
#84
avatar of Ulaire Minya

Posts: 372

Ho about we fix Forward Retreat Point cancer first. Blobbing around your titanium truck should be punished. not encouraged.
23 Nov 2016, 06:52 AM
#85
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

Ho about we fix Forward Retreat Point cancer first. Blobbing around your titanium truck should be punished. not encouraged.


How else do you want to balance the immobile nature of the truck set-up if not by making it sturdy? I mean, that's the entire reasoning as to why the Major can simply pack his stuff and move on after having been used as a (free) retreat point. The British and OKW retreat points don't have that luxury.

Aside from finally applying the same principles to all retreat points (that is to make them expensive) they should give a debuff within their reinforcement area. A damage multiplier (basically the opposite of the Command Panzer IV) would work greatly and be easy to implement.
23 Nov 2016, 08:07 AM
#86
avatar of Ulaire Minya

Posts: 372

I don't care if the truck is sturdy or not, but I do care about the fact that they can sit there and out reinforce any attacking force while shrugging off any infantry that's not heavily supported by mg's.
23 Nov 2016, 08:14 AM
#87
avatar of CartoonVillain

Posts: 474

I don't care if the truck is sturdy or not, but I do care about the fact that they can sit there and out reinforce any attacking force while shrugging off any infantry that's not heavily supported by mg's.


For 300mp it bloody well better be good.
23 Nov 2016, 11:08 AM
#88
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 1003

Dont fix, what is not broken.
23 Nov 2016, 11:15 AM
#89
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2016, 11:08 AMAradan
Dont fix, what is not broken.

This is a rather pointless argument most broken things are currently bugs.

On the other hand one should improve things if possible especially if it is easy fixes...
23 Nov 2016, 12:02 PM
#90
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 1003

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2016, 11:15 AMVipper

This is a rather pointless argument most broken things are currently bugs.

On the other hand one should improve things if possible especially if it is easy fixes...


OKW is strongest faction in 3v3 and 4v4.
http://coh2chart.com/

But the results off all factions are all virtually identical in all modes (1v1 - 4v4)
23 Nov 2016, 12:16 PM
#91
avatar of Cresc

Posts: 378

Most of these options are really not worth it, and the "put MG34 in tier 0" is the worst of all, I keep hearing this one a lot, I don't know what it is about that makes people think OKW needs an early HMG.

In my opinion, this comes mostly from players who skip medtruck to get an early luchs.


Ho about we fix Forward Retreat Point cancer first. Blobbing around your titanium truck should be punished. not encouraged.




Actually, if you know what you're up against, retreat forward point is also a weakness.
23 Nov 2016, 12:38 PM
#92
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2016, 12:02 PMAradan

But the results off all factions are all virtually identical in all modes (1v1 - 4v4)

fixing does not mean buffing...it can mean more options, more fun to play with and against, better design...
23 Nov 2016, 14:42 PM
#93
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2016, 12:16 PMCresc
Most of these options are really not worth it, and the "put MG34 in tier 0" is the worst of all, I keep hearing this one a lot, I don't know what it is about that makes people think OKW needs an early HMG.


They don't need it, but they need a T1 HMG as much as USF needs it. But TBH, this is a more throwback suggestions from before USF mortar. An early HMG helps OKW be able to do something if they're put on the defensive by heavy rifle/penal play.

But again, it's an old suggestion.

Although quite frankly, OKW needs a t0 MG as much as Ostheer needs a t0 MG. Take that as you will. Kappa.


In my opinion, this comes mostly from players who skip medtruck to get an early luchs.


Kind of. The early luchs option needs to be considered in the faction design as well as rushing the medic truck or delaying teching at all. There shouldn't be an 'intended' pathway for teching or rlse you end up with some pretty linear and stagnant play.
23 Nov 2016, 21:19 PM
#94
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

USF also needs a t0 mg. Reason is that all factions should be able to have a reliable suppression platform
23 Nov 2016, 22:17 PM
#95
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1

USF also needs a t0 mg. Reason is that all factions should be able to have a reliable suppression platform

Well, they basically already the general concepts set up to compensate for that with a cheap engineer unit that can suppress. It's just, ya know...kinda bad at it in practice.
23 Nov 2016, 23:13 PM
#96
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

I think that the OKW MG is fine where it is. It is locked behind tech anyway, just like USF/SU MG. Plus, I feel like in the current game state, OKW needs it. Here is my logic:

In CoH1, USA was designed to focus on Riflemen early with the option to get MGs from WSC later (much like how USF is designed in CoH2).

Wehrmacht in CoH1 had Volksgrenadiers which were weaker in early game combat than rifles, and thus the MG42 was made accessible to help Wehrmacht hold back the superior riflemen in the early game. That was the whole basis for fun, positional, and tactical gameplay.

Similarly in CoH2, I feel that with the introduction of Super-Penal squads, OKW needs an MG34 to help fight against them. Penals are so much better than volksgrenadiers (especially once the flamethrower comes out) that having an MG34 available early is logical for the same reason why having an MG42 early in CoH1 was logical. It allows OKW to deal with a SU core unit (Penal) without having to commit to picking a specific doctrine like Jaeger or Pfusiliers to counter a core unit.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 27
Germany 804
unknown 7

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

459 users are online: 459 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
38 posts in the last week
149 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45064
Welcome our newest member, edmond2003s
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM