Raketens should lose their received accuracy bonus

no gun shield

What?

What?

No.
Gun.
Shield.

What?

All other At guns are big enough that the hitbox blocks shots.

The AT gun itself is an entity which provides heavy cover, but the crew who is not operating the weapon generally doesn't take cover on it (due to formation and to avoid 1 shot wipes) and the guys who operate them benefit from it in irregular intervals depending at which side the weapon is aiming and from where it is getting shot at.

It has 4.0 AOE compared to 2.5 on the P4.

pz4 still deals way more often magical oneshot wipes to me, than my sherman in reverse.. its just my own experience

Medium tanks are not a counter to AT guns

I don't know why people are using the Sherman as a counter, even the Scott struggles vs ATGs and one mistake and you're up in flames.

Sherman is not a brumbar or AVRE

You'll realize sooner or later that it's because sherman's and Scott's have good mobility and weapon profiles to kill infantry that makes them viable to kill ATG (no one ever said they counter their counter, that's BS) same as HMGs and assault squads.

No please.
Last "nerf" was what ended up like this, nerf next is gonna cost 300 MP but have 6 man, 60 range and get some damage reduction nonsense, to avoid mortars and grenades from killing the models crewing the gun in one shot or something.

No please.
Last "nerf" was what ended up like this, nerf next is gonna cost 300 MP but have 6 man, 60 range and get some damage reduction nonsense, to avoid mortars and grenades from killing the models crewing the gun in one shot or something.

Axis OP

All other At guns are big enough that the hitbox blocks shots.

The AT gun itself is an entity which provides heavy cover, but the crew who is not operating the weapon generally doesn't take cover on it (due to formation and to avoid 1 shot wipes) and the guys who operate them benefit from it in irregular intervals depending at which side the weapon is aiming and from where it is getting shot at.

Proof?

I don't wanna talk about Poltawa. Delete it.

Poltava, Road to Kharkov, Rails and Metal, etc. I agree on the issue with Shadowlink... and telling someone to counter ATG with a medium tank is...
Calliopes also have bad veterancy and take long to vet too and have long cooldown because of that.

This change would mostly effect mediocre players who get their AT guns over run. The rak is really survivable in low-level, large-team play due the the "panic button" that is retreat, the lack of flanking options, and the lack of players who can execute said flank. Other AT guns are a guaranteed de-crew if the player doesn't back it up fast enough, which is the norm at that specific kind of play.

Increasing the Received Accuracy of the crew outright would decrease the forgiveness of letting a rack get caught out. This would also ONLY effect small arms vs the rak. This increases bleed, increases chance of decrew, increases damage from MGs, but DOESN'T change results vs tank (unless that tank has good MGs and is on top of the rak, where it SHOULD bleed like crazy).

A quick check shows all retreatable team weapons are 1.25 Target Size. Moving the Rak to that would make it equally punishable as other retreating team weapons.

Proof?

sander did the test, he ask him

Proof?

sander did the test, he ask him

I did the test, what i found is that it's unreliable.

Load a custom games with cheatcommands and make any AT gun be with 2 models only. Now, you can start by making it aim from left to right and you will see the cover indicator disappears depending on the angle and the type of AT gun.

If this is the case it means that one of the models has no cover whatsoever.

Now, EVEN if the cover appears to be been granted, i can with 100% accuracy kill a 2 model AT gun with a Rifle grenade from any side of it's arc when on neutral position (aiming dead center). At least with a pak40 (same thing happens with all other AT guns but it might change a little bit).

In this case if you are towards the left, center or slightly center right, if you aim towards the left model you can kill it 100% of the time. From center right, to right of the arc of the AT gun, you aim towards the right model.

This is so specific because the Rifle grenade has a smaller AoE. In the case of normal grenades or bundle nades, they have enough AoE that even if you aim dead center frontally you will decrew them.

If both models would be benefiting from heavy cover, you wouldn't be able to kill them as either grenade does 40 or 60 dmg.

I did the test, what i found is that it's unreliable.

Load a custom games with cheatcommands and make any AT gun be with 2 models only. Now, you can start by making it aim from left to right and you will see the cover indicator disappears depending on the angle and the type of AT gun.

If this is the case it means that one of the models has no cover whatsoever.

Now, EVEN if the cover appears to be been granted, i can with 100% accuracy kill a 2 model AT gun with a Rifle grenade from any side of it's arc when on neutral position (aiming dead center). At least with a pak40 (same thing happens with all other AT guns but it might change a little bit).

In this case if you are towards the left, center or slightly center right, if you aim towards the left model you can kill it 100% of the time. From center right, to right of the arc of the AT gun, you aim towards the right model.



This is so specific because the Rifle grenade has a smaller AoE. In the case of normal grenades or bundle nades, they have enough AoE that even if you aim dead center frontally you will decrew them.

If both models would be benefiting from heavy cover, you wouldn't be able to kill them as either grenade does 40 or 60 dmg.

Probably implemented like how Tanks become cover when stopped. Incredibly inconsistent, and to be ignored.

,,,,

https://www.coh2.org/topic/103793/why-does-rak-need-retreat/post/803735

It's not to be ignored cause "aAXISSS OPPP 11!!1!"

https://www.coh2.org/topic/103793/why-does-rak-need-retreat/post/803735

It's not to be ignored cause "aAXISSS OPPP 11!!1!"

Just to note, i tested it again before posting it. I didn't check what happens when the cover icon disappears completely but in a normal scenario it looks like always 1 of the 2 models doesn't benefit from cover.

I don't know why this topic turned into tank vs atgun while my initial point was about rewarding flanking with infantry.

Flanking any other atgun ends up by decrewing it. Why the raketen should be different? Because it has 5 less range than other atgun? It doesn't make sense, it already has 5 crew members and I'm not against the retreat button but the bonus it provides.

Retreat in time and you should save it, get flanked and lose it. This statement should be true for any atgun.

I don't know why this topic turned into tank vs atgun while my initial point was about rewarding flanking with infantry.

Flanking any other atgun ends up by decrewing it. Why the raketen should be different? Because it has 5 less range than other atgun? It doesn't make sense, it already has 5 crew members and I'm not against the retreat button but the bonus it provides.

Retreat in time and you should save it, get flanked and lose it. This statement should be true for any atgun.

U're right, especially give its price. If it cost 320, like other at guns, it probably should be as it is. But the 5 (or 10?) less range and the retreat mechanism plus 5 men crew shouldn;t be cheaper than regular non retreatable at gun. (USF at gun is also too cheap btw imo). I'd say that either what you write or just make it more expensive (better option imo).

U're right, especially give its price. If it cost 320, like other at guns, it probably should be as it is. But the 5 (or 10?) less range and the retreat mechanism plus 5 men crew shouldn;t be cheaper than regular non retreatable at gun. (USF at gun is also too cheap btw imo). I'd say that either what you write or just make it more expensive (better option imo).

As mentioned, the solution to other retreatable team weapons is just increase base RA to 1.25. That fixes all the issues.