Login

russian armor

Winter Balance Preview Replays

24 Jan 2017, 14:17 PM
#101
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

What about decreasing main gun damage and increasing coaxle MG damage?

My logic: I'm thinking about vanilla CoH1 and why they did such a good job designing and balancing light vehicles (please don't call me out for a fanboy, I just compare the games to think how to improve CoH2).

Anyway, in CoH1, Wehrmacht's light vehicle was the Puma, and was either very good at AI (while no AT), or moderate good AT (with poor AI capability). The Americans on the other hand had the M8, which with its 50cal had decent anti-infantry (but less effective than a puma), and decent anti-light vehicle (but less than an upgraded puma).

CoH2 axis design seems similar. Look at the Luchs and Puma. The Luchs excels at AI, and has no AT. The Puma excels at AT, but has poor AI.

Wouldn't it therefore be logical that the AEC fit a role similar to the M8, where it can defeat the Luchs 1 on 1, but lose to the Puma, while boasting greater anti-infantry capability than the Puma so that the vehicle serves greater utility in all situations, while simultaneously not being a huge shock unit that dominate all axis light vehicles outright?

Just my thoughts.
24 Jan 2017, 14:34 PM
#102
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742


Would it help if we reworked AEC timing to make it feel more like a panic-puma thing, rather than a generalist LV?


Depends on what is supposed to trigger this panic.

Stuarts and T70s trigger the panic puma. The Luchs would be the only real thing that would suggest a 'panic AEC'.

If anything I agree with Nosliw's assessment of how the AEC might be balanced best.
24 Jan 2017, 15:36 PM
#103
avatar of Tittendachs

Posts: 115

imo the AEC should behave like a Puma. It should not be both AT and AI (even if lackluster)
the Puma got nerfed by changing the TWP ability so it can no longer wipe 1 man squads on retreat which is good. so it has lost basicly all its AI power. AEC should behave the same.
It gives the British player a choice between AT gun and more mobile AEC to counter early LV.
With the changes to piats brits now have also a 3rd option to deal with LV (or has that been reverted?).

In the live version Brits go AEC every time to counter the expected Luchs or 2x222 because they also get a pretty good AI unit as well. OKW has to choose between AI or AT only (Luchs/Puma) in comparison.
24 Jan 2017, 15:44 PM
#104
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

If you make the AEC AT only then I think it's too niche, and removes strategic diversity and micro from the game. You'd simply build it if you saw mechanized headquarters from OKW, otherwise you'd skip it for cromwell. Boring. Inb4 AEC vs Puma every game, or no AEC vs medic truck.
24 Jan 2017, 15:56 PM
#105
avatar of Tittendachs

Posts: 115

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jan 2017, 15:44 PMNosliw
If you make the AEC AT only then I think it's too niche, and removes strategic diversity and micro from the game. You'd simply build it if you saw mechanized headquarters from OKW, otherwise you'd skip it for cromwell. Boring. Inb4 AEC vs Puma every game, or no AEC vs medic truck.


what is wrong with that?
would you rather see AEC every time as it is right now? that's my definition of boring.

this game isn't just about micro it's about teching as well. if you tech the wrong stuff you should be punished.
as you mentioned AEC would be the hard counter to mechanised Luchs or double 222. Where you would build the AEC AFTER the Luchs hit the field to prevent the Puma/AEC duel. AEC vs Puma should not be what the brit player wants. In case of the Puma brits would tech piats or AT gun.
btw AEC would be great against Flack HT as well which got its buffs and might be used more often now!
24 Jan 2017, 16:02 PM
#106
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

You're assuming things from what I said. In CoH1 M8 was by no means a hard counter to the Puma. It would take like 6-7 shots to kill the Puma, but given enough time in a fight, the M8 would win 100% of the time 1v1, unless the Puma was upgraded. Furthermore, the M8 was a good infantry deterent, but did not have the support and chasing capability of the Puma either. The M8 was a good all around support unit, that deterred certain Wehrmacht playstyles. Was the M8 built every game? Heck no. Would the AEC be built every game? It's hard to say. If it's damage is lowered as I stated, it wouldn't be a "hard counter" to the Luchs as much as it would be a unit to support AT guns, Piats, and deter overly aggressive Luchs play. If the AEC would kill the Luchs in 4 shots, it wouldn't be an absurd must rush hard counter. Then you have to ask yourself is the 75 fuel investment for the AEC worth it or should you wait for cromwell? You have to ask how the performance fits your playstyle, and the situation, and balance it. Making the AEC a very strong AT option makes it a no-brainer against mechanized. Making it a microable support vehicle with deterrant capabilities makes it a safe option to help defend against mechanized play, but by no means an obvious choice when you can easily use Piats and AT guns to hold off to the much stronger cromwell.
24 Jan 2017, 16:12 PM
#107
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

While doing the AEC a bit more like the M8 greyhound from CoH1 would sound be a great idea in general, doing so for the Brit faction is not such a great idea.

The reason for this, is that AEC simply comes too early to be great at AI. Unlike other factions, Brits don't have enough tiers/research stuff to pin the timing for an early AEC.

Moreover, Brits don't, exactly, have other great alternatives to applying pressure. M8 worked for US in CoH1 because it belonged to one of two possible tiers, and US could already have the option of applying pressure from its earlier tiers; it was a faction built for aggression.

