Received Accuracy

Received Accuracy is currently what i think is the biggest balance issue in the game.

The current patch (aside from some silly things like the USF mortar) is actually pretty good in terms of balance.

However the late game transition is slightly more painful for axis if they haven't been able to score early squad wipes.

The veterancy bonuses for particularly the US and UK infantry squads gives them a received accuracy reduction (of i think up to 50% in vet 3 USF infantry).

This... is just stupid. The experience of a solider does not allow him to dodge bullets or give him a temporal time shifting pack with which to avoid them.

The fact that a blob of vet 3 rifle squads can stand in a road, and take the same damage as a squad in cover, is just daft and encourages blobbing and skilless play. It also makes things harder for the axis since none of their infantry get such a significant received accuracy (except i think obers, but its still smaller than the rifle infantry get in USF).

Veterancy should make infantry better at shooting (which it also does) and maybe better when fighting in cover... NOT able to go all matrix in the middle of a road while beating enemy units in cover.


Id like received accuracy to be removed from all units and every man should be as hard to hit as the other with the exception of those suffering from dwarfism and for infantry to have different health and armor values to respect their cost/roll. Because received accuracy is just ruining this for me...

The tommies is balanced up to the point where they get double bren.

rifleman is balanced unless they get double m1919a6. the Higher defensive vet is balanced if they are using the bar but they become terminators with the dual m1919a6.

basically double lmg breaks the balance.

The tommies is balanced up to the point where they get double bren.

rifleman is balanced unless they get double m1919a6. the Higher defensive vet is balanced if they are using the bar but they become terminators with the dual m1919a6.

basically double lmg breaks the balance.

So would it be a solution to just make all lmgs use 2 weapon slots? This would also solve the "gren terminator" unit problem that sometimes shows up when grens die and drop their lmg for another gren squad.

Well I think too much reduced recived accuracy remove cover from the equation cause a .5 squad only get to .25 on green cover while a 1 squad get to 0.5 the more reduced recived accuracy you have the less you have need to use cover
Halving the bonus to ALL infantry seems the better solution

So would it be a solution to just make all lmgs use 2 weapon slots? This would also solve the "gren terminator" unit problem that sometimes shows up when grens die and drop their lmg for another gren squad.

that's one way. I would still prefer to allow tommies and rifleman to mix lmg and bazooka/PIAT.

Not good way. This mean faster unit dying and wiping.

-% received accuracy from vetterancy is reward for unit overseeing and good micro.

Funnily enough, riflemen received accuracy was adjusted to that level to adress the mp bleed USF had back then. Instead of, you know, adjusting reinforcement costs instead. lelic FailFish

Difference between RA/Size and armor is practically the same unless we talk about weapons with pen >1

It was changed from armor to RA for the sole reason that getting hit and not receiving damage was not "attractive visually". Only units which still have armor are Shocks (IRL), Assault Gren SL (?) and the hidden Assault PG upgrade.

IB4 someone suggest this:
If you move all RA bonuses from veterancy to only apply while in cover, this would push further the lethality on all units as they get increased accuracy through vet.
If accuracy also only applies while in cover, NO ONE will take any initiative on attacks as they are gonna suffer great losses. This would lead to more campy play which further increases the role of indirect fire and artillery.

IMO:
-Reduce reinforcement cost at vet3 on Rifles and rollback terminator RA levels.
No point on messing the whole ecosystem only due to 1 unit.

Offtopic: upgrade LMG been king is a whole different issue.

Not good way. This mean faster unit dying and wiping.

-% received accuracy from vetterancy is reward for unit overseeing and good micro.

Which Axis are not given....


-% accuracy rewards the USF mostly... Followed by the UKF....


It gives them the equivalent damage reduction of light cover... while stood in a bloody road. You cannot tell me this is right or balanced. It promotes skilless blob play and is what drives decent players away from the game because honestly? its a fkin joke...



If i was to suggest.... and if it actually happened.... that volks/grens were given 5 man squads 270MP cost, 2 LMG's and at vet 3 -50% received accuracy AND given nades, AND given smoke AND given an officer that can unsuppress them.... These forums would explode in allied fanboy rage...

Yet all im doing is describing Rifle squads lol.

Which Axis are not given....


-% accuracy rewards the USF mostly... Followed by the UKF....


It gives them the equivalent damage reduction of light cover... while stood in a bloody road. You cannot tell me this is right or balanced. It promotes skilless blob play and is what drives decent players away from the game because honestly? its a fkin joke...



If i was to suggest.... and if it actually happened.... that volks/grens were given 5 man squads 270MP cost, 2 LMG's and at vet 3 -50% received accuracy AND given nades, AND given smoke AND given an officer that can unsuppress them.... These forums would explode in allied fanboy rage...

Yet all im doing is describing Rifle squads lol.

the rifleman were originally given the high RA because their Bar were crap. The grenadier also had better weapon accuracy bonus than the rifleman (40% vs 30%). Unfortunately people ignore the existence of double m1919a6. So what we have now is terminator blob with double m1919a6. Bar is merely decent with the terminator veterancy, but m1919a6 is ridiculous.

remove terminator veterancy

decrease bar cost

limit m1919a6 to one per squad (except paratrooper)

lowered grenadier vet3 accuracy bonus (this is frankly what cause the entire chain of over buff to the rifleman)

oh yeah, nerf the USF mortar as well.

the rifleman were originally given the high RA because their Bar were crap. The grenadier also had better weapon accuracy bonus than the rifleman (40% vs 30%). Unfortunately people ignore the existence of double m1919a6. So what we have now is terminator blob with double m1919a6. Bar is merely decent with the terminator veterancy, but m1919a6 is ridiculous.

remove terminator veterancy

decrease bar cost

limit m1919a6 to one per squad (except paratrooper)

lowered grenadier vet3 accuracy bonus (this is frankly what cause the entire chain of over buff to the rifleman)

oh yeah, nerf the USF mortar as well.

I'm pretty sure the RA buff came after the bar buff.

Also if the m1919a6 holds two slots. They should also make it more powerful and expensive like a 90 muni upgrade, otherwise most players will probably just ignore it in favor of bars.

I'm pretty sure the RA buff came after the bar buff.

Also if the m1919a6 holds two slots. They should also make it more powerful and expensive like a 90 muni upgrade, otherwise most players will probably just ignore it in favor of bars.

the bar buff merely increased its moving accuracy. for 60 munition it's still rather expensive, especially since the far superior m1919a6 cost 60 munition as well. most USF player use either priest or calliope doctrine and spam m1919a6.

and the m1919a6 is nearly identical to the lmg42, which is functionally limited to one per grenadier.

the bar buff merely increased its moving accuracy. for 60 munition it's still rather expensive, especially since the far superior m1919a6 cost 60 munition as well. most USF player use either priest or calliope doctrine and spam m1919a6.

and the m1919a6 is nearly identical to the lmg42, which is functionally limited to one per grenadier.

It costs 70 muni.

And my point isn't about the stats. It's that players aren't going to limit themselves to 1 mediocre upgrade, forgoing the ability to get double bars, zooks, or picking things up from the ground. Especially since they have to wait til 3cp in the first place. If it's going to take up 2 slots it should atleast be better then a single 60 muni upgrade.

It costs 70 muni.

And my point isn't about the stats. It's that players aren't going to limit themselves to 1 mediocre upgrade, forgoing the ability to get double bars, zooks, or picking things up from the ground. Especially since they have to wait til 3cp in the first place. If it's going to take up 2 slots it should atleast be better then a single 60 muni upgrade.

my bad keep thinking that it's 60 munition.

and one m1919a6 is hardly "mediocre". the wehr grenadier manage fine with just 1 lmg42.

my bad keep thinking that it's 60 munition.

and one m1919a6 is hardly "mediocre". the wehr grenadier manage fine with just 1 lmg42.

They also cant choose to have double bars and don't haave to give up picking up weapons. So grens don't have another choice to compete with. Rifles garand also aren't all that great long range like that. Rifles always have more potential then other mainlines, that's how they work. Saying choose this option and you'll be as good as grens, isn't really an enticing option when the other option is better.

They also cant choose to have double bars and don't haave to give up picking up weapons. So grens don't have another choice to compete with. Rifles garand also aren't all that great long range like that. Rifles always have more potential then other mainlines, that's how they work. Saying choose this option and you'll be as good as grens, isn't really an enticing option when the other option is better.

in terms of long range, a single m1919a6 is roughly equal or slightly superior to double bar. This mean that a m1919a6 doesn't have to dive as hard to justify the price, unlike the bar.

It's a choice between a specialist upgrade that is just good enough or generalist upgrade that give some unneeded boost.

Assuming the m1919a6 get a price decrease to 60 mu and the bar a price decrease to 45 mu, the m1919a6 is the more economical choice that will still give your rifleman the need increase in firepower.


a single m1919a6 will beat a lmg42 grenadier as well.

and I consider the wehr faction the gold standard in terms of firepower. Their units are fragile but they punch above their weight. Grenadier shouldn't get a fifth man because they get access to lmg42 that give a lot of firepower.

Units like the rifleman or tommies are more durable than the grenadiers, but their firepower is still capped at around the grenadier's level.

axis shines in late game so i dont see how their transition to it is bad. Rifles get out classed as the game goes on. mg42 grens and mg42s can shut them down really well. For OKW mg34, obers, stg volks, do well vs rifles so i dont see the problem with their vet bonus. Also as rifles start to drop off, they become a big manpower bleed.

I dont see how recieve accuracy is a problem

Sort of tangential, but players shouldn't get access to the M1919A6 without first buying the weapon rack upgrade from the HQ.

Also, I'm against tweaking reinforcement costs. Everything should be Squad cost/squadmembers/2 imo.

This is what I've said months, years ago.

More experienced soldiers don't dodge bullets.
They can get better accuracy, betted fight behind cover but standing in the open field and receiving only 50% damage? Lel

Received accuracy should work only behind cover - fixed - otherwise 100% damage.
Or anything smiliar. Matrix should not take place + cover fight would be much more important.

Accuracy and received accuracy bonuses determine lethality. Generally speaking, accuracy bonuses benefit long-range troops massively, whereas received-accuracy bonuses benefit close-combat troops better (since they need to close the distance before dishing out damage).

That is to say, if you took the massive offensive bonuses of LMG-grens (LMG42, vet) and turned it into a received accuracy bonus, LMG-Grens would become a meh unit, at best.

On the other hand, if you gave every single infantry unit a massive boost in survivability, you would just push the game further down the maws of sniper spam (snipers don't give 2 fucks about received accuracy).

When you have 2 squads fighting against one another, it is the weapon profiles that determine the optimal ranges for the engagement for each squad.

For instance, if you have LMG grens vs Bar-Riflemen, LMG-grens need to keep the distance at a maximum where they can bleed the riflemen, whereas Riflemen need to close the distance. If you have Bar-Riflemen vs PGrens, it's probably the other way around.

While the enemy is at an optimal distance to you, it pays off to have high accuracy bonuses, so that you can bleed them even harder (thus reducing their DPS). If you fail to do that, the enemy can relocate to a position where they have the upper hand and start bleeding you.