Login

russian armor

Faction Fuel Balancing

26 Oct 2017, 08:10 AM
#21
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 07:02 AMEsxile


The problem with the Luch is it is simply too good. T-70 and Stuart have been purposely tone down the last patch but the Luch has only been re-positioned to be less of a dive machine. So we end today with a Luch that rape infantry even from far range and is far too durable vs T-70 and Stuart.
T-70 and Stuart are, at maximum, there to deny an area to the Luch but they can't kill it on their own.

And people telling you the Luch cost the same price than Stuart are simply lying to you. They purposely forget to add the ambulance and Zook/BARs unlock price on the bill, even to be fair in term of unlocked option, we could argue that as USF you still can't use grenade while the OKW can, so it is a 25 fuel upgrade to add...

Sturmpio can produce healing crates from T0
OKW truck = 15 fuel, unlock faust
OKW Mechanized regiment = 50 fuel, unlock STG and lavanade
Luch = 60 Fuel
OKW total fuel spent to reach a Luch = 125

USF Ambulance = 10 fuel
USF Rack = 15 fuel
Captain = 60 fuel
Stuart = 70 fuel
Grenade = 25 fuel
USF total fuel spent for the same amount of option to reach the Stuart = 180


Don't need grenades. Get a mortar instead. I avoid the stuart all together. Simply not worth to counter 1 luchs. Just go zooks and try and hold till m10. This issue isn't so much with the luchs, it's more of the meta which shapes very well for the luchs. USF doesn't go captain mainly anymore because there isn't really anything of value, therefore they don't have an AT gun. Same goes for soviets. No T2 no zis. The luchs would be no issue if conscripts were good and T2 maxims were decent.
26 Oct 2017, 08:47 AM
#22
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1



Don't need grenades. Get a mortar instead. I avoid the stuart all together. Simply not worth to counter 1 luchs. Just go zooks and try and hold till m10. This issue isn't so much with the luchs, it's more of the meta which shapes very well for the luchs. USF doesn't go captain mainly anymore because there isn't really anything of value, therefore they don't have an AT gun. Same goes for soviets. No T2 no zis. The luchs would be no issue if conscripts were good and T2 maxims were decent.


The question is about the price equivalence between Luch and Stuart, not effectiveness off the M10, same goes for grenade, we're talking about options available and prices.
26 Oct 2017, 09:00 AM
#23
avatar of WhyThatSadFace?

Posts: 13


It's not that soviets lack a counter to light vehicles and need to be buffed, its that they lack options and need their power redistributed (to other doctrines and units). As things are now, penals and lend lease allow a pretty well balanced and even match against okw, the winner generally really is the one that played better. That said, this balance relies on mechanics and units that may or may not be particularly healthy for the game.

As to refocus how this reply applies to the greater discussion: I don't think they need an early t3/t70 timing. I don't think soviets need a buff (read: more power added). They need the power that they do have to be redistributed to things other than dshks, penals, and m4cs.


That's true, I don't think, soviets need another unit, but I just wonder how this Fuel-discrepancy between the Luchs and T-70 can be explained, since they fullfill similar roles, don't you think?

But what do you mean with the term "need their power redistributed (to other doctrines and units)"? I can't picture what you are implying.

And I certainly disagree that Lend-and-Lease- or Soviet-Industry-Doctrin used against other OKW-Meta-Commanders evens out the score (the fact, that you need doctrins to even out the score seems, imho, like another indicator that some balancing needs to be done), since the Fuel-plane can be shot down by the flak-emplacements of the OKW... I sincerly would love to see a valid statistic, that shows how many out of 100 planes gets shot down by their base-emplacements. And that's 100 Munition or 3 Mines waisted. Which then again would be needed for Luchs-denying. Feels tricky.

Before this discussion gets out of hand focussing on Lend-And-Lease-Doctrin: I used it only a few times (I like the Soviet-Industry better) and don't know its impact, but I read a lot of complains. But - I guess - there is another thread focussing that issue.

Again, thanks for reply
26 Oct 2017, 09:32 AM
#24
avatar of Joshua85

Posts: 606




But what do you mean with the term "need their power redistributed (to other doctrines and units)"? I can't picture what you are implying.


Again, thanks for reply


Why Hello there team mate, Tordenskjold here. Thanks for the great matches yesterday :)

I think I'll stay out of the overall fuel balance discussion and instead focus on what I imagine is being meant here.

As it is now, the soviets have a very strong but also very unflexible meta. The reason for this is that their penal battallions and doctrinal mgs are significantly overperforming, whilst much of their t2 as well as conscripts are generally underperforming in terms of cost efficient exchange.

This could be helped a lot by making penals slightly less versatile and nerfing the dshk so it is not able to setup AND suppress enemy infantry emerging from the FoW before they are able to get within grenade range.

In exchange for these nerfs the conscripts should get some significant buffs so they are able to retain viability in combat into the endgame. Discussions on how to best achieve this range from giving better veterancy buffs or making them unlock a single dp-28 as a purchasable upgrade after building t3.

in return for a dshk nerf it would also be sensible to give some more power back to the maxim, perhaps by just reducing its price back to 240 mp and/or improving the stats a bit. Such changes could potentially open up for much more diverse soviet strategies which in turn would be less predictable and make the whole experience more enjoyable for both the soviet player and his opponent.

26 Oct 2017, 09:57 AM
#25
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


...
That's true, I don't think, soviets need another unit, but I just wonder how this Fuel-discrepancy between the Luchs and T-70 can be explained, since they fullfill similar roles, don't you think?
...

They do not fill the same roles exactly.

T-70 is a light Recon tank that uses its main gun that has AOE.
Luch is light AI tank that uses "small arm" fire.

Even if they did fill the exact same role any discrepancy would mean little because they are facing different enemies.

Even if they were facing similar enemies it would still not mean much since different faction are designed differently with different strengths and weakness.

If you are having trouble countering the luch try getting a Su-76. It's a solid AT unit with a bonus barrage.

Once more Penal are OP and blobbing them should not be a path to victory, Luch a a counter to exclusive Penal spam and actually there should be more.
26 Oct 2017, 10:07 AM
#26
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 07:02 AMEsxile


The problem with the Luch is it is simply too good. T-70 and Stuart have been purposely tone down the last patch but the Luch has only been re-positioned to be less of a dive machine. So we end today with a Luch that rape infantry even from far range and is far too durable vs T-70 and Stuart.
T-70 and Stuart are, at maximum, there to deny an area to the Luch but they can't kill it on their own.

And people telling you the Luch cost the same price than Stuart are simply lying to you. They purposely forget to add the ambulance and Zook/BARs unlock price on the bill, even to be fair in term of unlocked option, we could argue that as USF you still can't use grenade while the OKW can, so it is a 25 fuel upgrade to add...

Sturmpio can produce healing crates from T0
OKW truck = 15 fuel, unlock faust
OKW Mechanized regiment = 50 fuel, unlock STG and lavanade
Luch = 60 Fuel
OKW total fuel spent to reach a Luch = 125

USF Ambulance = 10 fuel
USF Rack = 15 fuel
Captain = 60 fuel
Stuart = 70 fuel
Grenade = 25 fuel
USF total fuel spent for the same amount of option to reach the Stuart = 180


If you were being fair you would have included the mp benifits of having a free unit for USF tech and Getting repair side tech. Flutermore nades and weapon racks shouldn't be equally comparable to Stgs and flame nades as bars and pineapples are bettter. Plus you don't include OKW trucks forward reinforcement against the ambulance.
26 Oct 2017, 11:03 AM
#27
avatar of WhyThatSadFace?

Posts: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 09:57 AMVipper

They do not fill the same roles exactly.

T-70 is a light Recon tank that uses its main gun that has AOE.
Luch is light AI tank that uses "small arm" fire.


I understand, but isn't that just different means for the same purpose, Infantry-Hunting?

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 09:57 AMVipper
Even if they did fill the exact same role any discrepancy would mean little because they are facing different enemies.

Even if they were facing similar enemies it would still not mean much since different faction are designed differently with different strengths and weakness.


Your first argument doesn't connect to me: How is the enemy you are facing correlating with the fuel-discrepancy? Shouldn't similar roles equal in a similar resource-cost?
Please don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the differencies between the factions and I don't agree on comments that propose making the core-units (like MGs, Motars etc.) all the same. And I don't have any problems with the T3 costing maybe 10 Fuel more then the T2-equivalent of the OKW. But 35 Fuel more, doesn't seem right.

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 09:57 AMVipper
If you are having trouble countering the luch try getting a Su-76. It's a solid AT unit with a bonus barrage.


Which then cost 5 Fuel more then the T-70, which makes the discrepancy rise to 45 fuel and still not have undermined the core-argument: Why this discrepancy?

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 09:57 AMVipper
Once more Penal are OP and blobbing them should not be a path to victory, Luch a a counter to exclusive Penal spam and actually there should be more.


I agree, there should always be more then one option to counter an enemy-measure. Although, OKW gets an MG-Option at T0 with the first Halftrack set up, which seems to be an effictive counter-measure, besides the Luchs and later on the Stuka-zu-Fuß... but that's too far up in the game already.

But again, I want to stay focussed on the discrepancy-discussion, not Penals :)

Thank you for your reply
26 Oct 2017, 12:24 PM
#28
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

I understand, but isn't that just different means for the same purpose, Infantry-Hunting?



Your first argument doesn't connect to me: How is the enemy you are facing correlating with the fuel-discrepancy? Shouldn't similar roles equal in a similar resource-cost?
Please don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the differencies between the factions and I don't agree on comments that propose making the core-units (like MGs, Motars etc.) all the same. And I don't have any problems with the T3 costing maybe 10 Fuel more then the T2-equivalent of the OKW. But 35 Fuel more, doesn't seem right.


T-70 price is based on its old impact value, when it was the king of early/mid game with its auto-repair. At that time the 70 fuel price was justified. Today it is not anymore, end of the story.
26 Oct 2017, 12:44 PM
#29
avatar of WhyThatSadFace?

Posts: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 12:24 PMEsxile

T-70 price is based on its old impact value, when it was the king of early/mid game with its auto-repair. At that time the 70 fuel price was justified. Today it is not anymore, end of the story.


Hmm... okay, that sounds like it or the T3 should be rebalanced, prise-wise, don't you agree?

And since it says in the faction-diagramm by relic (http://www.companyofheroes.com/blog/2015/08/17/coh2-faction-comparison), that the Soviet should have a stronger impact in the mid-game, I found this argument even more reasonable.

Which - and I can't stress this enough - doesn't mean that there are other balancing-issues like the penals, that needs to be fixed too. But that's not the topic of this thread :)
26 Oct 2017, 12:45 PM
#30
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 12:24 PMEsxile


T-70 price is based on its old impact value, when it was the king of early/mid game with its auto-repair. At that time the 70 fuel price was justified. Today it is not anymore, end of the story.

It counter luchs, got good at capabilities against lights and has a good rof.
At that time any light was nerfed, from stuart to puma and aec.
The 70 price is more than justified, especially since t70 scale well with recon capabilities.
26 Oct 2017, 14:18 PM
#31
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


I understand, but isn't that just different means for the same purpose, Infantry-Hunting?

Not really T-70 in addition to kill infantry the T-70 can counter light vehicles, Recon and cap.


Your first argument doesn't connect to me: How is the enemy you are facing correlating with the fuel-discrepancy? Shouldn't similar roles equal in a similar resource-cost?
Please don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the differencies between the factions and I don't agree on comments that propose making the core-units (like MGs, Motars etc.) all the same. And I don't have any problems with the T3 costing maybe 10 Fuel more then the T2-equivalent of the OKW. But 35 Fuel more, doesn't seem right.

Not really each faction need the tools do deal with it has to face. Luch is an anti-blob vehicle because allies tend to blob more.

In addition try to see the teching in if full, for instance the SU-76 is far more cost efficient than the Puma.



Which then cost 5 Fuel more then the T-70, which makes the discrepancy rise to 45 fuel and still not have undermined the core-argument: Why this discrepancy?

Now you are comparing different thing since Su-76 is an AT unit and actually one of the most cost efficient units in the game.

I agree, there should always be more then one option to counter an enemy-measure. Although, OKW gets an MG-Option at T0 with the first Halftrack set up, which seems to be an effictive counter-measure, besides the Luchs and later on the Stuka-zu-Fuß... but that's too far up in the game already.

But again, I want to stay focussed on the discrepancy-discussion, not Penals :)
Thank you for your reply

I am not focusing on Penal but Soviet have trouble vs Luch only if they choose to spam Penals. Penals is an OP unit very difficult to counter (as shown in factional showdown) and thus even if there are fuel discrepancies that does lead to imbalance, actually its the Soviet that are OP and need to be toned down.
26 Oct 2017, 15:15 PM
#32
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 08:47 AMEsxile


The question is about the price equivalence between Luch and Stuart, not effectiveness off the M10, same goes for grenade, we're talking about options available and prices.


So what you're saying is you should be able to get a 7 minute stuart?
26 Oct 2017, 16:13 PM
#34
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 09:57 AMVipper

They do not fill the same roles exactly.

T-70 is a light Recon tank that uses its main gun that has AOE.
Luch is light AI tank that uses "small arm" fire.



Stop spreading missinformation and bullshitting. Luchs gun have much more effective AoE than T70.

They perform closely equal but luchs gun have far more RoF, and at vet 2 he can just keep the dps on the move.
26 Oct 2017, 16:23 PM
#35
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 16:13 PMzerocoh


Stop spreading missinformation and bullshitting. Luchs gun have much more effective AoE than T70.

They perform closely equal but luchs gun have far more RoF, and at vet 2 he can just keep the dps on the move.


Read, understand, reply...

Luch uses accuracy its AOE is 1 with 0.1/0.6 multiplier and 16 damage.
T-70 uses AOE its AOE is 1.75 0.15/0.8 multiplier and 40 damage.

T-70 does more damage at 1.75 than Luch does at 0.25.

PLS:
"Stop spreading missinformation and bullshitting."
26 Oct 2017, 16:27 PM
#36
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

AoE means shit when acc and rof are so low. Which you conveniently didn't mention...
26 Oct 2017, 16:32 PM
#37
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1



So what you're saying is you should be able to get a 7 minute stuart?


No, just saying Luch price =/ Stuart Price.
26 Oct 2017, 16:45 PM
#38
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

Hey Ladies, Gentlemen and other human beeings ...


Hi WhatSadFace.

I don't want be rude towards you but I think that this is a learn to play issue. Currently Soviets are one of strongest faction and the disatvantage of having a light tank with slowest arrival time is easily mitigated by 2 factors - having the best main line infantry - penals - and having the earliest show unit - clown car (m3 with engineers put inside).

Another fact is that T70 hardcounters both luchs and 222 while still being very good against all infantry squads.

I think there is no point in buffing (balancing) Soviet light tanks t70 arrival time. At least not until penals, dushka and lend lease sherman are balanced.

If you continulously have problems with Soviets I recommend you visit State Office and post a replay in Replay Reviews thread. There are many good community members which are eager to spot your mistakes and help you to improve in your play :)
26 Oct 2017, 17:05 PM
#39
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Oct 2017, 16:27 PMzerocoh
AoE means shit when acc and rof are so low. Which you conveniently didn't mention...


? tell that to the old T70 which obliterated squads on AoE alone
26 Oct 2017, 17:08 PM
#40
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930



? tell that to the old T70 which obliterated squads on AoE alone


The one that died to everything and missed like crazy?

oh yeah, I remember losing countless games because that piece of shit underperformed so badly...

you had to be really bad to get rekt by old t70
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

571 users are online: 1 member and 570 guests
Makros
7 posts in the last 24h
29 posts in the last week
147 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45150
Welcome our newest member, Lansf304
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM