Login

russian armor

Volks Incendiary Grenade

7 Mar 2019, 22:35 PM
#41
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Mar 2019, 22:04 PMFarlon

Have kinda cheaper tech too


Have cashes too.
7 Mar 2019, 22:43 PM
#42
avatar of Farlon

Posts: 184



Have cashes too.

Those don't really change anything + Ostheer have them too.
8 Mar 2019, 00:35 AM
#43
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



While i agree that TTK has been lower since WFA release, that line doesn't make any sense. If you have low TTK and you are not hugging cover, your units get melted. Inversely, high TTK makes cover less important.
The rework after release of COH2 is a clear example of this.

If you look at the FPS genre, you can more so clearly see this. Compare how ARMA/Rainbow Six/CS/Red Orchestra/PUBG games play against Battlefield/CoD/Planetside/Apex.

Maybe the term or concept you are referring to is reactive play. If engagements end too soon, gameplay is geared more towards who has better preparations instead of better reactions. The problem is not low TTK, it's the mid-late game DPS disparity between factions (which has been tone down quite a lot from the days of double 1919s and release Obers)


Ontopic: make it a clone of Lolotov? I voted is fine.


If one's unit has lost half its members before it can move to cover they already have lost the fight even when they do get to cover.
8 Mar 2019, 00:39 AM
#44
avatar of kingdun3284

Posts: 392

volks should not have a nade that can force you opponent to leave the cover while they can just sit in cover at mid-long range.
8 Mar 2019, 00:40 AM
#45
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Mar 2019, 22:04 PMFarlon

Have kinda cheaper tech too

Less Popcap for units too
8 Mar 2019, 09:25 AM
#46
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Mar 2019, 00:35 AMVipper

If one's unit has lost half its members before it can move to cover they already have lost the fight even when they do get to cover.

Which means the unit who already was in cover had a great advantage by being in cover and not taking damage that could change that outcome.

Which means cover is more important with high lethality, which means you also need specialist durable CQC units or units advancing on terrain WITH cover to protect themselves on approach/positioning, which means cover is much more meaningful and impactful in low lethality setting, which contradicts your own personal (and wrong) opinion.
8 Mar 2019, 09:28 AM
#47
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Which means the unit who already was in cover had a great advantage by being in cover and not taking damage that could change that outcome.

Which means cover is more important with high lethality, which means you also need specialist durable CQC units or units advancing on terrain WITH cover to protect themselves on approach/positioning, which means cover is much more meaningful and impactful in low lethality setting, which contradicts your own personal (and wrong) opinion.

Not really it simply means that the unit moving is an disadvantage because it lower DPS.
8 Mar 2019, 09:48 AM
#48
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Mar 2019, 09:28 AMVipper

Not really it simply means that the unit moving is an disadvantage because it lower DPS.

Yes... moving unit is at disadvantage because it has lower DPS.... because the other unit is using cover... therefore moving unit can't just stop and start unloading, what could happen in high TTK enviroment... because positioning matters much more in low TTK environment... and shorter TTK promotes good positioning even pre engagement and elchino7 already explained to you why.
It really boggles my mind why you try to swim upstream so hard despite being clearly wrong.
8 Mar 2019, 10:08 AM
#49
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Yes... moving unit is at disadvantage because it has lower DPS.... because the other unit is using cover... therefore moving unit can't just stop and start unloading, what could happen in high TTK enviroment... because positioning matters much more in low TTK environment... and shorter TTK promotes good positioning even pre engagement and elchino7 already explained to you why.
It really boggles my mind why you try to swim upstream so hard despite being clearly wrong.

A unit moving will have lower DPS regardless is in the opponent is in cover or not, your claim is simply false, and low TTK means that entities will die before one can even move into cover.

The only one wrong is actually you who claim that QCQ would rolfstomp everything while in the current state it is these units that are receiving buff.

Since once more you are just posting to prove me wrong (and fail miserably at it) and once more you are getting personal I will simply wish you a good.
Bye bye.
8 Mar 2019, 10:14 AM
#50
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

What kind of long range DPS you go up against in your games that models drop before you get to cover? If any unit had a 20DPS at long range, that's still 4 seconds before any model drops and only if whole squad focuses on it, not taking any rec acc into account, which plenty of units(especially axis) have out of the gate.

And how am I wrong here and not you?
In high TTK CQC squads will just walk up to you and rip you to shreds, because you have NO DPS to actually bleed them on mindless approach, that alone is a hard proof that your theory is as wrong and incorrect as it can get. Even if CQC squads also had lower DPS, they would still have much more DPS then ranged squads, except now there is nothing short of HMG or blob to threaten them in any way, meaning they can get close even easier and rip to apart without suffering much if any attrition at all.

You have to be exceptionally in love with your own ideas to not see something as obvious as this.
8 Mar 2019, 11:32 AM
#51
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Mar 2019, 10:08 AMVipper
and high TTK means that entities will die before one can even move into cover.


I think you are misinterpreting "high" TTK as it being "fast" rather than what Katitif and Elchino mean, which is that "high time to kill" means it takes a long time to deal damage.

A high time to kill would mean low DPS and would give entities plenty of time to get into cover before getting killed. Low time to kill (high DPS) is what you are describing.


8 Mar 2019, 11:54 AM
#52
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I think you are misinterpreting "high" TTK as it being "fast" rather than what Katitif and Elchino mean, which is that "high time to kill" means it takes a long time to deal damage.

A high time to kill would mean low DPS and would give entities plenty of time to get into cover before getting killed. Low time to kill (high DPS) is what you are describing.



Actually that one was typo (was about to type High DPs). Thanks for pointing it out.
8 Mar 2019, 18:38 PM
#53
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Mar 2019, 21:17 PMFarlon

We can do that if the trucks become free to call in.


I want to add a 15 fuel cost and you want to take away 45 fuel in costs. Explain that to me?

One upgrade of 150mp and 15 fuel for both stgs and flame nades. Don't see how that makes OKW unplayable. Volks are too cost effecient, here's an increase to their cost.
8 Mar 2019, 20:39 PM
#54
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358



I want to add a 15 fuel cost and you want to take away 45 fuel in costs. Explain that to me?

One upgrade of 150mp and 15 fuel for both stgs and flame nades. Don't see how that makes OKW unplayable. Volks are too cost effecient, here's an increase to their cost.

Show me another way to stop an unbeatable early game allie push... Penals,riflemen and UKF standing IS (because no one consider those buggers on the move, but when they stand their ground they really hit hard, even more in garrison)
Sturmpios buff then? I thing no one wants that...
Volks are the concept of conscripts for axis well developed. And you cant argue against that. Cost efficiency is the main strenght of volks. IMO we could debate how volks succed in combat but you will never take their cost efficiency out of them without nerfing the entire OKM to oblivion.
8 Mar 2019, 20:44 PM
#55
avatar of Clarity

Posts: 479

I think they should just tie Incendiary nades to building a truck instead of just needing an sWs truck. Otherwise I don't really have an issue with them. Kind of annoying when you opponent is able to throw one 2-3 minutes into the game and swing an engagement. Molotov's aren't as problematic because Volks > Cons.
8 Mar 2019, 20:56 PM
#56
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

I think they should just tie Incendiary nades to building a truck instead of just needing an sWs truck. Otherwise I don't really have an issue with them. Kind of annoying when you opponent is able to throw one 2-3 minutes into the game and swing an engagement. Molotov's aren't as problematic because Volks > Cons.

Flamenade timing is the most difficult thing to balance.
Too early and no garrison is available for allied to hold its ground agains swarming volks.
Too late and OKM cant push allies from easy to get green cover.

Finally as OKM is meant to be really aggressive early game, there is an endless discussion on with side must have an upper edge in a front to front clash. Thats why so many people rant about volks and its abilities
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

212 users are online: 212 guests
0 post in the last 24h
15 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48922
Welcome our newest member, atomsincdigital
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM