Why ZiS get a slow debuff?
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
Posts: 2885
PAK40 doesn't need movement penalty because all of the Land Mattress craters would make them impossible to use
What about panzerwerfer though? It does even more moon-forming.
Posts: 283
Shock Rifle (IS2) commander ?
You're right, I overlooked that one. I don't think that one is in the current meta though, isn't it?
That said, I'd rather have the ZiS fixed than all others set to the same situation - AT guns are troublesome enough to use as it is, making them even less usable would set even more focus on tanks, which is exactly what is causing so many problems right now (most of which are amplified by the horrendous tank balance Relic apparently considers acceptable)...
Raketen is the most survivable AT
Thanks, I had a hearty laugh. The only thing that is similarly easily killed by the very thing it is meant to fight are PzGrens, and with them it is justified by their damage output being OP if their survivability were any higher.
Posts: 207
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
You're right, I overlooked that one. I don't think that one is in the current meta though, isn't it?
That said, I'd rather have the ZiS fixed than all others set to the same situation - AT guns are troublesome enough to use as it is, making them even less usable would set even more focus on tanks, which is exactly what is causing so many problems right now (most of which are amplified by the horrendous tank balance Relic apparently considers acceptable)...
I found it interesting that you overlooked the most common one
Yeah, that "bug/feature" should be fixed. Also, it's not "that hard" to get vet1 on rak. Surviving more than that it's another history, but first vet levels are easy for all AT wise squads.
Posts: 1158
As for the actual topic, the debuff needs to be changed or applied evenly among all factions for appropriate units.
Edit: Also, the cloaked units should have a sight debuff of like 40%. If you're hiding, you usually can't see as well as you can when not hiding.
Posts: 1487
Posts: 367
Last time I checked zis crew still shots infantry revealing himself while cloak is active
fixed in wbp, which is still not live. it coming!
Posts: 245
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
AT guns should not be moving while cloaked anyway. The raketenwerfer should have that toggle removed. Both the raketen and the doctrinal zis should have passive cloak when in cover. No stupid button, no sneaking across open ground with a giant gun anyone with 20/20 vision could easily see.
As for the actual topic, the debuff needs to be changed or applied evenly among all factions for appropriate units.
Edit: Also, the cloaked units should have a sight debuff of like 40%. If you're hiding, you usually can't see as well as you can when not hiding.
Zis gets free green cover from itself ...
Posts: 148
Yeah, movement on AT guns while cloaked should be removed. It should be ambush, not have multiple raks sneak up, kill something, and retreat.
yes it should not move while ambushing
they should gain more penetration or damage or sight /range instead
both zis and rak
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Zis gets free green cover from itself ...
Just in case cause this is is a tricky misconception.
Old post copy paste
1-The AT gun does not provide green cover for the guys operating the weapon. You do full damage (i can't test accuracy outside of making a mod) either through small arm fire or explosives (grenades or mortar shells for example). Easy to check by either killing the crew with a grenade/mortar or activating the dmg indicator on cheatmods.
2-The AT gun ITSELF does create green cover and each of them has a hitbox (which can blocks incoming shots). The thing is, it's mostly irrelevant for the crew due to formation.
Check the pic (for some reason the rak 4th guy spread out)
So yeah, green cover on the AT gun for the crew is useless, cause a shell landing on top of it will kill the 2 operating guys and heavily wound the 3rd guy which might be nearby.
That been said, it's not worthless putting AT guns behind cover, cause that will protect the operators.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Just in case cause this is is a tricky misconception.
Old post copy paste
As far as I know there is cover type described as "Team weapon heavy" and I am under the impression that the 2 crew member operating zis/pak/m1 57/6 pounder benefit from this type of cover.
This type of cover is directional as far as I know.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
As far as I know there is cover type described as "Team weapon heavy" and I am under the impression that the 2 crew member operating zis/pak/m1 57/6 pounder benefit from this type of cover.
This type of cover is directional as far as I know.
When i posted this i made real test checking for damage done by explosives and small arm fire. Crew does not benefit from it (team weapon heavy if working, would had applied a 50% damage reduction)
While there is a huge list of type covers, they are not used unfortunately.
Livestreams
288 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.1109614.644+10
- 4.606220.734-1
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.261137.656+2
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, jhonnycena0400
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM