Heavy Assault Guns vs Fortifications

Your opinion that fortification do not exist in COH2 is noted...no reason to go back to it again...

Maybe read that post again

Invissed a post, manners cost nothing.

Maybe read that post again

Since you agree that fortification in COH2 exist and you simply do not find my arguments valid, PLS feel free to respond to anyone questioning the existence of fortification in COH2, you can start with katitof and Gen0bi...your superior arguments will convince them.

No logic

Read and understand what katitof wrote and why what he writes is not "valid": He arbitrary translated the sentence "effective against infantry and buildings" (structures) to "clear buildings" (garrison), in order to continue arguing that emplacements do not exist in COH2.

In the end of the day it is not my logic the topic of the thread and since you agree with my there is little reason to question my logic...I have made suggestions on assault guns and fortification so pls stay on topic.

I am actually little surprise this thread has continue, despite everyone disagreeing with you continue. Katiof, while less graceful then most has a point, while your opinion is always valid and welcome for this particular case, it is wrong.

Fortification

noun
a defensive wall or other reinforcement built to strengthen a place against attack.

As far as I understand the only "real fortification" is the Soviet forward HQ, however the only real difference between that and the previous building is minor sandbags along the base which would implied a "hasty forward position" In military jargon.

Other military defensive such as trenches, sand bags, tank traps etc.. are often confused as fortifications but are are simply classified as obstacles in a "defensive line".
In military jargon that's called "field defenses"

Its very important for any soldier to understand these differences and I understand why it us often a sources of confusion among civilians

Not your fault it's too often that this generation takes what they see in media and video games and suddenly become experts.

As for the most important question and the linchpin of your argument

"Do fortifications exist In coh2", the answer is no considering the Soviet FHQ is up for debate since it seems the Russian do not bother to fortify the structure in any meaningful way to resist attack.

Bunkers, fighting position, brit SIM city etc.. are all clearly field defenses.

"Why are there assault guns in coh2"

The advantage of saying balance before realism is that balance is never dependent on historical facts where realism is, the Assualt gun units in game are just flare and spectacle, the "special effects" if you will of the game mainly to deal with infantry ans entrenched units like pack guns.

Do I expect this to reach you and any meaningful way? No not really, it seems that no matter what argument is presented you fail to see beyond your own views.

"Do fortifications exist In coh2", the answer is no...

Gen0bi feel free to debate the issue with Plaguer who believe that there are fortification in COH2.

Your opinion that fortification do not exist in COH2 is noted...no reason to go back to it again...

By the way, in your opinion is in-game reload better than accuracy for small arms fire? (I am still waiting for an answer)

No need debate, as I have shown both you and him are incorrect in the belief that fortifications exist. Fortifications, at least in English, is used specifically for a single building with few variations and exceptions.

I have have already said why reload is important, I am confused to why you say I shouldn't reiterate thus topic and then expect me to tell you why you are incorrect on a other topic? Which is it? I ha e no issue just message me and I can clarify it.

"Your opinion that fortification do not exist in COH2 is noted...no reason to go back to it again.."

okay yes, they do not exist,I simply here to correct lack of understanding of the topic, I understand it well through my military training the differences between field defenses and building fortifications. I am trying to informed you!

I have have already said why reload is important,...

You still did not answer the question "in your opinion is in-game reload better than accuracy for small arms fire?" and in your original post did not claim that reload is important, you actually claimed that is the more important than others.

Your attitude simply illustrates that you are incapable of acknowledging when you have made a mistake (and you have done in at least 3 different occasions) and thus there is little point in debating with you anything for long...

I see you simply don't understand, I rather be a Private message instead of your thread to prevent further discredition to you...but I suppose a little humility is good.

In regards to the previous post to "why are reload bulletins desired over accuracy bulletins in terms of DPS"

Simple my dear boy, it's not my opinion, it's mathematics.

FORMULA for DPS calculation

Damage / (Activation Time + Recharge) = Damage per Second

Damage equals the unit base damage, activation time is the "ready aim stats" and the key to it all,+ recharge or in other words RELOAD

At no point is accuracy a factor in DPS calculation therefore you are WRONG.

Your opinion of accuracy is important to DPS just that a opinion and is unquestionably wrong at that.

Mathematical Formulas are not subjected to peoples incorrect presumptions.

I wouldn't try to go back and start changing your post as you are known to do, I already have you quoted with the original texts several times.

Your attitude simply illustrates that you are incapable of acknowledging when you have made a mistake

First sensible statement you made this thread, I would strongly recommend you follow your own advice. It be a shame if I had to carry this on my signature as well to remind you, just like the last thread.

FORMULA for DPS calculation
Damage / (Activation Time + Recharge) = Damage per Second
Damage equals the unit base damage, activation time is the "ready aim stats" and the key to it all,+ recharge or in other words RELOAD
At no point is accuracy a factor in DPS calculation therefore you are WRONG.
Your opinion of accuracy is important to DPS just that a opinion and unquestionably wrong at that.

I will not even attempt to convince you that completely wrong. You can debate this issue with:

Offtopic: accuracy is leagues ahead been better than reload and cooldown.

Accuracy translates directly into DPS increase while reload/cooldown is around 1/4 as effective as accuracy is.

That's the beautiful part of stats and mathematical Fourmals they are not subjective to people's own views...no matter how wrong they are.

That's the beautiful part of stats and mathematical Fourmals they are not subjective to people's own views...no matter how wrong they are.

Your beyond salvation...PLS never question another person knowledge of the game...Just think about it a bullet that does not hit a target will make 0 damage....

Your beyond salvation...PLS never question another person knowledge of the game...Just think about it a bullet that does not hit a target will make 0 damage....

My debate teacher have always told me that you incite a reaction such as this it means you won....

Oh snap...we have CHECK

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damage_per_second

That link provides you info how to properly caculate DPS and even how major publisher use it...

....and obviously Myself a miss isn't used a part of the equation because you can not calculate 0 and is why accuracy isn't a factor to start with.

.....and MATE

/Thread close

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damage_per_second

That link provides you info how to properly caculate DPS and even how major publisher use it...

I actually have to agree with Myself here, accuracy has to be taken into account when calculating effective dps in CoH2. Ignoring accuracy gives you the theoretical dps when all bullets hit, which are much farther from a realistic value. The wiki page seems to refer mainly to DPS in MMORPG games (as stated close to the top of the page), which you realisticly can't translate directly to a RTS game with more/different variables. Quote taken from the wiki page:

Another key factor may be Accuracy (chance of an attack to hit a target), but for most calculations it is assumed the attacks will be hitting. However, realistically most characters in most MMO's need to somehow ensure they hit their intended targets, and most likely will enhance accuracy on their characters, sometimes sacrificing recharge enhancements and the like. This cuts down on theoretical DPS, but increases realistic values as they actually land every hit of their attack chain


On topic: Ignoring the terminological war in this thread, I don't agree with OP - fiddling with assault guns effectiveness against static positions would possibly require a chain of balance changes, especially with brit emplacements which are troublesome already. I don't have too much confidence with Relic's work when trying to balance the game, so creating problems by addressing an non balance - issue doesn't sound good to me. Also, assault guns are effective enough vs most static positions already imo.

Show Spoiler

Please, do not spread out false information if you do not know how the game works.

Game uses this formula:

DPS being calculated as: Damage x Accuracy x (Shots per burst x Shots fired before reload / Total time to shoot including reload)

Total time to shoot including reload = ((Shoot burst duration + Fire aim time + Wind up + Wind down)*Shoots fire before reload) + (Cooldown duration * Reload frequency) + (Reload duration)

Now check where in the formula accuracy is located in comparison to both cooldown and reload. And here i'm not even talking about values for cooldown and reload.

While this might change from squad to squad, range and weapons, it gives a general panorama on how bulletins work.

-I made the calculations based on the Gren Kar at mid range. Cooldown modifiers are better at longer range than at close range

+3 Accuracy: increases damage by 3%
5% cooldown: increases damage by 1.21%
3% Reload: ... by 0.27%
2% Reload + 2% Cooldown: ... by 0.66%

Just let it die guys...

You two fellows are correct, while we can discuss the specifics of DPS and how it translate into this game, obviously every game has its own factors, that's for another thread.

It be unrealistic to apply this base formula to every single game.

As for Australian magics wise words

/Let it die

You two fellows are correct,... /Let it die

I pleasantly surprised that you have proven me wrong and you can actually admit a mistake.

But what is is important here is not an error in some formula,(we all make mistakes) but your nonconstructive provoking approach that turned what should had been a debate on balance issue into knowledge competition...

What you need to contemplate is how would you react if someone now turned his signature to:

At no point is accuracy a factor in DPS calculation...
-Gen0bi,Jan 2016

Nothing further to add. Matter is closed for me....

On topic: Ignoring the terminological war in this thread, I don't agree with OP - fiddling with assault guns effectiveness against static positions would possibly require a chain of balance changes, especially with brit emplacements which are troublesome already. I don't have too much confidence with Relic's work when trying to balance the game, so creating problems by addressing an non balance - issue doesn't sound good to me. Also, assault guns are effective enough vs most static positions already imo.

My suggestions on what changes imo can be made that will have little impact in overall balance can be found in page 3:

One could add some damage modifier similar to Avre against structures.
One could also make it veterancy related:
for instance Brumbar vet 1 ability "Bunker Busting Barrage" could have damage bonus or even bypass some of the "brace" damage reduction. For instance instead of 75% damage reduction the reduction could be lower down to 50%.
A similar change could be made to the Sturm Tiger (S.T.) also by adding similar affect in vet 1 since the vet 1 S.T. is quiet useless.
Similar change could be made to other assault guns like the Dozer, Kv-2 indirect, ISU-152 giving some anti-structure barrage abilities (where not available) or some structure damage modifiers with veterancy.

I think that making emplacements slightly easier to kill would be a bad thing for the game, but that's just me. Mostly because British emplacements are already pretty rare. Making them easier to kill with a Brummbar wouldn't wreck balance or anything but I do think it would hurt the diversity of the game slightly while not really improving game play.