For the future patch that balances other factions.

[Kolaris]

For reference, there was no smoke added to Strafe and the Delay is 1 second, without anything to alert the opponent that its been used.

Its basically just a tad bit harder to aim, but essentially the same exact Strafe as in 2.6.

There are a lot of points where I agree there was a problem, but feel the change to address it was very...off the mark.

The one thing I disagree with is that Defensive Bunkers needed that nerf. Like Basileus says, that was back in 2.301 and in the early days of 2.4/2.6 when the meta-game was still adapting. They go down easy to 105's and Democharges same as regular bunkers.

[Paciat]

3- 2.301 Pak was OK. Why not revert to it instead? 3 Camoed shots BUT only the first gets the bonuses. Noone was complaining about the Pak back then, so why not go for something proven?

I was complaining that germans with their ninja packs, defensive bunkers and offmap arti were far better at forming a defensive line than Engineer UK emplacements.

4- Pioneer changes break the basic formula of the game and the consistency of the Wehr faction. I can understand why you did it, but I'd rather see it addressed through more "indirect" ways and defo not like that

Are you a piospammer? Than I hate you.
Pios didnt loose anything. They gain bettlefield repair at lvl 2 so you can repair early pumas under fire.

6- Marder: no, No, NO!!! The Marder is essentially PE’s AT gun! It’s not a tank God damn it and it cannot be used like one. It was always meant to work like that (An AT gun on wheels). I’d really like to have a word or two with the guys that gave you feedback about balancing >:<

All AT guns have weels for transport. But Marders are faster (max speed, not rotation) than tanks so they should used differently.

Again, was it THAT bad that you had to address it?

Dont understand posts like that.
People complained, and devs changed it.

1-   Stuart: reduced dmg modifier vs PE IHTs, ACs and Marders to 1.2. It currently has a modifier of 2 I think, acting as a WTF-pwn everything vehicle vs PE

The whole point of that Stuart is to counter halftrack/AC spam and MP44 blobs. You still can destroy a Stuart with Marders, Shrecks and PzIVs.

2-   Little john penetrates a bit too often the “very-heavy class” vehicles don’t you think?

Thats the point of a 5CP, 450MP vechicle upgrade "don’t you think? "

3-   I tried making dropping PE shrecks not turn into wehr shrecks. I failed, so I changed the PE shrecks’ stats to match the wehr ones, as I didn’t think that it was ok for brits and amis to be more effective than the creators of the weapon (In the case of PE ofc)

Is it OK to have doctrinal double shrecks and AT infantry weapons that cost no ammo and are not doctrinal?

[BasileusHotshot]

4- Pioneer changes break the basic formula of the game and the consistency of the Wehr faction. I can understand why you did it, but I'd rather see it addressed through more "indirect" ways and defo not like that

Are you a piospammer? Than I hate you.
Pios didnt loose anything. They gain bettlefield repair at lvl 2 so you can repair early pumas under fire.

I’m more of a PE player, but I’d like to consider myself objective with all factions. What I have in mind when implementing changes, is to make sure that this was a mistake by the devs, not something they did on purpose. Things that the devs did on purpose, I’m only changing if there’s a general consensus that they are too up/op. For example, in mod, I added a 0.9 modifier of flamers vs soldier armor. I don’t agree with the change, but since so many people were complaining about flamers vs soldiers, I implemented this minor change nevertheless. I also tried switching the order of Glider HQ and mandos HQ for Brits in order to give em mgs early to better counter piospam and although my fellow “colleagues” like that change, I voted to reverted, again cos it was breaking away too much from something that was obviously done on purpose. Hope I gave you to understand my reasoning behind what I’m posting, cos if you end up making so many changes, you’ll eventually lose some people’s support and the community will shrink, leading to an unsuccessful project.

6- Marder: no, No, NO!!! The Marder is essentially PE’s AT gun! It’s not a tank God damn it and it cannot be used like one. It was always meant to work like that (An AT gun on wheels). I’d really like to have a word or two with the guys that gave you feedback about balancing >:<

All AT guns have weels for transport. But Marders are faster (max speed, not rotation) than tanks so they should used differently.

I’d rather have 1 atgun than 2 marders. Seriously. Marders were a bit OP in 2.301 cos of the lockdown los bonus that was taken away from them in 2.6. Now they need a dedicated spotter to work correctly, something that the PE lack (Which is why I agreed to the los increase of PE capping units) In any case, an Atgun is cheaper, more difficult to target and can be remanned. If Marders SHOULD be used diffirently, then they should have different stats, to which I disagree. This change is VERY bad seriously.

Again, was it THAT bad that you had to address it?

Dont understand posts like that.
People complained, and devs changed it.
Copy-pasted: I have in mind when implementing changes, is to make sure that this was a mistake by the devs, not something they did on purpose. Things that the devs did on purpose, I’m only changing if there’s a general consensus that they are too up/op. If people complained, then I guess I’ll have to pass. I just didn’t happen to witness any of these complains when I was asking for feedback for myself, which is why I posted what I posted.

1-   Stuart: reduced dmg modifier vs PE IHTs, ACs and Marders to 1.2. It currently has a modifier of 2 I think, acting as a WTF-pwn everything vehicle vs PE

The whole point of that Stuart is to counter halftrack/AC spam and MP44 blobs. You still can destroy a Stuart with Marders, Shrecks and PzIVs.
In theory you’re right. Practically it just doesn’t work like that since you always need 2! kinds of AT defense at an given time to be secure. You just try it with a friend: The stuart currently rapes ¾ of the vehicles in PE’s arsenal acting like a light tank with a big gun, not representative of its price or its time of arrival in the game.

2-   Little john penetrates a bit too often the “very-heavy class” vehicles don’t you think?

Thats the point of a 5CP, 450MP vechicle upgrade "don’t you think? "
No I don’t, but I won’t insist either, since I’m getting mixed reactions with regards to this thing.

3-   I tried making dropping PE shrecks not turn into wehr shrecks. I failed, so I changed the PE shrecks’ stats to match the wehr ones, as I didn’t think that it was ok for brits and amis to be more effective than the creators of the weapon (In the case of PE ofc)

Is it OK to have doctrinal double shrecks and AT infantry weapons that cost no ammo and are not doctrinal?

Double shrecks have a quite high chance of dropping. Isn’t always good IMHO. No ammo option is paid in the form of higher MP cost. How many players prefer the latter option anyway? I’m watching like 1-2/replays a day and everyone (As I do BTW) is preferring the muni cost rather than pay extra MP.

Couple of extra things that I forgot in my previous post:
1-   I think it’s fair for troops inside a Bren to take dmg just like PGs inside an IHT.
2-   Some other bugs that can’t remember of right now. I guess I’ll make an extra post later
Post Merge: August 03, 2010, 02:45:16 AMROFL I messed up the quoting in my post above. Can't be bothered to change it. I think it's still readable and understandable right?

[bastex]

wow gotta love the fact u call the 1v1 egosentric bastards "the pro's" the roo isnt op bcouse it has 1 little mg
its nothing whout inf that costs 300 / 450 mp a squad
in the end u will have a vehicel that will cost  1290 mp 175 ammo and 10 fuel atm pure on u can build 4 pack of that will easely own that.

but i agree whit the most of the ppl the roo does not fit in company of heroes just like the infantry ht
 

[GodlikeDennis]

No, that's a foolish statement. You have the infantry already and they don't die with the kang. Ergo, their cost is not important in the calculation.

[bastex]

well atm u lose 50% of the infantry in a roo soo u better count that in if u want to nerf the roo if they pop out of a roo make it so u can't retreat for 5 sec

[GodlikeDennis]

Actually you only lose 25% from Roos. Good players eject before the thing dies anyway.

[Seeme]

And leave the poor man in the Roo to die 

[GodlikeDennis]

We have no pity for that man.

[AbhMkh]

Allright thts enough with the roo , i wish every brit vehicle had a 17 pounder on it and could tear  apart any german armor

[GreenApple]

Well, I have another suggestion.
It's about the Commandostree.
All know the left Commandotree has a weird order.
Commandos => Tetrach => Commando HQ (So, no one use the Commando HQ)

What do you think about:
Commandos => Commando HQ => Tetrach? or
Commando HQ => Commandos => Tetrach? or
Commando HQ => Tetrach => Commandos?

Let us find the order, where every item will be used (mostly)


I would recommend Commando HQ => Tetrach => Commandos, because the Commando HQ support your units in early-/midgame, the Tetrach would be to late as last item, and the Commandos can be used evrytime early-/mid-/lategame.

[AbhMkh]

No the Commando Hq should be the first on the right , whereas commandos can be placed after tht 1 CP ability ,


Hq>tht voice decoding ability>artillery: left

! cp ability>commandos>tetrach: right

[Paciat]

What do you think about:
Commandos => Commando HQ => Tetrach? or
Commando HQ => Commandos => Tetrach? or
Commando HQ => Tetrach => Commandos?

Let us find the order, where every item will be used (mostly)


I would recommend Commando HQ => Tetrach => Commandos, because the Commando HQ support your units in early-/midgame, the Tetrach would be to late as last item, and the Commandos can be used evrytime early-/mid-/lategame.

Great idea.
I would also lower CPs. 1CP for HQ and 1CP for Tetrarch so that Tetratch would still cost 5CPs.
It would be also great if Tetrarch gliders could produce Commando jeeps (PE campaign).

[Blackbishop]

What do you think about:
Commandos => Commando HQ => Tetrach? or
Commando HQ => Commandos => Tetrach? or
Commando HQ => Tetrach => Commandos?

Let us find the order, where every item will be used (mostly)


I would recommend Commando HQ => Tetrach => Commandos, because the Commando HQ support your units in early-/midgame, the Tetrach would be to late as last item, and the Commandos can be used evrytime early-/mid-/lategame.

Great idea.
I would also lower CPs. 1CP for HQ and 1CP for Tetrarch so that Tetratch would still cost 5CPs.
It would be also great if Tetrarch gliders could produce Commando jeeps (PE campaign).

I would prefer to be:

Left : Commandos->Tetrarch->Ultra decription
Right: Glider HQ->Radio Triangulation->Arty

And I hope that Glider HQ can deploy those jeeps that paciat said, they should be for early game, like US ones . Now I remember that Brits use in campaign a commando sniper, but it's not likely they'll give that to Brits for balance reasons.

[GreenApple]

So, we don't wanna have tons of new units, right?
Just change the doctrine order, I believe it was already discussed on GR.org. So it's not really really a new GreenApple-Suggestion.