Another change for the few 1v1 "pro" crowd left in the community. COOL!!!!
Meanwhile the 4v4/3v3 maplist continues the total garbage with the same maps for almost 4 years. I think the majority CoH players came from here, right?
Meanwhile the OST and Soviets continues with commanders overlaping. I know about the commanders revamp and the new commanders patch, but for OST and SOV its not enough.
Nice catch on spending the few Relic time and manpower resources for this game.
GG for who convinced Andy and others on that. 
How exactly do tech changes only affect 1v1s in your mind?
Maps is basically an issue that can't be fixed, because it takes a huge amount of time to design large 3v3 and 4v4 maps and apparently there never was much testing or feedback from the community, only whining. Which is why mappers have given up.
I don't see how overlapping commanders is much of an issue when they have about 20 each anyway. If there's one issue with commanders it's that certain factions had too few viable ones (mainly OKW, USF and UKF) which is being corrected in the upcoming revamp patch. |
Fast M8A1 is extremely strong when properly support by HMG and ATG.
IMO this isn't the teching fault but rather that the Scott (especially 2 of them) with vet becomes pretty much as OP as the Brummbär. At least in team games. With their range and smoke they become nearly impossible to deal with (except for Raketten cheese or a tank dive) while being very wipey.
Other than that I think this tech is pretty good, it gives the daredevils all the tools they need to stall for fast Major/tanks and it gives people reasonable access to whatever they like to play with without locking themselves out of core units. |
|
I'm also assuming (by the way the patchnotes are written) that the BAR on the LT is a unit upgrade and doesn't require weapon racks? |
|
0.5 tier system is good to see. I'm hoping OKW T4 can receive the same change so Obers can hit the field earlier. Moving them to 'early' mid game timing would then allow for OKW starting power to be nerfed a bit. AA cannon and tanks would be locked behind the upgrade, possibly also the MG 34 upgrade for Obers.
Very interested to see how these changes will make USF better. They seem to hit some of the core problems while not being too drastic. |
I see your point, but having that much early game manpower is bad for the sov/okw matchup, even if it does make for a "balanced" matchup. Because OKW has such early game power, soviet players are forced to get an m3. The m3 also has to be really strong in order to make up this power gap, meaning it has to hit harder than it should for its timing. It also just hurts build diversity since you always have to get an m3 since its the only way you survive. With OKW putting out less early game pressure, sov can explore more early build options, and OKW can get power in other areas to make up for the oppressive early game they lose. Basically, lowering OKW starting manpower can allow matchups that are currently balanced to be made into balanced AND fun/healthy matchups.
Finally, rifles to 260/26 probably will cause problems for the ost/usf matchup. If an ost player mismanages his mg42, then the usf player quickly achives map dominance. Straight up cheaper rifles can easily put this early matchup into a dangerous state as it makes the early game far more punishing for the ost player. Also, rifles would simply vastly overperform for 26 manpower. Finally, cheaper rifles would hurt build diversity. Why get a weapon team when you can get a cheap core squad that performs well? Other options (the kind of combined arms options I think the game should be pushing) become worse in comparison if you buff rifles like that.
Fair enough, although I'm still not the one saying Rifles should be 26 MP to reinforce. I'm only suggesting to lower the recruitment cost so the change would basically only impact USF build timing (and make it a bit more forgiving to replace squads but that's kinda neglectable).
Alternatively the most prefered solution (but also the most difficult one as it has so many side effects) is indeed to take some of OKW's early game power and move it to the mid game. I think this would be best achieved by lowering early MP but making Obers somehow come much earlier. One proposal I always liked is to make the T4 much cheaper (like 1000MP and 50 fuel for example) but only give acces to stock Obers (and maybe JP4) and put AA upgrade, Obers MG 34, PZIV and Panther behind a 100MP 70 fuel upgrade. Or less drastically make Obers buildable from HQ once the first truck has been set up. |
Again, just look at how youre describing this issue. Youre talking about it as if it were an okw starting manpower + sturm problem, and not a rifle problem (because it is). Again, fix whats broken. Changing rifles is tantamount to changing whats not broken in an attempt to fix something else thats broken.
Could just take away okws magic bonus manpower. I mean Soviet can't build a building and start building a unit out of asap but okw can lead with a shock unit and have a versatile build started right behind them?
That's because I think it's only the USF that really suffer from OKW's opening combo. The Soviets seem to do fine and the Brits have a fair chance with HMGs and UC. Combining this with the GCS2 win rate conclusion that currently faction balance is kinda (UKF<USF<)OKW=SOV=OST I wouldn't make any drastic changes to any of the latter three factions and instead buff the UKF and USF up to standard. Which is why for the USF I'm proposing a solution that fixes the symptons of the OKW/USF imbalance rather than its core problem, because fixing this core problem has side effects for at least the OKW/Soviet matchup which seems somewhat balanced right now. It might not be the best solution but it's the easiest I reckon.
|
|
I don't think it really adds much depth besides visuals, because basically the outcome would be the same as right now with units close to each other fighting it out at arms' length. Instead of rifle fire it's replaced by hand to hand combat animations that basically have the same role.
So in the end it would be cool to have but not really a priority IMO. I would much rather see more advanced garrison fighting mechanics, such as units being able to enter to contest or SMG units having a distinct advantage up close. |
The Bren increases one member from 2.89 to 6.86 (2.37x better) at long range for 45mu.
Is this the in-cover or out-of-cover DPS? I don't know which Cruzz took as a base although I'm assuming it's with the 'bonus'. |
If you make rifles 260/26 as some have suggested, then ask yourself whether or not the utility that volks bring is actually equivalent to these combat advantages rifles have.
I suggested to make them cheaper towards 260 MP so they can be fielded quicker to help USF face the OKW early game onslaught. Which is why I also suggested the ~60MP that is saved in the standard 3x Riflemen build should then go into weapon racks tech so USF mid game power spike remains at the same manpower timing. I don't think reinforcement cost should be lowered in this solution. Either this or increase the starting MP a bit.
I think Riflemen are fine or even good/excellent for their cost, especially at max potential (great vet and double BAR). I just feel that USF struggles to field enough units quick enough to stop the OKW Sturmpioneer/Volksgrenadier mass in the first 5 minutes.
|
I would also much prefer seeing it replaced with an Overwatch ability that automatically targets spotted enemies in a targeted area. Much like the Brits 25 Pounder ability in CoH1.
 |
Relic Entertainment
[L2P]Zdzislaw 
vonClausewitz 
