Raketens are too good
28 Mar 2020, 18:24 PM
#161
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
If I were to change the Rak I would like to try out 6 men and no retreat. I dont think its possible to add a gunshield, but Im no modder
28 Mar 2020, 18:39 PM
#162
Posts: 1351
If I were to change the Rak I would like to try out 6 men and no retreat. I dont think its possible to add a gunshield, but Im no modder
IMO it would make it too similar to other at guns. Also 6 men for latewar German army would be meh. Retreat is a cool feature and why not retain it? It all comes down to adequate pricing.
(09.10.2019): "You really are a jewel to this forum" - feels proud, thank You
(24.03.2020): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9PiqCeLEmM
(25.06.2020): http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198035553470/standings
28 Mar 2020, 20:26 PM
#163
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Every time AT gun shield is brought up: unless you magically change the hitbox to be something bigger, it won't block shit. The cover for the crew bugs out most of the time and i believe that other AT guns are more survivable is because the shell of enemy tanks ACTUALLY HIT the AT gun itself.
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.
28 Mar 2020, 20:37 PM
#164
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Every time AT gun shield is brought up: unless you magically change the hitbox to be something bigger, it won't block shit. The cover for the crew bugs out most of the time and i believe that other AT guns are more survivable is because the shell of enemy tanks ACTUALLY HIT the AT gun itself.
The gun shield does provide heavy cover AOE reduction under certain circumstances (enemy throwing a grenade from a certain angle, and I assume this works the same for ballistic weapons) and the gun crew itself getting cover from the gun shield means that the other crew members will spread out, while the Raketen's crew will bunch up on terrain cover. So even if it's mostly bugged, having a gun shield does provide a significant enough advantage to weigh into the discussion.
28 Mar 2020, 21:05 PM
#165
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
The gun shield does provide green cover AOE reduction under certain circumstances (enemy throwing a grenade from a certain angle, and I assume this works the same for ballistic weapons) and the gun crew itself getting cover means that the other crew members will spread out, while the Raketen's crew will bunch up on terrain cover. So even if it's mostly bugged, having a gun shield does provide a significant enough advantage to weigh into the discussion.
I didn't say it never works, but it does bug out more frequently than it should. The "certain" angle varies, but i just had the game open and throwing nades frontally while the AT gun is at neutral position (either aiming dead center or after reposition) and killing the crew (tested with 2 models).
Giving it a "gun shield" will not make the raketen as survivable as other AT guns, specially against tanks. That's my point. For everyone, just open the game, and compare them side by side with all other AT guns.
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.
28 Mar 2020, 23:02 PM
#166
Posts: 1392
Because 6 man weapon teams are standard setting of all factions and it makes perfect sense to compare everything to that.....
The main-problem is, beside of Brummbär, allii mediums and AI-tanks are better versus AI (crews) than Ost's + OKW's line-up.
So, even if Alliis get the Püppchen, it performs better versus Achse than versus Allii. xDD
28 Mar 2020, 23:26 PM
#167
Posts: 5279
The main-problem is, beside of Brummbär, allii mediums and AI-tanks are better versus AI (crews) than Ost's + OKW's line-up.
So, even if Alliis get the Püppchen, it performs better versus Achse than versus Allii. xDD
So do we normalize armour AI? No! Give more crew members!
Upgrade pintle mgs to be more reliable and help account for larger allied squads. Sherman's would retain but can be tuned via rof to have less impact than the pintle 42s.
Armour alignment has been a long time coming and heavies are seeing it now. Mediums next I hope
#stalinwept
29 Mar 2020, 13:38 PM
#168
Posts: 1351
The gun shield does provide heavy cover AOE reduction under certain circumstances (enemy throwing a grenade from a certain angle, and I assume this works the same for ballistic weapons) and the gun crew itself getting cover from the gun shield means that the other crew members will spread out, while the Raketen's crew will bunch up on terrain cover. So even if it's mostly bugged, having a gun shield does provide a significant enough advantage to weigh into the discussion.
True and nice to have it all explained
Yet, the retreat function on its own provides a hell of extra funcionality and can make the at more survivable. Additionally 5 men volks can recrew it really quickly. Most players just overextend it and it gets focused fired and then they complain. What should be looked at might be the reason why ZiS should have 6 men and Pak 4 men crews. It could be so much better to make both have the crew of 5 for many reasons.(09.10.2019): "You really are a jewel to this forum" - feels proud, thank You
(24.03.2020): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9PiqCeLEmM
(25.06.2020): http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198035553470/standings
30 Mar 2020, 12:29 PM
#169
Posts: 143
True and nice to have it all explained
The retreat function is ok, I think not being able to move backwards and having no gun shield is a bad combination.
I like your 5 man AT gun suggestion.
30 Mar 2020, 12:36 PM
#170
Posts: 1351
The retreat function is ok, I think not being able to move backwards and having no gun shield is a bad combination.
True. It can get you killed if you linger on a tiny bit too long before retreat. With rak one needs to retreat slightly earlier than you would with infantry units. But now thanks to increased range it should be less of an issue.
I like your 5 man AT gun suggestion.
Thanks. I'd implement it asap as ZiS is just too potent and Pak gets decrewed too easily compared to other ATs, especially in relation to its price and in connection with 4 men ost inf squads.
(09.10.2019): "You really are a jewel to this forum" - feels proud, thank You
(24.03.2020): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9PiqCeLEmM
(25.06.2020): http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198035553470/standings
30 Mar 2020, 19:37 PM
#171
Posts: 500
Correct.
Higher than PAK43/88. Higher than Allied 17 Pounder Emplacement.
Am I being trolled? Do you guys actually look this up? I mean, ballistics is a huge field of it's own but it doesn't take long to look the penetration numbers up and see this is wrong.
31 Mar 2020, 01:38 AM
#172
Posts: 785
The raketenwerfer is literally a Panzershrek on wheels. No difference besides the carriage, which one could argue made it more accurate at range and easier to load. It also entered service in 1943, only one year after the 6pdr/M1 anti tank gun used by UKF and USF respectively.
31 Mar 2020, 10:26 AM
#173
Posts: 10
The gun shield does provide heavy cover AOE reduction under certain circumstances (enemy throwing a grenade from a certain angle, and I assume this works the same for ballistic weapons) and the gun crew itself getting cover from the gun shield means that the other crew members will spread out, while the Raketen's crew will bunch up on terrain cover. So even if it's mostly bugged, having a gun shield does provide a significant enough advantage to weigh into the discussion.
So you cant fix the Rak being killed reliably by the thing its supposed to counter then? that's a shame. What about changing the crew to have a smaller size modifier so they are slightly harder to hit/insta decrew?
Are you able to fix the bug where you cant allow the Rak to move when cloaked (ie have it decloak, move, recloak) like camo'd ZIS/Paks can?
31 Mar 2020, 11:55 AM
#174
Posts: 956
Speaking of increased durability for AT gun squads behind the shield - yesterday I had an M1 57mm just waltz up to a (spotted) bunker, fire three shots off and reverse back without being taken out.
Meanwhile in Incendiary MG42 firing the whole time ?????????????
Would never get away with that with the Rak.
Meanwhile in Incendiary MG42 firing the whole time ?????????????
Would never get away with that with the Rak.
For Italy! We have outfoxed the enemy once more!
31 Mar 2020, 12:02 PM
#175
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Speaking of increased durability for AT gun squads behind the shield - yesterday I had an M1 57mm just waltz up to a (spotted) bunker, fire three shots off and reverse back without being taken out.
Meanwhile in Incendiary MG42 firing the whole time ?????????????
Would never get away with that with the Rak.
Well, go and walk up with rak against upgraded firing position and see for yourself?
These two are suppression area denial, they do nothing damage wise, unless you're pinned for a long time and accuracy penalty kicks in.
Hell, because of how suppression works and the fact that rak doesn't get penalized by it, rak will take little to no damage at all while suppressed for long enough time to kill FP.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
31 Mar 2020, 12:19 PM
#176
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Well, go and walk up with rak against upgraded firing position and see for yourself?
These two are suppression area denial, they do nothing damage wise, unless you're pinned for a long time and accuracy penalty kicks in.
That is incorrect both bunker do have good DPS in range 35. The reason they seem to do little damage is because of the suppression modifiers.
Hell, because of how suppression works and the fact that rak doesn't get penalized by it, rak will take little to no damage at all while suppressed for long enough time to kill FP.
Again this is incorrect RW does not get suppressed and takes full damage.
Having said that I will repeat my suggestion that ATGs should do less damage to all buildings.
31 Mar 2020, 12:20 PM
#177
Posts: 956
Well, go and walk up with rak against upgraded firing position and see for yourself?
These two are suppression area denial, they do nothing damage wise, unless you're pinned for a long time and accuracy penalty kicks in.
Hell, because of how suppression works and the fact that rak doesn't get penalized by it, rak will take little to no damage at all while suppressed for long enough time to kill FP.
I feel that the Incendiary (H)MG42 you know and the one I know, are very different things. The situation described earlier made worse by the fact that the AT gun was within the mid-range for the HMG42.
The bunker may never have fired, but the Inc (H)MG42 would have vaporised a Rak.
For Italy! We have outfoxed the enemy once more!
31 Mar 2020, 12:26 PM
#178
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I feel that the Incendiary (H)MG42 you know and the one I know, are very different things. The situation described earlier made worse by the fact that the AT gun was within the mid-range for the HMG42.
The bunker may never have fired, but the Inc (H)MG42 would have vaporised a Rak.
Oh, I wasn't aware bunkers have incendiary rounds, that changes everything!
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
31 Mar 2020, 12:28 PM
#179
Posts: 956
Oh, I wasn't aware bunkers have incendiary rounds, that changes everything!
Inb4 I thought it was reasonable to assume people could understand there was an MG42 weapons team with the bunker by mentioning Incendiary MG42...…silly me.
Now I remember why I stopped posting in 2015. Some stupid troll over the colour orange.
For Italy! We have outfoxed the enemy once more!
31 Mar 2020, 18:07 PM
#180
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
So you cant fix the Rak being killed reliably by the thing its supposed to counter then? that's a shame. What about changing the crew to have a smaller size modifier so they are slightly harder to hit/insta decrew?
Are you able to fix the bug where you cant allow the Rak to move when cloaked (ie have it decloak, move, recloak) like camo'd ZIS/Paks can?
The vehicles which hit using accuracy are the exception not the norm.
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.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
90 | ||
 |
|
|
33 | ||
 |
|
|
22 | ||
 |
|
|
17 | ||
 |
|
|
10 | ||
|
|
|
|
165 | ||
|
|
|
|
15 | ||
 |
|
|
9 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.839223.790+2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.592234.717-1
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.922406.694+1
- 9.1122623.643+3
- 10.265138.658+2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
10
Download
1245
Board Info
923 users are online:
923 guests
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49427
Welcome our newest member, Baqis73421
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Baqis73421
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM