The problem isn't the buy-in cost, it's the reinforce cost. With your changes (82hp sniper, lets say 41hp spotter), it's still a 90mp reinforce cost COMBINED with the ability to 'save' your vet. Your change could work, but the reinforce cost would need to be around 200mp for it to work, otherwise the ability to save a 360mp squad + vet for 90mp is going to be imbalanced.
The only "no design change" I can think of, that would allow for the Sov sniper to stay how it is currently, is to make losing 1 model stun the squad for 2+ seconds. That way it couldn't self-counter snipe, it couldn't save vet by retreating instantly, and having multiple would be risky, since they could all be caught easily. Of course, that would be an incredibly frustrating mechanic to play with.
Buy in cost is part of it. It allows for ratger quickly getting them out where they can do the most damage. I agree reinforcement would have to be increased as well. But for lets go with 440mp, not being countersnipeable isnt as big of a deal because even forcing them off is then a massive 2 squads worth of MP off the front (assuming we keep the reinforcment cost to the formula (440/2)/2= 110, total being 550mp, thats a penal and a con squad worth of MP so as a soviet player you fucking well better take the care that that doesnt happen. Youll need to kill 15 gren models just to break even and double the snipers more or less completely forfeits the map/micro, even in team games.
Delaying the snipers delays enemy map control meaning you yourself are in a better position to counter it |
|
Make spam unachievable. Make the sniper 82hp, spotter less, and make it 400 or more MP. Getting 2 snipers and a single support infantry is then minimum 1040mp. Thats 4 mainline squads and a lil smidge extra reinforcements. Flanking will still be rewarded because the spotter is squishier (plus buffed counters) sniper is still unique. Idk why they keep trying to fit units into special cookie cutter moulds when its clearly different when its clearly not designed to fit. Embrace its design and make the price fit the unit instead of making the unit fit the price |
|
If it gives custom bonuses it needs to be in the UI. no more of this same name different effect shit (hull down on cons increases defense and decreases offense and on guards its the opposite, nowhere does it say that in game)
Edit: hit the dirt, not hull down |
|
It would have to have a tear down time (like kv-2 perhaps) but that would be more than reasonable if the ability itself was strong |
|
Im not saying its alot worse, im saying its worse. Worse vet (flare vs incendiary shot) and worse rof but costing the same. Im not saying make it fire rifle gremades here or to double its ROF im saying it needs a little something because being the same but worse isnt good balance. Hell, knock off say...30mp and call it good, but it shouldnt cost the same without a single advantageous trait |
Thread: 22220 Apr 2018, 05:40 AM
The 222 was a bit under performing but both an armour buff AMD being cheaper is a bit much. Makes me think that mgs and especially 50 cals need a pen increase (the ones on vehicles like the greyhound and m20) to set them better apart. Even if its as a munition ability |
One more time, soviet sniper was BUFFED in return. It has BETTER ROF after romoving one model. Its not just blank model removal.
It it start looking like ppl like you are "give ost sniper for soviets or dont touch the model".
I agree, it needs better vet, better vet 1 ability. But second model is gone, forget about it.
Im not saying it needs the second model im saying being a wprse version of the ost sniper is an unbalanced decision. Im not saying it needs to be the same as the ost sniper im saying BEING WORSE AND COSTING THE SAME IS BAD BALANCE.
Would it be balanced if they copied the brit sniper but removed the light AT, the critical shot, the -33% rec acc at vet 2 and the arty flares and called it a day? Fuck no. Would it be balanced if the t34 cost the same as the p4? No. You cant have a direct clone of a unit, but made shittier, costing the same and call it balance. |
It's shooting 4 man squads. Were it a clone of the Ost one it'd be a big advantage to the Soviets.
Im not arguing that, im not saying it needs the killing power of the ost sniper im saying its worse for the same price. If its going down to 1 man it needs something more.
The brit sniper survives while being slower firing than the ost one but its got: light AT, arty flares, a critical vs armour at vet 1, a MASSIVE -33% target size at vet 2 (thats HUUGE) strip all that away and you have the soviet sniper, that and a flare that is FAR more effecient to get on a mortar |
You don't have even one game as WM so you opinion is completely biased and uninformed. Sov sniper retarded design should've been changed long time ago.
there were better ways to change it without making it a shittier version of the ost one.
buffing its counters is a way (they did that)
increasing target size is a way (they did that too)
call it a scout sniper squad and make it a long ranged, 2 man jeager squad that can camo and fire flares (from camo even)
a straight up worse sniper for the same price while bringing nothing to the table useful or unique is a lazy cop out |
It wasn't immune in real life(carbines and HMGs didn't really struggled with making it a swiss cheese), why would it be immune in game? It'll simply be MUCH more resistant to small arms fire.
now now, you know better than that.... |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
