Login

russian armor

Elite Mod Continues - Version 2.2+

PAGES (9)down
16 Jun 2014, 19:30 PM
#141
avatar of Pepsi

Posts: 622 | Subs: 1

Flamer HT looks badass when firing on both sides. But that's all.
I prefer to suppress rifles than showering them.
16 Jun 2014, 22:38 PM
#142
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

Sigh, I'll guess i'll have to make 2.5 then.


Btw, does anybody know if Kolaris reverted off map combat group or if he just forgot to write it down? I know it was there in Tommy's version and at first glance it's not reverted but I just can't be too sure.
17 Jun 2014, 02:40 AM
#143
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Jun 2014, 17:29 PMKolaris
What's missing? Flammenwerfer min/max damage is switched?


It's hardly worth making a new version over when nobody uses the Flammenwerfer to begin with. The minimum damage gets used and you get 35 damage instead of ~32.5.

As for OMCG, apparently it's still in because I forgot such a change even existed. The file is still altered, so whatever Tommy's original change was it's still in there.
17 Jun 2014, 03:17 AM
#144
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jun 2014, 02:40 AMKolaris


It's hardly worth making a new version over when nobody uses the Flammenwerfer to begin with. The minimum damage gets used and you get 35 damage instead of ~32.5.

As for OMCG, apparently it's still in because I forgot such a change even existed. The file is still altered, so whatever Tommy's original change was it's still in there.


- I was planning on making several changes anyways. Just to 'finish' the Mod. (Balance is never a finished product.)

- And yes Flammenwerfer damage changed doesn't change a thing. But the fact that it got reverted just made me paranoid.

- noticed aswell, just haven't looked into the ability yet.
17 Jun 2014, 14:52 PM
#145
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

So hmm I can make it do satisfying damage. But it's really hard to say if it's not going to be too much.

It's hard to factor in though. It's between Tier 2 and Tier 3 and costs 75 munitions hmm.
I won't lower the munitions cost. I rather have a nice weapon for my bucks in this case.

17 Jun 2014, 14:56 PM
#146
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

23 Jun 2014, 20:02 PM
#147
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

What would people think of small amounts of flamethrower damage to tanks?
23 Jun 2014, 22:07 PM
#148
avatar of Oktarnash

Posts: 403

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2014, 20:02 PM12ocky
What would people think of small amounts of flamethrower damage to tanks?

I would say, it would play no real role, and just be annyoing.
25 Jun 2014, 19:27 PM
#149
avatar of gunther09
Donator 22

Posts: 538

It could be fun to have a critical effect if you flame a tank for 10 sec. Like "gunner killed"
But then.....who builds the flamer? and who gets it close to tanks?
29 Jun 2014, 15:00 PM
#150
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

Elite Mod v2.5

Featuring buffed mortars, a couple of sniper nerfs, teching slightly more attractive, redesigned Stuh gun, halftrack upgrade buffs ... It's all in the notes.

Still to do's:

Priority:
* Redesign assault nades
* Fix new imbalances / new bugs

Possibilities:
* Give flames crits vs vehicles
* Reworks of the TOV units to give them better identity
* more smaller changes ...
29 Jun 2014, 18:41 PM
#151
avatar of Oktarnash

Posts: 403

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Jun 2014, 15:00 PM12ocky
Elite Mod v2.5

Featuring buffed mortars, a couple of sniper nerfs, teching slightly more attractive, redesigned Stuh gun, halftrack upgrade buffs ... It's all in the notes.

Still to do's:

Priority:
* Redesign assault nades
* Fix new imbalances / new bugs

Possibilities:
* Give flames crits vs vehicles
* Reworks of the TOV units to give them better identity
* more smaller changes ...

and where are the change list ?
29 Jun 2014, 20:34 PM
#152
avatar of Pepsi

Posts: 622 | Subs: 1

Allow me to write the changelog which are in the .rar file

30 Jun 2014, 15:01 PM
#153
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

^

That's the full changelist btw, I didn't make a specific 2.5 one.

30 Jun 2014, 17:17 PM
#154
avatar of GeneralCH

Posts: 419

I wonder, what was the point of changing the Puma and Ostwind? Too much rng?
30 Jun 2014, 23:12 PM
#155
avatar of Oktarnash

Posts: 403

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jun 2014, 15:01 PM12ocky
^

That's the full changelist btw, I didn't make a specific 2.5 one.


*facepalm, well i think some of the stuff aren't particularly smart, like reducing CP xp ...
1 Jul 2014, 14:35 PM
#156
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

I wonder, what was the point of changing the Puma and Ostwind? Too much rng?


Euhm yes, well not that much RNG, but the Burst bug: Everytime a projectile kills an enemy, it resets that particular round. So the Ostwind normally shoots 3 times in a burst. However if you kill a guy it will shoot 4 rounds, if you kill 2 guys, 5 rounds ... etc
In the end: Their theoretical dps is the same, even better at long range. (and vs heavy covers). The ridiculous burst rape effects are gone. But they are more reliable in return.

Thx to Kiraye: Puma DPS comparison (open the Index file)

facepalm, well i think some of the stuff aren't particularly smart, like reducing CP xp ...


Well at the moment (Vcoh) every first 2CP's go at a rate of 60xp per cp. And the rest goes at 80xp per cp.
This gives a clear disadvantage to doctrines like Defensive which can reset their CP timers fast (by spending points). And it's a disadvantage for doctrines like Armor.
I could make them anywhere between the range of 60-80. But as long as it scales equal. So if people rush superfast Pershings now for example, I will adjust.

Other than that, just play the game and make assumptions based on that. It was really fun to be able to use Mortars vs a Gren heavy strat. And Croc really rapes (probably too hard and I didn't change anything about that since Tommy changes.) Despite Sniper nerfs they are still really good...
1 Jul 2014, 16:51 PM
#157
avatar of Pepsi

Posts: 622 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jul 2014, 14:35 PM12ocky

Well at the moment (Vcoh) every first 2CP's go at a rate of 60xp per cp. And the rest goes at 80xp per cp.
This gives a clear disadvantage to doctrines like Defensive which can reset their CP timers fast (by spending points). And it's a disadvantage for doctrines like Armor.
I could make them anywhere between the range of 60-80. But as long as it scales equal. So if people rush superfast Pershings now for example, I will adjust.


So you're killing the little xp advantage players get from chosing a doctrine early early game ? (1 to 2 cp).

I remember a topic on GR talking about that.. the xp/cp advantage you get from picking your doctrine and so your global strategy, early in the game.


In others words, if I rush rangers at 1cp unlock then 2cp unlock (so I keep my CPs/xp optimized, I won't ge any (really really soft xp)advantage from building my play around a aggressive timed strategy. While the werh player can just wait for his 12cp to call in a tiger or a king tiger without any xp desadvantages.
1 Jul 2014, 17:55 PM
#158
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Jul 2014, 16:51 PMPepsi

So you're killing the little xp advantage players get from chosing a doctrine early early game ? (1 to 2 cp).
I remember a topic on GR talking about that.. the xp/cp advantage you get from picking your doctrine and so your global strategy, early in the game.
In others words, if I rush rangers at 1cp unlock then 2cp unlock (so I keep my CPs/xp optimized, I won't ge any (really really soft xp)advantage from building my play around a aggressive timed strategy. While the werh player can just wait for his 12cp to call in a tiger or a king tiger without any xp desadvantages.


No because you spent your cp's to obtain the Rangers you want to use in your aggressive strat. No the Wehr player won't have any CP disadvantage but so what? He waited so long to chose ... So he did let go of the opportunity cost to spent his CP's earlier into early game advantages. To make a better choice lategame that suits his needs.

Why do you think spending cp's fast has too be rewarded? What is the problem with not using cp's early?

With CP's being the same, the players get more options the way they want to spent their cp's. Instead of pushing them in one direction. More freedom like this, adds to better gameplay. Correct?
1 Jul 2014, 22:38 PM
#159
avatar of Pepsi

Posts: 622 | Subs: 1

Well the bug encourage early cps usage to see unexpected strategies. So I would reward it indeed.

3 rifles 1 ranger, rifles foward mines, foward medbunker, early blitz nades, early zeal...

Knowing that a player who didn't choose a doc within the first 20 minutes is losing a massive among of xp, i would keep this "bug"
2 Jul 2014, 08:35 AM
#160
avatar of Spanky
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1820 | Subs: 2

don't change the CP's.
PAGES (9)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

456 users are online: 456 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM