Login

russian armor

Comunnity poll for T1/penals design

17 Dec 2016, 17:56 PM
#21
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 2759 | Subs: 4



which unit would you nerf then?
if they stay the same as in the live-version nothing changes except you replace penal/guard blob with guard/penal blob ...


What would be the point of blobbing guards who only have conscript rifle (with better accuracy) until T3 is built?
17 Dec 2016, 17:59 PM
#22
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 2759 | Subs: 4

Guards with double DP 1928 should then deal a bit less damage than USF riflemen with 1x M1919 BUT with more durability
17 Dec 2016, 18:00 PM
#23
avatar of LimaOscarMike

Posts: 440

what about penal came with mosin with less acc than conscript (they spent most of their time in gulag not shooting range)and you eiter choose 2 PTRS or 4 SVT you still had molotov for deny enemy building tho
17 Dec 2016, 18:05 PM
#24
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Stop giving every tier a counter to ever phase of the game. Soviet tier 1 is dictated by snipers, good solid anti infantry units, a light vehicle and no real counters to light vehicles. YOU HAVE CONS WITH AT NADES FROM HQ FOR THAT.

Just because you have the green light to change certain things from Relic doesn't mean that you SHOULD change them purely out of the sake of changing them.

This all feels to me like you are trying to cushion the major changes you made in 1.0 of this 'balance' mod just so you don't have to change those back or alter them.

Face it, you people have no idea what you are doing lol.
17 Dec 2016, 18:28 PM
#25
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



Penals of course, to the WBP 1.0 standard. Then everything changes. You can go shocks for example. You can go for any other doctrine that has no guards. It makes playing as and vs soviets much more interesting.

The problem here is not ballance, its that it needs a change in meta commanders. Relic probably won't allow this.



Sure, then what kind of penals? Live? WBP 1.0? WBP 1.0 with late game upgrade?


Penals with fixed veterancy and no flamethrowerer.

Quasi-elite AI squad.
17 Dec 2016, 18:54 PM
#26
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1

i am a huge penal squad fan since coh2 release, and the 1.2 change with only 2 ptrs gave me nightmares. they are aggressive close range units, so i am really happy about the flamer ppsh package.

BUT: any chance to fix models, so the ppsh models always lead the squad into combat? seeing the ppsh behind svt rifle models is disgusting..
17 Dec 2016, 18:56 PM
#27
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1

Stop giving every tier a counter to ever phase of the game.

i think the issue for this is the fact, that the game gets balanced around boring 1v1. going T1 in bigger teammodes is usually no big deal.. but you know it #muh1v1balancesoimportant #muhESL
17 Dec 2016, 19:02 PM
#28
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

i am a huge penal squad fan since coh2 release, and the 1.2 change with only 2 ptrs gave me nightmares. they are aggressive close range units, so i am really happy about the flamer ppsh package.

BUT: any chance to fix models, so the ppsh models always lead the squad into combat? seeing the ppsh behind svt rifle models is disgusting..


I haven't had the chance to really playtest this; is this always the case? Don't the two types of models mix randomly, depending who died?

i.e., I don't think that the SVT/ppsh mixing is predetermined.

The only other option is make PPSh a slot items, which means you will get frustrating behaviour like Vet3 Tommies :(
17 Dec 2016, 19:09 PM
#29
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13286 | Subs: 1



I haven't had the chance to really playtest this; is this always the case? Don't the two types of models mix randomly, depending who died?

i.e., I don't think that the SVT/ppsh mixing is predetermined.

The only other option is make PPSh a slot items, which means you will get frustrating behaviour like Vet3 Tommies :(

why 3 different weapons with different optimum ranges?
Flamer optimum range 20
SVT optimum range around 25(?)
Cons PPsh optimum range 10

Is it not possible to replace all SVT with PPsh? (5PPsh +1 flamer)
17 Dec 2016, 19:14 PM
#30
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 19:09 PMVipper

why 3 different weapons with different optimum ranges?
Flamer optimum range 20
SVT optimum range around 25(?)
Cons PPsh optimum range 10

Is it not possible to replace all SVT with PPsh?


That way they become shocks that picked flamer without armour. Way too much overlap and way too good for the price.
17 Dec 2016, 19:18 PM
#31
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13286 | Subs: 1



That way they become shocks that picked flamer without armour.

The problem being?

PPsh are 2 type the one shock use with normal smg Curve and the Conscript one with higher DPS at range 10-15.

mixed weapon (ppsh /svt/flamer) Penal are actually more powerful since because they have more DPS at range 20 the optimum range for flamer...and making the unit behave inconstant since optimum range will change depending which model dies...

moving their optimum DPS to close (5) actually makes the unit better balanced...


Way too much overlap and way too good for the price.

I could claim the same about PTRs Penal and Guards...

17 Dec 2016, 19:29 PM
#32
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Dec 2016, 19:18 PMVipper

The problem being?

PPsh are 2 type the one shock use with normal smg Curve and the Conscript one with higher DPS at range 10-15.

mixed weapon (ppsh /svt/flamer) Penal are actually more powerful since because they have more DPS at range 20 the optimum range for flamer...and making the unit behave inconstant since optimum range will change depending which model dies...

moving their optimum DPS to close (5) actually makes the unit better balanced...


I could claim the same about PTRs Penal and Guards...



All mixed weapons do to penals is making them harder to use and thus more ballanced. But generally I'm not a fan of neither short range / flamer upgrade nor the PTRS upgrade.
17 Dec 2016, 19:37 PM
#33
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13286 | Subs: 1



All mixed weapons do to penals is making them harder to use and thus more ballanced. But generally I'm not a fan of neither short range / flamer upgrade nor the PTRS upgrade.


I am not a big fun of flamer either but imo if they go for it they should at least make it with 5 ppsh shock troops curve around 75% DPS
17 Dec 2016, 20:34 PM
#34
avatar of FLTA

Posts: 200 | Subs: 1

How I see 1.3 penals is like pgrens. Elite infantry that can be upgraded to have anti-tank capabilities in cost of anti-infantry. That is the idea atleast, the stats can be fucked with if they are OP or UP, but the idea sounds good to me.
17 Dec 2016, 23:46 PM
#35
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1


The only other option is make PPSh a slot items, which means you will get frustrating behaviour like Vet3 Tommies :(

are you referring to the models just standing around like puppets with the gun flying around? also like the obers with stg44 upgrade after they die? issues which will never get fixed by lelic :clap:

btw: why did the ura ability get removed? i totally understand it on the ptrs penals, maybe even on flamer penals, but overall removed? thats crap..

to fix the AT issue with T1: why not simply add the 45mm at gun? its not strong and only effective vs light vehicles, i dont really see a problem..
18 Dec 2016, 00:08 AM
#36
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885


are you referring to the models just standing around like puppets with the gun flying around? also like the obers with stg44 upgrade after they die? issues which will never get fixed by lelic :clap:

btw: why did the ura ability get removed? i totally understand it on the ptrs penals, maybe even on flamer penals, but overall removed? thats crap..

to fix the AT issue with T1: why not simply add the 45mm at gun? its not strong and only effective vs light vehicles, i dont really see a problem..


He was refering to the fact that squads having multiple slot weapons loose them randomly, while the expected behaviour is to keep the most valuable ones. For some units, like vet3 tommies, its even worse since they have undroppable slot weapons (scoped enfields), that are pretty useless, so they always drop much more valuable lmgs. And that is even if squad goes down to 3 men...
18 Dec 2016, 00:29 AM
#37
avatar of Budwise
Admin Red  Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2074 | Subs: 2

Just nerf them a little from their current terminator version and then stop messing with them.
18 Dec 2016, 03:56 AM
#38
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1191 | Subs: 1

The road to making t1 viable lies in fixing t2 and not making t1 better in every way.

CoH1 does this in part by making the at gun a t3 unit, making t2 openers harder to play due to a lack of supporting infantry for the support weapons, and also by making teching a need for both t1 and t2 players to get at.

In coh2, we have a t2 with an mg that is basically an infantry squad, plus counters to all the counters to be expected of a heavy support weapons build.

I think the 6 man russian crews need to be looked at, and one that is done, we will see a lot more t1.

I also think what t1 needs more than anything, is a clearer role. Currently, you have snipers (which should replace the atg in t2), which don't really mesh with elite, expensive infantry. The elite infantry should be the focus of the "special rifle command," and other units in the tier should exist to mesh with them, not to fill space.

Tldr., the best way to fix soviet early games is to take a hard look at the placement of units in the tiers, and the roles of the units themselves.
aaa
18 Dec 2016, 06:28 AM
#39
avatar of aaa

Posts: 1485

Penals have to be OP on individual basis otherwise T1 doesnt worth investment. - GG
18 Dec 2016, 08:27 AM
#40
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13286 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2016, 06:28 AMaaa
Penals have to be OP on individual basis otherwise T1 doesnt worth investment. - GG


Actually no. Having OP units early has proven problematic. When Shock and Guards where moved to CP 1 Soviet dominated the field, simply because OP unit early are have great impact and are too cost efficient. The only reason riflemen that are actually OP did work was that they did lose from grenadier max range and because they had less cost efficient support weapons.

I would actually argue the exact opposite. The (only) way to make T1 work is provide a cheap osstruppen style infantry so the the actually cost of building a T1 is mitigated by access to a cheap cannon fodder infantry. In addition the existence of such an infantry fits the Soviet faction and also fits the Penals historically and thematically.

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 shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

319 users are online: 3 members and 316 guests
SneakEye, Mr Carmine, PatFenis
7 posts in the last 24h
102 posts in the last week
509 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36473
Welcome our newest member, kowild86
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM