Penetration as a function of Range

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

Short barrelled AOE weapons would still "hit" other vehicles at long range where as currently ATG's and assault guns miss quite regularly at long range.

The mechanic in vCoH to make up for this was ATG's would hit consistently but have penetration modifiers at long range (and also have overall better damage with non-penetrating shots, meaning you could "chip away" at high armour value targets)

Wouldn't this also word on Infantry?

Theoretically, that would means that Cons > Grenadiers at close range and Grenadiers > Cons at long range?

This is a great idea and I think would add alot to the game. Lets make it happen, Relic!

Please, balance the game before ...

KV-8, IS-2, Precision strike ....

KV-8 could use a flame nerf, IS-2 is fine, Precision strike is fixed now.

Anyone voting against this is a moron and has clearly never played vCoH. Is that an incredibly offensive commend and in no way helpful to this argument? You betcha.

Take my yes vote.

EDIT: Additionally, this feature is almost a must for mods, if and when they are released. Any mod that wanted to follow a realistic route would be snubbed at the outset (unless you used a bunch of fancy modifiers and so on whilst coding it as a workaround, that I won't bore you all with) with the lack of this feature.

This also meant that you had a reason to kite. As it stands, your best bet is to drive your panther right into the face of your enemy to avoid being rammed/take advantage of your LELcan'tpenmebro frontal armor. With this change you'd actually have to use your head a wee bit and attempt to use your superior range (or stats at range) to hold off enemy units.

Anyone voting against this is a moron and has clearly never played vCoH. Is that an incredibly offensive commend and in no way helpful to this argument? You betcha.

Take my yes vote.

EDIT: Additionally, this feature is almost a must for mods, if and when they are released. Any mod that wanted to follow a realistic route would be snubbed at the outset (unless you used a bunch of fancy modifiers and so on whilst coding it as a workaround, that I won't bore you all with) with the lack of this feature.

This also meant that you had a reason to kite. As it stands, your best bet is to drive your panther right into the face of your enemy to avoid being rammed/take advantage of your LELcan'tpenmebro frontal armor. With this change you'd actually have to use your head a wee bit and attempt to use your superior range (or stats at range) to hold off enemy units.

It will be the Ram spammers' paradise!

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.

lol!

Yes, I absolutely love watching people discussing about stuff of which they have like 10% of the necessary insight.

on topic:

Well, penetration should always be in favor of - higher range, less penetration. Anything else makes no sense at all. However, if you want to be remotely historically accurate this would mean that axis tanks/assault guns would have the higher chance to penetrate soviet vehicles in general.
(better, more precise cannons and better ammunition quality). So, this makes SU vs. OH lategame even worse in terms of vehicle combat.

Great idea imo.
I think it promotes flanking and aggressive play with tanks. I hate when u successfully flank for example elefant with t34 and u are still unable to penetrate rear armor. This will also lower the RNG impact in these situations. Looking forwrd to this.

I love this idea, but of course it should be tank dependent. A tiger attacking a t34 at max range shouldnt be as highly affected as a panther vs is2, or a su85 vs Tiger. This would definitely add a deeper element to tank combat.

It will be the Ram spammers' paradise!

Yeah, it's not like you're going to kite the enemy tanks and/or bother to actually be bothered to support your own. That would just be silly, expecting effort from someone.

I think if you add too many variables into the game the damage would become highly unpredictable. It would also make it extremely difficult for the Soviets to counter Panthers/Tigers/Elephants without bum rushing them with so many T74's or relying on doctrinal call in's.

I think if you add too many variables into the game the damage would become highly unpredictable. It would also make it extremely difficult for the Soviets to counter Panthers/Tigers/Elephants without bum rushing them with so many T74's or relying on doctrinal call in's.

Soviets are already highly reliant on doctrinal call-ins.

The only bad thing about this I can see is that the SU-76 would be nerfed unintentionally, and the last thing poor '76 needs is a nerf.

Well, germans have high armor and high penetration, soviets have paper armor and pea shooters with exception of SU-85. This disbalance would be only deepened with penetration changing with range, SU-76 would completely disappear even from lul strats, T34 would get even worse and the biggest concern-what would happen to soviet only AT vehicle, SU-85? It already have a hard time penetrating vet2 P4.

Totally not like vCoH where you used ANTI-TANK guns to counter tanks, while your vehicles (the Sherman/M8) tacked enemy infantry in conjunction with your own infantry.

Cuz who would ever use anti-tank weapons to counter tanks. That's silly.

And the dice rolling in vCoH totally screwed U.S. players, so much that nobody ever used the Sherman. Or Brit players, nobody would dare touch the Cromwell for fear of bouncing at max range.

I'm sorry to be in arrogant prick about this, but the concerns about lack of penetration at long range...coming from vCoH, this is normal, this is the habit that I've learned after years of playing that game. Taking the argument that "this isn't vCoH, so we shouldn't use much of anything from that game" is silly regarding the degrading penetration over range issue. It's not like penetration can't be tweaked, with the Soviets seeing improved short range penetration and long range penetration akin to what they have now as the default. You're making the mistake of assuming that nothing else will change, and the current penetration values will simply degrade (rather than the current possibly ending up as the bare minimum penetration value).

I would go so far as to ask if anyone knew how vCoH penetration at range worked.

so much that nobody ever used the Sherman.

wat.

wat.

I think he forgot how to vcoh.

@Volsky
I'd love you to explain to us how vcoh penetration at range worked, because I've never felt such a thing, shrecks, paks, marders, p4s, panthers, jadgpanther all of them were reliably penetrating armor at all ranges, cromwells were flanker tanks that worked(unlike lolT34/76), shermans were reliable all rounders supplemented by 57mm and wolverines.

What range? 1 meter or 50 meter? The range is not that huge in CoH...

I think he forgot how to vcoh.

@Volsky
I'd love you to explain to us how vcoh penetration at range worked, because I've never felt such a thing, shrecks, paks, marders, p4s, panthers, jadgpanther all of them were reliably penetrating armor at all ranges, cromwells were flanker tanks that worked(unlike lolT34/76), shermans were reliable all rounders supplemented by 57mm and wolverines.

My long rant post was sarcasm. All of it, sarcasm.

In vCoH, you had target tables--that is, an 'armor type' for each tank unit on the field, against which a given cannon would have X multiplier of penetration, accuracy, accuracy whilst moving (the target is moving), and damage. You also had a penetration dropoff over range. Let's examine the Sherman vs. the Panzer IV (that had an armor type for when it was equipped with shurzen, and when it wasn't), in this case, one with Shurzen mounted.

m3_75mm_m4_sherman_gun:

(against) tp_armour_axis_panzeriv_skirts:
accuracy_multiplier: 1
damage_multiplier (0.9); the Sherman's cannon dealt 87.5 damager per shell by default.
moving_accuracy_multiplier: 1 (this is how accurate, or inaccurate, the cannon is against a moving target)
penetration_multiplier: 0.5864 (by default, the Sherman has a maximum chance to penetrate a skirted Panzer IV of ~59%)
rear_penetration_multiplier: 3.7 (flank the Panzer IV and shoot it in the arse, and you'll have a 3.7x chance of penetrating it vs. shooting at its frontal armor; a 2.61968 multiplier--you won't bounce off of the rear armor, EVER)

penetration values:
distant: 0.83 (0.83 x 0.5864 = 0.486712 penetration rate at long/distant ranges)
long: 0.83 (0.83 x 0.5864 = 0.486712 penetration rate at long/distant ranges)
medium: 0.92 (0.92 x 0.5864 = 0.539488 penetration rate at medium ranges)
short: 1 (1 x 0.5864 = 0.5864 penetration rate at point blank range)

TL;dr, the Sherman was an AI tank that needed the M1A1c 76mm upgun upgrade in order to be used against any enemy armor that wasn't a Puma (armored car) with any reasonable chance of success.

Okay, sarcasm, got it. Often doesn't translate across text and in a forum rife with babelfish.

One of the biggest things I recall the CoH2 team hailing was the homogenizing of the tables, specifically eliminating that sort of relationship between units. It's what allowed them to make CoH2 support mirror matching. Which was for some reason an important feature.