Login

russian armor

Idea: Mortars vs. Tank Destroyers

13 Aug 2016, 19:06 PM
#1
avatar of atlantis145

Posts: 63

Just had a thought; would it make sense for Axis mortars, if they get a direct hit on an open-topped turret, for them to stun the vehicle? (at least for firing) Heard ImperialDane the other day talking about spamming M10s being OP, so I thought maybe this would be a counter to that?

Just a thought!
13 Aug 2016, 19:15 PM
#3
avatar of atlantis145

Posts: 63

Sorry :( Still new here
13 Aug 2016, 19:20 PM
#4
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

The idea is not retarded at all. The only problem I can see is that it's hard to imagine anyone using mortar especially against a vehicle as they move quickly. So it would be rather a nice real life polish than meta change.

Btw the m10 spam is not OP. USF have better commanders than armor.
13 Aug 2016, 19:23 PM
#5
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

don't mind katiof he is like that
first of all welcome
second there where 2 other post like this but were very old
the end was that it would be too hard to implement cause there no upper armor and would be a not very used
13 Aug 2016, 19:34 PM
#6
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Aug 2016, 19:12 PMKatitof
Its both, a dead horse and retarded idea.


Sorry :( Still new here


Also, Katitof said it is retarded mainly becouse it affects only allied tds, while in fact there are some axis vehicles that could be changed in such way, too. For example top armour of real life panther turret was so thin it could easily be penetrated by mortar shell (15 to 16 mm depending on version). Other examples are LVs like 222 and 251.
13 Aug 2016, 19:52 PM
#7
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1





Also, Katitof said it is retarded mainly becouse it affects only allied tds, while in fact there are some axis vehicles that could be changed in such way, too. For example top armour of real life panther turret was so thin it could easily be penetrated by mortar shell. Other examples are LVs like 222 and 251.

Isn't that an good example why it shouldn't happen if it were applied with realistic logic? 222 and 251 are already damaged by mortars and they'd probably be pretty guaranteed dead most of the time from suffering a sudden random stun.
nee
13 Aug 2016, 20:23 PM
#8
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

Just had a thought; would it make sense for Axis mortars, if they get a direct hit on an open-topped turret, for them to stun the vehicle? (at least for firing) Heard ImperialDane the other day talking about spamming M10s being OP, so I thought maybe this would be a counter to that?

Just a thought!
Doesn't make sense, neither would it be very practical. Making the effect apply only to specific mortars is, besides fairness from a design perspective, presents technical questions, like if a Gr34 mortar was crewed/ recrewed by both sides, etc. The game is simply not reliable enough to avoid these potential hiccups. From a practical perspective, it is much more effective to merely deal with the TD spam issue than trying to tweak units to be more effective against it (which also raises the question of whether it actually is an issue, just because ImperialDane spouts a bunch of hearsay doesn't mean it's true).
In other words, M10 spam is an issue with the M10, not an issue with the design of other units. The odds of scoring a hit with mortar against one of the fastest moving vehicles in the game, coupled with the fact that the damage from being hit by a mortar is already substantial given that M10 and Jackson aren't exactly durable vehicles, makes the whole subject a moot point anyways: if it gets stunned along with substantial loss of health, a second mortar round will just finish it off. But before you consider this making mortar a hardcounter, this is assuming it hits at all.

If you want to deal with M10 spam then just tweak the M10. For example, making it a unit unlock rather than call-in through T4 will mitigate the problem- you can't spam M10s if you're waiting for Major to finish coming in, or building the M36 or Sherman. The Easy Eight and Soviets' T-34/85 was given this treatment precisely for this reason, despite the fact that both are T4 as well as late-game costing more, AND operating as superior versions of stock medium tanks.
If in doubt, the Captain's speed construction would help getting that first M10 out quickly; it costs less than M36 and if you blitz to T4 fast enough, can potentially let you bring in M10 even earlier than the 8CP unlock.

Performance wise IMO the M10 is in a good spot, which is why I don't advocate tweaking their actual stats. By the time they come into play, you've already got Major tier unlocked or just about: the spammability is from being able to dispatch them without using up queue slots.
13 Aug 2016, 20:29 PM
#9
avatar of tenid

Posts: 232

I'd love to see top and side armour properly modeled in game, but it's something for the next game rather than trying to force it into the current one.
13 Aug 2016, 20:40 PM
#10
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

I believe it would be hard to implement if possible at all, but yeah.

I know for sure you could make flamethrowers do damage to the crew in CoH tho.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Russian Federation 8
unknown 8
United States 3
unknown 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

862 users are online: 862 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49108
Welcome our newest member, Jolliyastefan
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM