Login

russian armor

December Balance Preview

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (85)down
5 Nov 2017, 14:20 PM
#401
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 18

Where i can see the patchnote for DBP 1.2? I have found it in the steam workshop, but haven't find any info about it.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1191687226


The reason v1.2 hasn't been made public is because, for some reason, the original mod refuses to update itself. So, Relic is looking into why this is the case, which is why v1.2 hasn't been publicly released.

If anybody has experience with workshop items refusing to update themselves, please contact me, so that we can find a solution.

I guess you can download the mod. If you are planning on playtesting Soviets, it's not worth playing v1.1 anymore, due to Conscript DPS "bug".


Conscripts
Our original changes to Conscript DPS caused an unintended, but significant increase in their DPS around ranges 5-to-15. We are adjusting the values to obtain the intended DPS curve.

- Near range reverted from 10 to 0
- Near accuracy adjusted from 0.7182821 to 0.7572339

Forward Retreat Points (affects all FRPs)
- Penalty changed to +75% reinforcement time per model
- It is now, again, possible to immediately disable the FRP
- 120 second cooldown on re-activating FRP after deactivation remains

Rear Echelon
- Rear echelons cannot use smoke when upgraded to flamethrowers (already in effect since v1.1)


Bugfixes
- Fixed an issue that prevented squads from properly obeying garrisoning commands
- Readjusted pathfinding behaviour for vehicles to avoid suboptimal behaviour around obstacles
- Addressed an issue with Target-Weak-Point and Treadshot abilities, that they were taking too long to fire
- Hammer tracking; partially revert duration from 7 secs to 9.5 secs
- Adjusted Lend-lease Sherman hotkey to avoid overlap
- Fixed an issue where the Jackson would cost more than intended (cost from 145FU to 140FU)


(v1.2 changes are minimal because it was meant to be a hotfix for v1.1).
5 Nov 2017, 14:42 PM
#402
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

Even though I dont agree with them, I understand why so many people opposed against FRP disable cooldown, as in lower ranked games concept of soft-retreat may not be known. Still, even if this feature is getting abandoned I think a +75% cost may be too hefty. This is 3 times bigger penalty than before. Did you try the +50% variant somehow?
5 Nov 2017, 14:44 PM
#403
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 18

Even though I dont agree with them, I understand why so many people opposed against FRP disable cooldown. In lower ranked games concept of soft-retreat may not be known. Still, even if this feature is getting abandoned I think a +75% cost may be too hefty. This is 3 times bigger penalty than before. Did you try the +50% variant somehow?


It's time per model; not MP per model.
5 Nov 2017, 15:04 PM
#404
avatar of MrBananaGrabber.
Social Media Manager Badge
Patrion 26

Posts: 323



It's time per model; not MP per model.


Does that also include US and UK FRPs, as well as reinforcing from HQs whilst a FRP is active?
5 Nov 2017, 15:07 PM
#405
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1



I can't imagine how offended some Axis Lovers would be if the Jackson penetrated their big cats every shot.


Considering accuracy tends to govern damage more than penetration in this game I'm not sure people would notice. :D
5 Nov 2017, 15:11 PM
#406
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



It's time per model; not MP per model.


Oh, sorry then. For some reason I thought you have used same penalty.

Btw. Why was manpower penalty abandoned? Increasing time somehow makes no sense to me as the reason why you build FRP is to have your troops constantly on the field. Making you pay more for this is justified as having troops on the frontline at all times is like having more troops than you actually have. But increasing reinforcement time takes away the whole point of building FRP imo.
5 Nov 2017, 15:57 PM
#407
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1

The manpower penalty was abandoned because it was excessive and it affected all units on the map. So having the FRP active meant you paid the penalty in your HQ. (Even stolen halftracks.)

The timer to disable it was the real problem though. I'm glad they changed that.

The increase in time just completely negates the purpose of FRPs, which, I believe, is the intention of the changes to FRPs in the first place.
5 Nov 2017, 16:22 PM
#408
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

The manpower penalty was abandoned because it was excessive and it affected all units on the map. So having the FRP active meant you paid the penalty in your HQ. (Even stolen halftracks.)

The timer to disable it was the real problem though. I'm glad they changed that.

The increase in time just completely negates the purpose of FRPs, which, I believe, is the intention of the changes to FRPs in the first place.


Well, I hoped that FRPs are going to be redesinged, not made pointless. That is why I was for manpower increase. Still, if it can only be global then it makes little sense.
5 Nov 2017, 17:00 PM
#409
avatar of TheLaGmAn

Posts: 8





What about limiting the jadgtiger to 1 per game per player (as the tiger ace), that will fix it for teamgames on which if you manage to spend a lot of resources and effort to kill it, they just insta-call another one because they didnt need to invest the fuel into more units while it was on the field.

This wouldnt affect 1v1 at all, 2v2 a bit (punshing risking jadg) and 3v3 and 4v4 even more.
5 Nov 2017, 17:40 PM
#410
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1



What about limiting the jadgtiger to 1 per game per player (as the tiger ace), that will fix it for teamgames on which if you manage to spend a lot of resources and effort to kill it, they just insta-call another one because they didnt need to invest the fuel into more units while it was on the field.


Maybe true for the Jagdtiger and OKW, but as far as the Elefant is concerned as Ostheer, most of the time I'm stuck at pop cap more than anything by that point.
5 Nov 2017, 17:50 PM
#411
avatar of TheLaGmAn

Posts: 8



Maybe true for the Jagdtiger and OKW, but as far as the Elefant is concerned as Ostheer, most of the time I'm stuck at pop cap more than anything by that point.


Yea, just the jadg, elephant is has worse stats and is easier to handle, plus ost can have a hard time with popcap, but usually if you are sov/usf you need to have a lot of units to kill the jadg and they can simply have a lot to support it due to the overall low popcap, so killing a jadg should really be rewarded and punished
5 Nov 2017, 19:00 PM
#412
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 639 | Subs: 1

What about limiting the jadgtiger to 1 per game per player (as the tiger ace), that will fix it for teamgames on which if you manage to spend a lot of resources and effort to kill it, they just insta-call another one because they didnt need to invest the fuel into more units while it was on the field
I would love it if there was a 1-superheavy-per-team limit (ISU, Ele, Jagd), or something like a shared pool of heavy tank population. This would not impact 1v1s at all (where the problem doesn't exist anyway).

Or like, entire team gets 15% fuel penalty per KT/IS2/Croc on field and 30% fuel penalty per superheavy. You want 4 KTs? Enjoy your 60% reduced fuel income lulz.

They wouldn't even need to nerf Ele/Jagd then (and could even make ISU great again).

It would be absolutely hilarious listening to people raging at their teammates.

It's not gonna happen of course, but a man can dream and giggle.
5 Nov 2017, 19:36 PM
#413
avatar of Luke_512

Posts: 42

Would it be possible to have infiltration units stay in the garrison they spawn in instead of having to wait a couple of seconds for them to come out and then another time to send them back in?
5 Nov 2017, 19:51 PM
#414
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

Would it be possible to have infiltration units stay in the garrison they spawn in instead of having to wait a couple of seconds for them to come out and then another time to send them back in?


This way there are not such a cancer to fight against. I think it should stay as is
5 Nov 2017, 20:34 PM
#415
avatar of Muad'Dib

Posts: 356



Well, I hoped that FRPs are going to be redesinged, not made pointless. That is why I was for manpower increase. Still, if it can only be global then it makes little sense.


FRP means a shorter retreat time, meaning squads start reinforcing earlier, plus shorter time back to the field. This will likely more than offset the 75% penalty on most maps, especially if you don't need to reinforce 4 or 5 models at once. Not to mention that the time to heal is sometimes greater than the time to reinforce, and is the limiting factor. I still think FRP will save a lot of time in many situations, hardly pointless - just less effective.
5 Nov 2017, 20:50 PM
#416
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 580



FRP means a shorter retreat time, meaning squads start reinforcing earlier, plus shorter time back to the field. This will likely more than offset the 75% penalty on most maps, especially if you don't need to reinforce 4 or 5 models at once. Not to mention that the time to heal is sometimes greater than the time to reinforce, and is the limiting factor. I still think FRP will save a lot of time in many situations, hardly pointless - just less effective.

+1:thumb:
I also believe it is still quite viable. Just turn the frp off after retreating and then play passively for next 2 mins. The real issue was people w5puld attack, get pinned and then retreat only to turn around and immediately attack elsewhere because they didn't loose many units. This removes the safety net somewhat.
6 Nov 2017, 00:16 AM
#417
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 842

if you immediatly retreat after encountering an MG you won't be affected since you won't spent much time reinforcing anyway
6 Nov 2017, 07:59 AM
#418
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 2

if you immediatly retreat after encountering an MG you won't be affected since you won't spent much time reinforcing anyway

So, basically, the Main Cancer of FRP wouldn't be healed.
6 Nov 2017, 08:48 AM
#419
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 1939

heavy super tanks like Kingtiger, JT and elefant are the endgame option for axis to deal with all the BS unit from allie faction.

ever played with stugs/ panthers vs fireflys or su85? its a cancer since ost has no doc endgame TD...

or the allie arty and infantery spam? with what do you deal with this bs?

tommys with double vickers shredd all axis infantery with no problem...thats the real OP bs...

or all this indirect fire from allies? its totally easy in teamgames with the right commander...sit back and blast all infantery and bases away with a single click...

6 Nov 2017, 11:01 AM
#420
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
Just to get this straight. You guys adjust OKW panther and Ostheer Panther because they are too spammable. You then increase pop cap, nerf both units hard, and then lower the OKW Panther price which makes the OKW panther more spammable.

Like lol? How is this logical hahahah


That the problem of there all nerfs or buufs, i called its double nerf, its to many changes wihtout reason.
PAGES (85)down
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
  • Ostheer flag T.R. 6 squads, 4 maxim 2 engies
  • U.S. Forces flag °NOSMarkov.-
uploaded by KahootKing

Board Info

151 users are online: 6 members and 145 guests
Lady Xenarra, Ægion, Nashka, grammar, DAZ187, Sturmpanther
78 posts in the last 24h
892 posts in the last week
4500 posts in the last month
Registered members: 22891
Welcome our newest member, 7madisone991wh7
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM