Login

russian armor

Spring Update - Balance thread

PAGES (23)down
18 Apr 2018, 20:26 PM
#161
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17883 | Subs: 8

So you guys nerf brumble, reduce Ostheer Panther armor so it can get penetrated by mediums more easily, increase its cost, without decreasing tier 4 teching cost, making tier 4 in 1v1 a luxury still, which is now also less potent than before.

You then nerf the tier 3 crutch too? You guys gone loonie?

I like the part where you completely ignored HP increase, return of armor vet, RoF increase(aka DPS increase) and accuracy increase.
18 Apr 2018, 20:26 PM
#162
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 20:19 PMKatitof

Well, cons are pretty potent at vet3, however before vet3 they still are pretty shitty.
Reliable, but shitty, even with ppsh as they die like flies.

I'd be fine with ppsh change if cons vet was slightly readjusted, moving part of vet3 durability to vet2 and vet2 accuracy to vet3, then increase in power would be less exponential between vet 0-2 and vet 3, making ppsh look viable with 2 guns, however the cost to dps increase ratio is just.... bad with 2 guns.


Agreed.
18 Apr 2018, 20:28 PM
#163
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 20:26 PMKatitof

I like the part where you completely ignored HP increase, return of armor vet, RoF increase(aka DPS increase) and accuracy increase.


It still will be a luxury, all it needed in its current live form is better accuracy or faster rate of fire...

Now it is more expensive in a tier less potent, that is still a luxury and the crutch to eventually get to tier 3 is nerfed..
18 Apr 2018, 20:48 PM
#164
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 18:13 PMKatitof
Best allied stock med have penetration of 135 at close range?

Vs 270 armor.

Do the math, its not hard, I believe in you.


M4A3 has 140. <444>3
18 Apr 2018, 20:49 PM
#165
avatar of siddolio

Posts: 471 | Subs: 1

The people that see the Panther hp/armour switcheroo as a nerf dont seem to understand that hp offers far better survivability than armour. The repair time is totally irrelevant when you will finally be able to use a Panther productively and actually kill things.

Absolute statement of game understanding if you'd rather have high armour than high hp. You think mediums are gonna pen 260 armour reliably?
18 Apr 2018, 20:56 PM
#166
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17883 | Subs: 8

The people that see the Panther hp/armour switcheroo as a nerf dont seem to understand that hp offers far better survivability than armour. The repair time is totally irrelevant when you will finally be able to use a Panther productively and actually kill things.

Absolute statement of game understanding if you'd rather have high armour than high hp. You think mediums are gonna pen 260 armour reliably?


Should we remind people that churchills losing HP and gaining armor was a major survivability nerf?
18 Apr 2018, 21:27 PM
#167
avatar of Rocket

Posts: 728

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 17:15 PMLuciano


Because it wasnt on scope, athough these are not the final changes, is a preview


What is on scope and who decided it was and why??????

Why is katy on scope lmao? wow because it can wipe a heavily wounded squad IF its lucky but dont do anything about werfer huge ost meta atm that can alpha wipe vet3 infantry with ease what are you thinking? again messing with allied meta but doing nothing about axis meta.

Why did jackson get put on scope to have its range nerfed who was asking for that when the unit was just changed with a cost increase last patch?? Its not the su76 or stug the real subjects you should be focused on that the community all agrees on.

Why is brits on scope ? your gonna nerf IS vet2 then indirectly nerf IS further by nerfing brens lol makes sense to just do both at the same time. Going to nerf ppsh because there in "scope" now too but not G43s hahahah what a joke you do realize you cant just rape the allied infantry meta and not do anything about the axis infantry meta G43s right????

Going to nerf AT tommys but buff 222 lmao. As if brits dont struggle against light vehicles anyway with no snare. As well slightly nerfing AEC adding a delay to field it with the UC costing fuel and infantry weps cost more fuel to tech. They will be subject to light vehicle raping more than ever. I dont disagree with the the UC fuel cost but dont agree with as big a buff suggested for 222.

THE .50 Cal ???? why the fack is that in scope no one thinks that. Wowzers it just not fair to have one allied MG that comes late requires a game changing tech choice/doctrine that pins axis blobs.

This is mostly going to be a shit show.

Doing something about su76 and stug extreme cost effectiveness and spammability. Putting panther in a good spot. slight nerf to ost mortar. doing something about ppsh AND g43s both being too cost effective. Werfer and katy brought in line with other rocket arty. is what you should be focused on getting right.

From Siddolio earlier in shoutbox "siddolio: If that patch went live, which it obviously wont as its preliminary, Ostheer would be totally op. Anyone with 2 eyes can see that"

"I've already said I disagree with most of what's in the patch, i might be in the balance team that just means im one of many voices. The Brit changes and pop/cap changes are way off the mark, Guard/sniper meta got overnerfed." +1 to Sid







18 Apr 2018, 21:28 PM
#168
avatar of Storm Elite

Posts: 246

Can anyone explain what the new 222 armor numbers mean?

Is the 222 FINALLY, after YEARS, going to be an actual ARMORED car that is immune to rifle fire?

Or is this just some symbolic buff that won't actually affect damage taken from any practical sources, in the same way all changes to the 222 over the past two years have been entirely pointless and failing to make it viable as pseudo-light armor?
18 Apr 2018, 22:05 PM
#169
avatar of Luciano

Posts: 712

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 21:27 PMRocket


What is on scope and who decided it was and why??????


Relic decides what is on the scope, we propose ideas and discuss but they are the ones that have the last word, they also like to work with community and they have open ears to recomendations. Most changes are aimed to the current dominant meta. I dont remember know what is the exact scope but now i can mention the light artillery/mortars, snipers and their counters and some specific units and abilities.
18 Apr 2018, 22:19 PM
#170
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Just overall on the patch notes so far there are some decent hits, and there are some very large misses. I'd elaborate but no one listens to my recommendations anyways :(
18 Apr 2018, 22:26 PM
#171
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Just overall on the patch notes so far there are some decent hits, and there are some very large misses. I'd elaborate but no one listens to my recommendations anyways :(

i listen to them

Relic decides what is on the scope, we propose ideas and discuss but they are the ones that have the last word, they also like to work with community and they have open ears to recomendations


Did Shocks and USF Captain Tier not come up? :(
18 Apr 2018, 22:35 PM
#172
avatar of Luciano

Posts: 712

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 22:26 PMLago
Did Shocks and USF Captain Tier not come up? :(


Yes. But like the thread mentions, these are not the final changes. We've brought tons of changes to make in addition to the ones that are on the list but we cant keep adding things because we need time to test, if we want this patch hitting on spring we should focus on the main scope first.
18 Apr 2018, 22:42 PM
#173
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 22:35 PMLuciano
Yes. But like the thread mentions, these are not the final changes. We've brought tons of changes to make in addition to the ones that are on the list but we cant keep adding things because we need time to test, if we want this patch hitting on spring we should focus on the main scope first.


If focusing on the main scope is the priority why all the little changes to other units? I'm surprised the ISU-152 and the Brummbar are considered higher priority changes than balancing the USF tech fork.
18 Apr 2018, 22:42 PM
#174
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911




Is there a reason why the LEIGs 20% scatter reduction comes at vet 5 compared to the vet 3 of all other mortars?

Also wth is happening with the LEIG changes?

Post patch its vet will be (unless "Vet 1 range bonus now applies a 25% bonus to smoke barrage range only" does not affect the 5% bonus to barrage range)






Vet 125% smoke range (and %5 barrage range?)
Vet 233% smoke range, -23% received accuracy (yay?)
Vet 3-40% barrage recharge
Vet 4+5 shots fired per barrage
Vet 5+15% damage, 20% scatter reduction bonus


I think you should really completely rework its vet, smoke range is nice, but is kinda valuless as its just going make up for the 150 -> 100 smoke range nerf and it certainly doesn't need two identical bonuses. Vet 3 barrage recharge and vet 4 overlap so that's another wasted vet bonus, and the 20% scatter reduction will never be reached in most games. Let me know if I have any of the above wrong, but all in all the leig's vet is a frankenstein combination of when it's role was a direct fire support gun and now as a slightly more expensive mortar.

Also will the AOE buff increase N/M/F ranges?

And also are XP values going to be looked at, some are too low (su76) and practically all of OKW is a mess.
18 Apr 2018, 22:55 PM
#175
avatar of Luciano

Posts: 712

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 22:42 PMLago


If focusing on the main scope is the priority why all the little changes to other units? I'm surprised the ISU-152 and the Brummbar are considered higher priority changes than the USF tech fork.


These are not the final changes. Maybe those changes will be introduced in further patch updates, we need to first focus on these changes because we need to test them and see how much time we got after.
18 Apr 2018, 23:07 PM
#176
avatar of Tomakaze
Patrion 14

Posts: 141

I'm surprised the Valentine didn't get a well deserved damage buff.
18 Apr 2018, 23:08 PM
#177
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Apr 2018, 22:55 PMLuciano
These are not the final changes. Maybe those changes will be introduced in further patch versions.


I was more wondering why the small edits to non-overperforming units made it into the initial scope. Fixing the OKW tech fork, reworking indirect fire and tuning down some overperforming units and abilities are all high priority changes I understand and can get behind.

There are a lot of little edits to units that don't seem to be high priority, however. I don't personally understand why the little nerfs to non-overperforming units (the Brummbar, Katyusha and SU-85 for example) made it into the first set of patch notes when what I'd assume to be higher priority changes, such as fixing the USF tech fork, didn't.

I'm not saying there isn't a good reason for it, I just don't understand what it is.
18 Apr 2018, 23:09 PM
#178
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
If the panther is TRULY better with an HP increase instead of armor, I think the StuG should be allowed to keep its current pop cap of 8. 1.5 seconds longer reload time is a huge nerf. Not sure why it needed a further pop cap nerf. And what the patch notes said about StuG is laughable. Stug has strong armor? LOL. Whoever wrote that should be taken off the balance team.

I think we need a clarification about the RoF nerf. Is it an RoF nerf only for vet 0 and we get the original RoF back at vet 1 or does this new RoF stick until the vet 2 bonus?
18 Apr 2018, 23:13 PM
#179
avatar of Smiling Tiger

Posts: 207

Can anyone explain what the new 222 armor numbers mean?

Is the 222 FINALLY, after YEARS, going to be an actual ARMORED car that is immune to rifle fire?

Or is this just some symbolic buff that won't actually affect damage taken from any practical sources, in the same way all changes to the 222 over the past two years have been entirely pointless and failing to make it viable as pseudo-light armor?


Its frontal armor is being increased to be more than the current Universal Carrier, which is basically immune to rifle fire, so it should finally be an actual armored car. So, Ostheer will finally have access to a light vehicle that can actually block something.
18 Apr 2018, 23:25 PM
#180
avatar of RAIDEN 46/93

Posts: 36

The people that see the Panther hp/armour switcheroo as a nerf dont seem to understand that hp offers far better survivability than armour. The repair time is totally irrelevant when you will finally be able to use a Panther productively and actually kill things.

Absolute statement of game understanding if you'd rather have high armour than high hp. You think mediums are gonna pen 260 armour reliably?


jajajajaja
nice try.

PAGES (23)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Russian Federation 77
unknown 14
unknown 11

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

373 users are online: 1 member and 372 guests
capiqua
3 posts in the last 24h
44 posts in the last week
142 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44896
Welcome our newest member, stovebay
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM