The extra issue is that it "remembers" the move order so if for any reason it gets detected it starts moving...
Oh wow. That's really special.
However I think the current 'don't move while in camo' comes from the idea that the Rak should be able to rotate while in Camo. If a playrr had to click it there would also be small kateral movements which would break it.
That was afaik the reasoning behind this, not sure what costs less micro and provides more overall benefits though. |
Small correction. The model at which the Maxim aims at, is not receiving any cover. The cover icon appears when half or more of the squad is receiving any kind of cover.
You can deduce at which model it is aiming by how it died a second later.
It must have gotten light cover I think.
The whole squad got the cover icon, which happens as you said if half of the models are in the respective cover type. I assumed that the two models in light cover were the guy to the bottom and the front model that was targeted. I don't think the two guys in the top left got any cover at all, they're too far out. The bottom and the front one are closer to the slope. |
Okay, so you think HGB on Tommies are a problem in general. This would have been a more successful premise for a thread, I think.
To be honest he made that point pretty clear. His issue is IS having both smoke and the HGB.
However the newest commander (the one with assault tommies) gave UKF a smoke mortar from the get go. Still there were no huge issues reported. Also you could just use the smoke shell of Cromwells and what not. Now it will just become slightly more accessible, that's all. In my eyes not enough to invest into potentially longer rebalances. |
"Super Heavy tanks" where not broken to being with, they become broken when they tried to "fix" them.
And this is quite a common pattern on the Coh 2 patches history, units become OP and then UP again and persisting problems being fixed at a very low rate.
Heavies were broken in a sense that they were never used beside sometimes the Pershing and the Elefant in large team games. OKW was designed around the KT and also OST is supposed to regularly bring on a Tiger. The game is designed with heavies in mind, and to be honest it would be a shame if the game did not include them properly. But that is very subjective.
Balance team decided to bring them back to the game again which was a very good thing. So they did a complete rework of how heavies function. Turns out that you can't foresee all consequences of a complex set of changes. No surprise here.
It is a bit of a shame that it took multiple months until they might finally be fixed, but as a matter of fact the meta now is not really worse than the meta we had before gameplay wise. And demanding regular updates and fixes from people that spent their free time on it would be inappropriate, especially since they have done an exceptional job in the last two years. CoH2 has never been better and strategies more diverse, even if there are issues and current metas. Earlier every faction had three commanders at best that were somewhat viable. There was no selection. Now you at least have to pick a few from a group of viable ones.
Well, back to topic, and I think this will likely be my last post since we will start running in circles now:
I don't think the HGB will become such an issue that we need to rework it before the patch. Spending so much time on reworking a minor ability will leave more glaring issues unfixed. The game is better off with other fixes. And if it really turns out to be a major issue, then a hot fix will do in a month or two. |
I have to disagree with resources investment as an argument.
When one has limited resources one should focus to problems that are easier to fix. When one gives exams one should first answer all the question that are easy to answer and then move to more complicated issues. One will have secure points even if he does not have time to complete the complicated issues.
Nope, you first fix the stuff that is broken and then go for optimization. After that you sort your list to stuff that has the highest gain for low effort.
The current HGB is not a balance issue, just the design is not pretty. It does not harm the gameplay. Still it would take quite some time to do it. Don't take my word for it if you don't want to, take Sander's words. So you have low gain/medium-low effort, it's also part of the optimization branch, so it's quite far down on the list where it honestly should be. Heavy tanks currently harm the gameplay ("broken" in some sense). Fixing them is high gain/high effort and is therefore overall better. |
Fine with me. I do not like talking about off topic things either.
Not in my point of view. This would actually give players more reason to produce more Ro.E. instead of spamming IS only. IS already can fight, build sandbags, cashes, sandbags, trenches, spot, call arty, heal and fight they do not need the extra utility of high explosives it can be easily transferred to Ro.E.
Heavy gammon was "changed" to be closer to Satchel at DECEMBER 19th 2017.
If I had to guess I would that reason behind this was that the ability was UP and probably Relic was still insisting that UKF should not have access to a normal AT grenade. The satchel approach was more like a band aid fix in making the ability more useful.
The actual "new" design is that now, UKF have access to a normal snare and thus the HGB needs to be incorporated better to the "new" design. The reason why I am talking about original design here is because there is starting point since the original values exist and have been tried.
I can agree with the general reasoning. I think there are three options:
- Leave as it: Maybe not as pretty design wise, but also this is almost "tried and tested". Less work, so far no real issues beside it's "not pretty" so to say. After patch potential problems with smoke.
- Give IS an AT focused HGB: New idea, rebalancing/tweaking needed. Would basically give all UKF units a snare (although IS only get it very late game)
- Give RE an AI focused HGB: "New" idea (build from 2 years ago, but at that time it was on IS(?)), rebalancing/tweaking needed; would give all UKF units some form of grenade.
I discarded the double AT thing on REs for already explained reasons.
I'm not against rethinking the HGB. But looking at the current live game, I think balance team should invest their resources elsewhere. |
Its not really that simple on 4v4 match, GrW 34 counter barrage is vet 1. they can flare u 1st and barrage your mortar before you can counter them
And you talking about mid to late game counter
IMO on early game + flares + standardized performance it is so hard to counter 6 men pm-41 on that early stage
The counter barrage minimizes micro and let's you focus on something else. While the power balance of these secondary abilities can of course be discussed, you present it highly biased. Also, as sad as it is: 4v4 matches are not a good reference for balancing units because the whole design of the game does not scale well (starting as early as map size etc).
In smaller modes the flare is good, but also a mun drain. There's more space to maneuver, and less unit density, which means that your flare will give you less information and is therefore not as much worth it as in dense 4v4s where you're guaranteed to discover something. |
(...)
Okay, the root of this is that we disagree on the Penal satchel in the first place. While I'd rather prefer to have a normal grenade, the satchel is mostly fine in my opinion.
I will skip over quite a few other points because I think it would derail too much (like Penal AT satchel exclusive with normal satchel and the whole balance team thing).
Just the last two points:
- IS having both grenade and HGB: Yes, suboptimal from a design point. But it's also in the current live game and does not cause balance problems. One could change it, but this would only lead to more issues that need fixing (for example: Giving the HGB to Sappers only, which is basically a nerf for usability as Sappers are occupied with repairing and there are only 1-2 on the field. This in turn would be a slight nerf for Hammer Tactics, which would require a buff in another domain etc etc.).
- reverting to inital HGB design: I'm not sure from which built the inital design you're talking about stems. But as far as I remember the HGB has not been changed for a long time. So you want to implement an old design into the new build and this is your argument that the implementation will be seamless and balance issues cannot arise? Sorry, but this does not make any sense. Old designs can of course cause issues in the current build. |
What usually gets somewhat standardized is the standard performance of a unit.
Afterwards every unit gets some ability goodies according to the faction's design. |
Not defending the maxim, I think it’s a PoS, but seriously after they got suppressed and were obviously crawling for a grenade, he should have repositioned the maxim further away to not allow a grenade throw.
Yes, he should have. Which is exactly why the Maxim is so frustrating if there is light cover, the PGrens should not have been able to throw in the first place. I assume we agree on that.
But to be honest if you reposition your MG you can assume that it should win. I stopped the time: From being suppressed starting the throwing animation was not even 2 seconds. And the time to the grenade exploding were an additional 4,5 seconds. So he had about 3 seconds from supression to ordering the repositioning, otherwise quite a few members will eat the grenade. That's enough time to do it, but when you reposition your MG you usually assume that the enemy squad should be suppressed and stuff like this does not happen. Look away to some other fight for 2 seconds and there is no way to dodge it anymore.
The whole issue in this video arises from the fact that the first model of PGrens was in yellow cover for the first burst of the Maxim. Thereby the squad did also not get suppressed by the short second burst and the PGrens were almost in throwing range by the third burst which finally suppressed. This is just bullshit. |