[[IP address redacted]] Needed changes for EF [IP address redacted]

hi folks
as the most of the good players already knows soviets are still op!
after a match today i talked to some players. and we all think that there is only one real way to balance the soviets finaly.

they need to pay for their amilities!
we mean in detail the molotovs, grenades demo charges
therefore its totaly ok to discard the mun upkeep of the soviets!

also the stormovies must be changed (but there is already a thread)
gurards only a little change. the at grenades only after the shock guards upgrade.
mariens maybe reducing squad members -1
tested them not much but it was a hard hit in the face for the axis player that 3 vet2 grens cant killed a vet1 marine.

and plz soviet fanboys ^^ dont flame and say no that dont works with the original concept of the soviets. mabybe but its the only real and fair way to make it balanced and if you forget in 1.0 all soviet abilities were 4free like GoW and IL-2 and now? they all costs mun and it was right to change it!

Frankly, I'm so tired of endless rampage about this OP issue, that I came to think about this solution to be the only viable one quite some months ago. I really don't see any other way, other than this one, or turning virtually all soviet units into worthless shit. No need to say, that is not an alternative I prefer.
So +1 to munition cost.
Concept, as I see it: lower MUN cost, longer cool-down, than that of other factions.

Quoteand plz soviet fanboys ^^ dont flame and say no that dont works with the original concept of the soviets. mabybe but its the only real and fair way to make it balanced and if you forget in 1.0 all soviet abilities were 4free like GoW and IL-2 and now? they all costs mun and it was right to change it!

Those are doctrinal abilities, not abilities concerning units and upgrades you purchased before-hand in the Armoury.

Does it matter???
The others armies must alsp pay for these skills or research them!
you can say what you want it is op and not fair for the other armies...

and as IJoe said
"I really don't see any other way, other than this one, or turning virtually all soviet units into worthless shit"

or did you say usa is shit because you must pay for stickys?
i dont think so ;-)

The fact that active abilities do not need to be paid for is a unique feature of the soviet faction. Adding cost to them in replacement of the high munition upkeep is just stupid, it's all going to be lost ammo in the long run, AND it makes the soviets like the other factions.

The compensation for the direct "No cost abilities" is the cooldown time. Rifles can chuck about 3 stickies in a 60 second period, where as Conscripts can only launch a single molotov in that time frame. (IIRC)

Think about things like AT Grenades on Tank Hunter and Guard squads. Those have ridiculous cooldown times. (~2 minutes on a Tank Hunter, no?)

Last edited June 2, 2011 at 1:23 AM by Cranialwizard

The point is, that people will never relent calling SU awfully OP as long, as soviet players will abuse (and they surely will) the use of MUN-free abilities through, as we are all aware, multiple similar  squad presence, to compensate for rather long cool-down timers. This leads us to:
A) inevitable blobbing, which is VERY bad, IMO,
B) unnecessary, excessive and annoying use of all possible abilities, like, f.e. even throwing AT nades at infantry, or mass satchelling enemy troops/armor (yeah, I've seen even decent players do that), just for the sake of doing something ["Hey, it's free anyway! So why bother?" (c)], which is just as stupid and bad, as point A), if not more.
Lower ( than that of other factions) MUN cost for abilities with longer cool-downs could make for a "unique faction feature" just as well, IMO.

Last edited June 2, 2011 at 1:36 AM by IJoe

Cranialwizard wrote:
The fact that active abilities do not need to be paid for is a unique feature of the soviet faction. Adding cost to them in replacement of the high munition upkeep is just stupid,

so and now read again what i had written!

i said that therefore the mun upkeep of the soviets can be discarded!!!!

i not mean upkeep and mun cost because it would be that what you said. just stupid

and these "unique feature" of the soviets what you mean is in my eyes that they have like the wehrmacht a special unit for every situation not the free use of grenades!

and this will still be unique even if they pay mun.

We'll see how the nerfing of the abilities goes first without the massive rebalance that will have to occur to change the way the faction works.

Soviets currently have muni upkeep instead of manpower upkeep, am I right?

Yauz wrote:
Soviets currently have muni upkeep instead of manpower upkeep, am I right?

Infantry have manpower upkeep.

Tanks/vehicles/team weapons/tanks (except ISU-152) have manpower and munitions upkeep.

I have a rather radical idea, but I really like it so I'll put it out there:

I have always thought that Soviets lack the Zerg feel to them that they're supposed to have.  USA can outspam them right now.  Perhaps if global vet was lowered to 9% maximum and all Soviet abilities cost a normal amount of munitions, EF can remove all upkeep from Soviet units altogether, so they can have a higher manpower / munitions income, as represented by the real war.  Soviets could then even have a USA-like supply yard upgrade to further increase their manpower income even more.

Yauz wrote:
I have a rather radical idea, but I really like it so I'll put it out there:

I have always thought that Soviets lack the Zerg feel to them that they're supposed to have.  USA can outspam them right now.  Perhaps if global vet was lowered to 9% maximum and all Soviet abilities cost a normal amount of munitions, EF can remove all upkeep from Soviet units altogether, so they can have a higher manpower / munitions income, as represented by the real war.  Soviets could then even have a USA-like supply yard upgrade to further increase their manpower income even more.

Mmm, I disagree. Soviet basic infantry already has high squad member counts, which gives enough feeling of numbers (along with the conscripts at the start).

CoH isn't designed to handle large battles well. It's about micro of individual squads more than relative positioning of large numbers of squads. Because of the relatively fast pace of the game and a lack of design for it, most people can't properly control a lot of units, which leads to blobbing, which isn't fun.

I think it would be extremely difficult to balance one faction having a higher income without just making all their units overpriced, or nerfing some other aspect of them (e.g. making their doctrine abilities bad) which would detract from the game rather than adding to it. But I think it's mainly that CoH isn't designed for large scale battles (certainly not on a 1v1 level).

Wilson wrote:

Yauz wrote:
I have a rather radical idea, but I really like it so I'll put it out there:

I have always thought that Soviets lack the Zerg feel to them that they're supposed to have.  USA can outspam them right now.  Perhaps if global vet was lowered to 9% maximum and all Soviet abilities cost a normal amount of munitions, EF can remove all upkeep from Soviet units altogether, so they can have a higher manpower / munitions income, as represented by the real war.  Soviets could then even have a USA-like supply yard upgrade to further increase their manpower income even more.

Mmm, I disagree. Soviet basic infantry already has high squad member counts, which gives enough feeling of numbers (along with the conscripts at the start).

CoH isn't designed to handle large battles well. It's about micro of individual squads more than relative positioning of large numbers of squads. Because of the relatively fast pace of the game and a lack of design for it, most people can't properly control a lot of units, which leads to blobbing, which isn't fun.

I think it would be extremely difficult to balance one faction having a higher income without just making all their units overpriced, or nerfing some other aspect of them (e.g. making their doctrine abilities bad) which would detract from the game rather than adding to it. But I think it's mainly that CoH isn't designed for large scale battles (certainly not on a 1v1 level).

+1

ATM playing with Russians in early game is not simple (for me) because a good axis player can be a slaughter of conscripts and normal eng. with a couple of MG and Volksgrenadiers (I'm talkin' about 1v1)..with Panzer Elite it's also different.

The problems comes with late game, when some abilities are searched...Molotov Bombs can be spammed like hell (cit.), Satchel charges too.

IMO The concept is not RUSSIANS ARE OP, but there are some little things that should be fixed.
Partisan's Demo Charges, if I'm not wrong has a long time of cooldown, why don't put it the same time at Sturmovie's Satchels or Molotov Bombs?

Last edited June 2, 2011 at 10:24 AM by Moonwalker

Molotovs and Satchels at least need an enemy to have an effect. A demo trap can lie dormant until it needs to be activated and can be put on neutral buildings. Spamming these would be too good. The demo will instantly kill everyone inside the building regardless of whether the building is actually destroyed or not. They're very powerful.

I get what Yau is saying. However, conscripts already have 0 upkeep and 0 pop cost. The main infantry should be the same as other factions (although 7 man squad strelky are already quite a lot) but the conscripts will remain throughout the game while costing you very little. They give the illusion of a massive hoard already. Many people are bad though and lose their conscripts. It's practically impossible to lose a conscript squad because of the high man count. Besides that, a redesign of this magnitude would take ages to balance when we're already doing reasonably well.

Alright I read everyone's posts and I took into consideration everyone's opinions.

The thing is that Wehr has medic bunker (I'm not saying Soviets should have a med bunker here) and USA has supply yard upgrade to make their troops a lot more recyclable, even more so than conscripts!  Hence why Soviets can actually be outspammed by gren or riflehordes.

I always felt that the Zerg feature should have been the unique faction feature for Soviets.  Free abilities was just fail, and should not have been that feature.

As for potential imbalance, as I mentioned, global could have its max lowered to 9 or even deleted, and all Soviet abilities could cost the normal amount of munitions.  USA already has superior manpower income.  Its a wonder why Soviets of all factions don't have that feature.

The claim that CoH cannot handle big battles is just false.  I'm not sure where that idea came from.  Also when you have a lot of squads to spare, that's when you can afford to flank for more dynamic play.  The idea of the Zerg thing is to have so many of these guys come from like 5 directions at once and flank the MGs.  If this were implemented, it would only effect late game anyways.

Anyways, I respect everyone's opinion nevertheless.  Thanks for the inputs.

Last edited June 2, 2011 at 4:44 PM by Yauz

mh i agree in many parts with yauz

but no upkeep in any kind of units? mh idk lower upkeep no problem. even to have the possibility to lower it more with an upgrade (like the americans) but i dont think balance will work without any kind of upgrade. but this is somethin that must be tested. mabybe im wrong and this works realy well :-D

you can also lowered some upgrade costs of the soviets but the free abilities cant realy be balanced.

but i hope the devs and the balancing team dont think i or better we are thinking that the did a bad job. thats bs! version 1.40 is untill now the best version of ef.

I don´t want to attack anybody personally. we all want the same^^ the best and balanced mod :-P

Yauz wrote:
The claim that CoH cannot handle big battles is just false.  I'm not sure where that idea came from.  Also when you have a lot of squads to spare, that's when you can afford to flank for more dynamic play.  The idea of the Zerg thing is to have so many of these guys come from like 5 directions at once and flank the MGs.  If this were implemented, it would only effect late game anyways.

I didn't say that it can't handle big battles, but that it isn't designed for it, in terms of gameplay. I'm not convinced it would be fun to play as or to play against a Zerging style enemy in CoH. Why wouldn't you just charge around the map with your huge blob, like people already do with Brits or PE (who aren't specifically designed to be zerg type sides)? I can't see a way in CoH to encourage 'proper' zerg play without ending up with blobbing. If you want to flank a machinegun from multiple sides with loads of men, you can already do that with conscripts.

I agree that Soviets done well as a zerg style faction would be cool, but I think it would be really hard to balance and design in a way that's fun. And it is a shame that the Soviets can be outspammed by rifles or grens under certain circumstances, but that's because of how the original game was designed with only the western front in mind. If Relic had started by making an eastern front CoH, I expect it would have been Soviets that got the best medic stations/manpower income, but the EF devs have their hands tied a bit.

Did all of you forgot that SU has better late game tanks and infantry (global CS, expensive but better upgrades) than US?
[sarcasm]Sure, give SU same upgrades that US has but dont forget to make IS-2 equal to the Sherman.[/sarcasm]
SU needs their upkeep being reworked and devs are working on it.

Its wierd that the same people complain that Soviets dont have anything to ballance med bunkers, and they complain that Sturmovie are to effective vs German med bunker strategy at the same time.

Its also wierd that Strelky Mosins werent nerfed at all. When running and fireing at long range they will do more than twice the damage that US rifles can! (and I didnt even count the fact that Mosins fire faster than Garands at long range!) When Sturmovie or Constripts throw their bombs/bottles Germans need to get out of cover and get slaughtered by that long range fire.

Paciat wrote:
Its wierd that the same people complain that Soviets dont have anything to ballance med bunkers, and they complain that Sturmovie are to effective vs German med bunker strategy at the same time.

For the Sturmovie strength, they were in fact spammable and OP.  I don't want to get into explaining that here.  As for their satchel charges, someone suggested that the Sturmovie satchel ability should have a global cooldown on it.  I disagreed for the very reason that it takes 2 consecutive satchels to kill a Wehr bunker, hence why I was in favor for the munitions cost instead.  Are you in favor that they retain their current free satchels instead?  I know that the Sturmovies are supposed to be there to bust bunkers.  What's wrong is that they're as spammable as they are right now, when they are really supposed to be a specialist unit.  Please read my posts in the Sturmovie thread before posting your nonsense.

Last edited June 3, 2011 at 6:15 AM by Yauz

Global CS does only affect Infantry Paciat.

I actually dont view soviets as zerg faction, more like terran. make sense to anyone else?

I fully agree with adding munitions cost to ALL abilites. Many of soviet abilities cost muni, like GoW or Il-2s, also Su-76 uses muni-costing AP rounds. So claiming that soviets don't use munitions based abilites is partially a lie. Munitons cost is to prevent spamming ablilites. However I think if those abilites will remain muni-free, they should be at least given after upgrade in Barracks or anywhere else. C'mon, even US has to pay for allowing rifles to throw 15-muni grenades.

Also I have to complain about Soviet squad numbers. Since conscripts are useful they should get at least number showing how many of them is in the squad. Morover, I'm quite annoyed with those 7-men squads. I know that soviets are to have huge squads, but often finding cover for 6 guys is a trouble...
CoH is not about zerging units, it's tactical game. No place for blobbing here IMO.

"I'm quite annoyed with those 7-men squads"-cephalos


Yes, But those 6 people in cover are weak compared to other troops. That gives you easier VET, CP, and forces him to reinforce longer. So in a way, its kinda a blessing for both Axis and Allies.

And yes, I think satchels should have all muni. Nothing can go well with free satchels.

Satchels will have a 35MU cost now. No need to continue discussing that.

I've noticed from watching a number of the latest replays that the molotovs are very destructive.
consider the PE equivalent has half the throwing range and a muni cost for each use. Soviet molotovs have a one time fairly cheap cost, 50 muni isn't going to hurt the soviet player as much as other factions. 20 fuel does hurt a little.

It seems like the ultimate way for conscripts to force retreat on MG teams.
Also given that the molotovs are available once unlocked to a variety of soviet units paired with no cost for each use.
I would recommend a rethink into how they're implemented, be it a higher one-time cost or pay-per use they're available very early on to a large number of units, and more destructive than frags imho (if you take into account large throwing range).

Last edited June 5, 2011 at 12:34 AM by Mad hatters in jeans

Mad wrote:
I've noticed from watching a number of the latest replays that the molotovs are very destructive.
consider the PE equivalent has half the throwing range and a muni cost for each use. Soviet molotovs have a one time fairly cheap cost, 50 muni isn't going to hurt the soviet player as much as other factions. 20 fuel does hurt a little.

It seems like the ultimate way for conscripts to force retreat on MG teams.
Also given that the molotovs are available once unlocked to a variety of soviet units paired with no cost for each use.
I would recommend a rethink into how they're implemented, be it a higher one-time cost or pay-per use they're available very early on to a large number of units, and more destructive than frags imho (if you take into account large throwing range).

For now we are halving the range and doubling the cooldown.

Do the molotovs do more damage than the PE incendiary grenades? I guess I'll have to watch how effective PE grenades are because the molotovs suck down the health of any infantry it hits.

Also, what about how the molotovs seem to always damage the engine of any tanks or vehicles it hits. I saw 1 molotov damage the engine of my jagdpanzer, and that allowed a few more squads to come and destroy the engine with a few more.

Also, I noticed a molotov's fire was slowly damaging my Jagdpanzer. It shouldn't hurt tanks should it? temp replay attached. (Please excuse my horrible gameplay skills).

Last edited June 10, 2011 at 3:58 AM by brandonn2008

But damage a vehicles engine for free? Isn't this kinda weird? I want to do this with PE grenades too!

Yes, Panzer Elite Incendiary Grenades are damaging to vehicles. I recall playing a game quite some time ago where i was pummelling a Stubby with Rangers, and then some A.I. Panzer Grenadiers came along and pushed me back with Incendiaries. Then the Stubby, with a sliver of health, moved forward into the flames, and blew up! :o ;D It was pretty funny.

I would like to know, what are you guys going to do about the forum? Do you have plans for the next patch, to prevent the forum getting overloaded again?

There is already a seperate server for downloads, Rizz told that some days ago.

Thanks. Must have missed that...

Has anyone noticed that regular strelkys receive an incredible accuracy from Gewehr 43 from PG. I saw that 2 times now that a strelky squad can get wiped out in seconds by g43's. Other infantry are more resilient than the strelkys against the g43. Will post a replay soon.

Donib wrote:
Has anyone noticed that regular strelkys receive an incredible accuracy from Gewehr 43 from PG. I saw that 2 times now that a strelky squad can get wiped out in seconds by g43's. Other infantry are more resilient than the strelkys against the g43. Will post a replay soon.

In 2.602 Relic made G43 shoot faster so if they allready had offensive vet they could kill low HP Strelky quickly.

I'm fairly sure this plea will go ignored, but I would really, really like to see the SU-100 make it's return. In my eyes the Light Armour Support upgrade is very, very weak now when playing against a skilled opponent. The only reason I end up buying it is because I need it to unlock the IS-2.

The main reason I want the SU-100 back is because it gave the Soviets a fighting chance against the Panzer Elite's Panther Battle Group. As I see things as of now the PBG is very easy to rush to and spam compared to how long it actually takes to get out a IS-2 for the Soviets. The SU-100 seemed to at least have the firepower to take down the Panthers, at least when supported properly.

---

Post Merge: [time]1308009031[/time]

---

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Satchels will have a 35MU cost now. No need to continue discussing that.

Wouldn't this require some sort of minimum muni income cap for the Soviets then?

Last edited June 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM by Dot.Shadow