Login

russian armor

Why ZiS get a slow debuff?

14 Feb 2017, 15:10 PM
#21
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1

PAK40 doesn't need movement penalty because all of the Land Mattress craters would make them impossible to use ;)
14 Feb 2017, 17:50 PM
#22
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

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.
14 Feb 2017, 18:18 PM
#23
avatar of Mirdarion

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)...

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2017, 13:19 PMzerocoh

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.
15 Feb 2017, 11:55 AM
#24
avatar of SUCKmyCLOCK

Posts: 207

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2017, 13:19 PMzerocoh


Raketen is the most survivable AT........


Your text..
15 Feb 2017, 17:45 PM
#25
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

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 :P

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.
Vaz
15 Feb 2017, 17:56 PM
#26
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158

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.
aaa
15 Feb 2017, 18:41 PM
#27
avatar of aaa

Posts: 1487

Last time I checked zis crew still shots infantry revealing himself while cloak is active
15 Feb 2017, 20:24 PM
#28
avatar of BIH_kirov_QC

Posts: 367

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Feb 2017, 18:41 PMaaa
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!
16 Feb 2017, 14:29 PM
#29
avatar of boc120

Posts: 245

Yeah, movement on AT guns while cloaked should be removed. It should be ambush, not have multiple raks sneak up, kill something, and retreat.
16 Feb 2017, 14:49 PM
#30
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Feb 2017, 17:56 PMVaz
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 ...
16 Feb 2017, 16:00 PM
#31
avatar of Taksin02

Posts: 148

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2017, 14:29 PMboc120
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
17 Feb 2017, 00:12 AM
#32
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

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.
17 Feb 2017, 07:25 AM
#33
avatar of Vipper

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.
17 Feb 2017, 13:22 PM
#34
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Feb 2017, 07:25 AMVipper

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.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

794 users are online: 1 member and 793 guests
aerafield
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM