KV-2 projectile changes in DBP
Posts: 36
Can anyone tell me more about what exactly changed with the KV-2 and whether it's for better or worse that its projectile trajectory was changed? Katitof and P2A3W4E5 complained about it in bug reporting post. I haven't been able to try it myself, since I am on the road.
Here the quote from Mr.Smith:
"There was a general rework on projectiles. The intention is that KV2 should have the same projectile trajectory as the Brummbar, which is a reliable trajectory. Previously KV2 would completely miss targets when firing from higher elevation.
We'll investigate the issue; thanks."
https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/244443/dbp-bug-reporting/p4
Thanks!
Posts: 36
Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3
In Siege mode however it remained the same slow-ass projectile speed with howitzer behavior
I mean, convince yourself: https://youtu.be/PEFCXazxvP8?t=348
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Its solid, reliable tank now.
Posts: 36
Was the direct fire mode changed "recently" during the Urban Defense commander revamp?
I just found that direct fire no longer collides with terrain and has more reliable, but less wipey AoE, but nothing about speed or trajectory.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
-152mm non-sieged angle scatter from 7.5 to 5
Posts: 36
152mm non-sieged bypasses terrain.
-152mm non-sieged angle scatter from 7.5 to 5
Thanks Vipper!
So that angle scatter change is what makes it behave like normal tank rounds, besides the not colliding with terrain anymore?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Thanks Vipper!
So that angle scatter change is what makes it behave like normal tank rounds, besides the not colliding with terrain anymore?
Generally speaking each weapon has type, all tanks use the ballistic type. I do not know if KV-2 was using another type and it was changed.
Scatter angle simply made miss less to left or right.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Generally speaking each weapon has type, all tanks use the ballistic type. I do not know if KV-2 was using another type and it was changed.
Scatter angle simply made miss less to left or right.
If it can scatter, its ballistic.
There are 2 main types of ballistic shots, flat trajectory aka tanks and "lob" aka everything that's indirect and AI howitzer vehicles(brumm, stug-e, dozer etc). No idea where this is being set, but its not separate type.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
If it can scatter, its ballistic.
There are 2 main types of ballistic shots, flat trajectory aka tanks and "lob" aka everything that's indirect and AI howitzer vehicles(brumm, stug-e, dozer etc). No idea where this is being set, but its not separate type.
Thank you for trying to correct me once more while being completely wrong, not all main guns use ballistic:
Stug-E use big_explosion not ballistic
Brummbar use big_explosion not ballistic
Sherman 105 uses ballistic.
You are also wrong not all weapon that can scatter are ballistic. Big explosion weapons can scatter too.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Thank you for trying to correct me once more while being completely wrong, not all main guns use ballistic:
Stug-E use big_explosion not ballistic
Brummbar use big_explosion not ballistic
Sherman 105 uses ballistic.
You are also wrong not all weapon that can scatter are ballistic. Big explosion weapons can scatter too.
Its just a tag to help tell "artillery" from "tank shells" in the files.
Mechanically, they are identical. They simply have different value for projectile velocity and "arc" of fire.
Glad you're as on point in regards to arguing semantics as ever.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Its just a tag to help tell "artillery" from "tank shells" in the files.
Mechanically, they are identical. They simply have different value for projectile velocity and "arc" of fire.
Glad you're as on point in regards to arguing semantics as ever.
No you are simply wrong again, the mechanics are totally different:
Ballistic weapons uses accuracy, big_explosions do not
Ballistic weapons can collide, big explosions do not
Funny how you try to present core mechanics difference a "semantics", instead of accepting that once more you where simply wrong. What is even funnier is that it you who actually start "semantics" debate when ever you proven wrong, hoping that your mistake will go unnoticed and the debate will disintegrate.
Posts: 5279
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
can you 2 just bang and get it over with?I am simply clarifying basic mechanism of the game at OP's request.
Livestreams
31 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.616222.735+1
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Drummer
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM