Counterplay to T-34 ram is just screening your tanks, and that'd be even easier if it were a vet ability since you'd be completely aware of the danger.
No, it's not. Firstly, on a lot of maps, this isn't possible. Any corners that offer sight blocking mean that you can't screen. Secondly, that's not how 'counter-play' works.
Counter-play works in this order:
#1. Oppenent does something
#2. you have the oppertunity to prevent it
#3. Something ether happens or doesn't, based on #2
Every single (balanced) unit and ability in the game follows this pattern, because it's good game design. Ram+Off map, and a few other abilities, are fundamentally over-powered because they flip the order in which #1 and #2 occur. |
Blablabla shouldn't be able to kill my epic tiger!!!1111 isn't justification for deleting an ability from the game, especially one on the T-34/76, which struggles enough to find usefulness in the late game.
Units and abilities insta-wiping stuff with no counterplay has been a justification for a lot of nerfs over the years, and they've all been well received and accepted by the community.
|
In general, "1-click" counters need to be removed. Ram+Off map, like any other "1-click" combo, is OP by any definition; once clicked, there's no counter. The targeted vehicle will take massive amounts of damage - often enough to destroy a 720mp/260f/15 point vehicle.
Anything that powerful needs to have counter-play available AFTER the attacker has "clicked". In most situations, powerful abilities/combos like this have counter-play options - this is one of the few exceptions. The problem is, it's the combination of two abilities that makes it so devastating; so we're left in a situation where one needs to be nerfed a disproportionate amount in relation to its individual power.
My preference would be a ram nerf, as the off-map is currently in-line with similar abilities. Ram should likely be adjusted to have either much less range, be a "skill-shot" (i.e. straight line), or (as suggested by Stormjager) have different effects based on the targets remaining HP.
why remove something from that game that hasnt been a problem since nearly 5 years?
The game has been changed and improved over the years, so the bar for 'balance' or 'quality' has risen. What was once acceptable isn't anymore. Ram+Off map was likely always OP, it just wasn't as OP as other things at the time, so it wasn't discussed that much.
Furthermore, Stormjager's suggestion doesn't remove stun - it just changes it so that the target vehicle needs to be damage first. Ramming a 50%hp vehicle, for example, would behave exactly as it does now. |
This sounds pretty good to me. RNG-wipes are pretty frustrating all around, so seeing them replaced by a more constant DPS would be a nice change. This would also have the added effect of making OST 4-man squads (or really any small squads) more resilient, as the chances of wiping 2+ models in a single shot would go down a lot.
My only concern would be garrison clearing, since they offer some pretty hefty resistances/defensive bonuses. Tank MGs (even with a cover modifier) might have trouble doing much, but that could be fixed with modifiers, I suppose. |
So let's recap on what cancer will still be in the game after the patch goes through with no more changes.
- Pack howitzers will still be braindead wipe guns.
- There's zero punishment for laying your mid and back lines with bunkers with excess resources even though only 2 (3 doctrinal) get no pop bunkers.
- Falls have basically no counter with brits except MAYBE commandos. Other than that you cannot fight them with an infantry unit.
- The KT is still a laughing stock.
- Panther vet is still outdated and has little to no meaning outside of its active abilities against super TDs. Its mobility means little when it can't hit the broad side of a barn while moving.
- G43 moving accuracy promotes blobbing and has little to no downsides.
- The jackson will still terrorize anything made of armor.
- Scotts still require 3 hits and have skill smoke.
- Skill tactician still untouched.
I'm sure there's more I just can't think of it currently besides snipers OP. And please compare the brummbar to the 105 howitzer sherman bulldozer. Dozer sherman >>>> brummbar.
I somewhat disagree with the UKF/Falls thing; without a faust, falls can be countered by the UC or fast AEC fairly early on.
Regardless, I'd also add:
- OST still extremely vulnerable to fast LVs
- OKW/UKF recon flares
- Sturmpios still overloaded with jobs, but also unable to build SBs
- UKF still missing basic tools (non-doc normal mortar, etc.).
- Commander balance (notably USF/OKW essentially using only 2 each)
It's a good patch (and I appreciate the work the team has done), but it feels like "part 1 of 2" considering the current state of things. Hopefully we'll get a patch addressing the above issues sooner than later; the meta is getting pretty stale, imo.
|
My point is, some people treat automatch as ranked, others as quickplay.
You can't think of implementing same set rules on matchmaking as games which have way bigger player bases.
We have the current match-making system because it eventually opens up to allow a wider ranking. If you don't like it, just restart search every two minutes.
[...]but at some point it's over and we're just wasting people's time.
Rename "quick-play" to "ranked" and put a disclaimer in it, saying that it's not a casual mode (maybe even direct people to custom matches). Then restrict the skill-range in that mode to a reasonable number, to prevent incredibly one-sided matches.
This solves basically every problem in the current match-making system.
That said, I doubt this will actually happen, since it requires UI and MM code changes, which seem to be 'out of scope' these days. Hopefully "CoH3" (if that's ever a thing) will implement a proper competitive system similar to other games. |
Reminder that in CoH, ranked = quickplay.
I'm not as informed on CS, but i don't think there's such a penalty on non ranked games.
Sort of?
While there isn't a penalty for leaving (or dropping) from a CS-casual match, those casual matches run on very different rule sets. If you want the "true CS experience" (5v5, no starting armor, etc.) you need to play ranked, which has those cooldowns.
While it's true that ranked and quickplay are the same in CoH2 (which is a mistake, imo), a match-making "cooldown" shouldn't prevent you from playing custom games. |
If this was combined with a match-making cooldown, I'd agree. As Rosbone pointed out, this can be abused by some players, either to simply get a better match (it's not much of a penalty) or to intentionally down-rank.
If we copied games like CS:GO, and implemented a "cooldown", this would be nearly impossible.
Explicit warnings are shown to players who wish to abandon Competitive matches. Choosing to abandon an incomplete Competitive match will result in a Competitive cooldown for your account.
[...]
First cooldown (level 1) - lasts 30 minutes
Second cooldown (level 2) - lasts 2 hours
Third cooldown (level 3) - lasts 24 hours
Fourth cooldown (level 4) - lasts 1 week
A week of clean play will reduce an account's cooldown level by one. An account whose cooldown level has been reduced to level 2 through clean play would receive a level 3 (24 hour) cooldown on their next infraction.
CSGO Match-making info
That said, a cooldown could only be implemented if the MM became more "strict" in its skill ranges. Games where 'Top-100' players are matched with 4000+ players are unplayable. |
- TDs are extremely viable against heavies and mediums at the same time
- Mediums are made obsolete by late-game TDs
- OST (and OKW, somewhat) rely on vehicle-based AI to stay relevant late-game
- Since mediums can't survive late-game, the only option is heavies (better investment)
- Constant 'heavy spam' forces allies to TD spam (or get their own heavies)
- OST/OKW now forced into heavies since TDs will always be present, invalidating mediums
I don't say this lightly, but the only solution to the current "60 TD Meta" is literally a rework of every tank in the game. We're currently stuck in a situation where either "60 TDs" are the obvious pick in every situation, or they're nerfed to the point where the game is unplayable. This needs to be fixed; and the only way to do this is by completely reworking how every vehicles relates to each other.
Rework the current set of TDs, then nerf heavies down to acceptable levels. Then mediums will be viable again, meaning different builds/metas can actually show up. TDs need to good against either] mediums OR heavies; not both. This would allow some actual counter-play. |
CE's are completely fine. They don't need a buff or a nerf. They're cheap, have decent utility, and can have good synergy when placed in a ScoutCar with a flamer. They're also surprisingly decent with a flamer, once they get some vet.
I'd argue that if every squad should be able to detect demo charges, than the detection radius should be lowered. They should detect it approximately at the point were they get the outer edges of the AoE damage. So no wipe if a player is careful and pulls back, but they should get damaged.
Firstly, the detection radius should never match the AoE radius, as this removes any ability for counter-play. I agree that the detection range should be smaller, but it needs to be slightly (+2?) larger than the AoE, to allow for the "attacking" player to back away on detection, while accounting for units that are sometimes unresponsive. Note, however, that any detection radius changes should also apply to other demos, including the goliath when it's not moving.
Secondly, the only way this would make sense, is if detected demos showed up like normal units - i.e. with a red highlight through buildings and a "unit" icon. Right now, even once detected, they can be incredibly hard to see on some terrain, and they can be placed behind stuff, so that they can't be seen from the default camera view.
Really, demos should just become a (slightly) cheaper, non-mobile, non-doc goliath.
|