Profile of Hannibal

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3119 | Subs: 2

General Information


Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - Ostheer Feedback21 Apr 2021, 07:02 AM Jump back to quoted post21 Apr 2021, 03:27 AMMMX interesting analysis. i've always felt that the G43 upgrade turns my PGrens into terminators, but maybe that was just due to the flashy firing sound of the rifles. if the only gain is merely a bit more DPS at range 30+ and the occasional chance for interrogation, i feel the mun cost together with the drastic DPS loss on mid to low range make PGren G43s a really awful upgrade. Just did some quick tests in the game. G43s are literally utter trash. 4 fights PGrens StG/G43 vs unupgraded Rangers from range 20 and 30-ish (actually the way the sandbags were set up I think it was more like 28-29) PGrens win convincingly at range 20 with 2-3 models and ~50% HP remaining. With G43s, they lost one fight, two fights won with about 2 models and 20-30% HP remaining and the fourth fight was literally a shootout between the last PGren and the last Ranger that could have gone either way. At 30 range, in my tests they performed similar to maybe a bit worse to StGs. But given that it were only 4 fights, similar is a good description. I used to get the upgrade because I heard AE and Ed80Hertz say the G43 were good on PGrens in some long ago tourney. But whenever I got it, I had the feeling normal PGrens would do just fine and looking at the tests and numbers I am pretty sure I am right on this. There is no reason to get this upgrade. Interrogation? I could as well just get a Gren with G43s. Still a downgrade, but at least only on a 240 MP squad. And I previously forgot about sprint. But why should I? There might be some situations where I can lob this bundle nade in, but overall it does not make sense. I don't want to close in to use my inferior DPS. And why should I sprint away just to get similar DPS compared to StGs? There are situations where this makes sense tactically, but overall it is not worth the heavy downgrade. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: COH2stats.com match and player statistics 2.020 Apr 2021, 13:56 PM Important thing I just noticed: The wins and losses do not fully add up, neither in "all data" nor in the "top200". For example, the current 3v3 top200 data: https://coh2stats.com/stats/month/1614556800/3v3/wermacht?statsSource=top200 If you add up all the wins and losses, you don't get 0. This means for some reason very few wins or losses are not counted for either Axis or Allies. In: Lobby
Thread: CoH2 statistics of top200 ONLY.20 Apr 2021, 13:51 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 13:33 PMCreativeName My assumption that the average Brit player is worse than the average player at the same rank with other factions is not based on any stat but rather 5 years of "how dafuq is this dude top x with brits" A playercard with lets say top50 Brit rank and top300 with every other faction is alot more common than similiar distributions with other faction. But allies do have a slightly negative WR or am i missing something? Yes, but the most likely reason for this is that Brits are not played as much, so it is easier to get to a higher level than with other factions. This is probably not true for rank 1-20, but likely for rank 100-200. Since USF ladder at the moment does not seem to be THAT much more populated, I would assume we should see a similar effect. The last point was mentally uncoupled from your statement and more generally meant. Since Allies have more factions, they have on average a lower skill for the same rank since good players "dilute" or simply do not play all factions all the time. I don't mean the top 20 that play every faction, but the top 150 player that does not "train" all his factions equally and might not even play some at all. By far and large, I'd also say that Allied win rates are slightly below 50%. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: UKF in ML so far...20 Apr 2021, 13:06 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 05:55 AMMMX That's some top class analysis right there! Is that all in the new ScatterThis? I have to admit I have not tried it in some time. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: CoH2 statistics of top200 ONLY.20 Apr 2021, 12:44 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 12:37 PMCreativeName You can use stats as an indicator but should not balance around it. You have to keep in mind that the Brit stats are kinda scuffed since the average top200 Brit player is significantly worse than the average top200 with every other faction which leads to a negative winrate by default. I agree, however USF 1v1 leaderboard is populated with only 1800 players (1400 for UKF) at the moment, yet USF has a ~50% win rate while UKF does not. We don't know how big the effect of +400 players is, but I assume it is not +8% WR. We should wait for a second month of data at least to check what is going on. Also, this argument should (generally speaking) lead to Allies having slight less than 50% WR by default. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - OKW Feedback20 Apr 2021, 12:05 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 12:01 PMleithianz Means it still exists & uncountable. The most important thing is that those require a unit, so you cannot place them anywhere you wish and you also potentially need to risk some damage. It is still not great, but FAR better than the previous versions In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - Soviet Feedback20 Apr 2021, 11:55 AM Jump back to quoted post20 Apr 2021, 10:31 AMVipper Maybe replace it with M1 ATG without the AP rounds it could be a great boost to T1 builds and the commander. I like this idea. Not sure about the AT round removal, but overall it would add a nice T1 teching route to an otherwise T2 commander. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - Ostheer Feedback20 Apr 2021, 11:16 AM I'd like to open up the topic of G43 upgrades on OST infantry: Currently, they do not provide much bonus. Graphs: I focus mostly on the DPS/POP, since I think this metric is worth a little bit more than the raw values. All numbers are late game (fully vetted). Bear in mind that the graphs neglect abilities. Grenadiers: - LMG Grens have a very flat DPS curve. Currently they function fine. I'd use this as benchmark to assess other upgrades - The new VSL upgrade trades their DPS on the long range for a tiny nudge in short range DPS and obviously a good chunk of EHP bonus. I think this is fine, too. - G43 upgrades give a good boost to close range DPS, but lose heavily from mid to long. It looks like a more emphasized curve of the VSL upgrade, but without getting as much EHP for it. - I'll include the "power" metric, although it is still under both construction and debate. HP was slightly weighted according to what I saw so far works decently well. VSL upgrade is still pretty strong, although the LMG has its niche when looking at the power/POP graph. I think this is how it should roughly be. G43 Grens really suck in this metric though. They do not get enough DPS to counter the EHP advantage of the VSL upgrade. It is a slightly more aggressive unit, but overall still a worse one. I'll predict here and now that the current changes are not enough. Long range DPS is worth more than short range DPS. G43s force me to close in with a relatively squishy squad. They have some advantages such as moving DPS, but I doubt it is really worth it when I have to assume that I lose 1-2 models already on the approach. PGrens: - I know some people like them. They were also used in previous tourneys, but I can't remember when I saw them last in the competitive scene. Personally, I also found them underwhelming. They are supposed to specialize PGrens at all ranges and add more DPS long range. But their DPS only gets better on the last 5-7 meters. Even if we include moving DPS, it is still the same. Standard PGrens win big on closer ranges. - Power-wise the same thing: Less DPS, same EHP (or did I forget something) -> less power. There is just no good reason to get G43s on PGrens. You just pay mun, gimp their DPS on almost all ranges while giving... interrogation? Really? That's probably the most expensive ability unlock there is. If they are supposed to be all range specialists with good moving DPS, they need better long range DPS. Or the StG needs a more refined profile to have higher short-mid DPS while decreasing faster on the long range. Otherwise they won't have a niche. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Buff for 5 man grens20 Apr 2021, 09:42 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2021, 16:44 PMVipper I actually meant 3+1 and 1+3 as a term of how many weapons a squad gets (3xG43 as opposed to 1xLMG). I'll sum the rest up so that we don't loose ourselves in too many details.: The number of weapons a squad gets determines how much thought you need to put into closing in. If all models are upgraded, each lost model hurts more. That's why most SMG (/close range in general) squads are fully kitted or at least have a large number of weapons: So that you are forced to think about when to close in or not. Those units usually get some type of defensive ability like a smoke or camo. If most of your damage is concentrated on few models, then there is less thought necessary for choosing the moment to push. Those units have to work via "brute force" and generally do not get defensive abilities (Rifles, Volks, Rangers). Another general design point is long range units having concentrated DPS so that it is harder to take them out of a fortified position by slugging it out. The number of weapons and the number of high value and low value models is therefore more a function of "how do I need/want to use the squad", so design and balance. Not of "unit A has 2 upgraded weapons, unit B also needs 2 weapons". There is no reason for G43 Grens to have exactly 3 G43s. But there is also no inherent reason for them not to. It depends on how we want to see the squad designed and balanced. But this has nothing to do with "squad X also gets two weapons with the upgrade". If we can create a balanced 3xG43 Grenadier squad, there is no reason not to. It would at least add something a bit more special to the upgrade compared to every other squad that uses either 2 or 4 weapons. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: COH2stats.com match and player statistics 2.020 Apr 2021, 09:01 AM If I can make a recommendation regarding visualization: Top graphs, you currently show "games played" with total wins/losses on the left and win ratio on the right. The way you display it is suboptimal. Reason: Left graph is a vertical bar graph, right graph is horizontal with reversed Y-axis. This makes it impossible to intuitively relate both graphs. At the very least, you should reverse the Y-axis of the right graph (or X-axis on the left). This way, if you mentally turn one graph by 90°, the factions line up (left faction in left graph then corresponds to top faction in right graph). My recommandation though is: - option 1: make both graphs either horizontal or vertical with factions lining up - option 2 (preference): merge into one graph, with win rate plotted as a line plot on a secondary Y-axis Further points: - color of wins should be blue and not green -> helps red/green blind people - more colors overall: You currently have three types of blue and red each. You could use a color gradient or simply a "boring" gray scale for commanders and intel bulletins that have a huge number of entries. - you could think about including unused intel bulletins and display them a "0". Currently they are kicked out if not used. I am not sure myself about this one, just as a thought. - some way to deal with unevenly populated ladders would be nice. Soviet and OST top players are probably better than UKF and USF/OKW because there are more people playing it. Probably not true for the top 20, but at some point the skill disparity will be bigger for the same "rank". "wish list": - implementation of the "general" page. What would be super duper dope is line plot showing faction win rate over all modes - some statistical data: for example, you could show the win rates of the last 2-4 weeks/months as a standard deviation to give an impression of how much the win rates "naturally" change between data sets. And while I am on this: How do you intend to deal with patches? They will change balance and therefore win rates and might come out mid-week and mid-month. Will there be a possibility to select only "current patch data"? It's not the highest priority, but might be helpful to more quickly assess how much balance has changed. Also it would be helpful to aggregate more games for better data. In: Lobby