Kappatch - A minor rebalance mod
Posts: 2819
Have you read my Blitkrieg-proposal?
Only possible when out of combat for 5 sec?
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
1. 50cal kills a 222 in 2 and a quarter bursts on the front armor, and one and a half bursts from the rear- pretty much the speed at which incendiary MG42s kill allied vehicles, except free of charge and not as an activated ability. it also happens to kill kubels in one burst. (about 1-2 seconds of fire) You might want to consider halving the initial penetration buff and give it back at vet 1 or 2.
2. If you haven't tested the stug E change, you should consider doing that. because it's worse than it was in its initial incarnation. I spawned one in front of a shock troop squad, on open, flat terrain, 20M away, and it took 1 minute 30 seconds to snipe 2 men. it got another two 30 seconds later, before the squad retreated. multiple tests were pretty much repeats of the same scenario. Compare to the new SU76, which does about the same in approx 15 seconds (5 shots fired, 3 men sniped).
3. RE mines still use the small size they had when they were meant to be stacked. fairly minor, the real concern is the fact that the US faction has cheap guaranteed engine damage mines, which is certain to be a huge balance factor. I think people haven't been testing the mod, and in particular this feature enough- it does seem to be a very, very big deal, and I don't think even one person has commented thus far on this (I may be mistaken, in which case I apologize).
edit- What seems to be going on here is a lot of very significant changes in a very short period of time, and it seems as if it isn't actually been tested ingame much- the changes themselves on the surface are all very nice (everyone hates callins, the ISU, soviet expensive tech, etc etc) and units over and underperforming are pretty obvious (see the stug E, for example). On the other hand though, lots of cumulative changes made now will make it a hell of a lot harder to balance than adjusting one or two factors, testing and altering, then moving on to the next one or two issues. Just my two cents.
Posts: 503
3. RE mines still use the small size they had when they were meant to be stacked. fairly minor, the real concern is the fact that the US faction has cheap guaranteed engine damage mines, which is certain to be a huge balance factor. I think people haven't been testing the mod, and in particular this feature enough- it does seem to be a very, very big deal, and I don't think even one person has commented thus far on this (I may be mistaken, in which case I apologize).
imo it is quite short-sighted to give the usf engine-crit mines. paired with the ability to repair any vehicle anywhere on the map at any given time, this makes it close to impossible to chase down damaged usf vehicles. i would like the usf to have some sort of AP mines, yes, but this is too much i guess. jacksons will dominate any armor, because no tank will be able to chase them down or flank them
unfortunately is was only able to play 3 games so far and my friend isnt the best usf player, but i can imagine, that in the hands of a very capable player, this change will be the most rage inducing. time will tell
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
imo it is quite short-sighted to give the usf engine-crit mines. paired with the ability to repair any vehicle anywhere on the map at any given time, this makes it close to impossible to chase down damaged usf vehicles. i would like the usf to have some sort of AP mines, yes, but this is too much i guess. jacksons will dominate any armor, because no tank will be able to chase them down or flank them
unfortunately is was only able to play 3 games so far and my friend isnt the best usf player, but i can imagine, that in the hands of a very capable player, this change will be the most rage inducing. time will tell
I had a similar opinion, but I withheld that judgment due to not playing sufficient games as USF where mines would've had a significant impact. Jacksons, yes, and also Scotts. those little buggers will be impossible to chase.
Mines + 50cal penetration means you can counter the entire wehrmacht T2 vehicle roster with nothing but smart mining + a 50 cal or two.
Another thing- the fact that you force the wehr player to get a minesweeper early instead of the all-important flamer is a big shift in power, in a part of the game where balance is already very delicate.
Out of all the changes, this addition of antivehicle mines to a faction that has been designed to function with none/expensive, tier-dependant mines is the one I'm most doubtful about.
Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
Posts: 179
Posts: 154 | Subs: 2
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
@ Cruzz;
Have you read my Blitkrieg-proposal?
Only possible when out of combat for 5 sec?
I don't want to do it because I find the combat check to be fairly unreliable, it's barely functional for automatic abilities like camouflage (ie. a lot of the time you see that units are staying in combat when they shouldn't be, and on the other hand leaving combat when they clearly are in combat).
You could make Captain On Me into a squad ability...like once you unlock the captain all inf and support units gain a "Get to the captain" ability(sort of like that new wehr commander with the supply building or whatever its called),and the captain himself gains a "On Me" toggle which then projects a visible on the UI aura around him about a screen that units within this range can "retreat" to him.
Can't be done for now as far as I understand things, would require SCAR scripting and we can't do that for tuning packs, it's only enabled for victory condition packs.
Out of all the changes, this addition of antivehicle mines to a faction that has been designed to function with none/expensive, tier-dependant mines is the one I'm most doubtful about.
I stand by the decision to change the broken mess that the light mine was in the release version. Adding them to rear echelons probably wasn't smart though, their addition changes early game dynamics too much. I just don't think it's good design for one single faction to be limited to a 340MP/20 fuel vehicle as the only source of mines in the late game. 4 out of 6 commanders already had access to the broken mines so it's not like USF didn't have access to infantry mines, they just didn't work so nobody bothered with them.
Question is, where do I put them so they're accessible eventually for everyone including the two commanders that don't get them (Airborne and Rifle Company)?
2. If you haven't tested the stug E change, you should consider doing that. because it's worse than it was in its initial incarnation. I spawned one in front of a shock troop squad, on open, flat terrain, 20M away, and it took 1 minute 30 seconds to snipe 2 men. it got another two 30 seconds later, before the squad retreated. multiple tests were pretty much repeats of the same scenario. Compare to the new SU76, which does about the same in approx 15 seconds (5 shots fired, 3 men sniped).
I'll assume you tried testing it with cheatmod. It's spawning the wrong version of stug e, already let Janne know about that. Try with the actual commander unit. You probably won't be able to tell the difference between the release version, the performance difference is that small.
1. 50cal kills a 222 in 2 and a quarter bursts on the front armor, and one and a half bursts from the rear- pretty much the speed at which incendiary MG42s kill allied vehicles, except free of charge and not as an activated ability. it also happens to kill kubels in one burst. (about 1-2 seconds of fire) You might want to consider halving the initial penetration buff and give it back at vet 1 or 2.
I feel like you're severely overstating how well this unit actually performs.
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
I stand by the decision to change the broken mess that the light mine was in the release version. Adding them to rear echelons probably wasn't smart though, their addition changes early game dynamics too much. I just don't think it's good design for one single faction to be limited to a 340MP/20 fuel vehicle as the only source of mines in the late game. 4 out of 6 commanders already had access to the broken mines so it's not like USF didn't have access to infantry mines, they just didn't work so nobody bothered with them.
Question is, where do I put them so they're accessible eventually for everyone including the two commanders that don't get them (Airborne and Rifle Company)?
On RE, unlocked after Major or Lieut+Capt?
I'll assume you tried testing it with cheatmod. It's spawning the wrong version of stug e, already let Janne know about that. Try with the actual commander unit. You probably won't be able to tell the difference between the release version, the performance difference is that small.
Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up.
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
IR halftrack now gives a 6 second 7.5% received accuracy debuff to units it detects
Rear Echelon Light AT mine now requires Captain or Major to stop them from affecting early game balance as much, other versions available as before (Assault Engineers, Infantry commander riflemen, Recon Paratroopers)
Slightly improved PIV Command Tank AOE & scatter as it tends to be quite bad against infantry
Recon commander forward observer ability no longer requires rifles to be out of combat. Note that rotating to face a new target counts as moving so the ability tends to turn on and off constantly in combat. May end up removing "not moving" check as well due to this in a later patch. Or alternatively reintroduce not-in-combat but remove "not moving" check.
Rifleman and Fusilier "rifle" AT-nades no longer require direct line of sight for targeting check so you can throw over hedges. They always ignored obstacles in the weapon code.
Bugfixes/consistency:
Recon Paratroopers now have same healing as regular paratroopers at vet2
LEFH given same fix as ML-20, veterancy except for scatter for vet3 was working here before though so not nearly as big a change.
AT nade abilities can now be used on abandoned vehicles. Soviet atnades can be used on buildings like all other atnades.
PTRS can now ground target
The debuff from the IR halftrack is mostly a proof of concept, wanted to see that it works properly and doesn't lead to performance issues etc. Might actually lead to an even worse volkspam problem, but at the same time the IR halftrack itself needs something to make it worth building when you can get similar vision really easy through units like the Kubel.
Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
what about increasing fire rate for PTRS's?
Possible, it's not like they're particularly strong against anything and the weapon is supposed to be semiauto. I would kinda like to make PTRS quite a bit stronger in fire rate & not as shitty against infantry and then make it an upgrade instead of automatically handed out, but kinda worried changes like these would make guard spam that much stronger.
Posts: 2819
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
The IR HT is just a piece of *** that doesn't belong to the game in it's current state. It shouldn't constantly detect.
Not sure why you think this. It is in fact one of the WEAKEST detection abilities in the game, kubel vet1 and ostheer scout car vet1 give a 360 degree constant detection that also detects camouflage. Only thing IR HT has going for it is a long range on cone, but tbh the other detection abilities have "enough" range to stop any flank from ever succeeding with them around.
Or how about vet T70 or scout car with scope, which give regular 360 vision roughly the same radius as the IR HT cone?
Posts: 4928
Possible, it's not like they're particularly strong against anything and the weapon is supposed to be semiauto. I would kinda like to make PTRS quite a bit stronger in fire rate & not as shitty against infantry and then make it an upgrade instead of automatically handed out, but kinda worried changes like these would make guard spam that much stronger.
Would it be possible to add a second "weapon" to the PTRS that did much less damage and had higher accuracy against Infantry, so the PTRS wasn't a complete liability? Currently it feels like the sole purpose of the PRTS is to make 2 units of a Guard squad completely hopeless at both AI and AT.
Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41
Would it be possible to add a second "weapon" to the PTRS that did much less damage and had higher accuracy against Infantry, so the PTRS wasn't a complete liability? Currently it feels like the sole purpose of the PRTS is to make 2 units of a Guard squad completely hopeless at both AI and AT.
Giving them a switch ability to use their rifles instead of PTRS would be quite simple. But you might as well just let the ptrs actually hit infantry sometimes instead of that, the only side effect would be that it will no longer miss against vehicles. In a game where panzerschreks have close to 100% accuracy I don't think an antitank rifle being accurate against tanks is an issue...
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Giving them a switch ability to use their rifles instead of PTRS would be quite simple. But you might as well just let the ptrs actually hit infantry sometimes instead of that, the only side effect would be that it will no longer miss against vehicles. In a game where panzerschreks have close to 100% accuracy I don't think an antitank rifle being accurate against tanks is an issue...
Add on top of that, that Shrecks can do 360 no scope head shot at vehicles while PTRS gunners seem to be building their own aiming device before shooting.
Posts: 2053
Add on top of that, that Shrecks can do 360 no scope head shot at vehicles while PTRS gunners seem to be building their own aiming device before shooting.
You see, the PTRS wielders have to test for wind speed, bullet drop over distance, and predicting the amount of recoil before they even start to consider to decide whether or not they should shoot at their target. The panzerschreck has a built in painter that allows the rocket to seek its target most times. German engineering prevails.
Any PTRS buff is welcome as i have quit using Guards altogether because the PTRS is such a hinderance compared to other handheld AT weapons that are much more efficient AND kill infantry better somehow.
Posts: 4928
Giving them a switch ability to use their rifles instead of PTRS would be quite simple. But you might as well just let the ptrs actually hit infantry sometimes instead of that, the only side effect would be that it will no longer miss against vehicles. In a game where panzerschreks have close to 100% accuracy I don't think an antitank rifle being accurate against tanks is an issue...
True missing accuracy against vehicles isn't a problem, in fact I'm all for 100% accuracy against vehicles considering overall RoF, Penetration, Damage, and even aim time are very poor. But I think just increasing the accuracy would be problematic due to the fact that they do 40 damage, half a Soldier's health. It'd be too inconsistent, 2 lucky shots would kill a model but 4 unlucky shots will do nothing at all.
What about increasing the accuracy tenfold, reducing damage to 20 (only 4 higher than a standard rifle), and doubling the rate of fire? Once that's complete, it can be tuned from there to do more or less DPS, but 20 is a lot more consistent than 40.
EDIT
Also Cruzz, is it possible to change the projectile from Target Weak Point to the HEAT type? Sometimes it's difficult to tell if TWP is actually working or if a regular shot is being fired, especially if it fails to penetrate. The flashier HEAT projectile type could help by showing when the TWP shot is fired.
Posts: 656
Livestreams
10 | |||||
177 | |||||
22 | |||||
21 | |||||
5 | |||||
4 | |||||
3 | |||||
3 | |||||
2 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.600215.736+15
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1107614.643+8
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, zhcnwps
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM