Login

russian armor

Some Love to OST

PAGES (8)down
12 May 2019, 16:14 PM
#121
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

If you find repair speed to be a problem, you playing the faction wrong, it's that simple. Don't rely on your armour, it's just a tool that helps you tip the balance. You can't fight allied tank destroyers head on with armour (exception a well used and supported elifant).

If you play correctly, repairing isn't that big a deal with Ost.

Yeah it's a tricky faction, but it's harder to be defensive and push off wave after wave of assault.


TBH it's not that I find it personally a problem. I just believe that is one of the things that makes ost a difficult faction to play with and, more importantly, a faction that does not forgive mistakes. You really have to have an almost perfect game to win against a similarly skilled opponent.
I feel that there has been so many boosts to US and UK or even Soviets with, for example, shocks and heavy tanks that ost was left behind.
The problem I see watching replays by propagandacast, tightrope or casts from tournaments make me truly believe that the repair department for ost is the problem. If you manage to kill allied tanks everything is ok, but if you just damage them (which is often the case if allies don't overextend) they come back fighting so much more quickly. They decap victory points more efficiently thanks to more consistent tank support. So now ost needs to decap VPs attacking allies at all costs. It is the moment when ost starts playing an uphill battle facing mgs, AT guns with armour piercing rounds, infantry with bazookas and jacksons and other tanks. In such situation pios slow repair speed and the fact that you need to spend quite a lot of manpower on pios create infantry imbalance. Ost withraw pios to repair a tank/tanks (very often you need two - 400 manpower) while your opponent has this manpower on the battlefield capping/defending points. Those 400manpower worth of units don't have to repair because the crew is doing it. Additionally, US crews may cap points while repairing. On top of that they do it more quickly than pios. To sum up, it's not the unit's stats that create the problem but the repairs. And it's sometimes just funny to see two pio squads following a tiger just to repair it. In many games a lucky artillery or mortar or opack howie or offmap kills many of them. Pios need to retreat because when they are fewer than four models repaiur speed is just terrible. This is when the tiger/panther becomes a paper cat.
12 May 2019, 16:33 PM
#122
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2019, 11:54 AMSmartie
It would improve the late game of a faction that is designed to dominate the late game.


I think the game has moved waaay past the "XYZ Faction should win by default in the lategame".
Even USF can hold it's own nowadays in the lategamwe, there is no reason we should reward a faction with a win, just because it stalled one VP and it's high resources.
12 May 2019, 17:09 PM
#123
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783



I think the game has moved waaay past the "XYZ Faction should win by default in the lategame".
Even USF can hold it's own nowadays in the lategamwe, there is no reason we should reward a faction with a win, just because it stalled one VP and it's high resources.


USF is kind of that faction that gains or keeps getting better until late game. Have to admit that it is kind of tough in the beginning but keeps getting better and better. USF base infantry Riflemen becomes the best infantry with upgrades, Vehicles that wear off enemy armour but that is not the major part. Better and quicker repairs also to reengage a lot quicker. Somehow also have the numbers, pop cap.

Wehr should or supposingly a late game faction just seems lagging behind. Based on infantry and repairing scaling poorly hindering their late game vehicles advancements. Infantry just becomes vulnerable to more dangers and thus having to rely heavily upon vehicles. Forcing even pios to retreat or prioritize repairing (and it kills the momentum due to their slow and limiting repairs, same for SU although their infantry 6 man is what prevents them from lagging behind) limiting even wehr infantry engagements. Kind of an issue I would say for Wehrmacht.
12 May 2019, 17:18 PM
#124
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2019, 15:44 PMKatitof
You can't even tell a faction theme and unique perk, each faction has one.


Faction theme and perks aren't necessarily good and shouldn't be kept if they are the root of some balance issues. Letting go of bad faction themes like OKW's resource starvation has made the game much better.
12 May 2019, 17:24 PM
#125
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



USF is kind of that faction that gains or keeps getting better until late game. Have to admit that it is kind of tough in the beginning but keeps getting better and better. USF base infantry Riflemen becomes the best infantry with upgrades, Vehicles that wear off enemy armour but that is not the major part. Better and quicker repairs also to reengage a lot quicker. Somehow also have the numbers, pop cap.

Wehr should or supposingly a late game faction just seems lagging behind. Based on infantry and repairing scaling poorly hindering their late game vehicles advancements. Infantry just becomes vulnerable to more dangers and thus having to rely heavily upon vehicles. Forcing even pios to retreat or prioritize repairing (and it kills the momentum due to their slow and limiting repairs, same for SU although their infantry 6 man is what prevents them from lagging behind) limiting even wehr infantry engagements. Kind of an issue I would say for Wehrmacht.


Riflemen are excellent but require vet, sidetechs and plenty of munitions to get there.
Fast repairs due to having average hp and armor while designed to use several mediums instead of one big heavy tank, at least that's how it used to be, now we got the Pershing too.
Pop Cap Feature is Relic Approved until further notice.

Why would Wehr be a lategame faction again?
Because of their extra tier? Because they should win by default when they get a T4 Unit out?
Wehr is getting buffs next patch, but I don't see why people think they should win, just because they stalled until they teched up. I don't get it.
12 May 2019, 17:36 PM
#126
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8



Faction theme and perks aren't necessarily good and shouldn't be kept if they are the root of some balance issues. Letting go of bad faction themes like OKW's resource starvation has made the game much better.

And you think relic will agree on letting usf vehicle crews go(which is his justification to overbuff ost repair stock)?
Come on, you know better then that.

Plus, while toned down, OKW didn't lost their vet5 trait.
12 May 2019, 17:38 PM
#127
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Remember I'm not suggesting any dramatic change. Effectively they will repair still more slowly but there should be a slight improvement thanks to default bunker (which still costs) or just making pio repair speed similar to that of other factions. Another option may even be a lowered cost of the pio (sov engies are cheaper)
12 May 2019, 18:06 PM
#128
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2019, 17:36 PMKatitof
And you think relic will agree on letting usf vehicle crews go(which is his justification to overbuff ost repair stock)?
Come on, you know better then that.


I didn't follow the rest of the conversation, I thought it was only about giving Ostheer a bit better stock repairs (like on the level of giving Pioneers faster vet or whatever). Which I wouldn't mind personally.
12 May 2019, 18:12 PM
#129
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8



I didn't follow the rest of the conversation, I thought it was only about giving Ostheer a bit better stock repairs (like on the level of giving Pioneers faster vet or whatever). Which I wouldn't mind personally.

Well, so there you have some context now.

And yeah, I personally also have an agenda about making EFA engineers vet up more reliably, especially with sweeper.
12 May 2019, 18:48 PM
#130
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



I didn't follow the rest of the conversation, I thought it was only about giving Ostheer a bit better stock repairs (like on the level of giving Pioneers faster vet or whatever). Which I wouldn't mind personally.

Hi. That's exactly my point.
12 May 2019, 18:50 PM
#131
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2019, 18:12 PMKatitof

Well, so there you have some context now.

And yeah, I personally also have an agenda about making EFA engineers vet up more reliably, especially with sweeper.

To me that's another good option. Since they lose firepower with sweeper maybe they should get slightly buffed repair speed when they equip sweeper. Could work the same for Sov
12 May 2019, 22:06 PM
#132
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783



Riflemen are excellent but require vet, sidetechs and plenty of munitions to get there.
Fast repairs due to having average hp and armor while designed to use several mediums instead of one big heavy tank, at least that's how it used to be, now we got the Pershing too.
Pop Cap Feature is Relic Approved until further notice.

Why would Wehr be a lategame faction again?
Because of their extra tier? Because they should win by default when they get a T4 Unit out?
Wehr is getting buffs next patch, but I don't see why people think they should win, just because they stalled until they teched up. I don't get it.


It is not about winning. It is just to make Wehrmacht more viable since infantry become more exposed/vulernable and repairs being above more demanding. Just to make it more viable.

I do agree that we should wait until the patch is released. Then we can actually decide!;)
13 May 2019, 12:56 PM
#133
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2019, 15:44 PMKatitof

But you're not using any logic here and are grasping at straws.
You can't even tell a faction theme and unique perk, each faction has one.


I'm using logic supporting it with a lot of valid examples and ideas. You, on the contrary, keep repeating general ideas that I agree with and all of us here understand. What I suggest won't change the game as much as U think :) And, by the way, I'm a coh1 veteran from the very first day it was released. I have more knowledge about the game and ideas behind factions than You expect. So please analyse what I/we write here a bit and don't assume everyone is a crybaby axis fanboy/girl
13 May 2019, 17:01 PM
#134
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783


To me that's another good option. Since they lose firepower with sweeper maybe they should get slightly buffed repair speed when they equip sweeper. Could work the same for Sov


Agreed. They both lack on those areas.
13 May 2019, 17:32 PM
#135
avatar of thekingsown10

Posts: 232

jump backJump back to quoted post11 May 2019, 11:21 AMKatitof





Tommies are much more expensive and require quite hefty fuel and muni investment. In late game each tommy squad sits on 110 muni worth of upgrades on top of already paying 50+ fuel to be in that state.
And it is NOT cover bonus, they have PENALTY out of cover, not bonus in cover. They are weaker outside of cover, not stronger in it - sappers have cover bonus at vet1 for stens.




Except for the fact that tommies utterly rape greandiers even out of cover says enough . They do not need a cover bonus for any reason.
13 May 2019, 21:59 PM
#136
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8



Except for the fact that tommies utterly rape greandiers even out of cover says enough . They do not need a cover bonus for any reason.

Why should they against grens who also aren't in cover?
There is a MASSIVE cost difference between the two. If grens would stand up to bolstered dual bren sections, you know how it would be called? Imbalance which would require massive section buffs or massive gren nerfs.
I suppose you have no problems with volks roflstomping cons for 10mp more alone.
14 May 2019, 14:25 PM
#137
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783

jump backJump back to quoted post13 May 2019, 21:59 PMKatitof

Why should they against grens who also aren't in cover?
There is a MASSIVE cost difference between the two. If grens would stand up to bolstered dual bren sections, you know how it would be called? Imbalance which would require massive section buffs or massive gren nerfs.
I suppose you have no problems with volks roflstomping cons for 10mp more alone.


Why should they against grens who also aren't in cover?

Aheem, meh, Grammar !

What is your suggestion for Conscripts then?


Conscripts fulfill the role of support although they do feel a need to get an upgrade.

Here is my proposal for Conscripts and Grens (just for diversity sake)

The Doctrine for Cons getting PPSH was produced from 1941-1947, only until 1944 they were able to produce in far larger quantities. Types of box magazine had an impact on PPSH41. The more popular magaizine were the drum magazines.

Drum Magazines were not produced until 1944.


Conscripts should get the PPD40 requiring them more often to reload in comparison to Shocktroops who got the Drum Mags. It was not until the end of the war that 55% of its army had PPD40. Still, I think it is justified to say Conscripts should get it. Limited to 3 or 4 units the PPD40 for 60 or more ammo. Should be worse than the doctrine version. Reload should be more frequent also.

The quality and thickness of the mag contributed to its performance. Having sometimes experience problems and certain failures. Conscripts should get it but worse than the proper PPSH41. Makes sense. Although they were not produced in massive quantites in comparison, for the sake of diversity would be certainly interesting.

So yeah, they should get the PPD by default but maybe a worse version since cheaper mags were easier to build, easier to manufacture and produce in mass quantites would fit the ideal weapon for Conscripts. If it is too much the PPD. Give Conscripts PPSH41 with stick mag. As explained how it should previously, more reload times, less effective than doctrine PPSH41 Drum Mag.

Better Equipment were put into to stock for elite/special forces.


Now German G43

G43 was introduced 1943 which was later than PPSh productions. It was given to grenadiers in service but not as many as intended. Around 30 G43 were introduced per each company, so it would be the similar with the distribution of MG42 (but MG42 served ferociously during the war). Roughly 10 out of 30 were scoped while the 20 were iron sights.

So to introduce upgrade for having G43 upgrade is not a bad idea. The weapon was good quality. Good quality took more time. G43 is exceptional. So it would be nice for grens to have by default another upgrade option, G43.

2 G43 options actually.

1./ 60 ammo for 1 "Scoped G43". Similar to that of JLI but worse. Should be very accurate and take 5-6 sec per shot being always precise dealing 16 damage. Cover will RA is ignored but does not ignore green cover damage reduction. Does not shoot any faster the closer the enemy is. Loses, close-mid advantages and fire rate advantages

2./ Same as the doctrine. 60 ammo. Excel faster in close and mid ranges for "2 G43 with iron sights". Keeps movement. Improves move accuracy. Loses some long range accuracy but improve close to medium range. Rate of fire also improved.


This makes hell a lot of sense. It would be even more ridiculous to give every grenadier G43.

So grenadiers will have overall 3 weapon options. Can only pick 1 of the 3. Grens weapon options are 1./ "Scoped G43 (1 only) 2./ "G43 iron sights" 2 provided 3./ MG42.

This will increase style of play for grens. Varying in diversity and very situational.

SU went for mass quantities, cheaper production and cost efficient.
GER went for quality and quantity.

So this whole idea is indeed flawless. Would not make sense at all replacing MG42 with G43 btw. Did some research.

I suggested also repair package specifically for Conscripts and Panzergrenadiers. Since both factions have repairing and having currently only one option to deal with their problems. Both will have upgrade option called "Support Package". Similar to what they have currently in their doctrines would be great. Should be worse than their current pios and engineers but at least something that would help deal with this issue!

So Conscripts will have 1./ PPSH41 with stick mag upgrade for 3-4 units (weapon model should be worse than the current doctrine version) 2./ Support Package. 3./ Oraah revamp

I was thinking of revamping "Oraah" a bit. They can help close gaps which we can all say is rather rather highly advantageous. I was thinking giving it also some disadvantage/defect bonuses. Maybe decrease overall efficiency output or increase received accuracy. Maybe both but minor or intermediate effect changes would appeal.!

OR 2nd Oraah choice
Take sprint away for more increased fire rate and faster reload speed but slows movement and increases received accuracy.

What do you think!

14 May 2019, 23:08 PM
#138
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

You're just trying to copy and paste that terribly uninformed post into every thread you can huh? Seeing it for the 3rd or 4th time doesn't make it any more correct than it was before. I'm actually a tad disappointed that you didn't even bother to modify the post with the corrections other members of the community, myself included, have kindly supplied you with.
18 May 2019, 20:23 PM
#139
avatar of Farlon

Posts: 184

How about instead of touching grenadiers, just buff the target size for OST weapon teams so MG42 won't die to LMG infantry charging at it frontally?
18 May 2019, 22:39 PM
#140
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 643

jump backJump back to quoted post10 May 2019, 19:52 PMVipper

The infatry in coh1 is an example to avoid.

Different HP and Different type of armor made the system extremely complicated.


As complicated as it was, it was far more balanced than the lazy man solution we have now in COH 2. People are always crying to have an extra man because the purpose of vet is to promote unit preservation through wise/thoughtful decisions with the retreat mechanic. At the moment due to the vast amounts of RNG in the game, losing a Vet 3 squad to a random mortar/pak howitzer/artillery shell without any chance of responding is a poor gameplay mechanic and defeats the purpose of veterancy.

Rather than apply a bandaid (5th Man for Grenadiers) to the problem, it would be better to fix the problem at its core and reduce the effectiveness of indirect fire so that Grenadiers aren't squad wiped by random RNG. This will also help out other factions as well. With British it is equally frustrating getting an Infantry Section wiped out by a random Whermact Mortar shot before you can purchase the Bolster Upgrade.Soviet Partisans might actually be used in game as well. This is not just a Whermact exclusive problem.

Company of Heroes 1 had 6 Infantry types. Rather than have such a complex system, a simpler solution with 2 Infantry Types could be used. A General Infantry type , and a weapon team infantry type. Have indirect fire do reduced damage (with higher aoe) vs General Infantry Type to make the damage more consistent and less RNG Squad Wipe Based, and the Weapon Team Infantry Type would keep the balance of indirect fire vs team weapons the same as is now.
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Diversity Cup Grand Final

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

246 users are online: 2 members and 244 guests
TheGiftLucas, rumartinez89
15 posts in the last 24h
111 posts in the last week
491 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36390
Welcome our newest member, shaunta1871
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM