Login

russian armor

December Balance Preview

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (85)down
11 Nov 2017, 15:18 PM
#601
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 640 | Subs: 1

Demos are not blobbing deterrent. They are blobbing incentiviser. Why? You only have one sweeper, so move the entire blob around your sweeper. Problem solved.
Well, that clarifies it. Since you do not consider demo charges as a viable blobbing deterrent, it explains the change direction. As I said, this change is certainly vastly preferable to status quo, so I am thankful for it. I am also interested in how it will play out with the new garrison timers. Just saying this will not eliminate losing cappers to demos.

The tricky part is I can't say at this moment how often will I be able to spot the timer and save a squad that would have been wiped in the previous patch. If I can save roughly a third of my squads, then the number of squad wipes per ammo invested remains identical (on victory points and cutoffs only, not for demo charges placed on crossroads etc which will become history and is certainly a welcome change).

If I can save roughly two thirds, as I suspect will be the case in high level play, then this change will succeed in making capping squadwipes too expensive to be useful.

I can still see Barton using them in a tournament for an unexpected victory though. :snfBarton:
11 Nov 2017, 15:20 PM
#602
avatar of Muad'Dib

Posts: 368

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 14:23 PMA_E
What do people think about demos being visible, and you have to be cunning about where to place them?


Yes and no. If you mean needing to place them behind actual LoS blockers (buildings, walls, large vegetation) - I am all for it. It might become a bit too map dependent, but it would be a step in the right direction, and fit well with true sight.

If you mean needing to place them behind objects so the player has a hard time seeing them from the default camera angle, then please no - that would add an arcadish element to the game similar to tank crushing, that is neither tactics or strategy. I also really dislike how eg. cloaked and burrowed units are a bit visible in SC2, so I might be biased.
11 Nov 2017, 15:38 PM
#603
avatar of Judge73

Posts: 10

1. Cons are too good at long range now. Suggest to slightly reduce long range acc (grens and volks should have bigger advantage).
2. Problem of panther is IMO lack of allied heavy armor. Most of the AT is handled better with stugs for lower cost. Better to change it's role maybe?
PS is2 could use scatter buff.
11 Nov 2017, 15:50 PM
#604
avatar of mycalliope

Posts: 721

modders logic :

axis armor(e.g, jadgtiger,panther..etc) nerf damage,nerf popcap,nerf other things,buff frontal mg lol,

allied armor : jackson buff health massively,marginal cost increase no popcap increase

:crazy::lolol::hyper::clap:

Relic should hire professional next time,if they have to pick from community maybe pick unbiased pro players than these biased modders who had a history of allied bias before they were even given task
11 Nov 2017, 16:19 PM
#605
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1


I think this is golden standard what we have now. Bigger fuse would make them very hard to use and thus weak.


Agreed. The 3s timer is the needed nerf for the demo charge while keeping it useful because of the decreased cost. It punishes carelessness but can be avoided by playing well unlike current demos that are very hard to avoid over the course of an entire game.
11 Nov 2017, 16:22 PM
#606
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 967

The change to demo charges seems to have gone too far the other way. Their main role is wiping blobs (see 75% of all COH2 youtube videos), now that's going to be impossible, unless the person happens to look away from the screen (blobbers only have to focus on their blob).

Maybe lower the time to 1.5 seconds. Or experiment with having them lower the health as much as possible but not kill models. So instead of instantly wiping several squads, it drops their health to almost nothing.

As it is now I can't see it being very useful, and potentially means the Allies are vulnerable to Axis blobs all over again.


Yes lower it to 1.5 but no more, else it become useless. You can't throw it like a snatchel...
I've tried the actual version and i would never build it in game ever.
11 Nov 2017, 16:24 PM
#607
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 967

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 10:40 AMA_E
Demo changes are a buff.

39% muni reduction >>>>> 3s timer.

I really consider anyone that thinks the demo 'nerf' is a 'nerf' is wildly inaccurate and needs to think through or playtest changes more.

It's a buff in my opinion, it's a 39% cost reduction (90 -> 65) to one of the most powerful abilities in the game.

  • Top level players can still put them on the side of maps on strat points, and wait a few seconds before clicking it, no one will see the timer.

  • put them on buildings (near doors ways), and 3 seconds won't mean shit

  • put them on retreat paths and just time the three seconds out.

  • put them where support weapons are likely to set up, and that's one dead support weapon.



39% reduction is way too cheap for demos 65 muni for something of that power is crazy to me.

If you can't play around a 3 second timer, i.e. your mental faculties aren't powerful enough to still use demos, you have to question what you're doing playing a strategy game.

The balance modders are suggesting a change here that I absolutely promise you will buff top level 1v1 Soviets.




They lose nearly all their tactical usefulness. Now they are confine to blowing inerte stuff. Not a deterrent anymore. 1.5 is more then enough.
11 Nov 2017, 17:14 PM
#608
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 15:38 PMJudge73
1. Cons are too good at long range now. Suggest to slightly reduce long range acc (grens and volks should have bigger advantage).


v1 Cons:
jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2017, 12:49 PMCruzz



v1.3 Cons:
jump backJump back to quoted post9 Nov 2017, 17:52 PMVipper




The uplift is rather little and due to overkill and no weapon upgrades, I am having a hard time believing that the difference is even that noticeable until they bleed enough to finally reach vet 3.
11 Nov 2017, 17:28 PM
#609
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



The uplift is rather little and due to overkill and no weapon upgrades, I am having a hard time believing that the difference is even that noticeable until they bleed enough to finally reach vet 3.

Actually the optimum range has been moved towards far and the curve has become linear both of which are bad things.

I will make better chart, explaining the affects when I have the time.
11 Nov 2017, 17:35 PM
#610
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:28 PMVipper

Actually it the optimum range has been moved towards far and the curve has become linear both of which are bad things.

I will make better chart when I have the time.


The chart is just fine. Again, DPS ratios between units are not optimum ranges. The optimal range is the range at which a unit wins the clearest. Talking of optimums by looking at DPS ratios is nonsensical because it completely ignores everything from received accuracy to target size, health pool and so on. Cons, with this DPS profile will lose at practically the same ranges as they did before.
11 Nov 2017, 17:41 PM
#611
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



The chart is just fine. Again, DPS ratios between units are not optimum ranges. The optimal range is the range at which a unit wins the clearest. Talking of optimums by looking at DPS ratios is nonsensical because it completely ignores everything from received accuracy to target size, health pool and so on. Cons, with this DPS profile will lose at practically the same ranges as they did before.

Received accuracy and target size practically the same thing and can be factor in easily.

Optimum range is not the range a unit wins but the range it trades better.

If grenadier vs conscript trade slightly better the closer the get, there will be very little reason for either unit to reposition. Grenadier will lose more during the move while cons will be able to simply ourah away.
11 Nov 2017, 17:49 PM
#612
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:41 PMVipper

If grenadier vs conscript trade slightly better the closer the get, there will be very little reason for either unit to reposition. Grenadier will lose more during the move while cons will be able to simply ourah away.

Sorry, but no one in the history of playing ostheer ever came to the conclusion that he/she should move their grens closer. Grens win more clearly the further away they are.

No one playing soviets ever used orah to get away from grens since cons lose the further away they are and are more likely to win (or just not lose as badly) the closer they are.

In your comparisons you neglect the health pool. We had this discussion and I showed you the calculations in the other thread so I won't go into this. :)
11 Nov 2017, 17:51 PM
#613
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

This is obviously something you guys can't control, but I'm just gonna throw it out there that it'd be nice if you were able to release more frequent, smaller scale patches so that you and the community don't feel obligated to fix every single thing wrong with the game every patch since they only come around like once a year. It'd also help fix stuff that the previous patch causes (looking at you, lend lease meta).
11 Nov 2017, 17:51 PM
#614
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 17:41 PMVipper

Received accuracy and target size practically the same thing and can be factor in easily.

Optimum range is not the range a unit but the range it trades better.

If grenadier vs conscript trade slightly better the closer the get, there will be very little reason for either unit to reposition. Grenadier will lose more during the move while cons will be able to simply ourah away.


There's a lot of things that you assume or suppose wrongly, which usually would get right by experience from playing the game. For instance, nobody moves grens closer at all! And nobody uses Oorah to move away from grens during combat, since grens get the upper hand at distance against cons. Furthermore, you neglect the DPS discrepancies of oorah on cons.
11 Nov 2017, 17:53 PM
#615
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7


Sorry, but no one in the history of playing ostheer ever came to the conclusion that he/she should move their grens closer. Grens win more clearly the further away they are.

No one playing soviets ever used orah to get away from grens since cons lose the further away they are and win the closer they are.

In your comparisons you neglect the health pool. We had this discussion and I showed you the calculations in the other thread so I won't go into this. :)




The more I see Vipper making his stats to support his statements the more I think that the theory remains only a theory and the gameplay eality is what minds, not some biased stat table :D
11 Nov 2017, 18:05 PM
#616
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


Sorry, but no one in the history of playing ostheer ever came to the conclusion that he/she should move their grens closer. Grens win more clearly the further away they are.

No one playing soviets ever used orah to get away from grens since cons lose the further away they are and win the closer they are.

In your comparisons you neglect the health pool. We had this discussion and I showed you the calculations in the other thread so I won't go into this. :)

And that is exactly my point, if the conscript optimum range is far all fight will take place far since non will have a reason to move. This change simply reduces the effect of "relative positioning" without achieving the intended goals:


The problem with VG is ST44 upgrade and not the Conscript DPS curve.

In addition instead of messing with the DPS buffing the Target size 1 (instead of vet1)is preferable because it also makes the merge more attractive.
11 Nov 2017, 18:13 PM
#617
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 18:05 PMVipper

And that is exactly my point, if the conscript optimum range is far all fight will take place far since non will have a reason to move. This change simply reduces the effect of "relative positioning" without achieving the intended goals:


Nobody in this game ever moves their units backwards to get into a better position. That's because while you're moving away from the enemy:
- Your squad is running out of cover getting shot
- Your squad is not shooting back at the enemy, while they're still getting shot
- The enemy squad can simply right click and follow you, and you're still getting shot without shooting back

The only squad vs which this strategy would ever work is Ostruppen or Tommies, since their moving accuracy is so attrociously low, you might as well ignore them. But then again, the only reason you would want to move away from either squad is if you are relocating your MG.

For every single engagement ever in this game, if the enemy has gotten too close, you either stay and fight, or you retreat. There is no option to soft-retreat anymore.
11 Nov 2017, 18:31 PM
#618
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 18:05 PMVipper

And that is exactly my point, if the conscript optimum range is far all fight will take place far since non will have a reason to move. This change simply reduces the effect of "relative positioning" without achieving the intended goals:

Again, the optimum in any mathematical problem is the single point (or all identical points) in the examined interval that maximises (or minimises) the gains (losses). To accurately calculate it, you'd need to take the health of the opposing squad, multiply it by the target size and then divide it by the dps at the range in question.

Having the DPS ratio for grens and cons go from (this is a hypothetical example but I'll gladly calculate the right values) 1.4 to 1.3 does not mean the new optimum is now the far distance. Cons will lose more the more distance you put between the grens and cons. The DPS of the entire squad increases by 1.5-2 DPS at far range ;)

The entire squad does less damage at that range than a lmg42.
11 Nov 2017, 19:31 PM
#619
avatar of Judge73

Posts: 10

Maybe make t34 10 pop?.It's weaker then every other standard medium and it's used in suicidal manner. Soviets could use better lategame limit.
IMO ptrs penals doesn't worth it. You pay 300 mp for 8 pop unit that can scare 222 or luchs (if in cover) and when serious armor hits the field you have unit that trades much worse against enemy inf and very weak against armor. Could they receive additional ptrs or two with vet?
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
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

487 users are online: 487 guests
17 posts in the last 24h
44 posts in the last week
100 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44647
Welcome our newest member, Vassarh9
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM