Received Accuracy for OKW JLI and USF Pathfinder

Pathfinders are questionable enough, they look even worse when compared to JLI, they also increased the cost of IRs which I felt was the superior alternative.

snip

States about some unit beign OP. Knows how RNG works.
*Makes a film with a single encouter on every setup. Source: Dude, trust me.

Its so likely that he repeated over and over again that same setup until RNG turns out in his favour. Thats malicious information manipulation, just to state that JLI are way OP than they really are.
There is no genius needed to identify your fraud. Please stay away from sensible arguments from now on.

The only prupose you seek is to deterr the game in your favour and your own bias. You are not respecting the game for everyone, you just want it to suit yourself.

AFAIK JLI are being nerfed in a new fashion, in order to remain somewhat useful and not a meme like many other mistakes in the past. Wether you like it or not JLI are not being hammernerfed.

States about some unit beign OP. Knows how RNG works.
*Makes a film with a single encouter on every setup. Source: Dude, trust me.

Its so likely that he repeated over and over again that same setup until RNG turns out in his favour. Thats malicious information manipulation, just to state that JLI are way OP than they really are.
There is no genius needed to identify your fraud. Please stay away from sensible arguments from now on.

The only prupose you seek is to deterr the game in your favour and your own bias. You are not respecting the game for everyone, you just want it to suit yourself.

AFAIK JLI are being nerfed in a new fashion, in order to remain somewhat useful and not a meme like many other mistakes in the past. Wether you like it or not JLI are not being hammernerfed.

he is right tho, change the 75% treshold to 50% and another sniper rifle so they still fill the supporting role better and become less of a spamming squad as they now snipe more but at lower health so instead of having to have 2 of them to do their supporting role 1 will do

States about some unit beign OP. Knows how RNG works.
*Makes a film with a single encouter on every setup. Source: Dude, trust me.

Its so likely that he repeated over and over again that same setup until RNG turns out in his favour. Thats malicious information manipulation, just to state that JLI are way OP than they really are.
There is no genius needed to identify your fraud. Please stay away from sensible arguments from now on.

The only prupose you seek is to deterr the game in your favour and your own bias. You are not respecting the game for everyone, you just want it to suit yourself.

AFAIK JLI are being nerfed in a new fashion, in order to remain somewhat useful and not a meme like many other mistakes in the past. Wether you like it or not JLI are not being hammernerfed.

I only performed one experiment in that experimental video. RNG sometimes work magically, but generally they do not make a huge difference to the extent that they do not overturn the win / loss unless they are of similar performance (all probabilities are close to the normal distribution).
As a representative example, in the fourth experiment (2 bar pathfinder and CQC situation), JLI's squad survived more than three people, showing very large performance differences. This has not had any effect on the victory or defeat even if I try again.
You can clearly see what is biased with just one experiment. Is JLI really helpless in CQC? It can not be said clearly. At least one thing is certain that even CQC is more powerful than 2BAR Pathfinder.
You say that JLI is not causing any problems, but JLI is still causing problems because of its incredibly fast start time of 1cp.
I do not think that this unit will overturn the game, but I think the OP is definitely solid. This unit is a unit designed as 'scout'. It is not a very good cost-effective unit to change the composition of the infantry combat.
And, as for the unit which performs performance out of the original role, we are usually called OP.

People don't understand that the 75% threshold is what gives it power,3 sniper rifle hit kill 1 unit for use as u just need to be at 60 hp to get sniped so the real dps is much more than the 2,2 shown in the chart but if we lower it to 50-45% the dps becomes lower as the hit will at max to do 40-36 damage when it crits instead of 60, this not counting the reduced damage given by cover or other sources as it would be 120 damage dealt to 80-72, the 0.9 accuracy in cover is not really that relevant if the snipe threshold was not so high

so lower it to 45-50% and either add another sniper rifle or double the current rate of fire

No, Stug, I understand that perfectly well and am 100% of the opinion it (or the durability) should be removed.

I only performed one experiment in that experimental video. RNG sometimes work magically, ...(all probabilities are close to the normal distribution).

You counter argumented yourself, RNG is not Magical, ffs. All probabilites are not close to the normal distribution, but the mean. normal distribution determines how far values are able to reach.
Pleaase stop spreding missinformation.

As a representative example, in the fourth experiment (2 bar pathfinder and CQC situation), JLI's squad survived more than three people, showing very large performance differences. This has not had any effect on the victory or defeat even if I try again.

Neither i believe your "dude trust me" experiments, nor representative example, 1/4 - 3 man surviving is not only a lie, but a very offset data from the real performance values.

You can clearly see what is biased with just one experiment. ...

Not at all.
As long as you keep biasing your samples, all your conclusions are biased too and flawed. Sry bro, statistics is a hard topic and you failed at it miserably.

FYI:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_bias

Dont force an argument if you cant back it up properly.

The funny fact is that JLI can actually defeat Pathfinders with BAR upgrades in almost any distance and situation.
The following video covers four different cases;

1. JLI hugging into 1BAR Pathfinder with light cover
2. JLI with light cover vs. 2BAR Pathfinder with heavy cover at Long range,
3. 3vet JLI hugging into 1 BAR 3vet Pathfinder with Heavy cover
4. 2BAR 3vet Pathfinder and 3vet JLI CQC Situation

Most situations are very ideally bad for JLI, but JLI defeats pathfinders very well.
JLI is obviously a long-range combat specialist, but even good enough at assuming a hugging situation using like CQC specialists.

JLI is clearly a unit designed with CQC weaknesses. However, in practice, JLI is not weak enough in CQC, and it becomes even more serious if it is a long-range combat.
In reality, If not ideal, the JLI is much more powerful with the help of utilities such as sprint, booby-trap, medic kits, and camo first strike bonus.
This unit is obviously OP. There are often people who tell a biased story here, but in any sense, it's no denying that there is a problem with JLI.



Interestingly, the JLI has a single weapon slot when it is repeatedly engaged with the USF, so a combination of BAR + JLI is often born.

this close the contest, JLIs are still overperforming at least

You counter argumented yourself, RNG is not Magical, ffs. All probabilites are not close to the normal distribution, but the mean. normal distribution determines how far values are able to reach.
Pleaase stop spreding missinformation.

You are breaking away from the present. It was a quick conclusion to conclude with one or two experiments, and I was surprised to find JLI winning, but the hugging condition of the first experiment was the worst condition for 'JLI'. how marksman can win vs. BAR infantry at close range? it means the they are not the same level of infantry. This shows that JLI is not weak at all even under CQC conditions.

Neither i believe your "dude trust me" experiments, nor representative example, 1/4 - 3 man surviving is not only a lie, but a very offset data from the real performance values.

And I do not know what the difference is from the experiment that addvaluejack did above, but if I did 10 consecutive same experiments, JLI wins with a 7: 3 probability. I do not know if this is the role of RNG, but in the end different results came out.

I do not know why this is happening, but in this case JLI has won 70% of the 10 trials. Even in the worst 'CQC hugging' condition for JLI.

Not at all.
As long as you keep biasing your samples, all your conclusions are biased too and flawed. Sry bro, statistics is a hard topic and you failed at it miserably.

FYI:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_bias

Dont force an argument if you cant back it up properly.

In most cases, JLI's long range combat capability does not even need to be mentioned, and even under CQC conditions, it is not as weak as you might think.
The conditions given here are once again mentioned, but they are theoretically close to the worst conditions and rarely occur in real situations.
In most cases, the JLI is able to break the opponent in a long-range combat in spite of a much lower cover condition, and it is difficult to catch the victory even if the JLI hits the CQC situation. JLI is not an elite infantry that requiring 400 manpower like Ranger.

This is not to say the logic being defeated by sampling bias. Everyone knows what a sampling bias is.
The problem is that there is a situation in which JLI wins, despite assuming the worst. In what RTS does this happen?
This can be said to be a problem.
Is there any worse situation in the confrontation between JLI and Pathfinders? But still JLI wins with a high probability.

The vet 5 system is one of many vestigial remains of the original, awful design of OKW.

They could only secure a handful of sectors. They were starved of fuel and munitions. They were expected to bunker in on a corner of the map and fight a numerically superior foe with elite troops and vehicles floated on a backbone of Volks.

This was also when the cancerous old school mentality of ‘If Axis survive to late game they get a free win’ was riding high. Contrary to all historical context, where the Axis early war gains were purely based on speed and shock – not raw strength. The giants on either side took time to get going, but they absolutely had every long term advantage possible. But I digress.

It was awful. It was rightly ditched. A lot of that terrible concept has been fixed! The base defences no longer shoot planes, their resource income was normalized alongside their unit costs, the conversion abilities were removed.

However, some relics of that past remain, and Relic (lel) most likely won’t ever find the people or funds to fix them. Vet 5 should be for nobody or for everybody. They still have base defences that deny light vehicles despite being no more vulnerable to them. They still have an IR halftrack and plane-free offmap recon.

At the least, the Vet 5 system was retooled. A bit. It still is far from perfect.


That said, JLI are bust even without it. They are unit sniping recon squads. Pathfinders are a GOOD example of this. They are fragile and expensive and help swing fights by focusing down low health models.

JLI are bad. They do the same thing as Pathfinders – but also, they are incredibly durable. And their snipe point is so high that they can trigger it totally solo.

There is absolutely no need for JLI to become so durable at any vet.

I agree that the Vet 5 System needs to go for OKW, or be available to everyone in some form. For example All Units have 3 levels of Vet for all factions, while elite type of units could go up to Vet 5 as a way to weaken call in units initially and having them scale better later on into a match.

I agree that the Vet 5 System needs to go for OKW, or be available to everyone in some form. For example All Units have 3 levels of Vet for all factions, while elite type of units could go up to Vet 5 as a way to weaken call in units initially and having them scale better later on into a match.

I would be in favour of everyone getting them. But I don't like the current vet system for a lot of reasons.

Everyone having 5 levels is a good start. Everyone having a much smoother gradient would be the next one. Rather than no combat bonus until the next star than a sudden 30% spike, give us some numerical indicators and smooth out veterancy so every level has at least some utility.


Would be a nice way to keep OKW units from becoming overbearing. Such as JLI, who get downright obscene.

There's 2 ways I'd be ok with okw vet going- vet 5=vet 3 of other factions but in smaller steps so that they sort of scale in smaller steps but the total result is the same as the others.
The other would be 2 levels of vet are active abilities focused on utility so that the bad players only get as much out of the vet as other factions but a good player can at the expense of munitions to raise the skill cap without just making okw vetted units lower it.

snip

After carefully reading all your post, i would suggest a propper data mining, a tedious one but the only way to achieve those claims you point out.

If JLI are able to do so (to win on those conditions), then they are clearly overperforming in a not intended way and that was your original point. But to achieve that its needed to back up your claims with more than opinions, im not targeting at your claims, im saying its the only concrete way to do it.

A non-cut video with all the experiment should raise some trust in the experiment, to begin with.
Its always good to repeat an experiment at least 40 times (yeah, kind of a lot) if you are not sure about standart deviation. You can get it by taking the full dps/hit formula and plotting it with its probabilities. Such task wont be easy, i wont lie to you. Thats why i insist in a metodical research through experiments need more samples.

Anyway i can back your claims if you give me a trustful datasheet. Im always for the truth rather than making a faction better/worse. JLI became cancer and we all know that, but lets not act like children about it