Small arm fire improving "point blank" mechanism

When it comes to small arm fire cover is one of the most decisive factors in the outcome of firefight.

The same factor becomes almost irrelevant once the units involved come closer to 10 meter when the "point blank" mechanism kicks in and cover bonuses no longer apply (accept garrison).

The issue with the current implementation are:

1)The change is great and completely sudden, the difference in fight between 2 squad at a distance of 10,1 and 9.9 units away can be drastic.

2)Players do not have any indication if and when the mechanism kicks in and can only estimate.

3)wide availability of smoke grenades and sprint abilities allow infantry to close the 25 units gap (35-10) fast reducing the effectiveness of cover.

I would suggest the following changes:

1)Make the transition of the "point blank" mechanism linear with distance similarly to accuracy and other modifiers. Even keep some small bonus at close distance so that denying cover with wire makes more sense.
Alternately reduce "point blank" to 5

2)introduce range indicator to squads informing players either set distances or changes in DPS curves like "point blank", close, mid far.

3)Rethink the availability of sprint abilities/smoke grenades, consider introducing penalties when using these abilities improve these abilities via veterancy...

Positioning makes a difference.
Don't fix what isn't broken.

More news at 11.

Don't fix what isn't broken.

The title say improving not fixing.

“No matter how good you get you can always get better, and that's the exciting part.”
― Tiger Woods

Not when you're trying to complicate simple, straight forward mechanic.

Not when you're trying to complicate simple, straight forward mechanic.

It might be simple (and that is the point is too simple) but is far from "straight forward".

A player with a unit in cover can has no way of telling tell if his unit is benefiting from cover or not and can only estimate and guess.

A player attacking cover a unit in cover has no way to telling if he has move his unit close enough to deny cover to enemy units or not.

The linear connection of DPS and range is already in game and introducing in close combat is not actually complicates thing actually it simplifies them since unit behave more consistently with out huge changes in DPS.

The connection of abilities like sprint and smoke grenades and veterancy doe snot complicated thing but again simplifies them since connection between abilities and veterancy is already there with normal grenade range for instance.

...

It might be simple (and that is the point is too simple) but is far from "straight forward".

A player with a unit in cover can has no way of telling tell if his unit is benefiting from cover or not and can only estimate and guess.

A player attacking cover a unit in cover has no way to telling if he has move his unit close enough to deny cover to enemy units or not...

Gotta give this a +1. It's pure estimation without even an option from the UI to improve the communication of a unit benefiting from its' current cover or not.

Hey uh, maybe that MASSIVE space in the bottom middle of the UI could help out somehow?

Can you even imagine if that area had real-time stats for dps, unit health, models in cover... etc ?!

Can you even imagine if that area had real-time stats for dps, unit health, models in cover... etc ?!

Such thoughts make me sad

Gotta give this a +1. It's pure estimation without even an option from the UI to improve the communication of a unit benefiting from its' current cover or not.

Hey uh, maybe that MASSIVE space in the bottom middle of the UI could help out somehow?

Can you even imagine if that area had real-time stats for dps, unit health, models in cover... etc ?!

i once thought about making a mod that would change all the unit's in-game descriptions in the middle of the UI to a list of the most relevant static stats possible, but I lost all motivation for that a long time ago

Well, if it were up to me I would change 10 meter point blank to 5 meters. But still, I think there is no need for change.

i once thought about making a mod that would change all the unit's in-game descriptions in the middle of the UI to a list of the most relevant static stats possible, but I lost all motivation for that a long time ago

The unit description space in game (bottom of the screen when the unit is selected) is completely wasted. They could have (and should have) used that space for detailed unit stats (DPS, range, sight, buffs etc).

Is there any balance reason why the "point blank" rule doesn't affect garrisons? I kind of feel like they should make it apply to garrisons as well to discourage building camping on certain maps like Semosisky where the point blank green cover can really screw you over if you aren't the one in the garrison.

That being said its kind of nice knowing about the point blank green cover thing to abuse it against opponents who waste time getting into green cover on the opposite side of the same sandbags you are using and such.

Is there any balance reason why the "point blank" rule doesn't affect garrisons? ...

There is, ambient building garrison might reduce ones dps if there more entities in the house than windows facing the enemy squad...

Why does point blank cover not exist? It seems like it should be reduced but not 100% zeroed

Why does point blank cover not exist? It seems like it should be reduced but not 100% zeroed

Because there is a certain distance, where it doesn't matter that you sit in that dirt hole or bush.

Dmg reduction modifier from green cover still applies.

Because there is a certain distance, where it doesn't matter that you sit in that dirt hole or bush.

Dmg reduction modifier from green cover still applies.

I think it's only for buildings actually. Even in CQB though, since the game is an abstraction, I think it's reasonable to assume that cover generally had some utility.

I think it's only for buildings actually. Even in CQB though, since the game is an abstraction, I think it's reasonable to assume that cover generally had some utility.

It's probably meant to be a bit of a boost for SMG units, since it allows their full DPS to always (well, usually) affect enemies as a compensation for how they must get close to be effective.

Of course, Relic could instead remove the point blank mechanic and increase small arms' DPS at close-range instead, but the current way is probably preferable to that so SMG units don't, say, totally obliterate a mortar squad out of cover that they get next to.

It would be easier to balance the game if there was a larger difference between assault and ranged troops, just like in DoW2.

Only assault troops should get the point blank cover negation, they should also be able to go inside of buildings and clear them out.

It would be easier to balance the game if there was a larger difference between assault and ranged troops, just like in DoW2.

Only assault troops should get the point blank cover negation, they should also be able to go inside of buildings and clear them out.

The concept of building camping getting so hard-countered without flamethrowers,

The "point blank" mechanism exist because either wise 2 squads fighting each other on opposite sides of a sandbag would take too long.

I think it's only for buildings actually. Even in CQB though, since the game is an abstraction, I think it's reasonable to assume that cover generally had some utility.

Garrison cover is entirely different can of worms.
Bonuses from it are lesser then from green cover, but lower distance doesn't negate them.