Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
1st of all, the reload would not fix the problem for 2 reasons.
1. you just move back to spawn and reload, no danger here
2. You don’t have to reload the first time stuka comes into the battlefield and the barrage IS COSTLY as hell, so you would not be firing any time soon anyway. Don’t get me wrong though… Barrage is costly, but it’s at least twice as worth it.The main problem with stuka is not it’s damage, it’s the splash. Stuka barrage covers a massive area and even if you nerf damage by 50%, it would still wipe infantry (majority of your army if you’re Airborne/Infantry) super easy.
I think most people don’t get it, but let me say it like this:
“What’s the biggest difference between rocket artillery and the howitzers?”
Sounds pretty stupid does it not? Yet most people don’t get the answer.
The answer is “how much time does it take to fire the whole barrage.”Let’s look at the example. If we look at how much stuka kills, we can compare it to B4.
Firing 6 shells with B4 or any other howitzer will take ~1 minute… And for stuka? ~4 seconds. That’s the main issue.
If b4 shot 6 shells at once would it be OP? Cause that’s stuka right now… But the rabbit hole goes even deeper.Stuka is one of a kind even for artillery! It’s the only artillery piece that can fire all the shells/rockets at once in the style of creeping barrage! The main difference that instead of a big area, it can cover 6 smaller areas!
Let’s say there are targets in area A, area B and area C (look at the pictures below).Normal artillery can attack 1 area. So let’s say it hits area C. 1 shell drops. It may kill something, but if it does not, you retreat everything from area C and the rest is untouched (area A and area B are safe)…
Now if we look at stuka… It can drop 2 massive rockets on each area, clearing ALL the units inside of the area and if something survives it, it will retreat. In this scenario you can say that stuka has 3 times as much killing power because it can use creeping barrage on all 3 areas at the same time.
Oh yeah… Creeping barrage on howitzers… Let’s keep it simple… Area 3 will get the initial blast from the creeping barrage, but area B and area A still have time to retreat or simply move, before creeping barrage hits them… Stuka hits all 3 at once.In short. The main problem with stuka is:
A) it’s rocket arty, so it shoots all of the rockets at the same time… Hits bigger area AT ONCE leaving only corpses.
B) Splash.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
This is the main issue. The main problem with stuka is that it has massive splash. I think it’s the 2nd biggest splash in game (right after B4). Imagine shooting 6x B4s at once…What would really fix the stuka problem is reducing it’s splash, damage is fine, it should kill tanks/buildings etc., but it covers WAY TOO MUCH AREA. Don’t balance it around how much splash 1 rocket has, it shoots 6 at the same time! Balance it around how much splash 6 rockets have combined.
This is stuka area of effect in 5 seconds:
This is typical howitzer area of effect AFTER 1 MINUTE:
Non ammo cost/reload can make it balanced. Cause the stuka will wipe way much than enemy pay for his troops anyway.
Testing on the video:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/218183761 (same link as in the comment below)-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
The other heavy mortars (if there are any???) did not catch my attention or they are not SS/USF.
Anyway every heavy mortar works pretty much the same and my solution should work fine for every each one of them :p
Artillery is not that big of a deal unless we talk rocket artyWhat’s really painful rn is the heavy mortars107mm emplacment for US inf and 120mm mortar for SE
They should be ability onlyI propose making them fire 1 shell with normal accuracy they have now (10 munitions)and fire one shell with really good accuracy for 40 munitions.
Each on cooldown of 10 secondsOr keep the standard barrages on, but if you disable automatic fire on these mortars, my solution makes them more useful (they can switch targets faster).
As per snipers:
1. reduce their range by 50% (yes, they have that much range…)
2. a) remove suppression
or
b) make them have 0.1 accuracy vs suppressed targets (Soldiers “go prone” for a reason 😉 )Copied my thoughts from discord. Enjoy.
I think jacksons should get a slight range buff like +10 meters, to make for their glass cannon playstyle and good players should be able to kite german tanks.
This ability on spamable unit might be OP 😛OK, so again historical accuracy argument came when talking balance, so I thought of a different idea.
Basicly at the moment. HVAP should penetrate everything with 99% chance from long range, BESIDES:
a) King Tiger (high chance to pen)
b) JT (Medium-high chance to pen)
c) anthing that has more than 220 mm of effective armor up front in any place. (Dunno which tank would have more, so let’s put it as is, maybe sturmtiger in the future)Anything that this round does not pen with a super high chance and is not on the list is probably a bug that will be looked at and fixed ASAP (thanks meatshield <3).
So I came up with another idea. Based on the documents I posted, accuracy report of those guns was equivalent of 3 minutes of angle. 3 inch group at 100 m!
For some of you these mean nothing, so let’s put it that way…
These shells were as accurate as the rifles in that era. Pershing shooting these shells could be compared to a sniper or surgeon.
Soooooo…Target weak spot ability!
Tiger has OP long-shot ability, so why not add something similar, yet different for the pershing?
How I think it should work:
1. 1.2 range of the normal pershing range (M304 shells had higher speed and could be delivered much further).
2. Ability always pens.
3. Damage is of the normal pershing damage. It does not deal less damage.
4. Shell apply 5-10 seconds stun (5 for Tiger/Panther and below and 10 vs Super heavies like KT)Tuning the balance of the ability is one thing, but you get the main idea:
Always penetrates, applies stun, does good damage, slightly more range.What would it fix? First of all Pershing costs ton of resources AND FINALLY could be used to counter german tanks instead of hiding from them. Because it does not have crazy range, you would have to flank with pershing to use it which rewards good tacticians…
I can only find it good for the game and justified, because Tiger has it’s crazy Long-shot ability 😀
Share your thoughts 😛I don’t know if you’re trolling me or not meatshield, but I’m talking about adding M304 round, which had one of the best penetration values in the whole allied tank arsenal.
I don’t think you can misread it, but it had ~7 inches of pen on 1000 yards against 30* degrees plate and when you convert it to normal human beings values it equals to 178 mm of pen on 914 meters. against 30* degrees plate
30* degrees sloped plate.
The following text and illustrations are reproduced from a U.S. War Department pamphlet published in January 1945.
Armor penetration values in inches against 30 degree plates.
How the shell looked like
Complete penetration of glacis plate of German Pz Kpfw V (Panther) Tank by Shot, A.P., 90mm, T33 at a range of 1000 yards.
All that is here: http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/90-mm-ammunition/
Shipment of the shells arrived in the 2nd last month of the war. These shells should penetrate everything on long range imo balance/realism-wise.
Also:
accuracy report of those guns was equivalent of 3 minutes of angle
3 inch group at 100 mthats as good as any rifle of the eralol :p
Anyway, ability to penetrate KT on long range with lower damage does not sound that terrifying. KT has +/- jackson range, so it’s not a big problem, especially when Jackson would have to pen 4-5 times to destroy KT I believe 🙂
Watch me streams duh… 😛
And for a better answer,
A) Game knowledgeplay a lot, but also learn the stats as much as you can. It does not have to be specific stats, like for example in vCoH, you need 5 pak43 shots to kill a churchill AVRE (pre-nerf). It can be like:
-This LMG will suppress me in 3 seconds without cover. In yellow in 6, so I can do this or that.
-Game knowledge, for example which OKW doc gives you what ability on SS Grenediers or which 210 mp.
– etc…B) Experience
Know what other good players like to do. For example Ragnar and sean like to spam 210 mp units, where Ragnar also likes to rush buildings and play a long game until he gets his King Tiger (you are a fucking cunt Ragnar, really xD).
C) Ability to make good tactics.
This can be split into 2:
a) map knowledge (you can quickly make shots knowing the sweet spots of the map and know where to go first)b) Knowing what to do after you do sth, make a list of things you have to do. A lot of players go around rusing X, Y, B (cyka), but after they do it, they just stop planning and hope for the best
You have to be more than that. For example:
1. I want to rush Armored Car.
2. I’ll have to rush the fuel points
2a) If I fail I have to help my ally do it.
2b) if it fails I have to switch to another strategy
3. When I get my armored car I’ll go and rush their fuel so they can’t get tanks quickly to counter me.
3a) If there is USF player a rush him first, cause USF does not have AT rifles like BritishD) Micro/Macro -> multitasking
This one is hard. You can play 100 hours or 1000 hours and it will not change. You probably know what Starcraft is. Micro/Macro is very important in this game.
If your micro is good you can dodge most of the enemy grenades, which already puts you in super good position.
If your macro is good, combined with game knowledge, you won’t be sitting with 1000 manpower wondering what to do with it 😛That’s my little guide on what is the difference between veteran and newbie. Hope you liked it and it was helpful. If you have any questions, hit the guy called Garry on discord AND WATCH HIS COH2 STREAMS 😛
If you want to balance cost around how cheap it was to make tanks, how about making t-34 cost 5 fuel and Tiger 300???
Cost is in-game performence. Panther is better than a Tiger in every possible way in most case scenarios. Why it should be cheaper then?
Because company of heroes has assymetric balance, axis having better tanks, while allies infantry, the only way to keep stuff really balanced is cost.
If tank A is better than tank B, tank A will cost more. If you wanna be realistic about the cost, then, trust me, axis will lose before they even deploy 1 heavy tank, cause the swarm of allied tanks will kill you 😉
[quote quote=4881]Side note though: Why does it say in Wikinger that the armor of the Panther tank is 140mm and not 160mm?? Wasn’t the frontal armor of the Panther 80mm while being sloped at 60 degrees??!! Meaning double the thickness! 80 + 80 = 160mm OR am I wrong here??!! [/quote]
Yes, you’re wrong. Panther hull armor was 80mm at 35 degree ~139.5 mm relative armor.
Also, you’re literally making a point where panther already has a better armor, speed and just so u know gun, cause both panther and tiger need 2 shots to kill a sherman in-game (correct me if I’m wrong about the panther).
Panther will also penetrated allied heavies more often than Tiger (Tiger pen at 1 km = 99mm, Panther’s 111mm).
Panther is Tiger+. Even realistically speaking, Tiger was not so impressive in 1944 and 1945 on western front. Allies had a lot of stuff to penetrate it. Panther was different, cause it had more relative armor and it was sloped.
You’ve literally answered your own questions why Panther is more expensive than the Tiger so…
Your only argument is that a better tank should be cheaper, cause it… used less fuel ? question mark ??? even though Panther is literally uber tiger xD
[quote quote=4877]We could delay both, Leig and Pack howitzer if necesary.[/quote]
Exactly what I’m asking for.
-
This reply was modified 6 years, 11 months ago by
