Login

russian armor

December Balance Preview

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (85)down
16 Dec 2017, 02:37 AM
#1621
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 26

Mr.Smith & miragefla, thank you so much for your work.

Not sure if this already too late notice, but I had a DBP 2.0 test game and tried the new UKF mortar pit. I really like the change that auto-attack range is shorter than barrage range, also smoke barrage is a justifiable adjustment.

But I noticed that vet1 and vet2 pretty much don't change anything anymore in context of a real fight. Vet1 decreases smoke cooldown and vet2 decreases barrage cooldown. Both cooldowns are already extremely short in the first palce, just a few seconds.

I tested a vet2 mortar pit vs. a vet0 mortar pit and the cooldown changes are pretty much insignificant and not really beneficial in any regard. There was almost no difference between barrages and barrage cooldown. And a few seconds less, like 2-4, for smoke barrage cooldown.

Basically regardless of vet0 or vet2 you can fire another barrage after your barrage is finished and you can also instantly fire another smoke barrage after your smoke barrage is finished.

Perhaps other vet bonuses should be given or the cooldowns should be significantly longer at vet0 in the first place. But Currently there is almost no difference between vet0 and vet2.
16 Dec 2017, 04:34 AM
#1622
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1844 | Subs: 1

so by your logic axis inf should always be worse at any point of the game right


I don't know how you came to that conclusion. It's all about scaling and investment - all mainline infantry should scale roughly the same given cost and munitions investment. My point is just that USF and UKF don't have doctrinal elite infantry so they should have a slightly higher ceiling via double upgrade than Volks or Grens (because they have Panzergrens and Obers for late game Infantry support). Ideally Rifles and Tommies are never going to be better (generally speaking) at all points in the game vs. Volks and Grens but they have to be good enough in the late game. This should be obvious with how the DBP is slightly scaling back Volks late game scaling and making Obers more accessible and before that the buff Panzergrens got. Basically Rifles and Tommies should be able to deal with axis elite infantry with roughly the same amount of ease that Grens and Volks can deal with double upgraded Allied Squads or Allied Elites. (In my opinion of course)
16 Dec 2017, 07:37 AM
#1623
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660



If you're sinking 120 munitions onto a squad it should absolutely be able to deal with elite squads. Because- pop quiz what do axis factions have that allies dont? What is Non-doctrinal elite infantry? Ding ding ding! Obers and PZ Grens have an easy time with non or single upgraded squads so the only way for commanders that don't have elite infantry to be viable is for allowing mainline infantry to be able to scale with other elite squads for a cost. It's either that or just allow Riflemen and Tommies to be outscaled just because they are facing off against "elite" squads and be forced into commanders with Rangers, Paratroopers, Commandos, etc. just to compete.

No they shouldn't, they should be able to 2vs1 those elite, or 1vs1 with much better micro/cover.
Those factions have the best AI tank to support infantry, like sherman and t34...
But apparently the general idea now is to make bar/bren spam into stuart/aec into jackson/firefly new mainstream meta

"Because- pop quiz what do axis factions have that allies dont?"

Start with he shells/super bolshevik mg on t34, m8 sniper carriage, centaur, tons of indirect fire even from direct fire units (su76/zis)...
16 Dec 2017, 07:47 AM
#1624
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660



My point is just that USF and UKF don't have doctrinal elite infantry so they should have a slightly higher ceiling via double upgrade than Volks or Grens (because they have Panzergrens and Obers for late game Infantry support).


No it wasn't... your point was that should be a-movable and waste anything, including much more expensive doc/non doc elite because of a one time investment that is laughable compared to the late game bleed of indirect fire and small arms that such elites suffer.

Now i may be wrong...but what about accounting the sensibly better in AI performances generalist allied tank and the other powerful ai late game vehicles (okw has none, ost has much less accessible brumbar and the ostwind) and use combined arms ? Or coordinate indirect fire...or something else that make it look like you are playing an rts...
16 Dec 2017, 09:57 AM
#1625
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3465 | Subs: 1


No they shouldn't, they should be able to 2vs1 those elite, or 1vs1 with much better micro/cover.
Those factions have the best AI tank to support infantry, like sherman and t34...


Ostwind and Luch have something to tell you...

16 Dec 2017, 10:27 AM
#1626
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Dec 2017, 09:57 AMEsxile


Ostwind and Luch have something to tell you...



An option with good AI and no AT is far less useful than an option with slightly less good AI and OK at.

Just saying.
16 Dec 2017, 14:44 PM
#1627
avatar of RussianHamster

Posts: 88

I have played 5 games with Denchicpsih as Sov vs Ostheer and Soviets have 100% winrate. We tried to find a counter for cons PPSH-41 spam, but we failed. Idk how it will be work with tier1 players, but that feels like new meta after patch and its looking better than penals+DSHK now.
I played 2 games as Soviet and 3 games as Ostheer. We using different commanders, but all of them was with PPSH-41.

P.S. Dont tell me something like "build more HMG", because conscripts killing them just face to face with "Hit the dirt!".
16 Dec 2017, 14:53 PM
#1628
16 Dec 2017, 14:58 PM
#1629
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

Just look at that:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/210022879


What happens when you have 480mp of conscripts vs an MG42 and a Mortar?
16 Dec 2017, 15:01 PM
#1630
avatar of RussianHamster

Posts: 88



What happens when you have 480mp of conscripts vs an MG42 and a Mortar?

Nothing changes:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/210024721
16 Dec 2017, 15:13 PM
#1631
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871

Is there a reason the MG isn't in cover (most players don't leave an mg sitting out in the open). Also saying nothing changes isn't quite correct, as both squads nearly died.
16 Dec 2017, 15:22 PM
#1632
avatar of RussianHamster

Posts: 88

Is there a reason the MG isn't in cover (most players don't leave an mg sitting out in the open. Also saying nothing changes isn't quite correct, as both squads nearly died.

In the real game I would try to flank with 2 squads (one come with hit the dirt, while second could get much closer), and HMG retreated when he lost 2 models (cause 3ed will be lost during folding).

I don't want to say what 2 conscripts can easily win the HMG, I want to say what in this case HMG just not doing its direct function.
And in a real fight to build a mortar against 5 conscripts is inanity, because conscripts are more mobile and will just win control of the map and waiting for a T-70 or T-34.
16 Dec 2017, 15:24 PM
#1633
avatar of Ayro

Posts: 43

Is patch live now?
16 Dec 2017, 15:32 PM
#1634
avatar of RussianHamster

Posts: 88

You constantly convince me what going fine and that I'm wrong, but in the case of OKW and falls no one gave a replay for me, where they made a significant contribution to the game from the falls as well and now you only give advice for me, but not a replays.

As i said, we trying to found a counter to conscripts, so all the time we knows what soviet player will be using (all build order), but never was able to win this strat. And as I said not only me playing wehrmatcht, my mate tried too and both of us failed.
16 Dec 2017, 15:36 PM
#1635
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Maybe the thing to do is to ditch Conscript Hit the Dirt entirely and just have the PPSh upgrade. Would neatly fix the whole problem and Hit the Dirt still exists on Guards so it's not as if it'd be gone from the game.
16 Dec 2017, 15:45 PM
#1636
avatar of RussianHamster

Posts: 88

And detracting from the topic:
I absolutely do not understand how we winning against OKW in current patch, given the fact how much OKW feels OP in opinion of balance team (I totally dont understand why so many huge nerfs to OKW).
16 Dec 2017, 17:03 PM
#1639
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 18

I have played 5 games with Denchicpsih as Sov vs Ostheer and Soviets have 100% winrate. We tried to find a counter for cons PPSH-41 spam, but we failed. Idk how it will be work with tier1 players, but that feels like new meta after patch and its looking better than penals+DSHK now.
I played 2 games as Soviet and 3 games as Ostheer. We using different commanders, but all of them was with PPSH-41.

P.S. Dont tell me something like "build more HMG", because conscripts killing them just face to face with "Hit the dirt!".


Hit Dirt has been on our radar for sometime. For live version we'll be reducing its effects to suppression immunity (same as before) plus a 0.9 received damage modifier and nothing else.

Otherwise:
- What makes Conscript PPSh that powerful in DBP?
- How do you counter the Hit-the-Dirt/PPSh commander in the live version?

The reason I'm asking you is because I'm under the impression that Conscript PPSh are at least weaker in DBP, due to Conscripts having worse received accuracy, and their abilities costing more.
16 Dec 2017, 17:26 PM
#1640
avatar of RussianHamster

Posts: 88



Hit Dirt has been on our radar for sometime. For live version we'll be reducing its effects to suppression immunity (same as before) plus a 0.9 received damage modifier and nothing else.

Otherwise:
- What makes Conscript PPSh that powerful in DBP?
- How do you counter the Hit-the-Dirt/PPSh commander in the live version?

The reason I'm asking you is because I'm under the impression that Conscript PPSh are at least weaker in DBP, due to Conscripts having worse received accuracy, and their abilities costing more.

I tried to use a new Jag inf commander with HMG+3grens+JOfficier+PGs and thats failed cause cons without PPSH on the start are better than they was against grens, after PPSH they just dive into my troops and killing them easyly. In the 2 and 3 games i try to use mechanised assault grenadiers + HMGs agains them, and they really showed himself much better than grens, but still losing to cons with PPSH-41 in late game and "Hit the Dirt!" (honestly I lost one game in late with a huge mistake with my P4).
Den tried to use a sniper and camping with waiting for tanks in first game, but he loosing by fuel (as I said before - cons with PPSH-41 have much more mobility than HMGs, snipers and mortars what making a better map control) and I won with a ML-20 and 2 T-34 against one P4 and pak40. In the second he trying to spam grenadiers against me, but after PPSH-41 they began to failed too much (I loose a one squad on the start of the game and in spite of that he could not win this game).
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
  • Oberkommando West flag Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

212 users are online: 212 guests
40 posts in the last 24h
200 posts in the last week
809 posts in the last month
Registered members: 34918
Welcome our newest member, Leitzels
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM