The G43 upgrade on storm kinda are bad. This upgrade is intended to I guess make them front line infantry. But it's not that great since the one that pg's get are cheaper and better cus they still have stg's.
So here is an idea on how to make it better.
1. Change storm RA from 0.75 to 0.83
2. MP40 upgrade now gives them RA 0.9 modifier (makes it 0.747 which is +0.4% from original this is not much as the pg vet rework gave them +0.6% better RA as a result)
3. MP40 upgrade locks g43 but not shreck.
4. Give stomr 5th man with kar98k
5. Increase the upgrade cost to 90/100 muni
6. (optional) Remove Camo
Improving the stormtrooper g43 package upgrade
28 Jan 2020, 17:27 PM
#1
Posts: 1563
28 Jan 2020, 17:30 PM
#2
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Dude stop making shite threads and ffs there’s nothing wrong with Stormtroopers.
28 Jan 2020, 18:00 PM
#3
Posts: 1563
Dude stop making shite threads and ffs there’s nothing wrong with Stormtroopers.
There is the g43 upgrade is useless.
28 Jan 2020, 18:04 PM
#4
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
There is the g43 upgrade is useless.
There should not be a G43 upgrade available for ST. Neither G43 nor ST should be available in that commander...
In addition since the ability's is name "Jaeger Light Infantry" it does not have to provide G43 to all (or any unit) it could provide other bonuses...
28 Jan 2020, 18:31 PM
#6
Posts: 1563
> Rank 2608 in 1v1
> Makes multiple threads lecturing everyone on why certain units he can’t use are underpowered
This is the codguy effect. You never banned codguy so now his clones are popping up. @mods
Look man storms should be a badass unit. Not some pussy hide and get cheese wipe unit. And why the fuck are they in elite troops. They make sense in infantry or meme doctrine. Unless they are bad ass they don't really fit elite troops cus let's face it even ass grens are more elite then them right now.
28 Jan 2020, 18:34 PM
#7
Posts: 1563
Or can we get a JCS style 5 man 3cp elite special unit in elite troops. Like rangers but not quite as badass. Maybe with 2x mg42 upgrade at T4.
28 Jan 2020, 20:21 PM
#8
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Each unit had different HP i know that. And that was good cus that didn't mean having 4 men squads was a disadvantage but a tradeoff. But in coh2 having 4 men squad is all disadvantage with no benefit at all.
Yeah I know it's a nightmare to implement coh1 system. If you do even a little bit coding you would know.
The balance between 6 men conscripts and 4 Men grenadier was fine so the 4 men squad is not the problem.
The problem started with the WFA and the power creep that they brought and especially with introduction of ST44VG/Penal when power creep increased. So it is actually the combination of high lethality and squad that can not afford to take causalities that is the issue.
28 Jan 2020, 22:08 PM
#9
Posts: 1563
The balance between 6 men conscripts and 4 Men grenadier was fine so the 4 men squad is not the problem.
The problem started with the WFA and the power creep that they brought and especially with introduction of ST44VG/Penal when power creep increased. So it is actually the combination of high lethality and squad that can not afford to take causalities that is the issue.
Yeah it's only cons vs grens that are ok. But nothing else cus 4 men squad are just all disadvantages. Grens have less over all hp, drops dps faster, has less over all dps. It has nothing to with WFA and Brits but the stupid standardization of models.
Let me educate you. CoH1:
Rifles 6 men 330 hp
Volks 5 men 300 hp
grens 4 men 320 hp
Rangers 6 men 390 hp + elite armor (basically functions as 1.78 armor)
Paras 6 men 390 hp
Stromtrooper 4 men 380 hp (elite armor at vet 2)
You think it was that difficult to balance them. No it was not.
The problem with coh1 was the Brits/PE. For whom the devs made an armor type that had -40% dmg and -15% RA against almost everything except for snipers and arty(arty suffered from -90% dmg, that on top of brits trenches game em -95% dmg).
Now look at coh2:
I don't really need to show you this do I.
28 Jan 2020, 22:12 PM
#10
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Most entities have the same 80 HP but not the same EHP vs small arms fire. So that is not the issue.
Again COH1 infatry system was unnecessary complicated making some units untouchable by certain weapon and eradicated by others. And weapons DPS varied from theoretical to practical due to over kill. Moving away from it was improvement.
Relic learned the lessons and move to simpler system with similar potentials. They tested those type of solution and did not like them. That is part of the reason the give up armor on most infatry and abandoned 40 HP entities.
28 Jan 2020, 22:26 PM
#11
Posts: 1563
Most entities have the same 80 HP but not the same EHP vs small arms fire. So that is not the issue.
Again COH1 infatry system was unnecessary complicated making some units untouchable by certain weapon and eradicated by others. Moving away from it was improvement.
Relic learned the lessons and move to simpler system with similar potentials and that is part of the reason the give up armor on most infatry and abandoned 40 HP entities.
Their were never any 40 hp entities.
Secondly give concrete example of your claim "some units untouchable by certain weapon and eradicated by others".
I do know that their are ehp but unlike coh1 where comparable units hps were close in coh2 it is not.
Cons 6 men 442 ehp
grens 4 men 352 ehp
volks 5 men 400 ehp
rifles 5 men 412 ehp
sections 4 men 356 ehp (377 ehp with the change)
Ranges 5 men 548 ehp
paraps 6 men 505 ehp
Commandos 5 men 556 ehp
Shocks 6 mwn 480 hp + 1.5 armor (720 ehp)
guards 6 men 495 ehp
Obers 4 men 457 ehp
falls 4 men 386 ehp
jagers 4 men 400 ehp
storms 4 men 427 ehp
agrens 5 men 421 ehp (532 ehp with 6 men)
JCS 5 men 440 ehp
look at it there is a huge difference.
28 Jan 2020, 22:37 PM
#12
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Their were never any 40 hp entities.
Partisan where 40 HP entities and that is why you can not merge to them...
Secondly give concrete example of your claim "some units untouchable by certain weapon and eradicated by others".
Knight cross holder took little damage from weapons but melted to flamers
Even that is true that would make better balanced not a better system...
28 Jan 2020, 22:57 PM
#13
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Snipers were also close to 40HP at the beginning.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
29 Jan 2020, 06:10 AM
#14
Posts: 1563
Partisan where 40 HP entities and that is why you can not merge to them...
OK didi not know that.
Knight cross holder took little damage from weapons but melted to flamers
So not true. Pre OF KCH were badass vs everything. The weakness to flames was given cus their armour type was also used by Brit officers. After OF KCH were nerfed hard even non vetted bared riflemen could beat them without breaking a sweat.
Even that is true that would make better balanced not a better system...
We were not talking about what makes a better system but what made a more balanced system. In an effort to prove me wrong and also forgetting what the point of this bak and forth was you at last agreed with me that coh1's system is more balanced. Good JOB!!!!
29 Jan 2020, 06:11 AM
#15
Posts: 1563
Snipers were also close to 40HP at the beginning.
1. I did not know that
2. I was only thinking of coh1
29 Jan 2020, 10:12 AM
#16
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Even (if) that is true that would make better balanced not a better system...
We were not talking about what makes a better system but what made a more balanced system. In an effort to prove me wrong and also forgetting what the point of this bak and forth was you at last agreed with me that coh1's system is more balanced. Good JOB!!!!
I never claimed that one of the other system where more balanced. I have said that COH2 is superior even if it not more balanced. And my original point is that adding different cover modifier make the system more complicated for no good reason. There simpler solutions.
29 Jan 2020, 17:35 PM
#17
Posts: 1563
I never claimed that one of the other system where more balanced. I have said that COH2 is superior even if it not more balanced. And my original point is that adding different cover modifier make the system more complicated for no good reason. There simpler solutions.
Yeah you did not, I did. Guess you really did forget what we were talking about.
you see, you say this :
Even that is true that would make better balanced not a better system...
And then contradict your previous statement by saying:
I have said that COH2 is superior even if it not more balanced
What with you people and only thinking of winning arguments to the point of contradicting and forgetting earlier stuff.
You did not say it was complicated you said "special" modifiers or something of sorts.
29 Jan 2020, 17:56 PM
#18
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Yeah you did not, I did. Guess you really did forget what we were talking about.
you see, you say this :
And then contradict your previous statement by saying:
What with you people and only thinking of winning arguments to the point of contradicting and forgetting earlier stuff.
You did not say it was complicated you said "special" modifiers or something of sorts.
Let me be crystal clear because this becoming ridiculous and I have no intention of continue it.
I have clearly stated that adding different cover modifier to grenadier g43 is not a good solution because it complicates things when there are simpler solutions.
I have never made any comment on, which game infantries, where better balanced, in COH1 or COH2.
I have however said that the COH2 system is superior because it simpler. I am now adding it is superior because it has weapon profiles and relative positioning.
I have not contradicted myself in relative post and I now am simply moving on.
29 Jan 2020, 18:07 PM
#19
Posts: 1563
Wow Sore looser much. On the topic, do you have any suggestion on making strom g43 upgrades better???
Let me be crystal clear because this becoming ridiculous and I have no intention of continue it.
I have clearly stated that adding different cover modifier to grenadier g43 is not a good solution because it complicates things when there are simpler solutions.
I have never made any comment on, which game infantries, where better balanced, in COH1 or COH2.
I have however said that the COH2 system is superior because it simpler. I am now adding it is superior because it has weapon profiles and relative positioning.
I have not contradicted myself in relative post and I now am simply moving on.
29 Jan 2020, 18:10 PM
#20
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
... On the topic, do you have any suggestion on making strom g43 upgrades better???
Read post 4.
Also reduce cost to match Pgs.
As for "jager light infatry upgrade" it could provide 5 g43s with a semi auto weapon profile +1 entity for the squad it is available.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
3 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.624225.735+2
- 5.920405.694+4
- 6.276108.719+27
- 7.306114.729+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1237
Board Info
325 users are online:
325 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49157
Welcome our newest member, 88clbblive
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, 88clbblive
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM