PE mid game balance hole

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 912
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

PE mid game balance hole

Post by Sukin-kot (SVT) »

After having several matches as Panzer Elite I feel like the time gets way too rough for them at Tier 3 stage. Mainly because of 50 cal. vehicles that Brits now also have. Units like M20, Recce, Greyhound, Staghound and Quad cal. almost have an ultimate map control when they hit the field, as they effectively shred PE vehicles and deny any infantry movements. By the time motorpool is built, PE player is forced to have a sort of "stronghold" at the key area of the map - pak 38 + at least 28mm protected by a couple of inf squads, otherwise, he might get steamrolled by a single vehicle. I had several games as USA where I made a comeback with a single M20 annihilating the entire force. It is relatively easy to pull off, you just need to know where is pak and catch AT truck on a middle distance.

WH on the other hand does not have such problems due to several reasons. Volks are cheap, you can easily have 3 of them for the map control and caping, whereas for PE it costs at least 1000 MP to get 3 inf squads. Moreover, every man lost to 50 cal. is costly to reinforce. Secondly, WH vehicles are much better in terms of damage output as well as armor. Thirdly, even if WH player gets rushed he still has decent chances for making a comeback with Stugs that are great. Lastly, WH AT team has 2 schrecks, which essentially means that they have 50% more chance than PE AT squad to score a kill.

That being said, I think that PE is very underwhelming when it comes to early vehicles game. They completely lose map control and 50 cals. provide ultimate denial against half trucks and panzer grenadiers.

From my point of view, at least 2 minor changes have to be made in order to balance things out.

1) 28mm is terribly overpriced for its performance. In fact, the only thing its good at is killing jeeps, if even. I still saw occasions when it failed the first shot at 50 cal. jeep consequently getting exploded by a single 50 cal. burst. The fair price for it should be around 230 MP and 10 fuel I would say. Think about it, for 250 MP US gets 57mm truck with 75 range and camo, that decently scales up to the next phase killing panzers from the ambush. Camo would be pretty cool for 28mm as well, I can't see it being OP with such a low gun damage.

2) Pak 40 Puma either has to come earlier (after upgrading the vehicle support building) OR cost significantly less. Currently it is a truck that requires full tech up which cost almost like a multirole tank. It can be a comeback unit if allies push with vehicles hard, as well as a nice alternative to Panzer 4. Furthermore, Luft players will not have to rush for Panther so much. I personally don't like this strategy, but since Hetzer has gone from the doc, Panther is pretty much a must, as there are not so many aggressive AT instruments. Cheaper Puma will make it a bit more flexible, instead of building Panzer Factory asap, players would be able to focus more on doctrinal things, fielding extra luft squads for instance.
Last edited by Sukin-kot (SVT) on 11 Jan 2021, 13:46, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

Agreed on both points, thought it was just me that felt that way about the 28mm and AT 75mm puma so I figured it was just an L2P issue for me.

F31.58
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by F31.58 »

28mm perfomance relies only on level of the player's micro, since it's not about just jeeps, but it can actually penetrate anything up to 75mm shermans.
Pak40 halftrack can fight on the same level as sherman 76mm, so there is no really a problem. Can easily outmatch enemy armor with ambush position. For anything else, there is a henshel AT run, so panthers are not really needed

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 912
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Sukin-kot (SVT) »

F31.58 wrote:
11 Jan 2021, 09:36
28mm perfomance relies only on level of the player's micro, since it's not about just jeeps, but it can actually penetrate anything up to 75mm shermans.
Pak40 halftrack can fight on the same level as sherman 76mm, so there is no really a problem. Can easily outmatch enemy armor with ambush position. For anything else, there is a henshel AT run, so panthers are not really needed
28mm performance is poor for its price regardless of micro, it simply has no advantages. Low damage, no armor, no long-range, no camo. Period. People only use it because there are no alternatives.

I guess you somehow have Henchels unlocked right at the start of the game, would you please teach me that trick? Jokes aside, you completely missed the point. Puma needs to be cheaper\earlier available to counter mid-game tanks, when Henchels and Panthers are still far away in terms of CP. And no, Puma cannot fight on the same level as 76mm sherman, because it has no HE, no machinegun, and no armor. Though, you a right that it provides a guaranteed counter from ambush. However, its shining ends exactly at this point, it's still a truck that gets one shotted by every mid cannon. Thus being aggressive with it is a poor choice, considering that it costs almost as much as 76mm sherman.
Last edited by Sukin-kot (SVT) on 11 Jan 2021, 11:11, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

F31.58 wrote:
11 Jan 2021, 09:36
28mm perfomance relies only on level of the player's micro, since it's not about just jeeps, but it can actually penetrate anything up to 75mm shermans.
Pak40 halftrack can fight on the same level as sherman 76mm, so there is no really a problem. Can easily outmatch enemy armor with ambush position. For anything else, there is a henshel AT run, so panthers are not really needed
Micro doesn't help the 28mm when it misses a third of it's shots and deals relatively little damage. Compared to the allied equivalents its a waste of money, and for 5 more fuel and a decent amount less MP, you can get a 37mm HT which will be way more useful late game with it's nuke, back MG, and treadbreaker.

Pak40 pumas make no sense to build when they require the tank building, as you might as well just buy a tank in most cases. Both the marder and P4 F2 are more cost efficient, either by being cheaper or multirole (respectively). Having them available sooner wouldn't hurt, they're still a defensive unit so it isn't like PE would be able to push any sooner. They'd just be less reliant on relatively static AT defense (AT guns), allowing them to be more flexible in their positioning.

For a faction that is renowned for it's early dominance with light vehicles, the PE light vehicle roster is pretty underwhelming in the early game (at least on high res, the setting the devs stated to have balanced the game around). Sukin's suggestions would help change that. Alternatively, the 28mm could retain it's current price and get ambush, along with some other vehicles. More details on that idea can be found in this thread if you're interested: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4060 . Sukin's suggestion regarding the pak puma be good either way.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 912
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Sukin-kot (SVT) »

Good explanation CGarr, I support.

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4235
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

i agree on both points, specifically the one about PAK40 PUMA, makes no sense at all how it requires the Panzer factory. Specifically if Chaffe is becoming cheaper or earlier available, which i also support btw...

And 28mm could be cheaper, or get camo as CGAR suggested.
in contrast, CW already has Daimler which 1 shots the 28mm car.

F31.58
Posts: 76
Joined: 25 Sep 2020, 15:31

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by F31.58 »

You cannot really compare light tanks to an armored car.
Cgarr, 57mm AT halftrack from US side is yes, much better option, tho it has less mobility and firerate. Anyway, it's pretty useful in early game and only during it, might exploit vehicles with HE enabled pretty much using range advantage. In current meta no one goes for greyhound without upgrading .50cal first, as well as building Stuarts to not use it in HE mode mostly. Arguement about accury is not legit, as I can say that people using 28mm to snipe infantry models - stats required. Tho, I agree that there are similiar vehicles that makes not much sense.
If Puma will ever get a buff, it definetely should not be more cheap, than a non-mounted version of PAK, either not be dominating over allied light tanks, to not make them completly useless, if it should come more early of course. In any of those cases, puma can dominate from light tank stage to a medium tier - not a really good move, compared to allied factions. It will be a meta and anything vehicle you build as allies you will face only pak puma

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4294
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Warhawks97 »

I do have issues with the way PE is layed out in general. It has a big variety of good units but overall this faction feels far less swift and easy as WH does due to mentioned reasons.

Regarding vehicles i do use them by far less than i used to but thats not just a PE thing. US also has the problem with many vehicles being not really usefull aside from M20 and stuarts have low damage output and die quickly due to their tiny health pool.

In the new Beta the turret rotation of the 20 mm vehicles will be increased again. That in particular makes the PE once hopefully usefull again since the biggest issue was that they couldnt fire back before being killed by the unit they attempted to attack.


But Its true that PE in general is far less solid in mid vehicle game than other factions like WH is.
WH has quickly access to good Pumas, 75 mm HT and even Tank III in one doc before having any tank factory. But the tec is quick enough to get even stugs out in record time.


WH has well armored Pumas, PE doesnt except for the 75 mm Pak version that requires a tank factory.
WH is quickly access to nice stugs and PE doesnt have any.


Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:
11 Jan 2021, 07:41

1) 28mm is terribly overpriced for its performance. In fact, the only thing its good at is killing jeeps, if even. I still saw occasions when it failed the first shot at 50 cal. jeep consequently getting exploded by a single 50 cal. burst. The fair price for it should be around 230 MP and 10 fuel I would say. Think about it, for 250 MP US gets 57mm truck with 75 range and camo, that decently scales up to the next phase killing panzers from the ambush. Camo would be pretty cool for 28mm as well, I can't see it being OP with such a low gun damage.

2) Pak 40 Puma either has to come earlier (after upgrading the vehicle support building) OR cost significantly less. Currently it is a truck that requires full tech up which cost almost like a multirole tank. It can be a comeback unit if allies push with vehicles hard, as well as a nice alternative to Panzer 4. Furthermore, Luft players will not have to rush for Panther so much. I personally don't like this strategy, but since Hetzer has gone from the doc, Panther is pretty much a must, as there are not so many aggressive AT instruments. Cheaper Puma will make it a bit more flexible, instead of building Panzer Factory asap, players would be able to focus more on doctrinal things, fielding extra luft squads for instance.
1. The 28 mm can penetrate everything, including shermans, and has a good RoF.
I think that should be considered. If you manage to keep them alive till later stages of the game they proofed to be usefull in support of other AT weapons. Like cromwells that took a hit from a 50 mm Pak and flanked it. The 28 mm takes out such threats. Or you can counter crusader Tank spam and in the past scotts and stuart tanks. Or you can hunt down damaged enemie tanks.

The issue i have is its accuracy. Many times when i attempted to finsih of a daimler/jeep/recce i just kept failing and the enemie escaped or won the fight at the end.


I would put its cost down to 290 MP and 10 fuel and fix accuracy against jeeps and some vehicles a bit.
Camo would make this unit quite OP because it can be build very early, even in standard Res (even earlier than any cal 50 jeep) and it is very fast as well and has a better pen than 50 mm pak 38.


btw. The US 57 mm HT does not have 75 range, not even in ambush.



2. Yes, it should only require Logistic company upgrade.
Long time ago i made a post about Pumas. Idk why two WH docs get 3 variants of it while PE gets just one in reward for the 75 mm AT.

The four variants should be split among docs and Factions.


20 mm version (234/1): BK doc
50 mm Puma (234/2): TS doc
75 mm stubby version (234/3): Propaganda doc
75 mm Pak 40 Puma (234/4): Luftwaffe


Why so?
BK has early Tank III and IV´Stugs etc. So a 20 mm unit to support inf and for cheap quick reconassaince makes the most sense to me
TS doc could use a mid game vehicle that counters enemie mid game vehicles, having HE and smoke ability to support friently inf just makes sense.
Prop inf could use some nice big HE support vehicle for its soft inf.
Luftwaffe does not have a Hetzer. So a Puma that can keep up with the luftwaffes mobile forces that counters tanks makes sense to me.


Edit: Ultimately it would be nice to have Stug II in PE as well.

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 705
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by mofetagalactica »

I mean, you can always use the 37mm HT wich has the same ROF, higher accuracy, more damage and is cheaper MP wise (still usefull in late game thanks to his missile hability) why do you always want to use the 28mm?

As for 75mm Puma, man that thing is crazy with his magic evasion stats, want it earlier? ok sure, but check and revise his received accuracy stats.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

mofetagalactica wrote:
11 Jan 2021, 21:18
I mean, you can always use the 37mm HT wich has the same ROF, higher accuracy, more damage and is cheaper MP wise (still usefull in late game thanks to his missile hability) why do you always want to use the 28mm?

As for 75mm Puma, man that thing is crazy with his magic evasion stats, want it earlier? ok sure, but check and revise his received accuracy stats.
I think it's less a "PE has no good AT option early on" and more just that the 28mm is underwhelming for the price. It does the job ok (although it fails to kill jeeps somewhat often for me but i think thats just me). but it's a lot of resources for a pretty weak nondoctrinal unit. Personally i'd rather see it get more utility with ambush, but even a price reduction would be fair.

Agreed on the 75mm puma evasion stats.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2266
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by kwok »

As far as I can see, the only "weird" evasion stat for the 75mm puma is specifically the hellcat's gun.... everything else that I can find doesn't really have any accuracy modifiers at all.

Also decide to look up for fun the accuracy ratings for the 28mm and the 37mm on the halftracks.
The 28mm is set to 65/65/90/100
The 37mm is set to 60/70/90/100
So technically the 28mm is better at long to far range while the 37mm is better at far to medium. They are basically the same at ranges 40 and below (which is a little more than 60% of their max range). Haha, so whoever said that the 28mm misses about a third of its shots is pretty spot on.... but that's also true for the 37mm.
The penetration of the 28mm has a -25% penetration modifier against shermans while 37mm has -88% penetration. So, that's probably where people are saying it "scales better".

I'm just providing info for discussion, not siding with anything.

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 770
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Walderschmidt »

Sounds like 37mm shots vs Shermans should have their penetration modifier reduced to -25%, at least.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

kwok wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 03:52
Haha, so whoever said that the 28mm misses about a third of its shots is pretty spot on.... but that's also true for the 37mm.
The penetration of the 28mm has a -25% penetration modifier against shermans while 37mm has -88% penetration. So, that's probably where people are saying it "scales better".

I'm just providing info for discussion, not siding with anything.
I think people aren't complaining about the 37mm HT because it has a nuclear nerf football and a treadbreaker ability, so it's got some utility late game. The 28mm is just a shitty AT car that can't cloak, it doesn't really bring anything useful to a late game unit comp like the 37mm does. @Kwok - more responding to the group than you, just wanted to use your quote.
Walderschmidt wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 06:47
Sounds like 37mm shots vs Shermans should have their penetration modifier reduced to -25%, at least.

Wald
The 37mm is fine tbh, it shouldn't really be directly fighting any tank. It's got enough late game utility with the abilities. The 28mm getting ambush would set it apart a bit from the 37mm in the sense that it'd be able to do some fat damage from ambush while also being viable without ambush (unlike most other AT halftracks and cars). A cost drop would just be fair in the sense that it reflects how shitty of a unit the 28mm is. I'd rather see it be more useful, making it cheaper is just admitting that it's a garbage unit later on and there's still potential for it not to be.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4294
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Warhawks97 »

The 37 mm mounted on the HT is far weaker than the normal infantry 37 mm AT gun when it comes to pen vs sherman.

However, if i checked correctly, the HT fires every 2 seconds. Normal 37 mm takes 3.5-4 sec reload and the 28 mm takes 3 seconds.



The pen stats of all weapons are fine. The 28 mm had better pen than the 37 mm.



About the treadbreaker ability: I dont like such things where you pay something and get a guranteed crit. Recently i saw a heavy churchill getting engine destroyed by such a 37 mm that stood in front of it.



What i would like to have for such units (and even AT guns) is to have some sort of toggle ability. Like HMGs that can toggle between long suppression and short accurate bursts, it would be nice to have these units (and all lighter vehicles) to have toggle abilities. Either aiming for "kill shots" or "crit shots". Crit shots would increase pen against any target but in exchange for far less damage dealed (like new AB RL rifle squad).


This way all light armed units (37 mm, 28 mm etc) would be able to crit targets they wouldnt be able to kill.

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 770
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Walderschmidt »

Holy shit that’s a great idea!

And vet could improve crit shot ability (vet 2 or 3 and above).

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

tarakancheg
Posts: 10
Joined: 26 Aug 2020, 22:19

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by tarakancheg »

+1 on toggle abilities.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

Warhawks97 wrote:
12 Jan 2021, 12:51
The 37 mm mounted on the HT is far weaker than the normal infantry 37 mm AT gun when it comes to pen vs sherman.

However, if i checked correctly, the HT fires every 2 seconds. Normal 37 mm takes 3.5-4 sec reload and the 28 mm takes 3 seconds.



The pen stats of all weapons are fine. The 28 mm had better pen than the 37 mm.



About the treadbreaker ability: I dont like such things where you pay something and get a guranteed crit. Recently i saw a heavy churchill getting engine destroyed by such a 37 mm that stood in front of it.



What i would like to have for such units (and even AT guns) is to have some sort of toggle ability. Like HMGs that can toggle between long suppression and short accurate bursts, it would be nice to have these units (and all lighter vehicles) to have toggle abilities. Either aiming for "kill shots" or "crit shots". Crit shots would increase pen against any target but in exchange for far less damage dealed (like new AB RL rifle squad).


This way all light armed units (37 mm, 28 mm etc) would be able to crit targets they wouldnt be able to kill.
If we're using anecdotal examples, I don't think I've ever seen the new recoilless rifles score a crit while I'm using them, and I've used them quite a bit recently. I've seen it work for others every once in a while, but given my horrendous RNG luck, I'd rather at least have a guaranteed crit if I'm going to risk driving a relatively slow unit that costs 20 fuel really close to a tank that can just one shot it.

The range is short enough that you're pretty much guaranteed to lose the HT if the target isn't preoccupied, so I don't see why you shouldn't get a guaranteed crit in return. With that in mind, I'd be more on board with the toggle if light vehicles were to get ambush and the range when crit-prioritization is toggled would be the same as it's normal range. If those 2 things happen, I wouldn't mind the toggle.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4294
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Warhawks97 »

I think it was before your time in BK we did have treadbkreaker ability everywhere.... AT squads, AT boys....

Thing is that every tiny unit can thus get to any target of any size, activate this ability for some ammo and bam, your super might unit is immo.


Imagine an SP... all you have to do is to send some inf in, then comes the super fast 28 mm Vehicle, immobilizes in one shot and then throw everything you got on it... arty, schrecks, Henschels.

That would be too easy. Given that fact that these units shoot pretty fast you should be able to occupie your target with something else, move your tiny vehicle into position and fire several shots. 2-3 sec reload is way faster than 12 second reload on handheld AT weapons.


But thats why i dont like "pay to guranteed heavy crit" stuff. It got removed from all units except this little 37 mm HT. Which in my opinion can be badass enough with the rocket.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

Warhawks97 wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 02:12
I think it was before your time in BK we did have treadbkreaker ability everywhere.... AT squads, AT boys....

Thing is that every tiny unit can thus get to any target of any size, activate this ability for some ammo and bam, your super might unit is immo.


Imagine an SP... all you have to do is to send some inf in, then comes the super fast 28 mm Vehicle, immobilizes in one shot and then throw everything you got on it... arty, schrecks, Henschels.
I was there for it (I was really young so I wasn't exactly good at PVP, but I've seen it in action in BK, and much more recently in other coh/coh2 mods). I am still 100% fine with guaranteed immobilization on the HT in it's current state. As I said before the HT is probably screwed unless something else occupies the taget long enough for it to make a getaway (assuming your opponent doesn't simply click on the HT). This thread also isn't suggesting that we add a tread breaker to any new unit, so I don't know why you're comparing the 37mm HT having it to back when "every little unit" had it.

If ambush on the 37mm HT (among other light vehicles) becomes a thing, then I might change my mind about nerfing the treadbreaker. In it's current state, I don't see people abusing it ever (and I play with people who constantly try to find shit to abuse, Mencius being one of the better known ones), so this one time that it happened to you recently seems hardly like justification for a nerf. This is exactly like what happened with Wald and the kangaroo. One person has 1 bad experience with a unit in a recent game and asks for it to get nerfed, one or two people agree because it'd be beneficial to their playstyle for said thing to be nerfed, and bam, the unit gets nerfed with no justification.

If you're losing games because your heavy tank got immobilized by a shitty HT that can't cloak, you have bigger issues than the treadbreaker ability. I didn't say anything in this thread about giving the ability to "every little unit", I said don't remove it from the shitty halftrack.
Warhawks97 wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 02:12
But thats why i dont like "pay to guranteed heavy crit" stuff. It got removed from all units except this little 37 mm HT. Which in my opinion can be badass enough with the rocket.
The nuke is cool, but sometimes you don't want to blow 100 muni on whatever you're trying to kill/disable. Having a disable that costs less but is more risky because the target can still shoot back is 100% fair if you ask me.

Seriously, what is with you guys and having trouble with light vehicles? I've literally never had an issue dealing with the kangaroo or 37mm HT, and I can even say that's true when facing players that are leagues ahead of me in PVP skill. Light vehicles are literally the most underused main unit type in the game, the other 3 main types are always present but it's pretty common place for people to just straight up ignore light vehicle phase and rush for tanks because tanks are just a flat upgrade instead of just expanding your arsenal horizontally through the addition of new utility.

These vehicles were not useless as soon as a tank was present IRL, so why should they be in BK? Fun? Having a smaller unit roster because a bunch of units become irrelevant after 15 mins doesn't seem very fun. Balance? We have a shit ton of underused units that could fill niches that very badly need to be filled for the sake of balance, that's literally something that was brought up in this thread with the suggestions for the Pak40 Puma, by a BK vet no less. It just blows my mind how quickly people would jump on board with nerfing a light vehicle if it means they have to micro their stupid tank a bit less carefully. Tanks aren't magic, even the big ones. This is the kind of shit that makes me want to play spearhead or wikinger instead of BK, those 2 are terribly balanced but at least all the units are fun to use and don't just become irrelevant late game. Its the same reason I was on board for buffing the rifles of basic inf like riflemen, volks, and pgrens. Sidegrades are almost always better than flat upgrades in game design because it keeps your unit roster from artificially shrinking, thus giving player more options in the late game rather than just replacing the ones they already had with the same thing but bigger.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4294
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Warhawks97 »

Wait, who said i or anyone had issues with light vehicles or lost to an HT. I am not the kind of guy who puts all eggs into one basket (thus i dont use pershings, Tigers etc).
In fact i am always on your side (and have been) when it comes to make units that are barely used becoming more usefull. But for the sake of fun, balance and "realism", not by having tons of treadbreaker abilities just to make a unit usefull. Like, "Oh what to do with this unit? Idk, lets give it treadbreaker".

All i said is that i dont like such "gurannteed abilites" like hitting the front of a pershing with 37 mm gun and ruining its engine just because "i payed for it". The game is about chances and if you would want to immobilize a tank you would try to aim for the tracks but you might fail hitting them.
Or do you think a soldier will shoot better just because he gets told then when he makes a crit hit on a tank he gets a piece of choclate or 20 dollar extra payment?


The 37 mm HT for instance is cheap, quick shooting and the rocket shot ability is a cool add-on which has already killed Super Pershings. 100 ammo for a game winning kill shot is already cheap. Paying just 30 ammo for a game winning guranteed crit is even more cheap.

Its not really hard to occupie an enemie unit. Esspecially PE can send dirty cheap Krads to trigger tanks and anti tank guns and then follow up with tanks or said vehicles.


So, do not have or had issues with it since most units affected by such abilties are not the once i use. But i think its just too dirty cheap considering how easy it would become to just spam light vehicles, crit all heavies with one click just to smash them with arty that is usually all over the place.



Thats why i would want a togle to incease crit chances. And since you refered to real life, there is nothing "real life" in a 37 mm shot blowing the engine of a heavy tank while hitting its front armor and without dealing any other damage as if the shot has the ability of phase shifting to go through armor just the phase shift back when it is in the engine compartment.
And in real life a gunner would take several shots aimed at tracks or whatever in order to deal some fundamentally criticall damage.

So i would assume that you would be in favour for such kind of toggle ability that trades damage for pen/crit damage.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2266
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by kwok »

One day you should all play steel division with me.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 546
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by CGarr »

Warhawks97 wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 13:35
Wait, who said i or anyone had issues with light vehicles or lost to an HT. I am not the kind of guy who puts all eggs into one basket (thus i dont use pershings, Tigers etc).
In fact i am always on your side (and have been) when it comes to make units that are barely used becoming more usefull. But for the sake of fun, balance and "realism", not by having tons of treadbreaker abilities just to make a unit usefull. Like, "Oh what to do with this unit? Idk, lets give it treadbreaker".
37mm HT is the only unit that has it, correct me if I'm wrong. I didn't say anything in this thread about giving treadbreaker to more units. Why do you keep circling back to that?
Warhawks97 wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 13:35
All i said is that i dont like such "gurannteed abilites" like hitting the front of a pershing with 37 mm gun and ruining its engine just because "i payed for it". The game is about chances and if you would want to immobilize a tank you would try to aim for the tracks but you might fail hitting them.
Or do you think a soldier will shoot better just because he gets told then when he makes a crit hit on a tank he gets a piece of choclate or 20 dollar extra payment?

Its not really hard to occupie an enemie unit. Esspecially PE can send dirty cheap Krads to trigger tanks and anti tank guns and then follow up with tanks or said vehicles.
The 37mm will not be able to get more than 1 shot in most cases, maybe 2 if it is lucky. It is very easy ignore the suicide unit you mentioned sending in as a distraction (and a 50 cal will probably kill it anyways since these are US tanks we're talking about). Just click the HT to prioritize and keep it in vision, or use the manual aim. The Axis player will be busy microing the 37mm HT, so it's not like you'll be at a loss in terms of wasted focus/APM.

"The game is about chances" 100% is just a really high chance, so I don't see the issue. If you want to talk about gambles, going anywhere near an allied tank with a 37mm HT is a pretty fat gamble that it won't die. That 20 fuel isn't a massive loss, but it shouldn't have to be sacrificed just to use the treadbreaker ability. Hell, if you want the treadbreaker to be a gamble, lets replace it with a ramming ability where your HT gets flank speed but drives straight into the target and kills itself, in hopes that the explosion will get a crit on the tracks. Is that enough of a gamble? Because the only difference between that and what you're asking for is visuals, given that the 37mm HT currently does not have ambush or some other means of being able to poke or get a free shot in. Therefore, if the 37mm gets ambush, I'd concede, but in it's current state, that change would just make the treadbreaker useless the same way that M18/chaffee white phosphorous stuns are useless.
Warhawks97 wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 13:35
The 37 mm HT for instance is cheap, quick shooting and the rocket shot ability is a cool add-on which has already killed Super Pershings. 100 ammo for a game winning kill shot is already cheap. Paying just 30 ammo for a game winning guranteed crit is even more cheap.

So, do not have or had issues with it since most units affected by such abilties are not the once i use. But i think its just too dirty cheap considering how easy it would become to just spam light vehicles, crit all heavies with one click just to smash them with arty that is usually all over the place.
If you build a heavy tank, you should be willing to accept that it can die to the stupidest little things, like a mine or treadbreaker turning it into an arty magnet, or some lucky 5% chance from medium tank shot to the front. Not accepting that would be hypocritical if you're going to use "it's a game about chance" as an excuse for changing the game.

30 muni for a game winning crit via a mine or active ability like treadbreaker isn't cheap if you consider that the opponent still has to either risk their own unit to finish off the target, or blow hundreds of muni on doing so with indirect fire. If someone is desperate enough to use a treadbreaker ability instead of just using their own tank to kill yours, they probably have weaker units on the field than you. That means that moving in to finish you off is still a very risky venture for them. If their units are stronger than yours, then they probably wouldn't bother with the treadbreaker to begin with. If the units are similar in strength, then it is still an even fight, the person with the immobilized tank just needs to go through the effort of manually aiming at the enemy tank to account for it driving in and out of range. Sure, they can choose to arty a bit before initiating the fight so they have the advantage, but they have to pay more to do so.

With all that being said, the 100 muni nuke and the lucky 5% shots are arguably far cheaper than actually trying to finish off a tank after breaking it's treads. And if you don't try to finish it off, there is always the chance that the enemy can repair it, with the nuke, a comeback wont happen because the unit is probably going to instantly die. That's why the treadbreaker is cheaper.
Warhawks97 wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 13:35
Thats why i would want a togle to incease crit chances. And since you refered to real life, there is nothing "real life" in a 37 mm shot blowing the engine of a heavy tank while hitting its front armor and without dealing any other damage as if the shot has the ability of phase shifting to go through armor just the phase shift back when it is in the engine compartment.
And in real life a gunner would take several shots aimed at tracks or whatever in order to deal some fundamentally criticall damage.

So i would assume that you would be in favour for such kind of toggle ability that trades damage for pen/crit damage.
Does the visual effect and text that pops up for the crit matter that much to you? Engine crits and "immobilized" crits (broken treads) are interchangeable in BK, I have noticed 0 difference between the 2. The target loses a miniscule amount of health from either, both can be quickly repaired, and both just make the tank incapable of moving with no other impact gameplay-wise. Anyways, I didn't bring up real life in reference to the 37mm getting an engine crit, I brought it up several paragraphs down from that in reference to light vehicles often being made obsolete by tanks in BK because many have no useful abilities to make the fuel investment worthwhile late game when you can get a tank that does the same basic functions of drive around and shoot but better.

I specifically said that I would be in favor of the toggle, but only if ambush or some other means of poking or getting a free shot in is given to the 37mm HT. And even then, I wouldn't agree unless the chance was like 75% or higher. Gambling and getting fucked by RNG work in the same way, but they are not the same thing. RNG is means of artificially creating gambles, something I am generally against. Natural gambles like "hopefully they'll notice just a fraction of a second too late to successfully react" are already in the game, introducing big artificial gambles on top of that is just infuriating. It's the same reason I always talk about increasing pen on big guns or inf AT. Armor as a mechanic is fine, but when I pay a ton for a unit with a big ass cannon or when I go through the effort of clearing out your supporting inf so I can get an AT squad in to go shoot at your TD since my tanks cant touch it, I expect there to be a consistent reward. Failures in those scenarios should be a rare occurrence, not a regular one. CoH won't lose it's RNG flair just because units get patched to actually do their job reliably, as it'll still have more random elements than most other RTS games by virtue of the 5% instakills, the crits having substantial effects on unit performance, and so on.

I don't personally have anything against you, so I apologize in advance if it feels that way. That being said, I'd rather not see the kangaroo incident happen again with the 37mm HT.
kwok wrote:
13 Jan 2021, 15:59
One day you should all play steel division with me.
SD2 is like the 4 player chess of CoH, it's got nearly identical mechanics but it's not the same. The scale change almost makes it feel like an entirely different sub-genre, like Supreme Commander and Planetary Annihilation.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 4294
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Warhawks97 »

CGarr wrote:
14 Jan 2021, 03:11


37mm HT is the only unit that has it, correct me if I'm wrong. I didn't say anything in this thread about giving treadbreaker to more units. Why do you keep circling back to that?
So who gets it? All 28 mm and 37 mm?

My suggestion was that all such units (also stuart tanks, daimler) would get the togle ability where they aim for crits but lower damage.

That means that in your suggestion only a few would benefit from treadbreaker while many others still remain useless.

The 37mm will not be able to get more than 1 shot in most cases, maybe 2 if it is lucky. It is very easy ignore the suicide unit you mentioned sending in as a distraction (and a 50 cal will probably kill it anyways since these are US tanks we're talking about). Just click the HT to prioritize and keep it in vision, or use the manual aim. The Axis player will be busy microing the 37mm HT, so it's not like you'll be at a loss in terms of wasted focus/APM.

It does and i do it with other units.

A Panther for instance wont make more than 1 or two shots against an SP, however i frequently saw situations in which it was possible by giving the SP a bait....

Same for Jacks vs KT.... I recently managed to get of 4 shots against a KT with one jacks just because i managed to occupie that target by giving it flanking units to deal with that i am willing to lose.

I am working with baits very often, rushing krads and bikes into known ambushes so that following units can get a shot against them.

A Tank that fires a shot against a bait will give you the time to fire 2-3 shots with your 37 mm armed unit.
Cal 50´s are a thing but they always shoot inf first. No one should be so stupid to charge a 37 mm HT against a tank but this is what treadbreaker would actually do. People would frontal charge with units that have this ability without any tactical skill involved.

Its damn easy to lure and bait units or to occupie them by giving them targets to shoot at that are more durable.

Hell, what about using grens with LMG and suppressive vehicle fire and then using this time to attack with a light unit to immoblize it?

Brits are doing it all day long. I charge them with tank, they suppress me and send piats in which basically works the same way.
Piats deal more often crit shots than kill shots so the principles are the same just that you use a 37 mm HT instead of piats (or stuart, or daimler or tetrarch or any light armed vehicle)


"The game is about chances" 100% is just a really high chance, so I don't see the issue. If you want to talk about gambles, going anywhere near an allied tank with a 37mm HT is a pretty fat gamble that it won't die. That 20 fuel isn't a massive loss, but it shouldn't have to be sacrificed just to use the treadbreaker ability. Hell, if you want the treadbreaker to be a gamble, lets replace it with a ramming ability where your HT gets flank speed but drives straight into the target and kills itself, in hopes that the explosion will get a crit on the tracks. Is that enough of a gamble? Because the only difference between that and what you're asking for is visuals, given that the 37mm HT currently does not have ambush or some other means of being able to poke or get a free shot in. Therefore, if the 37mm gets ambush, I'd concede, but in it's current state, that change would just make the treadbreaker useless the same way that M18/chaffee white phosphorous stuns are useless.
Thats a weird comparission.




If you build a heavy tank, you should be willing to accept that it can die to the stupidest little things, like a mine or treadbreaker turning it into an arty magnet, or some lucky 5% chance from medium tank shot to the front. Not accepting that would be hypocritical if you're going to use "it's a game about chance" as an excuse for changing the game.
30 muni for a game winning crit via a mine or active ability like treadbreaker isn't cheap if you consider that the opponent still has to either risk their own unit to finish off the target, or blow hundreds of muni on doing so with indirect fire. If someone is desperate enough to use a treadbreaker ability instead of just using their own tank to kill yours, they probably have weaker units on the field than you. That means that moving in to finish you off is still a very risky venture for them. If their units are stronger than yours, then they probably wouldn't bother with the treadbreaker to begin with. If the units are similar in strength, then it is still an even fight, the person with the immobilized tank just needs to go through the effort of manually aiming at the enemy tank to account for it driving in and out of range. Sure, they can choose to arty a bit before initiating the fight so they have the advantage, but they have to pay more to do so.With all that being said, the 100 muni nuke and the lucky 5% shots are arguably far cheaper than actually trying to finish off a tank after breaking it's treads. And if you don't try to finish it off, there is always the chance that the enemy can repair it, with the nuke, a comeback wont happen because the unit is probably going to instantly die. That's why the treadbreaker is cheaper.

Yes, and so are the chances that a light armed vehicle immoblizes you in a hit. There is a chance to hit a mine... you you pass it without noticing it was there.
A small vehicle with treadbreaker will show up and will crit oyu heavily.
Smaller tanks can (by chances) kill heavier tanks in a shot. But they do not have an ability thats called "Heavy Tank killer shot" where you pay 50 ammo but pens/kills/crits your target for sure.
Even those pay a good price for AP rounds which at the end still do Nothing. But a light vehicle should get something like a "100% chance"?

I mean right now people do use stugs/Tank IV´s/Shermans and hoping the best and trying to outplay them with superior tactics/micro when fighting Pershings/Tigers etc. and win by chances and gamble.
But that requires skill. How fair does it seem when a small vehicle, much cheaper than any tank, has an ability to "insta succeed". people would just build like two of them, run into a tank and one of those two will get a crit shot for sure but it was worth it since two of them+arty is usually cheaper than building own tanks.

Why would i build a KT or Panther or pershing to kill an enemie Panther/Tiger/Pershing/KT when i can get a 280-300 MP unit that crits them for sure and then calling in arty on the traget?
Why paying 75 ammo and risking a 600+ MP unit that at the end still does nothing when i can use a 300 MP unit, pay 30 ammo and then using 50-100 ammo to finish the target?

weaker units means also cheaper and more and that you need to outplay your enemie. Not to just use a stupid ability on your dirty cheap unit for a dirty cheap price that turns every target, no matter its cost, into a usless sitting duck ready to get killed.


Does the visual effect and text that pops up for the crit matter that much to you? Engine crits and "immobilized" crits (broken treads) are interchangeable in BK, I have noticed 0 difference between the 2. The target loses a miniscule amount of health from either, both can be quickly repaired, and both just make the tank incapable of moving with no other impact gameplay-wise. Anyways, I didn't bring up real life in reference to the 37mm getting an engine crit, I brought it up several paragraphs down from that in reference to light vehicles often being made obsolete by tanks in BK because many have no useful abilities to make the fuel investment worthwhile late game when you can get a tank that does the same basic functions of drive around and shoot but better.
thats why crit togle ability for all light vehicles.
Treadbreaker for all of them would just turn them into OP "easy heavy tank stopper".

Instead of three mediums trying to kill one heavy you would see 2 small vehicles stopping the heavy for sure while cheap arty does the rest.

I specifically said that I would be in favor of the toggle, but only if ambush or some other means of poking or getting a free shot in is given to the 37mm HT. And even then, I wouldn't agree unless the chance was like 75% or higher. Gambling and getting fucked by RNG work in the same way, but they are not the same thing. RNG is means of artificially creating gambles, something I am generally against. Natural gambles like "hopefully they'll notice just a fraction of a second too late to successfully react" are already in the game, introducing big artificial gambles on top of that is just infuriating. It's the same reason I always talk about increasing pen on big guns or inf AT. Armor as a mechanic is fine, but when I pay a ton for a unit with a big ass cannon or when I go through the effort of clearing out your supporting inf so I can get an AT squad in to go shoot at your TD since my tanks cant touch it, I expect there to be a consistent reward. Failures in those scenarios should be a rare occurrence, not a regular one. CoH won't lose it's RNG flair just because units get patched to actually do their job reliably, as it'll still have more random elements than most other RTS games by virtue of the 5% instakills, the crits having substantial effects on unit performance, and so on.

I don't personally have anything against you, so I apologize in advance if it feels that way. That being said, I'd rather not see the kangaroo incident happen again with the 37mm HT.


What if units like the 37 mm HT or 28 mm would get ambush once logistic company is up or via upgrade like dingo has it?


The chances would be like 35-45% for a crit, perhaps higher from ambush. Considering how quickly you can fire it should be fine.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 912
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: PE mid game balance hole

Post by Sukin-kot (SVT) »

Sorry to interrupt you guys, but seems like you are driving the topic not in the right direction.

Now it would curious to know what devs think about 28mm and Puma, as it appears to me, many people admit that PE is a bit weak when it comes to mobile AT options.

Post Reply