In short, the reason why AEC can't take the middle ground is due to:
- Early arrival
- Lack of viable alternatives for aggression (except for mortar pit, of course)

If UC changes would have gone through, we would be having a completely different discussion right now.

Since UC changes didn't make it through, it boils down to what Tittendachs said: we don't want to make the AEC a no-brainer option. At the same time, between the alternatives (PIATs/AEC), we should at least make it that the Brit player gets what he pays for.
24 Jan 2017, 16:20 PM
#108
avatar of Nosliw

Posts: 515

If the problem is a timing issue, why not make the AEC like an M8 and increase the upgrade cost for it so that it is delayed? Or would that just make Cromwell the better option always?

Sounds like faction design flaw... putting a light tank so early in the tech tree for a defensive faction. Sigh.
24 Jan 2017, 16:24 PM
#109
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jan 2017, 16:20 PMNosliw
If the problem is a timing issue, why not make the AEC like an M8 and increase the upgrade cost for it so that it is delayed? Or would that just make Cromwell the better option always?

Sounds like faction design flaw... putting a light tank so early in the tech tree for a defensive faction. Sigh.


That could work, if we made the AEC/Bofors upgrade a requirement for buying T4 (with cost adjustments as necessary). Otherwise, if the upgrade remains optional, I think that people will generally skip it.

But, even then, it comes down to faction design. For instance, somebody that went Captain will almost always want to get a stuart out, regardless. However, unlike USF, Brits don't have an alternative Lieutenant tier to alternatve their builds.

(Yes, there's also Bofors tech, but do we really want to present that as an alternative?)

Having an auto-build AEC will make so many opposing strategies miserable:
- FlakHT
- 222
- MechHQ

... and at the same time, it will also make UKF miserable, since their strategies will be ultra-predictable.
24 Jan 2017, 16:31 PM
#110
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7



That could work, if we made the AEC/Bofors upgrade a requirement for buying T4 (with cost adjustments as necessary). Otherwise, if the upgrade remains optional, I think that people will generally skip it.

But, even then, it comes down to faction design. For instance, somebody that went Captain will almost always want to get a stuart out, regardless. However, unlike USF, Brits don't have an alternative Lieutenant tier to alternatve their builds.

(Yes, there's also Bofors tech, but do we really want to present that as an alternative?)

Having an auto-build AEC will make so many opposing strategies miserable:
- FlakHT
- 222
- MechHQ

... and at the same time, it will also make UKF miserable, since their strategies will be ultra-predictable.


Also sometimes you do not want to go either AC or bofors mid game and then teching them would be pointless mainly because of strategical diversity thing because maybe lategame you will need AC as cheap stunner/command vehicle/ light vehicle duty unit or you will need bofors to lock down valuable yet hardly defendable VP without some kind of set up defence. If you chose bad mid game, you´re screwed and forced to something you do not want.
28 Jan 2017, 15:26 PM
#111
avatar of Muad'Dib

Posts: 368

Soviet - Ostheer 1v1 on Faymonville. Rather noobish (Soviet player at least) but you can see penals, and a T70 at vet 1-3. Not sure if opponent used something WBP-specific.

Tank Hunter vs Spearhead

14 Feb 2017, 07:36 AM
#112
avatar of DonnieChan

Posts: 2260 | Subs: 1





2 Replays with Brits vs wehr on close combat and a bit opener map


i liked the new AEC and PGrens especially, also the sniper

14 Feb 2017, 09:23 AM
#113
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17





2 Replays with Brits vs wehr on close combat and a bit opener map


i liked the new AEC and PGrens especially, also the sniper



We did a recheck of all the game-files we modified.

Note that the AEC still has live-version AoE (but massively worse accuracy vs infantry). We are fixing this ninja-bug (along with all other remaining ninja-bugs) in v1.9.
14 Feb 2017, 13:37 PM
#114
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jan 2017, 16:20 PMNosliw
If the problem is a timing issue, why not make the AEC like an M8 and increase the upgrade cost for it so that it is delayed? Or would that just make Cromwell the better option always?

Sounds like faction design flaw... putting a light tank so early in the tech tree for a defensive faction. Sigh.


Not sure you can compare the M8 with the AEC, the Coh1 M8 came as an alternative to the global BARs upgrade. 60 fuel each if I remember well.
If you went BARs first, you're unlikely to build a M8 to counter Pumas. If you go M8 first, your opponent isn't going to build a Puma without upgrade.
You cannot really compare this situation with the Bofor/AEC.

I'm all for the AEC becoming a Puma like. But if nothing is change for the Bofor (aka nerfing it usage by making it less brainless autofire everything in range) everybody will go Bofor over AEC and we'll be ending in the same meta over and over but this time with the Bofor.
28 Feb 2017, 17:48 PM
#115
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4



If you wanted to see effectiveness of Assgren spam, soviet snipers, and Dank Hunters you can watch this.
28 Feb 2017, 19:33 PM
#116
avatar of |GB| The Hooligan486
Senior Referee Badge

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



If you wanted to see Brümmbare and Ez-8's in a good game, you can watch this.

:P
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

579 users are online: 579 guests
8 posts in the last 24h
16 posts in the last week
137 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45027
Welcome our newest member, Dadcdfo03
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM