Jump to content
World Warfare
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Balance Changes


Which Units Do You Want to Adjust?  

82 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Units Do You Want to Adjust Most?

    • Mobile AA. Its overpowered!
      2
    • Strategic Bombers. Too good vs everything!
      22
    • StuG. Too easy to get killed!
      35
    • Navy units. Make them better! (AOE. Speed. Attack range)
      38
    • Katyusha. Too slow!
      35
    • Tanks. Too slow!
      32
    • Mobile Arty. Its overpowered!
      4
    • AA. Too easy to get killed!
      29
    • No need to adjust anything!
      7
    • Others. (Plz leave your opinions in comment! :))
      18


Recommended Posts

On 12/28/2016 at 1:15 PM, SnakeEater said:

The Snake's $.02.

For question 1, I will not only explain why I checked some units, but also why I didn't check others.

1. If some units are so overpowered that they have broken the balance? If any unit should be strengthened?

 

1. Which Units Do You Want to Adjust Most?

Mobile AA. Its overpowered!

- The Mobile AA (Wirbelwinds) in this game are not overpowered. It was a Quad 20 mm turret, mounted to a Panzer IV chassis. Each 20 mm Flak 38 auto cannon fired up to 450 rounds per minute putting out a combined 1800 rounds per minute. To put in perspective that is 30, 2 centimeter high explosive, armor piercing or incendiary rounds per second. 

- So if you ask me it may be a little underpowered.

- I also feel they should be allowed to attack ground units, at a minimum infantry and vehicle type troops. During the war they were used in this role more than in the Anti-Aircraft role and were extremely effective.

 

Strategic Bombers. Too good vs everything!

- Yes Strategic Bombers are used for their namesake, Strategic Bombings. They were very effective against industry and infrastructure but when used in a tactical role they were disastrous. Read about "Operation Cobra" July 24 and 25, 1944. The friendly casualties numbered 136 killed and 621 wounded over those two days from weather reduced visibility or wind drift.

- There is a need for an intermediate or tactical bomber such as the Junkers Ju 87 Stuka or the Republic P-47D Thunderbolt.

 

StuG. Too easy to get killed!

-Yes the Sturmgeschütz III is very easy to kill. But you must understand that it is a support type weapon system and is very limited in its capabilities because of it's lack of a rotating turret. I think maybe a slight increase in power (Hit points) and defense would be sufficient. (More about this in the answering of question 2)

 

Navy units. Make them better! (AOE. Speed. Attack range)

- Transport: Make them a LST (Landing Ship Transport) and allow them to load troops anywhere not just in harbors which would be more realistic and. also more effective. The crews of these boats nicknamed them Large Slow Targets. 

- Destroyer: Increase power and defense.

- Cruiser: AOE vs Aircraft!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Battleship: Increase attack power vs troops.

- Aircraft Carrier: Increase load capacity decrease supply usage.

 

Katyusha. Too slow!

- Yes, self explanatory.

 

Tanks. Too slow!

- No, but remove the transition timer for force march, it makes no sense. I just lock down turret change gear and go faster.

 

Mobile Arty. Its overpowered!

- NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Artillery is known as the King of Battle for a reason. When your King is isolated and can no longer move in chess you lose.

- Leave it alone, I will speak more on this in answering question two.

 

AA. Too easy to get killed!

- No, I will go into further details about this also in question two.

 

No need to adjust anything!

- Very good argument for this in answering question two but not entirely. Some units do need to be changed, some buffed some nerfed and some a combination.

 

2. Do you think the strategies we are using are very repetitive and lack of diversity due to the unbalance?

 

There is one thing I would like to be clarified, and two things I want to clarify before answering this question.

The one I want clarified is, "WHO IS WE?" Because to answer the question properly you must know what strategies are being discussed.

The first thing I want to clarify is that this game is Awesome. It is one of the most broad scoped strategy game out at this time. It also allows the player the use of the; in my opinion, best combination of strategic planning and tactical execution of the different levels of warfare and yet remain extremely user friendly. Whether this is by design or by accident I am not sure, but the importance of production and campaign planning at a strategic level, and the necessity of combined arms, use of terrain, and a variety of tactics for use at crucial points in a battle at the tactical level, allows a player with the better understanding of warfare a distinct and overwhelming advantage in this game. If it is by design, and you are an advisor GREAT JOB for one and two slap the $#!+ out of anyone trying to change it to much. If it is by accident then you have stumbled onto greatness. Stop listening to the loud majority. Who cares what they think. A Philosopher named Heraclitus from Ancient Greece said this about people when it comes to Warfare, he said, “Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a Warrior, and he will bring the others back.”  He is basically saying that only 10% will be successful in the art of warfare, and that only 1% will Truly, I mean Truly understand and not just succeed but excel at Warfare. So keep that in mind when making changes.

The second thing I want to clarify is Strategy vs Tactics. Strategy is a method of play to achieve a certain goal laid out over the course of an entire Battlefield from entry to Victory. Tactics is methods of approaching single objective in support of one's overall Strategy.

So now that that is settled let's answer this question. The current style of play (I refuse to call it a strategy, because it isn't) that is popular in this game is Bomber, Fighter, and StuG III spam. This is easily defeated. A strategy is a plan of actions laid out over a course of short term goals or phases to accomplish a specific overall purpose. If you think a bunch of the same type troops bashing noobs and surrendered cities is a viable strategy, then you are the ones complaining about certain troops being over or underpowered. Each troop in this game has a specific function. One must understand how these different troop functions either compliment or enhance each other's effectiveness in a tactical situation. Either you will reach this understanding, or you will not. I will say this to the developers, if I had a say over mass changes to please the many FarmVillians and losing the true Strategists, or change nothing and send the sheep back to FarmVille.... I would say, "See ya Ole' McDonald and take your dog with you." 

I am not posting this to teach you how to play and win at this game. I am only stating that this game isn't unbalanced. The main problem is not the game, it's the lack of understanding and use of combined arms by players.

 

SnakeEater Out!

Jets no like AA, you should not have wasted 40 troops count on jets. It's this lack of understanding that causes the complaints, which then causes changes  to be made that fits a certain style of play. If it only took jets to win a war then why do countries produce tanks and train infantry.

Well freaking said i get some things are a bit underpowerd (just the katuska to me) but the games well balanced besides the navy  ands whats snakes $0.2?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The Snake's $.02. For question 1, I will not only explain why I checked some units, but also why I didn't check others. 1. If some units are so overpowered that they have broken the balance?

First let me say the game is pretty balanced as it is, having said that there are a few tweaks that I feel would improve it. 1. For the most part, I think the units are balanced. I do think st

Well i played this game almost 500 hour. i got 11 game played and 9 win. my avr. score is 190k. Mostly i always in top 3. Evryone use same tactics in the game:  - Brings enough mobile aa (la

Posted Images

I think infantry is underpowered against everything, cmon infantry in almost every war is center of the fighting force (excluding the gulf war which was focused on planes and tanks)

image.jpgMany could argue it can capture buildings so it makes it valuable but when do you actually see infantry in battles other than the end.

image.jpg

the next is the stupid aa on ships the only ships with aa are cruisers which is wrong battleships and more importantly aircraft carriers had aa guns. I understand game balance but why would you not put aa on a carrier cmon these aren't escort carriers 

 

image.jpg

 

 

 

 

Edited by Supehooman
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sunsy1 said:

What dose it mean tho like why dose he do that

"My two cents" ("my 2¢") and its longer version "put my two cents in" is an American idiomatic expression,[1] taken from the original English idiom "to put in my two cents worth" or "my two-cents." It is used to preface the tentative statement of one’s opinion. By deprecating the opinion to follow—suggesting its value is only two cents, a very small amount—the user of the phrase hopes to lessen the impact of a possibly contentious statement, showing politeness and humility. However, it is also sometimes used ironically when expressing a strongly held opinion. The phrase is also sometimes used out of habit to preface uncontentious opinions.

 

 

In Snakes case is it always used ironically :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2017 at 0:45 PM, Sunsy1 said:

What dose it mean tho like why dose he do that

 

On 1/14/2017 at 0:45 PM, Sunsy1 said:

What dose it mean tho like why dose he do that

 

On 1/15/2017 at 1:00 AM, MkV said:

"My two cents" ("my 2¢") and its longer version "put my two cents in" is an American idiomatic expression,[1] taken from the original English idiom "to put in my two cents worth" or "my two-cents." It is used to preface the tentative statement of one’s opinion. By deprecating the opinion to follow—suggesting its value is only two cents, a very small amount—the user of the phrase hopes to lessen the impact of a possibly contentious statement, showing politeness and humility. However, it is also sometimes used ironically when expressing a strongly held opinion. The phrase is also sometimes used out of habit to preface uncontentious opinions.

 

 

In Snakes case is it always used ironically :)

 

 

Exactly what MkV said.

On 1/14/2017 at 6:24 PM, Commanderburger said:

Idk

SnakeEater Out!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may or may not b correct area for this but lets list some changes im seeing that r needed in my opinion. 

1. Y is my stug moving like arty speed? Stugs could hit 38 mph on rd 22 over land plz speed up stug its motorized thus able to move as fast as a sherman.

2. At gun issue, 57mm at guns were almost always towed by jeeps and trucks can we create something that will allow at gun to move with say a jeep say it takes 3 minutes to hook up and once in position 3 minutes to dig in and b ready...

3. In real world history gigants or gigs carried 4 tanks at most and never anything bugger than a tiger due to weight issue, we should look into creating a more realistic carrying base here...

4. Idk if turrets have gotten stronger or units weakr or both something is not right, lost 8 stugs and shermans taking out a single lvl3 turret wow i must have been noobing it up the other day lol, can u plz let us know if turret strength and ir unit weaknnesses have been implimented?

Enjoy yall day everyone and above all b safe

Link to post
Share on other sites

We want to assure everyone that, with the help of our moderators and our team working directly with the developers, your feedback is valuable and not forgotten and is passed on.

 

Just to be sure, has everyone seen the changes made with the new update which you can follow here: 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KapitanSkorzeny said:

This may or may not b correct area for this but lets list some changes im seeing that r needed in my opinion. 

1. Y is my stug moving like arty speed? Stugs could hit 38 mph on rd 22 over land plz speed up stug its motorized thus able to move as fast as a sherman.

2. At gun issue, 57mm at guns were almost always towed by jeeps and trucks can we create something that will allow at gun to move with say a jeep say it takes 3 minutes to hook up and once in position 3 minutes to dig in and b ready...

3. In real world history gigants or gigs carried 4 tanks at most and never anything bugger than a tiger due to weight issue, we should look into creating a more realistic carrying base here...

4. Idk if turrets have gotten stronger or units weakr or both something is not right, lost 8 stugs and shermans taking out a single lvl3 turret wow i must have been noobing it up the other day lol, can u plz let us know if turret strength and ir unit weaknnesses have been implimented?

Enjoy yall day everyone and above all b safe

Sup captain, understand that each troop counter isn't a single unit it is a squad or fight or what ever. I do believe that to relieve the bandwidth burden less troop markers equals faster download and upload speeds. I also don't think it takes to much away from the realism.

As for Stugs speed, yes they may have been faster but they were attached to the infantry as a mobile gun platform. Meaning that even though they could go that fast didn't mean that was the norm. Armored vehicles in combat situations are extremely high maintenance no matter the quality of the manufacturing, so crews didn't push the limits of performance unless absolutely necessary. 

Lastly for the turrets the player you were attacking may have had the General that affects the performance of the turrets so that maybe why his seemed better.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok ppl good morning good evening depending on where u live. Today we shall discus turrets, mzs and various others.

Plz ms. Jane plz allow us to control city turrets! This is insane when u spend hrs building only tyo have someone come in with a scout to draw turret fire. WE NEED CONTROL OF THEM!

2) the other day i watched bombers hitting an lc that had lvl4 turrets...not a single bomber was lost! This is autrocious to b polite. Whats the sense of building turrets when u cant control their fire and they r so weak they kill nothing. Even lvl 7 and up r a waste of time t9 build as each takes hrs to get ti that lvl and die in two minuts under bombers.

3) we need, as i mentioned before to b allowed four turrets at each city and we should b allowed to place those turrets anywhere within that cities boundaries not just fixed in or around city. 

4) again what is the purpose of a military zone when associated city is taken...zero, u cant build at it u cant warehouse rss...plz fix...mzs r just that fortresses that r capable of self sustainment.

5) back to the bomber issue, we all like bombers but they r way to powerful, especialy when ur fighting a gemmer who has a brand new force in one minute...as previously mentioned b4 bombers were a good tool but not a war winning weapon. Plz lower their hit points along with the hit points of gigs its just way to much...either that or up the hitting power of the turrets,,  and y r city turrets not designed with 4 guns like lc turrets? 1944 berlin the so called flack towers were huge and had multiple guns and for more than a year they were pounded by first the allies then the russians and were still standing and operation on the last day of war...in my opinion one should not b allowed to simply bring in 30 bombers and destroy 30 hrs of work at city...this needs to, this must b corrected !!!

6) has anyone thought about rewards when capturing city, not just capping city but actually obtaining part of whatever was left their, i.e; assume i was making stugs and my city was over run the attacker who took my city should b awarded some of the produced stugs, planes etc not just 2000 rss...and again i will ask that some type of system b implimented to firce players to take rzs and villages around a city as it is now i can just cap city and wallllla im rich no this is crazy, a city needs life to sustain itself...

7) finally no i have not noticed any vusabke changes ti any units, just hit points of some went up which brings me to anothr subject, currently i have a lvl5 stug hit points r still below 4gs y, if i lvl m40 up its above 10gs...have we started to investigate these issues yet?

And lastly ships again, they r worthless no one really uses them y becyz they r worthless! The fire from aa guns against aircraft must b fixed y is it taking 6 minutes for 3 fighters to shoot down a single gig? Hit points fighter vs gig and scout in my opinion need to b adjusted..

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KapitanSkorzeny said:

Ok ppl good morning good evening depending on where u live. Today we shall discus turrets, mzs and various others.

Plz ms. Jane plz allow us to control city turrets! This is insane when u spend hrs building only tyo have someone come in with a scout to draw turret fire. WE NEED CONTROL OF THEM!

2) the other day i watched bombers hitting an lc that had lvl4 turrets...not a single bomber was lost! This is autrocious to b polite. Whats the sense of building turrets when u cant control their fire and they r so weak they kill nothing. Even lvl 7 and up r a waste of time t9 build as each takes hrs to get ti that lvl and die in two minuts under bombers.

3) we need, as i mentioned before to b allowed four turrets at each city and we should b allowed to place those turrets anywhere within that cities boundaries not just fixed in or around city. 

4) again what is the purpose of a military zone when associated city is taken...zero, u cant build at it u cant warehouse rss...plz fix...mzs r just that fortresses that r capable of self sustainment.

5) back to the bomber issue, we all like bombers but they r way to powerful, especialy when ur fighting a gemmer who has a brand new force in one minute...as previously mentioned b4 bombers were a good tool but not a war winning weapon. Plz lower their hit points along with the hit points of gigs its just way to much...either that or up the hitting power of the turrets,,  and y r city turrets not designed with 4 guns like lc turrets? 1944 berlin the so called flack towers were huge and had multiple guns and for more than a year they were pounded by first the allies then the russians and were still standing and operation on the last day of war...in my opinion one should not b allowed to simply bring in 30 bombers and destroy 30 hrs of work at city...this needs to, this must b corrected !!!

6) has anyone thought about rewards when capturing city, not just capping city but actually obtaining part of whatever was left their, i.e; assume i was making stugs and my city was over run the attacker who took my city should b awarded some of the produced stugs, planes etc not just 2000 rss...and again i will ask that some type of system b implimented to firce players to take rzs and villages around a city as it is now i can just cap city and wallllla im rich no this is crazy, a city needs life to sustain itself...

7) finally no i have not noticed any vusabke changes ti any units, just hit points of some went up which brings me to anothr subject, currently i have a lvl5 stug hit points r still below 4gs y, if i lvl m40 up its above 10gs...have we started to investigate these issues yet?

And lastly ships again, they r worthless no one really uses them y becyz they r worthless! The fire from aa guns against aircraft must b fixed y is it taking 6 minutes for 3 fighters to shoot down a single gig? Hit points fighter vs gig and scout in my opinion need to b adjusted..

1. After the first 12 hours of a game, turrets alone aren't going to defend your city, nor should they. Control is irrelevant. Think of them as a steady income source of xp, cash, and steel. Turrets are fine, what needs to change are your expectations and tactics. Turrets have a set target priority of fire, learn what it is and how to manipulate it.

2. Once again, if turrets are your only (or even if they are your primary) defense, you're doing it wrong. Turrets alone cannot, and should not, defend a location.

3. Three turrets is fine, you're asking for major coding for something that isn't broken. 

4. MZ's are not only useful, imo they are critical. Once again, they don't need fixing, you just need to figure out how to use them. 

5. It's true that bombers are used a lot, but they are beatable, try using things other than just turrets. AA, Mobile AA, and Jets/Fighters kill them just fine. Just don't expect a couple of towed AA to kill the huge bomber fleets that we see running around.

6. This is a good idea, but a low priority imo. As for the players not taking of the rss around the city, different players have different priorities on how to spend their command points. Some take everything in sight, and some concentrate on cities. There are pros and cons to each method, the game shouldn't force you to go one way or the other. Besides, you should never interrupt an opponent when they are making a mistake.

7. Why are you saying that the units having different hit points is an issue that needs to be investigated? 

8. Ships are not worthless, they are situational. Their usefulness ranges from "not very useful" to "critical for success" depending on a number of factors, mainly geographical obviously, but that's to be expected. As for the fighters vs the gigs, there are other factors that could be affecting what you are seeing, for example, was the gig being healed? Was it moving? Did the gig player have Ramke? Was it blitzed? Please don't ask for the game to be changed every time something doesn't work exactly the way you think it should. Try new things, learn more about the game, join a decent league and get experience and training. You will find some of the issues you are having can be overcome by changing what you're doing and doesn't require the game to be modified for you to be successful.

 

Edited by MkV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. I dont know how to play this game evidently, but whatever they r suggestions nothing more and i disagree with ur expllanations about turret sets priorty fire, how is an empty gig a priorty target???. If uda took the time to look u would see ive been in a good league for a while and i have hrs of play and a descent record. Everything  i put on here r simply ideas some u may disagree with some u may not...the only bad idea is one not thrown out for the public to ponder. The one thing we will always have is agreement or disagreement...everyone will not be on same page always!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...