Faustmann Balance Mod Release V1.06

User avatar
Tiera
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2344
Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012 00:08
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby Tiera » Mon 20 Feb 2017 21:43

Thanks for the answers.

Razzmann wrote:We try to avoid having objectively worse / better IFVs for the same price, especially if they are effectively the same vehicle.

Balance-wise it's a good goal, but it's pretty hard to avoid that in the useful IFV cost range. And if AV differences don't count, aren't different Bradleys effectively the same vehicle as well?

If anything line infantry is more useful than it has ever been before. Jääkäri are overperforming very much

I know. Yet wouldn't call them old Jäger-level overperformers. One of the main reasons people take Jääkäri 90s so often are the transport options, after all.

Hence I wanted to avoid them being spammable, while retaining their utility, by cutting the number of cards and removing the spammy 5-pt transport option with more than 1 AV, as well as the better XA variants.

and it is not like Finland lacks either good fire support or good shock infantry.

This is true - note that I wanted to get rid of their go-to fire support unicorn as well.

They will still be a very strong (and most like must have) unit. We'd rather not remove the KT as it is certainly a very strong and for some people a problematic unit, Finland (and Baltic Front) really rely on it.

I'd rather see more KPTV BTR-80s instead of mandatory KT spam.

Changing base Jäkääri would not fix the issue at all since nobody takes them really.

Because Jääkäri '90s are totally superiour investment with the current Kk 62 stats.
Image

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Mon 20 Feb 2017 21:48

Are you going to do anything about the Japanese infantry equipment?

You mentioned that weak inf AT was a problem for BD, but strong inf AT could become part of Japans flavour. Replace the unrealistic M72 and M67 with the CG 2 and PzF 3.
Image

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby Razzmann » Mon 20 Feb 2017 22:08

Sgt._Pepper wrote:Are you going to do anything about the Japanese infantry equipment?

For now, not more than what is mentioned.
We thought about giving line infantry the Pzf 3, but that seemed too cancerous for 15 points. We are also currently experimenting around with the Japenese shock squad, instead of turning it into a standard 10men squad.

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Tue 21 Feb 2017 00:49

If you give the CG 2 to the Cat C version, you free up one unit that you could make into another shock squad. Currently BD only has 2 different shock squads, that's quite meager.
Image

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby FrangibleCover » Tue 21 Feb 2017 01:04


So, that's a UK/NL deck going up the right-hand side there. Is that prior to the Dutch rethink and you thought it was too strong or is that what we're going with now?
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

throwaway
Lieutenant
Posts: 1262
Joined: Fri 27 Feb 2015 21:23
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby throwaway » Tue 21 Feb 2017 02:42

too strong

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby Fade2Gray » Tue 21 Feb 2017 04:44

Wolf In Arms wrote:Given the F-15J changes, I'm really holding out for a revisit to the NORAD airtab for some improvements.


Come come now, we can't totally undo the Hollywood Myth now, can we?
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

User avatar
FoxZz
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 614
Joined: Thu 27 Mar 2014 19:16
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby FoxZz » Tue 21 Feb 2017 18:22

To be fair, the F-15J shouldn't have 55% ECM. It's ECM suite is inferior to the Rafale or Typhoon's one.
Furthermore, until now, combat planes were limited to 50% ECM, only SEAD could go higher. I don't see a reason for this to change.

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby Razzmann » Tue 21 Feb 2017 18:24

There was also no reason for Micas or Derbys having more than 60%. And there is more stuff on that list.

User avatar
FoxZz
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 614
Joined: Thu 27 Mar 2014 19:16
Contact:

Re: Faustmann Balance Mod Announcement

Postby FoxZz » Tue 21 Feb 2017 18:45

Mica or Derby are more advanced and better missiles than the AMRAAM A/B, so yes, it makes actually sense that they have better stats. (Even though 70% acc is too much imho).

I'd keep the F-15J ECM ay 50% but would buff the AAM-3 to 65% considering it's an improved AIM-9M.

Also no 6HE F&F missiles plz, it's not necessary.

Return to “Modding”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests