Rant: WTF is with OKW Overwatch doctrines sector assault

Don't bother, ddd is on a campaign of trolling and got banned two times in a row for it already.
I guess he's looking for the third straight away.

Ahh whoops, should've looked at the poster

Lol @ the guy gas light me and telling me what I saw didn't happen



Replay link below:
https://www.coh2.org/replay/95255/sector-assault-being-dumb

Historicaly german air forces in 1944 were far superior to usa or british so it makes sense.

LOL is this guy serious

Lol @ the guy gas light me and telling me what I saw didn't happen

Replay link below:
https://www.coh2.org/replay/95255/sector-assault-being-dumb

So, I watched the replay, and as I posted above, clearly what you "saw" (and reported) is not what actually happened.


Your first IS-2 died mostly from a Goliath and multiple penetrations from the Jagdpanzer IV. The Sector Assault planes barely did any damage as they missed most shots.



Your second IS-2 ran into two Rakettens and a Jagdpanzer IV who penetrated multiple shots before the planes even arrived, and the planes merely finished off the IS-2, dealing only about (I estimate) 30-40% damage.

Thanks for the video it makes it easier for everybody to judge for themselves.


People obviously have different ideas of balance when someone can "estimate 30-40%" damage by an evidently self spotting point and click ability on the sturdiest of allied tanks that reversed immediately, and not detect the ridiculousness.

So, I watched the replay, and as I posted above, clearly what you "saw" (and reported) is not what actually happened.


Your first IS-2 died mostly from a Goliath and multiple penetrations from the Jagdpanzer IV. The Sector Assault planes barely did any damage as they missed most shots.



Your second IS-2 ran into two Rakettens and a Jagdpanzer IV who penetrated multiple shots before the planes even arrived, and the planes merely finished off the IS-2, dealing only about (I estimate) 30-40% damage.

1st IS2 hit his own mine too when the p4 hit it too

People obviously have different ideas of balance when someone can "estimate 30-40%" damage by an evidently self spotting point and click ability on the sturdiest of allied tanks that reversed immediately, and not detect the ridiculousness.

People obviously have different ideas of balance when they have no idea how abilities work exactly, apparently. Sector Assault does not self spot, the planes need vision provided by ground units in order to lock onto a target. Once locked on though, they will follow the target no matter how far it moves, but that is the same for all strafes.

It's also a 250 munitions ability, so it's perfectly fair that it can deal 30-40% damage to the sturdiest of Allied tanks. That is its purpose. There are multiple similar abilities, for the Allies too, that deal just as much or even more damage to even more sturdy vehicles for a lower munitions cost.

as sander showed

a rant is a rant not in the balance section

/thread

It's also a 250 munitions ability, so it's perfectly fair that it can deal 30-40% damage to the sturdiest of Allied tanks. That is its purpose. There are multiple similar abilities, for the Allies too, that deal just as much or even more damage to even more sturdy vehicles for a lower munitions cost.

Fair, yes since everyone gets them. Is it fun? Personally i don't think so. I'd rather all of the loiters be gone in coh3 (besides recon). Or at least make them less impactful

Could be just me though. I understand the rage behind these abilities, but when people pick one to rant on and ignore the others there's clearly something else going on

AI loiter is fine IMO.
AT lioter should replace with AT straft run (more lethal, come a bit faster but can be shot down by AA).

They can get rid of loiters as soon as they can create a strafe that targets units in the strike area instead of ground (that's empty by the time it gets there).

Replacing "never-miss" skill planes with "never-hit" no-skill planes is just a dumb idea - bad for the game AND historically inaccurate.

Fair, yes since everyone gets them. Is it fun? Personally i don't think so. I'd rather all of the loiters be gone in coh3 (besides recon). Or at least make them less impactful

Could be just me though. I understand the rage behind these abilities, but when people pick one to rant on and ignore the others there's clearly something else going on

+1

I'd rather all at loiters get replaced by strafes like in the new soviet airborne commander, even in coh2. Especially p47s cuz those are useless lol.

They can get rid of loiters as soon as they can create a strafe that targets units in the strike area instead of ground (that's empty by the time it gets there).

Replacing "never-miss" skill planes with "never-hit" no-skill planes is just a dumb idea - bad for the game AND historically inaccurate.

If your strafe missed that's your fault.

But historically innacurate? What are you talking about? In ww2 it was intensely difficult for planes to reliably hit moving ground targets. Far more difficult than this game suggests

If your strafe missed that's your fault.

But historically innacurate? What are you talking about? In ww2 it was intensely difficult for planes to reliably hit moving ground targets. Far more difficult than this game suggests

There's plenty of gun-camera footage from WW2 that says otherwise. Gun-camera footage was reviewed after every mission and any pilot whose gun-camera footage showed him shooting empty ground while enemy units could be seen elsewhere would be grounded. If your CO saw footage of you continually shooting at nothing, you'd be stuck scrubbing toilets while all your buddies were off getting the glory.

My point is that, as long as strafes target a spot on the ground instead of enemy units, they are an unrealistic waste of munitions. No human behaves the way the stupid AI does when it comes to strafes. The difficulty of hitting the target should be addressed through the amount of damage done, not by making it nearly impossible to hit anything that can move.

What I'd like to see is the targeting from loiters applied to single pass strafes, that's all. I don't think that's unreasonable.

There's plenty of gun-camera footage from WW2 that says otherwise. Gun-camera footage was reviewed after every mission and any pilot whose gun-camera footage showed him shooting empty ground while enemy units could be seen elsewhere would be grounded. If your CO saw footage of you continually shooting at nothing, you'd be stuck scrubbing toilets while all your buddies were off getting the glory.

My point is that, as long as strafes target a spot on the ground instead of enemy units, they are an unrealistic waste of munitions. No human behaves the way the stupid AI does when it comes to strafes. The difficulty of hitting the target should be addressed through the amount of damage done, not by making it nearly impossible to hit anything that can move.

What I'd like to see is the targeting from loiters applied to single pass strafes, that's all. I don't think that's unreasonable.

No one said anything about shooting empty ground. It was just more difficult to hit moving targets than the loiter tracking in this game would suggest. I don't oppose your idea about buffing strafes, but id like to nerf the loiters as well

There's plenty of gun-camera footage from WW2 that says otherwise. Gun-camera footage was reviewed after every mission and any pilot whose gun-camera footage showed him shooting empty ground while enemy units could be seen elsewhere would be grounded. If your CO saw footage of you continually shooting at nothing, you'd be stuck scrubbing toilets while all your buddies were off getting the glory.

My point is that, as long as strafes target a spot on the ground instead of enemy units, they are an unrealistic waste of munitions. No human behaves the way the stupid AI does when it comes to strafes. The difficulty of hitting the target should be addressed through the amount of damage done, not by making it nearly impossible to hit anything that can move.

Millitary Aviation History made an amazing video called "The Great Tank Destruction Myth ft. The Chieftain." In the video he explains just how effective or more accurately ineffective airplanes were at destroying tanks. The most striking and useful example in the video to me was the British test fire on a Panther. The British actually took a captured Panther, painted it entirely white, put it in the middle of a field with no cover, and then strafed it several times with Hawker Typhoons. The Typhoons fired 64 rockets, but even in this perfect situation they only hit the Panther with 3 out of 64 rockets.

Whatever gun camera footage you've seen was extremely deceptive because it doesn't matter at all how much it looks like you hit a target, it only matters if you actually did which is another thing that the video gives examples of, which is extremely exaggerated kill claims by pilots. This isn't usually even the fault of the pilot it's just a result of the fact that there isn't any way to observe the effect of fire on target when you just flew past it at several hundreds of MPH and you just blew a bunch of debris in the air. It was also common for planes from different squadrons to both strafe a target and both claim a kill. Also the gun camera footage online is probably only the most impressive and not the most average example.

Weaponry and aircraft were nowhere near as precise as they are today, to expect WW2 era aircraft to be able to somehow target and track a target is absurd, because that was impossible. When a plane in WW2 strafed a target it commited to a path and took that path, it didn't change direction at the last second to correct for the movement of a vehicle or squad because that's not how momentum and inertia work and their weapons were fixed and unguided.

Aircraft were indeed effective at attacking ground targets in WW2, but their effectiveness against infantry was mostly psychological and their physical effectiveness was only exceptional against static targets, or convoys with thinly or non-armored vehicles that could be destroyed by indirect hits.

Also, "getting the glory" are you serious? There isn't a single thing glorious about gunning down a bunch of virtually defenseless people on the ground, now dogfighting, that's glorious.

Sorry. I thought we were talking about a way to get rid of loiters altogether. If the strafes had loiter targeting, loiters could be replaced completely.

... Long discourse about historical accuracy ...

As I said, the fix for that is reducing the damage, not having the AI target a point on the ground. A human pilot would line up on a particular vector, for sure, but it would usually be to ensure strafing a target-rich area. No human pilot would deliberately shoot at a point where he could see there were no enemy units but, that's what the current in-game strafes do all the time.

As for "getting the glory", my comment was tongue-in-cheek but, I'm sure those pilots whose gun-camera footage showed them blowing up trains (and the one who managed to blow up a destroyer) were heartily lauded by their fellow pilots.

If your strafe missed that's your fault.

But historically innacurate? What are you talking about? In ww2 it was intensely difficult for planes to reliably hit moving ground targets. Far more difficult than this game suggests

Actually, that depends purely on the plane, its weapons and if the moving target was infantry or vehicle(latter weren't hard to hit at all).

Actually, that depends purely on the plane, its weapons and if the moving target was infantry or vehicle(latter weren't hard to hit at all).

Coming from what? all those years you served as a pilot in ww2? get outa here