"One-shot-wipe-potential"

I can agree 100% with the OP. The OSWP is really prevalent in CoH2.

But a solution to this problem won't be easy. I don't think nerfing certain explosive weapons would do the trick, because they always end up ether to powerful or weak, depending purely on the spread of the shots and spread of the models in the squad.

There needs to be a mechanic similar to the old "5% bug". If a squad is at full health and steps on a mine for example a squad wipe is impossible to occur - one model will always survive with a sliver of health.

Or in other words: If you can't remove the RNG, give it at least boundaries.

That's a very good idea that can be apply too many things in Coh2. Random with boundaries.

That's a very good idea that can be apply too many things in Coh2. Random with boundaries.

I remeber this from Coh1.

5% Sherman and i shoting on him with my Kingtiger

- first shot bounce
- second weapon destroy
- miss
- engine destroy
- bounce
- kill

You need 4-5 shots take him on 5% and then another 5 to kill him. Zombie tanks. :-)

I remember this from Coh1.

5% Sherman and i shoting on him with my Kingtiger

- first shot bounce
- second weapon destroy
- miss
- engine destroy
- bounce
- kill

You need 4-5 shots take him on 5% and then another 5 to kill him. Zombie tanks. :-)

I would rather see it apply on insta kill only and when its logic to have it.

Your example is a good one at showing when to much random is wrong.

I remeber this from Coh1.

5% Sherman and i shoting on him with my Kingtiger

- first shot bounce
- second weapon destroy
- miss
- engine destroy
- bounce
- kill

You need 4-5 shots take him on 5% and then another 5 to kill him. Zombie tanks. :-)

Meanwhile, the Sherman is still killing your infantry and finally, when destroyed, it ran over a vet3 squad killing them

It was really frustrating too those zombie kettenkrads with titanium plates as rear armor.

Completely agree with OP. We are talking early-mid game where OSWP heavily favors soviets. Ive seen multiple guard nades wipe squads in cover numerous numerous times. I never (or hardly ever) seen a bundled nade do that. Usually a bundled nade will severly damage a con squad in cover but it will be able to retreat. Soviet mines have the potential for squad wipes but I usually escape with 1 man if not 2 most of the time. Don't get me started on 120mm mortars, I been saying they were OP from beginning.

Seems hard to balance though, Ginnungapgap has a pretty good idea.

Also, a Pak will rarely one-hit a M3, I've even had it survive a faust+Pak-hit, but the 222 does not survive a shot from a ZiS.

Also, a Pak will rarely one-hit a M3, I've even had it survive a faust+Pak-hit, but the 222 does not survive a shot from a ZiS.

this isnt true at all. rng affects both of this situations identically. an m3 getting fausted then hit with a pak has the exact same chance to survive as an m3 only getting shot by a pak (in other words, overkill doesnt increase the chance of a vehicle being destroyed). its also the same chance that a 222 has to survive a shot from a zis. i just explained this in another thread, but about the t70. the numbers are the same.

death is considered a crit in this game. a t70 has an 80% chance to die when its at 0 hp (that includes a 5% chance to be abandoned). theres a 10% chance it will lose its enginge and a 10% chance its gun will be destroyed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdEpuSHcxNko1VGVFYjczYXpFZWhqOHc&usp=drive_web#gid=11

Stuka dive bomb has great one shot potential yes it gives a noise but if you don't notice it in the heat of battle...

I have never seen a soviet mine one shot a full hp squad but demo charges yes an I think its fine they cost alot and are easily destroyed by stray mortar shots etc + you need to place them tactically and be aware when squads are near, does kind of suck germans dont have something though, I guess pios can build bunkers which are very useful. 120mm one shots your own units more than the enemys I swear! especially in team games. Out of everything though I see much more rnade squad wipes or guards nades than anything else tbh.

Strafe is op but needs price reduction if its nerfed.

this isnt true at all. rng affects both of this situations identically. an m3 getting fausted then hit with a pak has the exact same chance to survive as an m3 only getting shot by a pak (in other words, overkill doesnt increase the chance of a vehicle being destroyed). its also the same chance that a 222 has to survive a shot from a zis. i just explained this in another thread, but about the t70. the numbers are the same.

Hm nice, didn't know this.

Owing to the irregularity of armor blocking small arms, Grens are somewhat more unpredictable when it comes to wipes. You can hang around and maybe roll a lucky string of armor blocks, but you can just as likely roll an unlucky string of penetrations. Its a 50/50 thing (literalpy, since 1.5 armor is a 50% chance to deflect). I dont know how or whether retreat status affects penetration. I dont think it does, i think there is instead an accuracy increase on units in retreat.(Regardless, I think retreat kill efficacy is in an ok place on small arms. Whqts a bigger issue, is how early or late you retreat).

But since this topic is about explosives, thats irrelevant anyways, because they largely ignore armor. (Except in some vagueries regarding the outer reaches of AoE on some effects, which I dont dompletely umderstand or know the values for, merely that they exist).

Yes, 4 man units are far more vulnerable to wipes from explosive and AoE effects, than are 6 man units.

Thats just obvious, but it bears repeating, because some people dont seem to grasp the implications of that. It basically means that vs anything other than small arms, Ost units count as the equivalent of 4 Cons in terms of survival, but cost more to reinforce. Also every loss of a model is a more significant drop in DPS than the loss of a single model feom a 6man unit.

A 6 man unit howver, with a wider unit footprint, is more vulnerable to "missed" explosives, in that it might lose some models to either side. But that also means on a direct central hit, even if themodels are tightly grouped, its far more likely a wipe will be averted.

As others have pointed out, this really starts coming into play in a significant way once more explosive/AoE weapons hit the field, and actually may be one of the incipient reasons behind why Con spam is so effective in comparison. Once AoE/Explosives begim to start raining, your 4xGren force is reduced in survivability terms to 4x4 models, as opposed to Sov with 4xCons having 4x6 worth of models to soak that with.

Great post Stoffa. I enjoyed your contributions in vCoH as well.

Great post Stoffa. I enjoyed your contributions in vCoH as well.

Thanks MorgolKing

I don't know if having more models in the squad is always positive.

I find soviets units, specially maxims and mortars more "clustered" than the german ones, making them very vulnerable to nades.

In term of cover is too very dificult to put the whole unit in green/yellow cover, as there's always one model outside cover that cause all the squad to get pinned.

In the big picture, all factions have their petty imbalances that cancels each other advantages.

+1 to this.
When IS2 or ISU152 comes to field the main reason I lose is because they one shot kill vet 3 grens or PGrens.

i think that squad wipes happen way to often. but compeltely getting rid of them is a bad idea.

Edit failure. Delete please.

I find soviets units, specially maxims and mortars more "clustered" than the german ones, making them very vulnerable to nades.

VS

In term of cover is too very dificult to put the whole unit in green/yellow cover, as there's always one model outside cover that cause all the squad to get pinned. .

These two statements contradict each other.

In the first you argue Sov 6man units are more closely placed (which imo is false, to me there seems no difference in the dispersal of a 6man unit to a 4man one. They all stand the same distance from each other generally)

In the second you argue that 6mans are so widespread they cant fit behind cover.

So which is it? Are they more closely together than Ost, as you claim in nr1, or more widely dispersed, as you claim in nr2?

Nvm. Why do I bother...

TLDR: Less insta-death, more damaging. Overall less randomness, both underperformance and overperformance created by randomness.

I think there are mainly two different kinds of OSWP explosive weapons and they require different aproaches (see explanation further down).

For problematic OSWP weapons, I suggest the following two steps for most problematic explosive weapons (mainly those of 160 and 80 base damage but with large explosion radii):
1) Reduce the AoE Distance Far value but keep the AoE Distance Near value and the AoE radius the same.
2) To compensate for statistically reduced overall performance, increase the AoE Accuracy Far value from 0.6 to at least 1.0 (possibly higher) and thus balance (problematic) explosions.

For problematic OSWP weapons with very large base damage (e.g. 250 demo charge, 200 Soviet Mine) I suggest the following two steps:
1) Slightly Increase the AoE Distance Far value to compensate for step 2. Keep the AoE Distance Near and AoE Radius the same.
2) Decrease the AoE Damage Far multiplier to a very small value, so that Multiplier*BaseDMG < 80, ideally Multiplier*BaseDMG=60 or something around that.


Explanation how explosions currently work (required to understand what the above changes do):
A explosion has a base damage (often 80 or 160). This value is chosen so that infantry close to a explosion will always die because they normally have 80 health (or less).
Inside a circle around the explosion center with the radius of AoE Distance Near, it will always (over 100% accuracy) deal its full damage DMGmultiplierNear=1, normally).
Around this circle, there is another cicle with the radius of AoE Distance Far. Between those two circles, the damage of the explosion decreases from its full value to a reduced value (DMGmultiplierFar) linearly. Note that this is not the case for certain weapons like the Soviet mine (near damage = far damage, which is stupid). Furthermore, the accuracy of the explosion (=chance to hit) decreases linearly as well (for most explosions: near and center normally 500% accuracy, guaranteed hit, far is 60%)
Around those two circles is a third circle of the radius AoE Radius in which the chance to hit and damage multiplier are the same as at the far range. This means inside this region the damage is not reduced any further.

Ok, so what do the proposed changes do?
The change for problematic 80 and 160 BadeDMG weapons means that units inside the center of the explosion will still die (as they should) but the zone in which units survive (heavily injured) is larger. To compensate for this, the randomness effect of the decreased accuracy is negated by the proposed accuracy change. So this means more units survive but also more units will receive damage at all, leaving the overall damage roughly the same. This is also desirable for both sides because the explosion is less random. Example: "kill only one guy and leave the others unharmed" VS. "kill all of them in one shot" will both be a lot less likely.

The change for problematic high damage weapons means that the insta-death radius would still be roughly the same but units farther out would survive heavily damaged (if they are in good condition before the explosion).

Good post rofltehcat. Hope the devs pick it up

Dont stand in front of 152mm assault gun, just like you dont park your tanks in front of the Elephant.

Guard grenade has very good potential to kill full squad, everytime I use these guys, I kill 1-2 squads with them.
Never wiped full squad with a mine though.