Company of Heroes: Eastern Front
Eastern Front Mod (Read-Only) => Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Flanker1949 on February 19, 2011, 09:56:24 AM
-
Hey guys. Firstly I am sorry for my poor English skill as it is my second language.
And please don't get offended, since my English is too bad, sometimes it sound like I am being rude and telling people what to do. Please forgive me if that happend here. I never meant to offend anyone. Those are just merely our subjective opinion, and we just trying to discuss with everyone.
1. From the start of the game, the Soviet can build nothing but conscripts. Since half of them are unarmed, they perform poorly in a fight. And their combat effectiveness against infantry is only 2. I tried to capture a point once and encontered a term of German engineer. And my conscript term was wiped out by the engineer. (the engineers did not have the flamethrower). :-[
And most of them are getting slaughtered by the motor-bikes.
2. It is so expensive to upgrade, by the time I have the Red banner trooper, the German already have motorised machine gun units. And since both upgraded conscripts and the Red banner trooper have no anti-armo capabilities, I only find myself getting slaughtered. Also, the Red Banner trooper also have only 2 point of combat effectiveness against infantry. Aren't they suppose to be different with the consripts?
3. Since the Soviet can not have any armored support, I can only watch German take my land one after one. And since they can have the upper hand by doing so, I would have limited resource. So by the time I built my Tank factory, the German would have various panzer. And the worst part is even after I built the Tank farctory I still can not build Tanks because we have to upgrade it first. We often find ourselves have no resource to do so as Soviet Tanks are expensive.
4. If I somehow hold it out untill I can produce the T-34, I will only find my Tank be surrounded by a number of Panther. And they will Bi**h kick me up and down main street untill they gets bored and decide just charge into my base and destory me.
Since there are so many limitations on the Soviet produce line as we often have to upgrade the building before we can put it in use. It will take a lot of time and extra resources from us and that makes it fatal in the game.
We hope that if the design term agrees, and modify the game a little. Me and my friends who have less English skill have writen down a list of suggestions and hope we can discuss with everybody.
1. The base combat effectiveness of the un-upgraded Red Banner troop set to 3. But reduce the ungrade of PPsh-41 and the DP-42's combat effectiveness by 1. So the ungraded version has no difference. And also give them the RPG-43 and F-1 grenade. So they would not be slaughtered by the armored cars in the earlier of the game.
2. The shock guards as the most elite of the Soviet infantry, it'll be nice if their number be reduced to 6, to make it look different with the Red Banner troop since no trooper can become a shock guard. ;) It will be easier for people to manage. And 2 of them use SMG plus one of them carry DP-42 for covering fire.
3. In the earlier stage of the game, Soviet troop are running arround with no support. We were hoping that we can free the medical truck so we can produce it before we upgrade the building.
Also, the Soviet is the only faction that does not have armored vehical in the earlier stage of the game to support its infantry. It would be cool if we add motorpool to the Soviet and allow them to build BA-10 and BA-46.
4. The Soviet outpost, the Soviet troopers can resupply themselves there. But there is no one in there and people can garrison it. This did not seem logical. We suggest that the outpost can not be garrisoned, and after you build it, you can see there are 3-4 logistic managers in there, and they can shoot with Mosin-Naggan rifle if enemies approach.
The main issue in the Soviet faction is just too many upgrade we have to do before we can do anything. It cost people a lot of time and resources and that make people who choose the Soviet loss its advantage. So the gap between the earlier stage weapon and later stage weapon are too big. There is almost no middle stage for the Soviet. And while Soviet is heavily rely on the infantry, they have no infantry support structure. Only of you choose the propanganda tactics you can build machine gun nest and trenches. Otherwise your infantry will be exposed out side and open for slaughter.
And the special tactics are weired too. The artilery for example: it says that it will cover a large area, and it indeed cover a large area. It practicaly wiped out my enemy, my aliance and me in one go. And it will charge 5 mins before I can use it again. It'll be good if we just use the normal artilery like the US one.
And we found some bugs too. The Soviet machine gun nest, after the gunner is killed, when you trying to send another guy in there, the nest icon will become a big purple square.
Thank for listening. If anyone thinks that what we said are not true. And what we experienced simply due to we had insufficient experience to play the Soviet faction, we hope you can teach us how to play it in correct way. Thank a lot.
-
Let me guess, the conscripts were capping while the pioneers were shooting at them,didn't they? Or they were in red cover and the pios in green or whatever.
Anyhow, it just seems you're being severely outplayed (Multiple panthers hen you have 1 T34) and thusly t is hard to take your suggestions for face value.
One thing: The numbers under the unit pictures, they mean nothing. Literally nothing. So there's no balance problem there.
You really need to get a grip of the game first, play the tutorials, watch some replays, play some 1vs 1 automatch and you'll see your problems are not what they seem to be.
-
1. Version tag (Im guessing your reffering to 1.30 in this topic)
2. Conscripts are meant to be weak requiring the command squad to be effective and capping is about the only thing their good at apart from cannon fodder (ntm Analpirat's point)
3. Red banners are medium infantry and are good at their job if you want AT you need tank hunters and the ZIS gun's they arent like other factions where most inf can handle armour and inf they're very specific to what they can engage.
4. Again use Tank hunters and ZIS's dont try to counter their early armour with your own armour especially against PE bad mistake
5. T-34's arent an "I WIN" button support them they wont win 1v1 vs a panther.
And your english is fine btw :P
-
Ok first of all, please follow the rules about posting and adding tags to the headline.
This pretty much sound like you're very new to the game and you're having trouble adjusting to the way soviets play
Please have a look some of the latest replays in our Replay section as they may help you understand how to use them better. I can assure you that soviets are anything but UP at the moment. Infact some nerfing is due in the next patch.
You definitely do not need to use all the upgrades, and they're there to provide different teching paths once you get used to them
-
Thank you guys for apply our message so quickly. It looks like we need to practice some more.
By the way, Mr Zerstörer. You said that :"Infact some nerfing is due in the next patch." What does "nerfing" mean? I check it and it is not in the dictionary.
Is that OK if you leak us some inside information about what's the next patch is going to like? Or when is it going to be out? Would the Soivet have their own speech? Because right now they don't. The T-34 is using the Sherman's speech and the T-70 is using the greyhoung's speech. Would Soviet also have the it's own winning and losing pictures? Can we have the Soviet ranks in our profile? And is the bug we mentioned earlier about the purple square machine gun nest icon going to be fixed? Would there be an animation when T-34 broken its own main gun?
Thank a lot for replying us. This forum is so friendly here. We weren't sure if anyone is going to anwser our newbies' stupid questions.
-
Nerfing = Give less power to a unit/faction/ability.
ISU-152 will be nerfed. ;)
-
@Flanker1949
Is that OK if you leak us some inside information about what's the next patch is going to like? Or when is it going to be out?
We don't know yet :).
Would the Soviet have their own speech? Because right now they don't. The T-34 is using the Sherman's speech and the T-70 is using the greyhoung's speech.
Maybe in the future... if not at least at that time we could remove those speeches from Soviets units.
Would Soviet also have the it's own winning and losing pictures?
Nope, harcoded bug.
Can we have the Soviet ranks in our profile?
Nope, this is up to Relic.
And is the bug we mentioned earlier about the purple square machine gun nest icon going to be fixed?
Yes, we have it in our internal changelog list for the next version.
Would there be an animation when T-34 broken its own main gun?
Yeah, this will be added in the future, for all soviet vehicles/tanks. Don't know when, but it's planned.
-
Wow!!!
Thank you for anwsering all our questions. This is definely one of the most friendly forum we have been to. And Mr Moonwalker, thank you for the heads up too.
Byt the way? what tool are you guys using to make the mod? I am not a very talented computer person, but we do have a unit in our university specificly teach people how to make game mod. And I know the lectureer. Me and my friends are hoping may be we can make some other mod like Italian force in north African or the Chinese Red Army (maybe not this one since the Chinese Red Army did not fight German in Europe)
We have found a website that is a encyclopedia on World War 2 vehicals:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tanks-light/t-80.asp (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tanks-light/t-80.asp)
Hope it can provide some assistance for you guys in future mod modification.
Almost forgot, may I ask if there is a planing to create Soviet structures in the future patch? Because they are currently using the Americans structures with a new texture.
Thank you guys again. If you guys need any assistance from us, just let us know.
-
yeah i think russia is a bit weak at the start of the game.
yesterday we died cuase of an inf rush....
the conscripts could not hold thos huge army of inf.
-
Byt the way? what tool are you guys using to make the mod? I am not a very talented computer person, but we do have a unit in our university specificly teach people how to make game mod. And I know the lectureer. Me and my friends are hoping may be we can make some other mod like Italian force in north African or the Chinese Red Army (maybe not this one since the Chinese Red Army did not fight German in Europe)
For modding CoH -
3Ds Max 8
Corsix Mod Studio
Object Editor
RGM Importer
Corsix model exporter
Photoshop
Photoshop DDS Plugin
And some other stuff I may have forgotten. I personally use all those ^
Almost forgot, may I ask if there is a planing to create Soviet structures in the future patch? Because they are currently using the Americans structures with a new texture.
Its planned for the future, but right now is not our priority.
-
Thank you, Mr BurroDiablo.
And I don't know if this is a bug or not. Sometimes my base stoped or reduced to regenerate ammunition. My supply line isn't broken and my enemies are all regular German army, not the Panzer elite. So they are not supose to have that "scratch the earth" (I don't think I spelled it right) capabilities.
And hi there, firefox126. I totally agree with you. Soviet is weak at the start. But if we somehow hold it to the end, then the Soviet will be almost unstopable, both infantry and Armor. I have tried, there is no chance for someone to stop a full scale Soviet assault. We put the Red Banner trooper with tank hunters, upgrade them with SMGs and MGs, then mix them with T-34 and IS-2 with the support from the Katyusha. The enemies can either die for their country or surrender. :)
Except it is hard for us to hold out in the earlier stage of the game though.
-
Advanced Soviet units have a munitions upkeep, like the manpower upkeep of all other factions, that reduces their munitions income as the number of units on the field increases. The panzer elite ability is "scorched earth" which disables a neutral or friendly point and must be repaired to be able to be used again.
Soviets are only slightly weaker than wehrmacht right at the start of the game but have an extremely powerful midgame. Their snipers, strelky and command squad vet are currently much more powerful than anything the wehrmacht player has at that stage. Their late game is on par, with both sides having excellent tanks, infantry and vet. In fact, Soviets probably have the edge in late game too since snipers are so epic.
-
Oh, I see. Is there a user's manuel can tell me that which unit will cost me ammo unkeep?
But I think it is a bug as well. This morning when I played it, while no combat have occured, no lost of land and no production, my ammo number have changed itself. I think it have something to do with the fact that I ticked "run progrem in window xp". After I unticked it, it went fine. Plus the aliance AI is stupider and the Axie AI is smarter when I ticked "runs in window xp".
-
I believe all the tanks/vehicles (includes katyushas), mortars, AT guns, medic truck and firebase have a munitions upkeep. The exact values should be found in the 1.2 changelog.
There shouldn't be any difference between compatability mode and running it normally.
-
That is probably not fair now.
People who play the Soviet have to keep a large amout of troops in the earlier stage since we are weak as you point it out earlier. But in that case we will not be able to have any production of ammo due the ammo upkeep to upgrade out buildings and troops. How can we hold out the middle stage of the game then?
-
Soviet abilities are free remember. A Soviet player will have more munitions midgame than an American player since he will have to pay for everything. Think about it, a Soviet player only has to pay 50 munitions to upgrade his conscripts with all rifles and free molotovs. That's equivalent to just 2 US nades. Troops don't have the upkeep either so it doesn't effect midgame. It's more of a lategame nerf to stop massive tank attacks while doing limitless IL-2 runs etc. Soviets have to make a choice on what to spend their munitions on just like the rest of the factions. They just do it differently.
Trust me when I say Soviets should have no trouble midgame. Katyushas, snipers and strelky are all extremely good in this period.
-
I do trust you. You guys have much more experience than me. But just since German normal AI always come out with a massive strike very fast. They use infantry supported by machine gunner, sniper, IFV, and stunk. It is hard to build enough AT united by that time. And if we start to focus on buliding AT unit, we wouldn't be able to go capture lands. And if we don't go capture the lands, we would have hard time upgrade our units and buildings. Specially on a map like Kursk where there are no points for you to hold and you just can not consentrate too many of your troops at one point. If it's a map like Leningrad we wouldn't have to worry about it. We just go blow up a few bridge and hold on the last pass and wait unit we have enough upgrade and troops to overrun the enemy. Since the Soviet can not even blow up a bridge, we have to go and babwire and tank trap the bridge.
-
Soviets used to float muni more than Brits mid late game. This gave way to spamming a gazillion mines(for those who know how good they are and don't forget to use them) as well as ll the arty abilities which were always available when the player needed them without any worry.
-
I do trust you. You guys have much more experience than me. But just since German normal AI always come out with a massive strike very fast. They use infantry supported by machine gunner, sniper, IFV, and stunk. It is hard to build enough AT united by that time. And if we start to focus on buliding AT unit, we wouldn't be able to go capture lands. And if we don't go capture the lands, we would have hard time upgrade our units and buildings. Specially on a map like Kursk where there are no points for you to hold and you just can not consentrate too many of your troops at one point. If it's a map like Leningrad we wouldn't have to worry about it. We just go blow up a few bridge and hold on the last pass and wait unit we have enough upgrade and troops to overrun the enemy. Since the Soviet can not even blow up a bridge, we have to go and babwire and tank trap the bridge.
Try changing the game types you play. It might change your perspective on balance. Compstompers who play on Leningrad and other noob maps will never be taken seriously on balance.
-
It a matter of who can blow the bridge before the enemy comes kinda thing.
-
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerfed (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerfed)
1. nerfed 420 up, 25 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
The term "nerfing" comes from the online gaming world of Ultima Online.
At one point in the game, the developers reduced the power of swords in melee combat.
This resulted in players complaining that it was like they were hitting each other with nerf bats, not swords.
From then on, if ever something gets made less worth while than it had been originally, it is considered 'nerfed'
"Oh man, they reduced the dmg on the berserker class and now it's totally nerfed!"
"Damn, the Devs nerfed those axe's real good!"
by Dave Elliott Jan 11, 2005 share this
2. nerfed 88 up, 40 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
v: something that worked at one time, but was changed (usually for the worse) by someone who did not understand that particular thing's usefulness. You used to have something cool, but now your stuff
suxors. Often refers to MMOFPS's or MMORPG's, when the game designers change in-game rules and they screw stuff up.
"That game used to pwn, but now it blows. They took out the best part."
"Whatever I was doing, I'm not doing it anymore, I got nerfed."
"Our junk was so much better before the designers all nerfed it."
by CmdrAwesome Dec 29, 2004 share this
3. Nerfed 33 up, 24 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
1.To make something pointless whereas before it was productive
2.To Stop something working
Usually a term used in online games
'' Aww Gawd They Nerfed My Fave Farming spot''
nerf nef ner nerfed crap shit
by James94 Feb 24, 2008 share this
4. NERFED 8 up, 104 down
buy nerfed mugs, tshirts and magnets
I've always wondered what exactly it means - in context it's code that's been deliberatly broken or functionality removed from a program in order to sell a higher priced alternative or also used as a general description of code that no longer works (after patching or updating)
I think it's something like "Not Even Really Functioning Effectivly Disabled/Destroyed" or something similar
-
But there are a lot of the unit which does not have ablity and yet we have to suppend ammunitions to upkeep them.
And the Soviet is the only one without suppressing capability. Unlike other factions, they have machine gun. I tried to use the DP-27 to suppress the enemy, but it never worked. And the Soviet machine gun nest is still using the obsolated Maxim M1910? I thought they have much better stuff like the Vladimirov KPV-14.5mm.
Especialy when you versus the pazer elite. They have powerful infantry since the beginning of the game plus they have a lot very good anti-infantry vehical was well. Soviet will take a good beating. Especially since half of the conscripts are unarmed. Can we at least give them a Nagant revolver?
-
Blob control is the role of the sniper with his callin arty. That's part of the reason he's so dominant and important to tech to at the moment.
-
Also I somewhat disagree with the muni upkeep of soviet (which break the fun of playing 'em), I think however that soviet should be nerfed in mid-late game due to their very powerful combo.
But there are a lot of the unit which does not have ablity and yet we have to suppend ammunitions to upkeep them.
And the Soviet is the only one without suppressing capability. Unlike other factions, they have machine gun. I tried to use the DP-27 to suppress the enemy, but it never worked. And the Soviet machine gun nest is still using the obsolated Maxim M1910? I thought they have much better stuff like the Vladimirov KPV-14.5mm.
Especialy when you versus the pazer elite. They have powerful infantry since the beginning of the game plus they have a lot very good anti-infantry vehical was well. Soviet will take a good beating. Especially since half of the conscripts are unarmed. Can we at least give them a Nagant revolver?
Hm. Soviet in EF are based on "ennemy at the gates" movie, so conscript will remained as they are ;D
Seriously: conscript are very cheap, and so is their upgrade which enable them molotovs and full rifles. Even after their upgrade, they are still very cheap for what they do.
Against PE you should really try to obtain PTRD infantry ASAP, as they perform quite well against PE.
-
Re: Dennis
But we hardly ever get a chance to upgrade the sniper with that ability since I have to keep a large number of troopes to keep the pressure on the enemy. Because the upkeep I needed for my troop, my ammo regeneration rate is often 0. My last game for example, I had 5 T-34s and 3 IS-2s, 2 Katiushas, 1 conscript team and 2 engineer teams. By the time the game ended, I manage to capture all of the ammo depots and build outpost on all them. But my ammo regeneration rate was still 0.
Re: Red Stinger
Yes, you are right. But in the "Enemy at the gate" movie, the conscripts are allowed to pick up whatever weapon they find. It can be pistol, rifle, SMG, MG, rocket launchers and so on. But in the game they are not allowed pick up pistols and rifles, and the enemy hardly ever drop their MGs and RLs.
Since you mentioned the tank hunter and its PTRD, I just could not understand that the tank hunter need to cost 8 manpower? Think about this way, the tank hunter is a 4 man group and they have only limited anti-tank capability. An AT-gun cost only 3 manpower and it is far more capable that the tank hunters. Of course that you may argu that the AT-gun has very limited anti-personal capability. But if I put a conscript with an AT-gun together that well make them far more capable that the tank hunter, and a conscript term and an AT-gun only cost you 7 manpower. So no one would ever bother to train the tank hunter. So we just want to suggest that the tank hunter only cost 4 manpowers.
By the way, I have got another WW2 weapon encyclopedia. Just post here to share with everybody.
From the encyclopedia, it shows that Soviet used a AT-gun which is 45mm, how come the our in game AT-gun is still using the 37mm one?
As I recall, in game we upgrade the AT-gun, may I suggest to make the upgraded version of the AT-gun 45mm. :)
Thanks for the attention.
Post Merge: February 25, 2011, 01:33:48 PM
Ah.... >:(
The encyclopedia file is too big, 70MB.
OK if anyone want it, please leave you name and e-mail address below and I'll send it too you.
Or if anyone know that I can upload it somewhere else pubic for everyone to download.
-
My common build order (standard resources) with Soviets is:
Ingenery (Build barracks/cap) - Command Squad - Conscript X3 - Support Barracks (Long range upgrade) - Sniper team (arty upgrade)
This is usually timed so that by the time the sharpshooters are out I have the 125 munitions to upgrade it. This occurs 2-3 minutes into the game and he usually lives the whole game. Yet again it comes down to the gametype you're playing. Don't play against coms where your entire force is tanks. Even with 0 munitions, Soviets can use most of their abilities. This is the price you pay for tank spamming.
Really, this should not be in the balance forum since you honestly don't have the qualifications to make balance assessments. Balance cannot be gauged from games against coms.
-
Don't worry fellas! Conscripts should be fixed on the next patch, so armed soldiers can pass their rifle to the next soldier when die and unarmed conscripts won't rush the enemy (or at least that's what we have planned).
-
Wow, that's great news.
-
finally
-
the balance issues and infantry rushes (if they were in skirmish) were probaly due to the improved AI and also i agree that the ammount of upgrades you need to get for some units are insane and that you have to upgrade to produce the tank and support however i do know there are powerful but maybe shorter upgrade times and lower upgrade cost would balance this out
can i have the encyclopedia and also is the name necsasarry anyway
Don't post email adds plz name Joshua
-
Wow, that's great news.
+1 8)
-
can i have the encyclopedia and also is the name necsasarry anyway
Don't post email adds plz name Joshua
Hi, Josh. Due to the big size of the file I was unable to hotmail it to you. However I have created a torrent for everyone. (this is my first time create a torrent file, please let me know if there is any issue)
-
Uhh Josh, word of advice. Never post your email on a public forum. You should go back and edit it out.
-
Ah, I am so sorry. I was unaware of this issue. A million pardon.
And hope you successfully downloaded the file, J. If you encountered any problem, please let me know.
-
Personally, I'm still having a hell of a time with Russia, so I'm definitely in agreement that Russia is overpowered, I'm just not sure its only slightly.
Point is taken that Russia is weaker early game, and this probalby should be the point where wehr gets an edge capable of staving off the brutal onslaughts that are likely to follow as russia gets steadily stronger...controlling the early game certainly isn't going to put russia out of it(I just had a remarkable game where my opponent went early snipers, lost 2 squads to 2 of my snipers, and his command squad while I was entirely intact, and then proceeded to turn everything back around with first one, and then 3 t90's, which outclassed my feeble attempts to keep up a decent vehicle deterrent-even though I did have AT popping out when the t-90 hit the field)
So yes, russia is supposed to start out weaker, and have a hard time getting a foothold on the map, maybe. I find too many of my games don't go that way, and the reason is just how effective these cheap units of russia's become when they are put into a building. It makes it really easy to hold desirable points with very little. Snipers are way too slow at getting thesse large squads out, mg's are ill suited to deal with units in buildings, especially because of the punch these units pack at long range when garrisoned.
Flamers work of course, but russia can deter attacks from an area easily, even before 50 munitions is available, making it hard to actually deprive him of resources, and even the flamers can be easily dealt with, given the surprising range and strength of the russian rifles while garrisoned. massing volks probably works as well, but it's inflexible, and even if this is the answer, it seems problematic that ruissan play should require it.
This condition is actually fine...it's kind of interesting that these units just work so much better when in buildngs(partly because they don't charge in to die the way they would on foot), except that it makes the mid-game against russia a nightmare, and late-game a passive experience of just watching in abject horror.
maybe some of the problem i'm having is the vet, which will be changing,
and then some of the problem is in the effectiviness of tank hunters against infantry, which will aslo be changing(though I think they are still too good against vehicles...and so are guards for that matter, these definitely aren't PE style At grenades)
and for an army as mobile as russia, I find the retreat to medic truck also quite maddening(if cool), because a very powerful, fast blob, can be anywhere at any given moment. given how badly i'm getting owned by everything under the sun, i'm not yet positive what the justification of this added shock value is)
T-90's make me wet myself currently. I'm not sure how much AT it takes to handle 3 of these, but I never seem to have enough. This is probalby a problem with my early game trials against russia. would be nice if they did less than they do to units in cover..so that their very presence didn't push off grens(or just annihilate them in moments). Cover does help, but it doesn't seem to help enough.
Anyway,
love the game, love the mod, but the matchup is quite exasperating at the moment, leaving me to speculate wildly at where exactly this seeming imbalance is originating from.
Yeah, I know, its all in my head. I'm actually fine with that explanation. hopefully after the retail beta goes live you guys can find some players to post some replays at their more impressive level so I can finally get a handle on where I'm going wrong.
-
Hi, Joshua9. I partially agree with you.
(I hope the administrator can put this topic into the Red Army Suggestions section after this. After weeks of non-stopping online battling with human players in various maps, I have organised some suggestions.)
The part I disagree with you is that the enemy snipers can easily take out my teams in the building, and in a lot of map, the building is usually far away from the strategic point. So the garrison the buildings can not secure a point.
I have a few suggestions for the modification of the game to rebalance this great mod.
1: We all agree that the Soviet is a weak faction in the earlier stage of the game. The main reason for this is that the Soviet has the weakest infantry at the beginning. Mr Black bishop have told us that he is going to fix the issue of the conscripts. That is a great news, but I still suggest that the unarmed conscripts should be equiped with a Naggan revolver.
2: After the upgrade of the conscripts, all conscripts will be armed with a commissar equiped with a SMG, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. Now let us have a look at the Red Banner trooper (sorry, I can't remember the name). 6 men are all using the Mosin rifle, 1 man unarmed, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. As you can see, the upgraded conscripts are more powerful than the Red Banner trooper. Plus most importantly, the conscripts has cocktail and they only you 4 manpower to upkeep while the Red Banner trooper cost you 7. So in this case, who would train the Red Banner trooper? Therefore, I suggest that we increase the base of the combat effectiveness of the Red Banner trooper by 1 as they are the actual Soviet infantry, not untrained 3 weeks wonderer like the conscipts. But in the same many, we reduce the effect of the upgrade by 1. So if you upgrade them with the PPsh-41, the CE only go up by 3 (but only 3 men of the team will receive the SMG, not all of them). And if you upgrade them with the DP-27, the CE only go up by 1, but with the supressing capability like the Bren. Plus, they are the only basic infantry without AT capability, I was thinking that at least we can give them a cocktail.
3. And the shock guards CE should also be higher than a Red Banner trooper since they are the elite, at list they should be a equivalent of the panzer trooper, so we can upgrade their CE by 1. Otherwise, everyone will just go and train the Red Banner trooper, becaue they can by upgraded with SMG and make their CE up to 6. And it doesn't make any sence that an elite unit like them, only one man has a SMG. Do you think we can give another one or two of them a PPs-43?
4. About the tank hunters. They cost us 8 manpowers to upkeep, yet they only has a embarrass AT CE of 2. I normally let one team of conscripts go along with the AT cannon. Because a conscript team and an AT gun only cost me 7 manpower and they are much more powerful than the tank hunters in every espects. So in this issue I have 2 suggestions:
(1) the tank hunters only cost us 4 manpower to upkeep, one man per manpower.
(2) the size of the tank hunters are reduced into a 2 men team, cost us 4 manpowers to upkeep. This way, it is much earlier for players to organise.
5. In the later stage of the game, the Soviet is too powerful for all factions. Its IS-2 can put an King Tiger into shame. Plus that German player can only call one King Tiger tank. My suggestion is that the Soviet can only have one or two IS-2 at a time, and if the German player lost its Tiger or King Tiger, they are allowed to call another one.
6. The Soviet T-34/76. As I record this tank's main gun is not as impressive as his counterparts. And the T-34/76 and the T-34/85 has no difference in the combat effectiveness. So we want to suggest that we reduce the T-34/76's AT CE or anti-building CE by 1.
7. About the panzer elite, it is a bit weak for players who did not choose the anti-tank tactics. The panzer elite is very fast and powerful in the earlier game. So they can pressurise the enemy and corner them. But if you fail to do so, you will have hard time stop enemy tanks since most of their units are lightly armored. And you have to purchase 2 tank in the same time which cost you 1000 unit of supply. So we suggest that we enable the elephant tanks for them in the later stage of the game.
Those are our suggestions based on out gaming experience, hope everyone agree with us. And we are open for feed back as well. Thanks.
-
Hi, Joshua9. I partially agree with you.
(I hope the administrator can put this topic into the Red Army Suggestions section after this. After weeks of non-stopping online battling with human players in various maps, I have organised some suggestions.)
The part I disagree with you is that the enemy snipers can easily take out my teams in the building, and in a lot of map, the building is usually far away from the strategic point. So the garrison the buildings can not secure a point.
I have a few suggestions for the modification of the game to rebalance this great mod.
1: We all agree that the Soviet is a weak faction in the earlier stage of the game. The main reason for this is that the Soviet has the weakest infantry at the beginning. Mr Black bishop have told us that he is going to fix the issue of the conscripts. That is a great news, but I still suggest that the unarmed conscripts should be equiped with a Naggan revolver. No need. Conscripts are already decent troops. The only reason they seem so ineffective is the AI bug. Good players are able to micro them to mitigate the effect of the bad AI and can perform decently early game. They are still much weaker than volks though as intended. Also, it adds the Enemy at the Gates feeling of having unarmed troops running along which adds to the cinematic feel of the battles.
2: After the upgrade of the conscripts, all conscripts will be armed with a commissar equiped with a SMG, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. Now let us have a look at the Red Banner trooper (sorry, I can't remember the name). 6 men are all using the Mosin rifle, 1 man unarmed, total combat effectiveness against infantry is 2. As you can see, the upgraded conscripts are more powerful than the Red Banner trooper. Plus most importantly, the conscripts has cocktail and they only you 4 manpower to upkeep while the Red Banner trooper cost you 7. So in this case, who would train the Red Banner trooper? Therefore, I suggest that we increase the base of the combat effectiveness of the Red Banner trooper by 1 as they are the actual Soviet infantry, not untrained 3 weeks wonderer like the conscipts. But in the same many, we reduce the effect of the upgrade by 1. So if you upgrade them with the PPsh-41, the CE only go up by 3 (but only 3 men of the team will receive the SMG, not all of them). And if you upgrade them with the DP-27, the CE only go up by 1, but with the supressing capability like the Bren. Plus, they are the only basic infantry without AT capability, I was thinking that at least we can give them a cocktail. The "stats" you are quoting from the UI are meaningless. Conscript mosins do 7 damage I believe and have quite poor accuracy compared to strelky mosins which do about 12 damage I think and have much better accuracy. They are (will be) used for different purposes and are not comparable. Strelky will be your mainline infantry though conscripts will be a cheap flanking force that will be immune to suppression when upgraded, giving more strength against MGs. Strelky weapon upgrades are powerful and in line with other faction's brens and MP40s etc.
3. And the shock guards CE should also be higher than a Red Banner trooper since they are the elite, at list they should be a equivalent of the panzer trooper, so we can upgrade their CE by 1. Otherwise, everyone will just go and train the Red Banner trooper, becaue they can by upgraded with SMG and make their CE up to 6. And it doesn't make any sence that an elite unit like them, only one man has a SMG. Do you think we can give another one or two of them a PPs-43? Guards are a powerful unit because they have tools at their disposal against any threat. Their rifles are quite decent but they are not assault troops like PPSh strelky. They are more like vetted PGs with lots of upgrades. Effective at most ranges, fairly easy to blob but also flexible and able to perform multiple roles like clearing buildings, or using AT nades. They are extremely good for their price.
4. About the tank hunters. They cost us 8 manpowers to upkeep, yet they only has a embarrass AT CE of 2. I normally let one team of conscripts go along with the AT cannon. Because a conscript team and an AT gun only cost me 7 manpower and they are much more powerful than the tank hunters in every espects. So in this issue I have 2 suggestions:
(1) the tank hunters only cost us 4 manpower to upkeep, one man per manpower. By manpower, I assume you mean population. Population isn't really a balancing factor since it doesn't mean anything unless you're capped, which only really happens in compstomps/bridge maps. That said, I have no idea why Zerst decided changing population was a good idea.
(2) the size of the tank hunters are reduced into a 2 men team, cost us 4 manpowers to upkeep. This way, it is much earlier for players to organise.
5. In the later stage of the game, the Soviet is too powerful for all factions. Its IS-2 can put an King Tiger into shame. Plus that German player can only call one King Tiger tank. My suggestion is that the Soviet can only have one or two IS-2 at a time, and if the German player lost its Tiger or King Tiger, they are allowed to call another one. IS-2s are expensive and extremely ineffective against infantry. Panthers may be slightly outclassed by them in a slugfest but are more mobile and better against infantry. Axis AT in general is better than the other factions so use PaKs and shreks to support your units when you fight tank battles. KT and panther will easily put 2 IS-2s to shame.
6. The Soviet T-34/76. As I record this tank's main gun is not as impressive as his counterparts. And the T-34/76 and the T-34/85 has no difference in the combat effectiveness. So we want to suggest that we reduce the T-34/76's AT CE or anti-building CE by 1. I don't know what this CE is that you keep mentioning. T-34/76 is rather ineffective against anything heavier than P4.
7. About the panzer elite, it is a bit weak for players who did not choose the anti-tank tactics. The panzer elite is very fast and powerful in the earlier game. So they can pressurise the enemy and corner them. But if you fail to do so, you will have hard time stop enemy tanks since most of their units are lightly armored. And you have to purchase 2 tank in the same time which cost you 1000 unit of supply. So we suggest that we enable the elephant tanks for them in the later stage of the game. Elefants will be in the OH. Panzer elite has always had a weakness to early light vehicles. Use the AT halftrack, marders or infantry halftracks in combination with shreks. AT half kills the mobility which is the greatest threat, marders do loads of damage but are easily flanked (that's what shreks are used for) and shreks in infantry halftracks are good for chasing down the vehicles on low health, since they can still fire on the move from the back of the HT.
Those are our suggestions based on out gaming experience, hope everyone agree with us. And we are open for feed back as well. Thanks.
-
Hi Flanker,
thanks for the reply, but my complaint was that Russia seems overpowered to me, not underpowered.
godlikedennis,
if you're getting in some good games, is there a chance that you can post a couple replays? My frustration could be out of making some bad choices as wehrmacht, rather than imbalance, but it would be nice to know what the good choices are.
-
What's your RO name?
I would gladly play you anytime since it's getting more and more difficult to get games (in my timezone). Unfortunately most of my games have been in the next patch version testing for the devs so I have no replays saved but there should be at least a couple around in the replays section. Chancellor plays T2 terror well, look up his. There might even be a couple games against me.
My preferred strat against SU is T2-T4 blitz, substituting grens for stormtroopers. I find T3 underwhelming.
-
would be glad to play at some point...name is josh9 in game...i'm pretty mediocre though...me and my friend play at about the same level...russia is just breaking that balance for us right now
-
the good news is I keep walking back my frustration with russia as we play more.
I think I was jumping to t2 too early(about the time I do against america) and that transition was giving russia the field advantage he needed to make that early t-90 a guaranteed posibility, and then it was just a choice between it or the earlier sniper, both of which really make me scramble.
Also, the straight jump to t2 seems really possible against russia, and halftracks really make their lives miserable early, not to mention 3 or 4 grens following.
I'm getting used to the damage the t-90 does. I think it should die slightly easier than it does now. it really seems to take a punishment, definitely seems to take more damage than a skirted m8, from my unscientific experience, which might be a reasonable trade-off if it were just anti-infantry, but it is also effective against pumas, and is horribly horribly effective against infantry. At the rate it takes to kill them, a couple fausts will not make it limp away, which means that if I don't already have some AT out when it hits, game is pretty much over.
I'm managing the tank hunter threat much better than I used to, so with their minor anti-infantry nerf to the ptrd, i'll probably be happy.
My new complaint is SU-85 and SU-100 armor. I'm cool with their front armor being really tough, but their side armor is also monsterous. my friend spammed about 4 of the su-100's and really did a number on everything i had. I'd gone t-3 with storms. after getting some vet for the misery he'd caused, he engaged my base, and my storms got to the side of a vet 2 Su-100, and were allowed to shoot it about 6 times, to negligable effect. I also had somebody shooting shreks at it from the other side, but probably hitting the front armor. I certainly could have used some paks, as they seem pretty effective against these vehicles, but I would expect the shreks to be a better counter.
Then there's that bleeping air-strike again. I had a protracted engagement with my friend on langres. We were both building tanks and losing them, which apparently was a great benefit to him because he wasn't getting too mauled on munitions upkeep. He literally used that air-strike 7 times that game, one after the other, after the other...its a much better ability than straffing run, and yet it costs the same ammount. I would appreciate a munitions cost of about 200 per use(though 225 would suit me better). it can be a game making ability, even in a single use, which is as it should be, but as a perpetual contribution, there's no challenge in it.
-
In short
T-90 has M-8 armor and similar (not sure if it is the same) HP. Youre right when saing that you need any kind of gun to counter them becouse its really hard to hit a moving M-8 with a Shreck.
SU-85 and SU-100 both have Hetzer armor. That makes them really weak to rear hits, even to upgunned Pumas but OP to Stugs and Marders. This will probably change since the axis dont have much fast flanking tanks
-
Agree with Paciat. SU-85s aren't as good as they once were since their damage output was balanced and their armour isn't so great. Shreks actually are the counter. SU-100s won't be around next patch anyway.
The airstrike was, and always will be, imbalanced. It's simply too powerful to use, even once. The cooldown was broken in one of the recent patches too I believe, allowing it to be used again almost straight away.
-
cool, so if nothing else, there will no longer be su-100(happy day),
and they will probably fix the cool-down on the air-strike, if not the munitions cost.
I can look forward to those changes
-
thanks guys for replying me, especially for the Dennis to anwsering me our questions. But there is one more thing I want to know is I could not understand this part of your anwser to well since my English problem: "Population isn't really a balancing factor since it doesn't mean anything unless you're capped, which only really happens in compstomps/bridge maps. That said, I have no idea why Zerst decided changing population was a good idea."
So we still voting for the reduce of the population for the tank hunters.
Because it is really big disadvantage for us in a pop-caped game.
And to Joshua9:
What do you mean??!!!! I just left the forum for a few days and you are voting to deleted the SU-100. Did we do anything to you in the past life??? The Soviet is weaking enough for the first half of the game especially their lacks of AT capability.
-
By no means Soviets are weak. Whether the SU-100 is going to be kept or discarded isn't going to be discussed here. For now wait until the next patch is released and then express your opinion after reading it's changelog.
There's no reason to discuss uncommitted changes.
-
...
"Population isn't really a balancing factor since it doesn't mean anything unless you're capped, which only really happens in compstomps/bridge maps. That said, I have no idea why Zerst decided changing population was a good idea."
...
Basically I mean that changing the pop cap doesn't REALLY balance a unit since in 1v1 balancing (the primary balance concern), pop cap is rarely an issue since you don't really come close to it often. The same can usually be said for 2v2AT as well, the other realm where balance is important.
-
And why is the Soviet tank hunters are using the British AT rifle??? The Soviet AT rifle is way better than the British one. The PTRS-41 can penetrate 25mm steel at the range of 500m. While the British BOY AT rifle can only penetrate 21mm (0.827 in) at 302m (330yards).
-
Tank hunters will be getting their PTRD model soon.
-
And why is the Soviet tank hunters are using the British AT rifle??? The Soviet AT rifle is way better than the British one. The PTRS-41 can penetrate 25mm steel at the range of 500m. While the British BOY AT rifle can only penetrate 21mm (0.827 in) at 302m (330yards).
Because gameplay has priority over realism.
-
And why is the Soviet tank hunters are using the British AT rifle??? The Soviet AT rifle is way better than the British one. The PTRS-41 can penetrate 25mm steel at the range of 500m. While the British BOY AT rifle can only penetrate 21mm (0.827 in) at 302m (330yards).
Because gameplay has priority over realism.
Indeed, no matter if they are using BOYS AT rifle or PTRD-41, their stats will remain the same. Only the model will be updated.
-
Gameplay MUST have the priority over realism, except in campaign levels, which I am sure the mod team said they will try to work on it.
Other than that, I agree that the russians are not weak. You need to rush-tech to either T34s or Guards as your core, strekly as your support, Penal/conscripts as your cannon fodder, and the IS as your Ultra-powerful tank. If he gets you early game, well, its the same as the US getting the Wher early game
-
the IS as your Ultra-powerful tank
T34/85 is actually much more combat-capable than the IS-2, and is cheaper btw, in my opinion!
-
A single T-34/85 is actually more expensive than an IS-2. But for mass production, I agree T-34s are better than IS-2s.
-
Uhh Josh, word of advice. Never post your email on a public forum. You should go back and edit it out.
uuh a moderator already did
-
After I mentioned it.
-
I personally don't think T34/85's are worth all the fuel you have to spend to get them.
Often games don't get to the point where you can mass produce them, making them a gamble.
We all know the SU-100's are what's needed to take out panthers, so what exactly is their place?
-
I recall someone saying, there will be no more SU-100 after the nearest patch :(
-
Don't know if in the next patch, but soon.
-
I recall someone saying, there will be no more SU-100 after the nearest patch :(
Because they are OP or because of gameplay? :P
-
then you could chancel the t34 85 also >:(
-
I recall someone saying, there will be no more SU-100 after the nearest patch :(
Because they are OP or because of gameplay? :P
Ofc gameplay is the reason xD.
-
then you could chancel the t34 85 also >:(
:o
Its like saing could you cancel PEs Panther Battle Group.
-
then you could chancel the t34 85 also >:(
:o
Its like saing could you cancel PEs Panther Battle Group.
Please, no comparisons, Paciat. You know where this will end.. ;)
-
And why is the Soviet tank hunters are using the British AT rifle??? The Soviet AT rifle is way better than the British one. The PTRS-41 can penetrate 25mm steel at the range of 500m. While the British BOY AT rifle can only penetrate 21mm (0.827 in) at 302m (330yards).
Because gameplay has priority over realism.
Indeed, no matter if they are using BOYS AT rifle or PTRD-41, their stats will remain the same. Only the model will be updated.
Yes, I know. I was just wonder why would the Red Army use the British weapon that's all. And could we suggest to reduce the tank hunter into 2 man and with 4 population cost? This way it is easlier for people to manage. Other wise one AT gun and plus one conscript team only cost 7 population while tank hunter cost 8. So not many people would train them.
And about the Guards. Could we still suggest to give them at least give the upgraded gurad one DP-27? Because using semis to pin the enemy down just doesn't make any sense. And about the garrison mode. Most of the infantries can not use their abilities while in garrison mode. It is not very realistic. We wise if we can throw a RPG-43 or a cocktail when a tank drive pass our building.
Thanks for your attention.
-
THs had the boys model because their PTRD model was not finished/working. Unless you want the THs carrying invisible weapons this is how it had to be.
Tell your suppressive fire comment to relic, who gave PE G43s the ability first. I don't see why a hail of bullets, no matter the source, wouldn't make soldiers dive for cover. G43s/SVTs make a pretty angry noise when fired quickly anyway.
SU-100 is being taken out (probably) because it is hardly ever used in a real game. There is very little point in it when SU-85s already penetrate everything and deal good damage. Another use might be found for it.
-
i find rifles more devestating than machine-guns though. Machine-Guns have high recoil due to their firing speed. If the gunman is very accurate it won't matter much anyway :P
@GodlikeDennis: *throws nerf darts*
-
And the sound of the PTRS-41 is not correct. I have found one on youtube
PTRS anti-tank rifle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_ClWi27olA#)
Post Merge: March 27, 2011, 06:30:58 AM
Bug found, the Su-100 has no texture for some reason. The newest patch I mean. I have just been testing it and found that Su-100 is a snowwhite.
-
And the sound of the PTRS-41 is not correct. I have found one on youtube
Be pretty hard to sound like that the vid is in slow-mo :D
Also i'd like to point out thats a PTRS not a PTRD and they may be slight differences in their sounds to begin with.
-
SU-100 texture is a glitch to do with player colour. Vehicles are lighter or darker depending on the player. SU-100 will be removed soon anyway, but don't freak the fuck out because we have other stuff planned... we're not just going to remove it and leave it at that ::)
SU-100 will be back in the future, with a new model, probably as a reward for the ISU.
-
And the sound of the PTRS-41 is not correct. I have found one on youtube
No the current sound for the PTRS is good, your realistic PTRS sounds way too much like a howitser.
-
And the sound of the PTRS-41 is not correct. I have found one on youtube
No the current sound for the PTRS is good, your realistic PTRS sounds way too much like a howitser.
+1
Looks like an entire artillery regiment is firing at once!
Would be strange in COH!
-
Personally I'd like to see less SU-85 / 100's running around and more T34's.
I find myself not going for T34's (especially T34/85's) because they just cost too much fuel to unlock, and then I find them lacking.
I'd really like to see them as the go to unit for mid / end Russian games, but they're comparable to a Sherman and cost a lot of cost fuel to unlock.
I'd almost rather they be nerfed a little and made cheaper / easier to unlock. So that the Russians can use them in numbers as they did historically.
Just a thought..
-
Just make the SUs harder to lay hands on, or nerf t-34 series, and you're about done, since germans will eat you right away.
IMO, to insrease the usage of t-34 you'd have to make 'em harder against paks, which is something no one is going to do.
-
And the sound of the PTRS-41 is not correct. I have found one on youtube
Be pretty hard to sound like that the vid is in slow-mo :D
Also i'd like to point out thats a PTRS not a PTRD and they may be slight differences in their sounds to begin with.
The first fire is in normal mode and the second fire is in slow mode. And by the way, that is another thing I am pushing ---- to have PTRS instead of PTRD ;)
Post Merge: March 28, 2011, 04:14:06 AM
SU-100 will be back in the future, with a new model, probably as a reward for the ISU.
Great news!
-
I disagree that T34s are unimpressive. I actually think they are by far the best mass production tank in the game. They have decent health, good speed, are effective at all targets with an excellent main gun against tanks and are inexpensive (after teching). They are far better than the comparable shermans, P4s and croms.
-
They're (t-34s) good, and impressive :), but it's not about impression, really, - it's all about cost/effectiveness. This way, most people find it better to use SUs, that are a lot cheaper and a little less or equally effective, if used in a proper combination with other troops.
-
Exactly right, the T34's are a fine tank, but the cost of your first T34/85 is the same as an IS2.
Now it's all very well for them to be cost effective once you've built your 4th or 5th one, but who really gets to that point in games?
By the time you're using heavy tanks, a PE player has popped a Jadtiger and their first panthers. At that point SU100's are what you need to damage them and IS2's to soak up the hits.
There is no niche for the T34/85. As I said before, I'd rather see it nerfed a bit (because I do agree they're quite decent) but out in the field earlier and in greater numbers.
-
"Now it's all very well for them to be cost effective once you've built your 4th or 5th one, but who really gets to that point in games?"
I do, I am known for my tank formation with 6 or more tanks. With the support of 1 upgraded conscript team, 2 Red Banner trooper team, 1 shock guard team, 2 engineer team and possibly 3 Katiusha depend on the situation.
No one ever surive ;)
-
"Now it's all very well for them to be cost effective once you've built your 4th or 5th one, but who really gets to that point in games?"
I do, I am known for my tank formation with 6 or more tanks. With the support of 1 upgraded conscript team, 2 Red Banner trooper team, 1 shock guard team, 2 engineer team and possibly 3 Katiusha depend on the situation.
No one ever surive ;)
Sounds like a "no pop-cap" game, since that's like about all the force you can field out in a regular one. Moreover, I think, it wouldn't even fit into standard population limit.
-
true, it is in a no pop-cap game. If there is a pop-cap I would only have like 5 tanks, 1 Katiusha and no conscript and 1 red banner troop and may or may not have the shock guard.
-
This post has been temporarilly remove for editing by the author . please visit us later.
Enigma
-
That's it. That's the last three-pages long post from that guy, that I've read till the end. ;D
-
haha I agree, No pop cap and rants about the mod don't really address my point.
I think EF is absolutely fantastic, I don't think even Relic would have done as good a job. I think the balance is just about right, I just reiterate my point about T34/85's not really have a niche when you consider how much they cost to unlock.
Maybe it should be dropped to 35 fuel / 100 munitions for T34/85? :P
-
Flanker 1949,
You raise many good points and valid issues. The real problem is not that the Sovs are too weak. The problem is that EF is not a finished and polished product. It is a work in progress. Many play issues revolve around ideas that improve CoH play not EF per say. Keep in mind that the game you are really playing is Rock, Paper, Scissors. This is complicated by the prerequisite that the game platform has to work for both AI and MP modes. MP games are thrilling, fun, ego-trips (when you win): but provoke a call to arms to nerf/buff the game to death when players get frustrated. the EF community respond to these battle cries very rapidly. The result is often quick fixes that work to the detriment of the game platform long term. This Chaotic response is normal and not unreasonable; but it is counter productive to rational design process. If player reaction causes too much Chaos the development process will reach a resonance stage that could destroy either the game or the Development Teams ability to complete the process. We play the game to have fun and for instant gratification. Design and Development is work and results in delayed gratification. The customers ie players are always right, a very thorny problem indeed! If you have neither time or inclination to contribute to the design effort, fine have fun. But you can still contribute to the Development effort by throwing some money at it. A finished version of EF will still be cheaper than a new THC product and more responsive to your desires than the profit motivated requirements of Relic. Sorry for the diatribe but psychology and Rock, Paper Scissors go hand in hand.
Flanker1949, are you still awake? Your post indicates you have a solid appreciation for the Soviet Tech Tree and R&D possibilities; and you use a cost/effectiveness approach. Since you show some inclination to crunch numbers; analyze the effects of mp/tick maintenance costs on the number and type of units you can field in your OB. I think this will aid you in prioritizing R&D expenditures. Let me guess, you are studying Engineering at the University?
You have received many excellent ideas in the replies to your initial post. Let me be one more. I believe your evaluation of the Tech trees and R&D options to parallel my own.
My take on EF is that the developers would like this to be a ground sloggers game. Since every challenge must have a counter look to your infantry and support troops for solutions. Lead with your nose. Get that command squad out early. Get him vetted.
use the command squad and sharpshooter artillery call ins to interdict the enemy armor. So what if you don't destroy them. It only means that their AFVs will be of lesser quality when you do pop out that T34/85 or ISU2. The OPs and Ambulance can furnish mobility to your infantry. Stage the Zis to the OP nearest your next objective. Retreat your Battered assault forces to the Zis, reinforce at OP and attack when concentrated. Infantry and support counters.
The WM support vet strategy may pay dividends to adapt to the Sovs. Cheap Builders with ROKs and hardened combat engineers can be fielded much earlier than enhanced Strelky and Guards. Free satchel charges too! The MG? Ahh there's the rub. Where can you get a 1910/30 Maxim when you need one?
http://www.gamereplays.org/companyofheroes/portals.php?show=page&name=stratguide-supportvet (http://www.gamereplays.org/companyofheroes/portals.php?show=page&name=stratguide-supportvet)
One of your posts mentioned MG pits. Nikulturni! No cost effectiveness at all. Katyushkas - The Bolshoi! Excellent cost effectiveness. Try the T90 AA for an MG unit.
On to Berlin Tovarich!
Wow :D Thanks for your reply and good advice. It is been helpful. I hope we can play together online sometimes. My in-game-name is Zhenlin. And I study Management and Economy in University not Engineering. If I was studing engineering I would probably have at least tried to modify this mod by adding new models myself. ;)
-
haha I agree, No pop cap and rants about the mod don't really address my point.
I think EF is absolutely fantastic, I don't think even Relic would have done as good a job. I think the balance is just about right, I just reiterate my point about T34/85's not really have a niche when you consider how much they cost to unlock.
Maybe it should be dropped to 35 fuel / 100 munitions for T34/85? :P
I agree on all points comrade
EF is best mod cant thank enough to dev team
and t34/85 take a lifetime to tech to lower cost would be balanced and appreciated
I suggest a 25pt muni decrease MINIMUM for t34/85 tech and 10 fuel atleast
Its hard to come up with 50fuel and 150muni floating around in competitive games to upgun t34s
-
haha I agree, No pop cap and rants about the mod don't really address my point.
I think EF is absolutely fantastic, I don't think even Relic would have done as good a job. I think the balance is just about right, I just reiterate my point about T34/85's not really have a niche when you consider how much they cost to unlock.
Maybe it should be dropped to 35 fuel / 100 munitions for T34/85? :P
I agree on all points comrade
EF is best mod cant thank enough to dev team
and t34/85 take a lifetime to tech to lower cost would be balanced and appreciated
True, the best strategy game mod so far!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I've done some more testing and I think we're onto something.
I would be wary of dropping the fuel requirement too much, but then I don't want to see the first T34/85 costing the same as an IS2. I think a munitions reduction is absolutely necessary.
At this stage I would advocate for 50 / 125 (fuel/munitions) unless the tank is slightly nerfed. If the tank is slightly nerfed I'd be happy with 40 / 100.
Cheers guys! Keep up the fantastic work!
-
If a T-34 series need something, that would be not a nerf, but a slight buff to acceleration and deceleration to increase it's battle performance. That would be especially in time and quite adequate, with wehrmacht's pak AT buffs, some heavy tanks' cost reduction, and slight buffs to heavy armored support, that are coming with the "final patch", taken into account.
After all, it's just not good, that these values are the same as ones of a panther (a much, much heavier tank): it's these that make the battle, not the speed (which, in turn, is OK ATM, I guess).
-
If a T-34 series need something, that would be not a nerf, but a slight buff to acceleration and deseleration to increase it's battle performance.
After all, it's just not good, that these values are the same as ones of a panther (a much, much heavier tank): it's these that make the battle, not the speed (which, in turn, is OK ATM, I guess).
That was already done in 1.31 :).
-
If a T-34 series need something, that would be not a nerf, but a slight buff to acceleration and deseleration to increase it's battle performance.
After all, it's just not good, that these values are the same as ones of a panther (a much, much heavier tank): it's these that make the battle, not the speed (which, in turn, is OK ATM, I guess).
That was already done in 1.31 :).
It was, but only to make it equal, somehow, while IMHO, T-34 should accelerate/decelerate faster.
-
Perhaps a compromise is 50 fuel 100 munitions. (For T34/85 unlock).
It still means the first T34/85 costs you 135 fuel, but at least it doesn't gimp your munitions.
-
Game-wise, and historically as well, there should not be many t-34/85s appearing, until some decent amount of panthers (starting at 3) hits the field.
So, if I were to suggest some reduction in the munition part of the cost (which I'm not sure is right), I would have to confide, that there would appear a necessity in a proportional increase of fuel (times 1.5/2, or so of that munitions amount reduced) cost of the upgrade for the matter of halting (relatively) early T-34/85 spam.
However, there seems to be a need of some change in the approach of T-34/85 entering the game, since it is rarely possible to field any significant amount of these even as a response to massive panther force,- at that stage most people find it way more appropriate and significantly less of a burden to the economy to field one, or two IS-2s (that is if they aren't just spamming SUs right from the start).
The exception to that would be a break-through doctrine, where the upgrade allows fielding tanks for free, on fuel account. But even then, most will just call in ISU, and punch with it through the enemy ranks (provided some TH and a couple of AI squads are there to support it).
Thus ATM it seems, that T-34/85 ends up heavily underused, which is sad.
P.S.: All that is not some sort of a truth in the last instance, but just my view of the situation at the current state of affairs.
-
T34/85 is a fantastic tank, probably the best in the game overall, and doesn't really cost that much to tech to. 150MU doesn't matter because you're Soviets and 50FU is basically nothing. Wehr pays 80 for vet 2 tanks. People should stop complaining that the best tank in the game doesn't just fall into their hands.
-
Sigh, I am not some kid saying: "Gimme T34/85's so I can winzz the game plzzz."
I'm trying to make the point (and IJoe seems to agree) that T34/85's are missing a place in real games. Theoretically they're great, and historically maybe we shouldn't see as many, but the point we're making is there is little reason to pay 135 fuel for your first one when you can get an IS2 instead.
Which is why I said I'm even happy to see the firepower reduced a little if it means they cost less to unlock. Right now I'd rather an IS2 and use the 150 munitions on the other million more useful things than go for T34/85's. (Which is a shame because they're such a nice tank).
I'd just like to see them being a staple in a soviet tank strategy rather than something that is best overlooked.
-
Sigh, I am not some kid saying: "Gimme T34/85's so I can winzz the game plzzz."
I'm trying to make the point (and IJoe seems to agree) that T34/85's are missing a place in real games. Theoretically they're great, and historically maybe we shouldn't see as many, but the point we're making is there is little reason to pay 135 fuel for your first one when you can get an IS2 instead.
Which is why I said I'm even happy to see the firepower reduced a little if it means they cost less to unlock. Right now I'd rather an IS2 and use the 150 munitions on the other million more useful things than go for T34/85's. (Which is a shame because they're such a nice tank).
I'd just like to see them being a staple in a soviet tank strategy rather than something that is best overlooked.
+1 point very valid, this couldnt be more true and its always ashame when a unit is not used because of some fault in pricing that is correctable
thats why i just mass t34/76s not really a reason to upgun them, when u can go is2 for same price
-
thats why i just mass t34/76s not really a reason to upgun them, when u can go is2 for same price
Most players worth there salt as russians know that 2 T34/85 are actually just as effective as 2 ISU-122 because of the superior anti infantry and mobility. ISUs are nearly as sluggish as churchills, all they got is armour.
-
IS2 also requires light tankovy 55FU which you are overlooking. Taken from the perspective of someone who has yet to build their tank depot:
IS2 T34/85 Panther *assume already in skirmish phase
55 FU for TD 55FU for TD (55) 50FU for assault phase (50)
85FU for heavy tanks 85FU for heavy tanks (140) 50FU for battle phase (100)
55FU for light tanks (140) 50FU for T34 upgun (190) 50FU for PC (150)
135FU for tank (275) 85FU for tank (275) 110FU for tank (260)
135 for second tank (410) 85FU for 2nd tank (360) 110FU for 2nd tank (370)
Therefore pricewise 2 T34/85s<2 Panthers<2 IS2s which matches their combat effectiveness. The difference only increases as more tanks are produced. Realistically, the Wehr player must research skirmish phase and build a kriegs barracks which cost a total of 60FU while a Soviet player should research at least 1 of the support barracks upgrades which is 35FU. This creates a difference of 25FU which puts the first panther 10FU later than both IS2 and T-34/85. Both the IS2 and Panther cost a significant amount more MP than the T34 as well.
Personally I would only build IS2s if I had rushed light vehicles, in which case I already have the light tanks upgrade. Any situation involving teching up from a support barracks build and I would only research heavy tanks and start pumping out T34s.
-
Your first two T34 85's cost manpower, 220 fuel and 150 munitions. You can't tell me that those resources aren't better used on something else?
I just love the tank so much, I want them to be more worthy of use :)
Let me just say something else, which is why these "tables" or crunching "numbers" is of little use...
You're in the heat of a fight, and you have some fuel to spend. The opposition already has panthers on the field. Are you honestly going to go go for a T34/85 upgrade, then build a T34/85 with your 135 fuel or are you going to go straight for your shiny new IS2?
You talk about the ability to build more T34/85's at a discount rate, but at the end of the day you can only build one tank at a time, and when we need the firepower on the ground you're going to go for that IS2. At least the IS2 can get straight into the action with more hope of surviving. We all know a lone T34/85 isn't going to survive long against even 1 panther.
So can we stop looking at this from a mathematical point of view and instead look at a "real game" situation, because don't forget, time is also money and I know i'd rather have an IS2 now than maybe 2 T34's in the "future."
-
Munitions are negligible in the Soviet faction. 2 T34/85s cost less FU than 2 IS2s as well as vast amounts less manpower (especially since the light tanks upgrade costs around 200 from memory). Just the tanks cost 1200 MP whereas 2 T34s only cost 760. Therefore, T34s are better in a support barracks build where manpower is spent on support weapons, strelky and probably guards since you now have all 3 buildings. IS2s are more appropriate in a fast vehicle build since you would be more fuel restricted than manpower restriced and would likely be using (personally I would) sturmovie ingenery since they are MP cheap and can vent your spare munis. They are excellent troops that wouldn't require support barracks and are a counter to bunkers and paks that would be your LVs weakness. They can also repair all your vehicles easily.
EDIT: Alright, in a real game situation I would rather T34s even more. Mobility and anti-infantry effectiveness are key. If he had panther popped out I would have built AT guns as the counter rather than try a last minute tech to tanks. Also, your time argument is flawed. A T34 only requires the one upgrade but IS2s require both. Therefore, in the time taken to research both upgrades I have already built one T34 and have a 2nd on the way.
Your first two IS2s cost 1200MP, 270FU. You can't tell me those resources aren't better used on something else? Oh wait, I'd rather T-34s.
-
1.does anybody bother with su-100 upgrade? is the extra armor and penetration all that necessary?
2. whats better penetration on panthers the upgun t34/85 or the SU 85?
3.another question for the pros what wins in a straight shootout p4 or t34/76?
-
1) No, that's why it's being removed/moved
2) The SU-85 ALMOST always penetrates panthers at every range. Only at long range there's around a 2% chance to not penetrate. T34/85 only penetrates around 43% of the time at long range.
3) T34/76 beats a P4 IMO. P4s sometime have a the odd bounce off against sherman armour. It's very close though.
-
Well, I not God, like Dennis, - I could be wrong. ;D ;D
That post was to describe my observations and the mood they bring. Done without some deep analysis, it might contain some flaws (major and minor).
Now, back to tanks.
What do you, people, think: should the T-34 series have a greater (slightly) acceleration and deceleration than that of panthers?
Put aside history books, think game-wise.
I, personally, think they should, since these parameters are what is required for maneuvering during battle encounters, and lighter tanks should have some preference in that over the heavy ones.
-
IMO they are fine as it. They should have by now the same acc/dec than panthers.
-
IMO they are fine as it. They should have by now the same acc/dec than panthers.
That's exactly, what I'm talking about: they have THE SAME PARAMETERS AS PANTHERS, considering acceleration/deceleration, which, in my opinion, is not all that good, really.
-
Panthers are very mobile tanks. They have much better acc/deceleration than P4s or shermans. If fits in their role as a tank hunter. T34s still have a higher max speed I believe, so if they have the same mobility as panthers as well they should be very fast tanks now.