Terror draft

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Hicks58]

Lawl, 60% increased accuracy with 30% more damage if your standing in green cover.

Do we HAVE to say how many layers of bullshit that would be? Really?

KT buff... Full penetration half squad killing rounds which spit out faster than a Tiger at a longer range.

A few more layers of bullshit perhaps?

Ugh... Headache imminent.

[MittinsKittens]

Oh, I thought the patch notes would of been out by now xD
Optimism I guess got the better of me

[TheIcelandicManiac]

Oh, I thought the patch notes would of been out by now xD
Optimism I guess got the better of me

They be mods, they will never follow their words   

[Mysthalin]

You see, freedom of speech is a nice concept and all - but then you get somebody like nugnug who posts something utterly RETARDED and MORONIC and you can't just tell him that because that wouldn't be "politically correct" and the guy apparently requires every single bit of nitpicking as to why his suggestion is retarded before he goes away. And then you start realising that universal freedom of speech is in fact a terrible idea.

It's posts and threads like these that have ascertained the developers will never ever give the general community any power whatsoever in dictating what should be done about balance. Heck, if I was them - I'd understand them if they completely ignored the balance/suggestion boards flat out, having perhaps unknown or groundfire post words of acknowledgment at the occasional half-assed idea that's cumulative brainpower might actually power a 10 watt light bulb for longer than a potato.

[PonySlaystation]

I don't think what terror need is more permanent buffs than what the other doctrines have combined. I guess some of the suggestions were ok.
But;

Fearless can not be a T2 and the grenade damage part is too much.

Terror soldiers AND Pervitin pills with even more buffs are both too strong.

King Tiger already has good Anti-Infantry capabilities.

Improved Skirts is too cheap and probably a bad idea.

Extra range buffs is a bad idea.

GW doesn't need rotation, damage or reload bonuses. This would break the entire concept of the unit or make it too strong.

Nebel does not need to move faster, especially not from a T2, all your T2s are too powerful.

Ostwind does not need more damage, give it penetration bonuses instead, so it can kill m8s.

I like all the changes to puma upgun, it needs to be stronger.

[smurfORnot]

King Tiger already has good Anti-Infantry capabilities.

have u seen one? I used him alot,half of the time he just misses,other half u hit one guy,and on rare occasions when you are lucky,you will hit 2,which is very rarely. So yeah,I consider AI capabilities of a sherman (even upgun) greater than KT's.

[Spartan_Marine88]

have u seen one? I used him alot,half of the time he just misses,other half u hit one guy,and on rare occasions when you are lucky,you will hit 2,which is very rarely. So yeah,I consider AI capabilities of a sherman (even upgun) greater than KT's.

I think he is comparing the KT to the FF's ai capabilities

[smurfORnot]

and that would be why exactly?

[panzerman]

have u seen one? I used him alot,half of the time he just misses,other half u hit one guy,and on rare occasions when you are lucky,you will hit 2,which is very rarely. So yeah,I consider AI capabilities of a sherman (even upgun) greater than KT's.

+1

why not just have a T4 that gives Kt tiger splash damage maybe? or just improve it's splash damage

[PonySlaystation]

You have to stay still to hit anything. And when it does hit it can kill entire riflemen squads. It's not like bazookas and other hand held AT are a threat to it.

[nugnugx]

mysthalin rage post

It's not retarded, just all other doctrines need buffing also. Having weak buffs in everything does not make everything balanced, it makes a bland and uninteresting gameplay.

If you can make interesting buffs, which show t4 power and keep it balanced,  then i will say you can balance.


Still Mysthalin, you are the only rager in this thread,  i'm dissapointed,  also this a suggestion and it does not mean that 'IT HAS TO GO INTO LAUNCHER RIGHT NAAAAAOOOWWWW'.
You take it like it was granted that it will get implemented tomorrow with current numbers, just shows your lack of maturity, numbers can be tweaked in a second, but the idea not.

[smurfORnot]

You have to stay still to hit anything. And when it does hit it can kill entire riflemen squads. It's not like bazookas and other hand held AT are a threat to it.

Yes,I stood still most of the time,and it still does miss alot. Post me a video how it can kill whole rifleman squad when it hits 

Well,bazookas can do nice dmg,I laughed when I saw groupies KT against 2 ranger squads,most of the time they hit him from front,player who used them didnt even try to flank etc he keept his 2 squads together,and by the time KT managed to finish them,he was on 1/3 health(KT),so dont tell me zooks are no threat to it

[nugnugx]

Basically, what's essential is:
1. A variety of units are buffed throughout a doctrine path (With a certain gameplay in mind)

That's what I did

2. Units should not be buffed consecutively throughout a doctrine path

This is the problem of current doctrines and that's where i differ, having same units buffed through 3 paths, creates a confusion, because
people do not want to pick 2 t3s to buff one unit, it's not effective and leaves you with spam companies and that's why people spam 1 unit because it's buffed over top and other units are left out,then your whole doctrine revolves around this unit  instead of revolving around 'support' setup for example.
Having multiple buffed in same tree IE: of 'infatry' role leaves you with an option of using kch or grens or volks for different roles. Having good buffs in T4 for KT or p4 stug panther leaves you with an option to use 1 kt or 5-6 of those tanks  and both options are useful not some placeholder, meaning we would see different build because some would prefer 8 stugs or 6 pz4 instead of 1 KT.
Having limited MP we cannot buy unlimited units so nothing would be too powerfull.

3. The T3s and T4s are the only real defining abilities for a doctrine path

That's what i did , (and also a slight weaker t2 could be in my humble opinion also, that's why i putt fearless in t2)

4. The three different doctrine paths offer different gameplay (For example, one path could be 'offensive' orientated, one 'defensive and another 'utility'. )

I was tweaking the current one that we have in launcher so just went with it.

5. Units need to stay more or less true to their original roles (I.E you should respect a unit's weaknesses)
    -> Units are not buffed on every possible level

Ok with that i might went over the top with some numbers.

[PonySlaystation]

Having weak buffs in everything does not make everything balanced, it makes a bland and uninteresting gameplay.

Having a lot of permanent buffs makes for bland and uninteresting gameplay, because some units will be very overpowered and others underwpowered. And using these overpowered units requires practically no skill, just a use a lot of them and play often enough to grind up even more buffs. It doesn't really take much skill to know which units to abuse when the balance is skewed.

The closer to vanilla balance units are, the better. Because vCoH is fairly balanced (there are exceptions ofc, like kangaroo, but EIR crew was smart enough to fix that).

For example if there is a T4 that makes riflemen 5 times better, then that would just make riflemen a lot better then grenadiers, sure you could make grenadiers 5 times better as well but then you'd have to buff every single unit in the game, and that wouldn't solve anything, so what's the logic in that?

Having a bigger diversity of units, more short duration buffs and unit abilities like in blitzkrieg mod, that makes it more interesting and micro-intensive.


However, having buffs that increase the damage output of units can make the game more interesting, this means that firefights are decided faster, which makes the game harder and more realistic. Again like blitzkrieg mod and MoW. The problem with this idea is that CoH is already quite complex and people want it to be easy to retain veterancy.

It's also the other way around, if you increase the health of units, gameplay will be slower.

[nugnugx]

Having a lot of permanent buffs makes for bland and uninteresting gameplay, because some units will be very overpowered and others underwpowered.

If every t4 was powerful and balanced they wouldn't be OP because people would have different strong things which they can use.

For example if there is a T4 that makes riflemen 5 times better, then that would just make riflemen a lot better then grenadiers, sure you could make grenadiers 5 times better as well but then you'd have to buff every single unit in the game, and that wouldn't solve anything, so what's the logic in that?

If there was a t4 that would make them stronger, and axis also had a similiar t4 + all other t4s would be equaly powerful , i don't see a problem because other companies would have different means of defeating them on  equal terms of power.

Having a bigger diversity of units

That's what the doctrine promotes, YOU choose what you want to use, not the doctrine for you.

more short duration buffs and unit abilities like in blitzkrieg mod,

Also is in t4 on tank tree, and current pills.

Also, having buffs that increase the damage output of units does make the game more interesting, this means that firefights are decided faster, which makes the game harder and more realistic.

That's what is in also.......

It's also the other way around, if you increase the health of units, gameplay will be slower.

There is no health upgrade in this particularl one that i've written.


Basicaly Pony everything you want is in that doctrine. 

[Demon767]

If every t4 was powerful and balanced they wouldn't be OP because people would have different strong things which they can use.




If there was a t4 that would make them stronger, and axis also had a similiar t4 + all other t4s would be equaly powerful , i don't see a problem because other companies would have different means of defeating them on  equal terms of power.

That's what the doctrine promotes, YOU choose what you want to use, not the doctrine for you.


Also is in t4 on tank tree, and current pills.



That's what is in also.......




There is no health upgrade in this particularl one that i've written.


Basicaly Pony everything you want is in that doctrine. 

Ahem.. werent you banned from discussing balance issues

[nugnugx]

This is suggestion forum.

[Demon767]

Yes precisely, so why are you discussing balance issues.

[nugnugx]

I'm not


balance issue  --  decrease price of something because it's too powerfull in game


suggestion -  terror draft.

[Demon767]

It's not retarded, just all other doctrines need buffing also. Having weak buffs in everything does not make everything balanced, it makes a bland and uninteresting gameplay.

If you can make interesting buffs, which show t4 power and keep it balanced,  then i will say you can balance.


Still Mysthalin, you are the only rager in this thread,  i'm dissapointed.

You are allowed to suggest new features

what you are not allowed to is discuss already implemented features and critically evaluate how they are weaker and stronger then eachother, that is not suggesting, that is a balance issue.