Login

russian armor

Penetration as a function of Range

Would you like penetration affected by range?
Option Distribution Votes
78%
23%
Total votes: 120
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
24 Feb 2014, 22:08 PM
#1
avatar of DocRockwell

Posts: 60

Currently range does not affect weapon penetration as it does accuracy, which I find curious considering the capabilities of the engine, the significance of range in historical tank warfare and the overall game design, which for infantry allows for combat to be paced differently (fast at close range, slow at long).

Currently you're either in or out (of range) and shoot outs last roughly the same time at pointblank or maximum range. I think this is something that could be tuned to add a lot more depth to tank warfare (think closing distance with t34's, using tank traps to control range, long distance engagements resulting in stalemate, etc).
24 Feb 2014, 22:13 PM
#2
avatar of Janne252
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 3421 | Subs: 11

First user created poll ever!

Yes, for me it makes more sense to have a better chance of penetrating at closer ranges. That's how it pretty much went with AT weapons. You had to be really close to deal actual damage.
24 Feb 2014, 23:34 PM
#3
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

Elefant will be useless :(
25 Feb 2014, 00:53 AM
#4
avatar of ferrozoica

Posts: 208

Yes it should (like in vCoH)
25 Feb 2014, 01:08 AM
#5
avatar of rmag37

Posts: 39

Elefant will be useless :(


Obviously the elephant would still penetrate very reliably at max range =P

This change would be messy though. With some really rough balance for a while. Maybe they will do it for an expansion.
25 Feb 2014, 01:16 AM
#6
avatar of korgoth

Posts: 170

Yes this change would be great!
25 Feb 2014, 01:39 AM
#7
avatar of Razh

Posts: 166

Permanently Banned
Accuracy is a function of range and the dice roll is very similar to penetration dice rolls. Having both is redundant.
Only Relic postRelic 25 Feb 2014, 16:58 PM
#8
avatar of pqumsieh
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 267 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2014, 01:39 AMRazh
Accuracy is a function of range and the dice roll is very similar to penetration dice rolls. Having both is redundant.


Not if we wanted to better define a units functionality; i.e. a vehicle having a relatively high close range penetration but a steep drop off at long range.
25 Feb 2014, 17:23 PM
#9
avatar of WilliG

Posts: 157

Perhaps having the stug III e and command tank have better chances to pen at close range vs t-34s and t-34/76s better able to pen pIVs at close range?
25 Feb 2014, 18:01 PM
#10
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

doesn't make sense to me, Razh already has a point on it, plus longer range = more chance to miss because of scatter.
mobility already defines units roles, turreted tanks are close/mid range, non turreted are long range, paks are mid/long range
25 Feb 2014, 18:16 PM
#11
avatar of WilliG

Posts: 157

People always complaining about depth... wouldn't something like this add depth?
25 Feb 2014, 18:32 PM
#12
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1

People are voting against this?

#CoH2
25 Feb 2014, 18:52 PM
#13
avatar of Senseo1990

Posts: 317

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2014, 18:32 PMKolaris
People are voting against this?

#CoH2


A 1000 times this! :D
25 Feb 2014, 18:57 PM
#14
avatar of gokkel

Posts: 542

Don't know, I would usually be strongly in favor of it, but the way units work in this game with very unrealistic range values in comparison to real life units in the first place I am not sure.
25 Feb 2014, 19:32 PM
#15
avatar of Shell_yeah

Posts: 258

I think all tanks need minimum range, something like 3-4m, and all AT weapons - increased penetration for every shot from close range(under 15m).

25 Feb 2014, 21:24 PM
#16
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

This would just bring a truck load of new balance problems for very little potential gain in the quality of game-play.
25 Feb 2014, 21:26 PM
#17
avatar of Razh

Posts: 166

Permanently Banned


Not if we wanted to better define a units functionality; i.e. a vehicle having a relatively high close range penetration but a steep drop off at long range.


So why not give it high accuracy at close range and steep drop off accuracy at long range?
25 Feb 2014, 21:28 PM
#18
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2014, 21:26 PMRazh


So why not give it high accuracy and close range and steep drop off accuracy at long range?


That would just make too much sense. Away with you!
25 Feb 2014, 22:35 PM
#19
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2014, 01:39 AMRazh
Accuracy is a function of range and the dice roll is very similar to penetration dice rolls. Having both is redundant.


Have you looked at how the weapons are programmed?

Ready aim time
Fire aim time
Post firing aim time
Post firing cooldown
Cooldown
Windup
Winddown

What does all this translate too? The time between shooting one bullet and shooting the next.
25 Feb 2014, 23:15 PM
#20
avatar of Losttruppen

Posts: 63

I like this idea, but I agree it should be different for each vehicle. Long range tank destroyers should be less affected. Maybe even increase the penetration for some vehicles up close from their current values(t34/76, su76, PzIV command tank, etc).

I'd be interested to see how it would be implemented, percent values or penetration ranges maybe?
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

849 users are online: 1 member and 848 guests
juliavargascom
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49077
Welcome our newest member, juliavargascom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM