Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Talk about CoH1 or BKMOD1 in general.
Post Reply

Kar98k vs. Garands - is it balanced?

1) Yes - keep things the same
5
63%
2) No - needs to be rebalanced
1
13%
3) It could use a little tweaking
2
25%
4) Other - post in comments
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 8

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 510
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by Walderschmidt »

Kar98K changes were made back in August 2019.

What do you guys think of the current balance for Kar98k and Garands?

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 584
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by mofetagalactica »

There should be a pool of enfields vs kar98k instead of this (with the stats being show up).

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3825
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by Warhawks97 »

mofetagalactica wrote:
26 Jun 2020, 19:04
There should be a pool of enfields vs kar98k instead of this (with the stats being show up).
yeah, thats what i also had in mind.


I keep on talking about rifle balances being totally thrown over, both sides keep on hammering K98 vs Garand while i expressed many concerns regarding the balance between german K98 and Enfields as well.

K98 (Volksgren):
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.7/0.55/0.4/0.4

Damage: 30

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage: 0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1
Damage: 1

Negative:
Accuracy: 1
Damage: 1

Cooldown: 2-2
Cooldown modifier: 0.75/1/1.25/1.25

Reload duration: 2.5-3
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 4


K98_ PE_Pgrens:
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.7/0.55/0.35/0.35

Damage: 23-33

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage: 0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Negative:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Cooldown: 2-2
Cooldown modifier: 0.75/1/1.25/1.25

Reload duration: 2.5-3
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 4



K98_ Elite (Grens, Storms):
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.8/0.65/0.5/0.5

Damage: 30

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage: 0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1
Damage: 1

Negative:
Accuracy: 1
Damage: 1

Cooldown: 2-2
Cooldown modifier: 0.75/1/1.25/1.25

Reload duration: 2.5-3
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 4



K98_ PE_Assault_Grens:
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.8/0.65/0.5/0.5

Damage: 30

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage: 0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1
Damage: 1

Negative:
Accuracy: 1
Damage: 1

Cooldown: 2-2
Cooldown modifier: 0.75/1/1.25/1.25

Reload duration: 2.5-3
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 4



CW_Enfield (Tommies, Canadian):
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.75/0.55/0.45/0.35

Damage: 19-29

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage:0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Negative:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Cooldown: 1.2-2
Cooldown modifier: Cooldown modifier: 0.75/1/1.25/1.25

Reload duration: 3.5-4
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 9





CW_Enfield_Commandos :
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.75/0.6/0.45/0.4

Damage: 19-29

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage:0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Negative:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Cooldown: 2
Cooldown modifier: Cooldown modifier: 0.75/1/1.25/1.25

Reload duration: 3.5-4
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 9





M1_Garand :
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.65/0.45/0.21/0.114

Damage: 20-30

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage:0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Negative:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Cooldown: 0.5-1.5
Cooldown modifier: Cooldown modifier: 0.7/1.3/1.5/1.5

Reload duration: 2.5-3.5
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 3 (??)





M1_Garand_Rangers :
Accuracy (short/Mid/long/distant): 0.8/0.65/0.42/0.4

Damage: 20-30

Cover Type modifier:

Heavy:
Accuracy: 0.25
Damage:0.5

Light:
Accuracy: 0.5
Damage: 1

Open:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Negative:
Accuracy: 1.25
Damage: 1.25

Cooldown: 1.5-1.75
Cooldown modifier: Cooldown modifier: 0.55/0.7/1.371/1.486

Reload duration: 2.5-3.5
Reload duration modifier: 1.25/1.15/1/1

Frequency: 7




Here you are Figree.


I am not surprised that my Rifles got their asses kicked every single game.
They did not only drop its accuracy at max range from 0.17 to 0.114.
The Magazin size is currently also lowered down to 4 rounds instead of 8.


Normal Tommy inf seems to have gotten a shorter cooldown while commandos did not. That makes normal tommies at close and long range essentially superior to enfield commandos.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jun 2020, 00:14, edited 1 time in total.

MenciusMoldbug
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 12:57

Re: Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by MenciusMoldbug »

Ah, I just checked that brit enfields did actually get changed this beta patch. I was wondering why sappers seem much more murderous and dangerous compared to non-beta BK and it seems they got buffed along with tommies in cooldown values.

Kind of funny that commando enfields are now worse than the enfields of tommies. That's kind of the same problem I had with old ranger garands being slower to fire than riflemen garands.

I'm pretty sure the riflemen garands ammo count being smaller compared to rangers is a bug. Still, I don't really want brit enfields to become sniper rifles to adjust to kar98k. Balancing rifles in comparison to each other throws off the 'range attrition' battle in BK. Because rifles are meant to win at range, it forces players to decide whether it's best to close in or not depending on what weapons they have available. I did feel like my volks don't even allow for maneuvering units close to them if they are in a good position because now you have to decide within the first 10 seconds of the engagement as a US player whether you want to close in on the kar98ks or not because if you don't you are going to lose that engagement with nil chance of victory.

Now if enfields got patched to accuracy values in relation to kar98ks, that's just going to cause the same decision making for the axis. Except axis don't have any 'buffs' to close range combat with their rifles (compared to allies) other than getting MP40 upgrade to replace them. So it would turn into more of a "Do I sit here and die with my volkssturm/volksgrenadiers or move to an even more campy location vs brits" dynamic.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3034
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by MarKr »

Warhawks97 wrote:They also shadownerfed the Garand and reduced its magazin capacity
(...)
Nerfed and then shadow nerfed by cutting their magazin
HOLY FUCKING SHIT! SHADOWNERFZZZZZZZZZ EVERYWHERE! I am realy getting tired of that word. The magazine size is overlook from the time when we adjusting the RoF. One of the versions I was working with was to make the Garands fire in "burst" and see if it would bypass a problem I ran into back then. It didn't work so stuff got reverted and I forgot about this one but YEAAAAAH SHADOWNERFZZZZ, ILLUMINATI CONFIRMED! I kan kinda understand Apollo/Papa(whatever his nick is) and those other dudes from his "Allies OP" group using that word because they think we intentionally nerf stuff without telling anyone about it (althought their list of "shadownerfs" is mostly BS based on false or inclomplete data) but I really wondr why YOU of all people think that IF we wanted to make a "shadownerf", we would make it in a place where it is ridiculously easy to spot - especially when we know that people in community know how to open the files and see the stats.

Most curious thing about this is that the RoF changes took place like a year ago and nobody noticed smaller magazine so far and when the RoF changes took place (including the overlooked smaller mag) people still reportedd great performance of the weapon. Hell, even with the smaller mag size several people here in this topic told you that the rifles work just fine but for some reason in their games they have no problem with the weapon but in your games the smaller mag sizes are the reason why your units sucked ballz...

CW rifle changes were postponed for later because they didn't really feel TOO bad compared to other units + there have been changes in vehicle avalability which allowed for some new unit combinations sooner which compensated for the cmoperatively lower rifle performance of CW. If you check the entirety of the beta, nobody complained about the CW rifles underperforming, there have, however, been complaints about CW being OP in general.

Most ridiculous part about this all is that people, who have been playing the beta with these changes for MUCH longe rthan you, told you several times that in their hands-on experience the rifle performance is fine but you keep complaining about how BS it is because you saw some numbers that you didn't like in the Corsix and you want to change it despite people having said it works well in the current way...but no, they don't know what they're talking about because their months of experiences is worth shit compared to your few games in last 3 weeks, it should be changed as you say. :roll:

So thank you for reporting the overlooked magazine size, not so much thank you for hopping on that "shadownerfs" train just because you didn't like some numbers...and fuck ME for writing stuff on forum when I'm drunk.
Image

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 584
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by mofetagalactica »

Just because peopple told you "its fine" or "don't got any complains" is not a good argument to use always so watch out with that mark, if something is an error or is wrong or is too unbalanced stats wise with a weapon wich is almost a copy of it or same role, should always be looked and tweaked if necesary (so good thing that you're looking into enfield stats).

jhonson mg = fg42 = bar
garands = ghewers
enfield = kar

If kar's are too strong compared to enfields then you can work around that by tweaking the price of the support weapons such as bar/bren.

Bar has horrible stats for example if buffed that would help in long distance fights.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3825
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Do Kar98k vs Garands feel balanced right now? POLL

Post by Warhawks97 »

MenciusMoldbug wrote:
26 Jun 2020, 23:16
Ah, I just checked that brit enfields did actually get changed this beta patch. I was wondering why sappers seem much more murderous and dangerous compared to non-beta BK and it seems they got buffed along with tommies in cooldown values.

Kind of funny that commando enfields are now worse than the enfields of tommies. That's kind of the same problem I had with old ranger garands being slower to fire than riflemen garands.

I'm pretty sure the riflemen garands ammo count being smaller compared to rangers is a bug. Still, I don't really want brit enfields to become sniper rifles to adjust to kar98k. Balancing rifles in comparison to each other throws off the 'range attrition' battle in BK. Because rifles are meant to win at range, it forces players to decide whether it's best to close in or not depending on what weapons they have available. I did feel like my volks don't even allow for maneuvering units close to them if they are in a good position because now you have to decide within the first 10 seconds of the engagement as a US player whether you want to close in on the kar98ks or not because if you don't you are going to lose that engagement with nil chance of victory.

Now if enfields got patched to accuracy values in relation to kar98ks, that's just going to cause the same decision making for the axis. Except axis don't have any 'buffs' to close range combat with their rifles (compared to allies) other than getting MP40 upgrade to replace them. So it would turn into more of a "Do I sit here and die with my volkssturm/volksgrenadiers or move to an even more campy location vs brits" dynamic.
You have hit the spot





MarKr wrote:
26 Jun 2020, 23:32
Warhawks97 wrote:They also shadownerfed the Garand and reduced its magazin capacity
(...)
Nerfed and then shadow nerfed by cutting their magazin
HOLY FUCKING SHIT! SHADOWNERFZZZZZZZZZ EVERYWHERE! I am realy getting tired of that word. The magazine size is overlook from the time when we adjusting the RoF. One of the versions I was working with was to make the Garands fire in "burst" and see if it would bypass a problem I ran into back then. It didn't work so stuff got reverted and I forgot about this one but YEAAAAAH SHADOWNERFZZZZ, ILLUMINATI CONFIRMED! I kan kinda understand Apollo/Papa(whatever his nick is) and those other dudes from his "Allies OP" group using that word because they think we intentionally nerf stuff without telling anyone about it (althought their list of "shadownerfs" is mostly BS based on false or inclomplete data) but I really wondr why YOU of all people think that IF we wanted to make a "shadownerf", we would make it in a place where it is ridiculously easy to spot - especially when we know that people in community know how to open the files and see the stats.

Most curious thing about this is that the RoF changes took place like a year ago and nobody noticed smaller magazine so far and when the RoF changes took place (including the overlooked smaller mag) people still reportedd great performance of the weapon. Hell, even with the smaller mag size several people here in this topic told you that the rifles work just fine but for some reason in their games they have no problem with the weapon but in your games the smaller mag sizes are the reason why your units sucked ballz...

CW rifle changes were postponed for later because they didn't really feel TOO bad compared to other units + there have been changes in vehicle avalability which allowed for some new unit combinations sooner which compensated for the cmoperatively lower rifle performance of CW. If you check the entirety of the beta, nobody complained about the CW rifles underperforming, there have, however, been complaints about CW being OP in general.

Most ridiculous part about this all is that people, who have been playing the beta with these changes for MUCH longe rthan you, told you several times that in their hands-on experience the rifle performance is fine but you keep complaining about how BS it is because you saw some numbers that you didn't like in the Corsix and you want to change it despite people having said it works well in the current way...but no, they don't know what they're talking about because their months of experiences is worth shit compared to your few games in last 3 weeks, it should be changed as you say. :roll:

So thank you for reporting the overlooked magazine size, not so much thank you for hopping on that "shadownerfs" train just because you didn't like some numbers...and fuck ME for writing stuff on forum when I'm drunk.

I edited the first post.

Also:
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=3688&p=33738#p33738

Post Reply