Patch small arms changes DID NOT CHANGE DPS

Focus on better aligning infantry small arms within our health/damage system. This reduces the amount of overkill and better enables us to control how small arms functions within the game.

Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 20:19 PMEndeav

There's been some talk that the new patch notes have nerfed grens and buffed penals and etc.

However, in line with relic's reasoning for changing small arms:



DPS values MOVED VERY SLIGHTLY (less than .5%)

Example:

Kar98k:
Prepatch: 3.8 near / 2.42 mid / 1.03 far
Post patch: 3.78 near / 2.40 mid / 1.03 far

Penal SVT:
Prepatch: 5.73 near / 3.62 mid / 1.50 far
Post patch: 5.78 near / 3.61 mid / 1.50 far

They did the math to get the numbers to work out to be the same. Why they changed grenadiers from 20 to 16 when it wasn't overkilling units is unknown, but their dps is still unchanged and they still do more dps than conscripts. Penals will no longer overkill units which may be a usability buff but their overall dps remains consistent.

Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 21:07 PMrofltehcat

Interesting. I already suspected as much, would have been very surprised if it really favored one faction.
I guess it decreases the effectiveness of the conscript health bulletin, though? In pure Gren vs. Conscripts early game engagements of course.

Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 20:50 PMwooof

hey man you stole my work, just reformatted it. thats called plagiarism no wonder you didnt last long in college.


as for the mosinn dps enkidu, a squad of conscripts deals very similar dps to a squad of grens. everyones major complaint was flanking mgs wasnt rewarding enough. thats been fixed now. i dont think cons need a buff

Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 22:20 PMEnkidu

In that case thanks woof : P !

I know that in a bubble cons and vanilla grens are very similar in their dps and survivability but with gren lmgs; mg-42 suppression, point blank damage and survivability (hopefully fixed); cons having to cross out of cover to throw a molotov vs rifle nades being often easier to use from cover... The list goes on but the point is, in the complex context of an actual game I often find cons to just be lacking. I get the whole asymmetrical balance thing and I'm not saying "Soviets so UP!!!" or anything like that; I was just hoping for an adjustment for cons to make their semi required aggression feel more rewarding. Something like an increase in close range accuracy and a decrease in long range accuracy or something to that effect.

Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 20:34 PMEnkidu

I'm pretty surprised they didn't tweak the Mosin Nagants as cons just feel so unimpressive right now

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 06:17 AMNullist

Everyone needs to stop spreading this myth.

Seriously. Just fucking stop it.

They are almost entirely identical.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 06:52 AMMike.Gayner

Have to agree with Nullist here and the data supports it. vGrens vs vCons is 50/50, anyone who believes that one is particularly stronger/weaker is delusional.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 07:48 AMCptEend

Well six Mosin Nagants are a strong as four Kar-98s, but isn't having six of them a disadvantage here? I mean when you match up a Grenadier in same cover as a Conscript against each other, and just let them fire away at each other, it's most likely that the first model to die is a conscript one. At that point there are 5 Mosin Nagants against 4 Kar 98s, so the Grenadiers will actually have higher DPS at this point. The question is if this will be enough of a difference for the Grenadiers to gain and hold some DPS momentum. If the 2nd conscript dies about at the same time as (or sooner than) the 1st grenadier, then the grenadiers will effectively have had more DPS than the conscript, leading them to win the engagement in the end.

Now the question is of course what really does happen, RNG makes this a little complex. Would love to see some tests on this, but until then I tend to think Grenadiers are at the advantage here.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 07:48 AMCptEend

Well six Mosin Nagants are a strong as four Kar-98s, but isn't having six of them a disadvantage here? I mean when you match up a Grenadier in same cover as a Conscript against each other, and just let them fire away at each other, it's most likely that the first model to die is a conscript one. At that point there are 5 Mosin Nagants against 4 Kar 98s, so the Grenadiers will actually have higher DPS at this point. The question is if this will be enough of a difference for the Grenadiers to gain and hold some DPS momentum. If the 2nd conscript dies about at the same time as (or sooner than) the 1st grenadier, then the grenadiers will effectively have had more DPS than the conscript, leading them to win the engagement in the end.

Now the question is of course what really does happen, RNG makes this a little complex. Would love to see some tests on this, but until then I tend to think Grenadiers are at the advantage here.

Jump back to quoted post26 Jul 2013, 18:52 PMpqumsieh

At near range, 0 - 10 units, a Conscript takes on average 31.53s to kill a Grenadier squad. Similarly, a Grenadier squad takes 31.58s. However, if you take the absolute values the time is nearly identical, rounding resulted in the minor discrepancy.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 16:06 PMNullist

Which is why the Gren change concerned me.

I assume Relic know what they are doing though, and give them the benefit of the doubt with only one reservation. If it was so balanced, why change it...

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 16:32 PMBlovski

I think what they were explaining on the stream was that it was about the overkill. So, previously the gren rifle would take 4 good hits to kill an infantry/support team member. With the +25% damage buff, it'd result in grens overkilling maxims or mortar members and wasting a lot of their damage (in that they'd still take 4 shots). Making it more consistent over time better balances that matchup out.