and again its not i that its forcing you to react which bothers me. its that it inevitably shortens your reaction time by recducing the survivability of the vehicle which is unique in coh2 and doesnt feel right to me
Yes that is a reasonable concern and i am against units going *poof* magically as well. However, think the state of the game (in 2v2 and higher, as the change said it was too powerful at those levels) requires such an ability. IMO i don't think it is overpowered. It is alost a necessary ability considering how strong Panthers, KTs, and Jagdtigers are
edit: no. ofc its not as bad as that. but needing 3/4 of penetrating shots drastically reduces the time one has to react. if its 3 instead of 4 shots that basically means you got 1 less aimtime/reload cycle to react (when fighting 1v1 or when getting hit by 3 sources within less than a second or two)
It would be interesting to test Mark Target if it got changed to penetration bonus instead of damage. I guess that is what the open beta is for. Let's hope that Relic continues to use that in the future. |
with the difference being that you can drive out of a barrage/off map ability (react) and that they dont lower your theoretical hp... they just deal dmg... you cant re-target with barrages... you can chase a marked vehicle though...
Yes you can chase it, but that would mean going through other tanks and support weapons of the opponent's army. If you are isolated or the enemy has swaths of tanks coming to you, then i doubt mark target is the issue at hand. |
really? p4: 640hp * 0.7 = 448 theoretical hp with mark target. thats 3 hits instead of 4 with every 160 dmg weapon (shermans, t34s, su85 etc). its 2 shots instead of 3 with 240 dmg (isu, m36)
and thats the problem. while penetration would enable you to score more hits that actually penetrate. dmg increase simply negates a huge potion of the vehicles HP, which imo doesnt belong in a game, where unit preservation is such a big deal.
a simple example: if 3 x 160 dmg vehicles shoot at and penetrate a p4, that is marked, itll die instantly. usually youd have 1 more hit to escape, which gets denied by mark target. no other ability ingame reduces a vehicles theoretical hp like that. this gets worse since crits are tied to hp and hence occur more often on vehicles that have been marked (in this example the 3rd shoot could crit main gun/heavy/abandon instead of the 4th, too)
edit: to mention a few other (actually used) vehicles:
Panther (both factions) 800 -> 560 hp
Tiger 1040 -> 728 hp (3 jackson shots and a scratch on the paint and its gone... instead of 5)'
Luchs puma Stugs 400 -> 280
King/Jagd/Sturm(for the fun of it) 1280 - 896
if you dont see why thats wrong, i cant help it. everyone is aguing "lol if you lose a marked vehicle its cause you didnt react, etc" when waht mark target does is reduce the time you have to react at all.
again: 3 sources with 160dmg cause damage to a p4 that is maked = death
with pen-increase instead of dmg-increase they would have to reload for 1 additional hit and actually give the p4 a chance to react
Ok it is pointless to mark target a vehicle that is in a slugging match with you because it can just reverse out. People only use mark target on tanks that have overextended or have engine damage/immobilized/surrounded. It is silly that you are complaining about an ability to makes one react. I guess we should nerf katyusha even though you can hear the damn rockets coming and have to, god forbid, REACT!
I appreciate you putting down those numbers, but you make it seem like tanks are getting instantly vaporized when they get mark targeted. Now if it gets smashed by a B4 or is completely surrounded with multiple tanks shooting its rear, then yes, it would die fast. I am saying this is not a common occurrence and i have played about 250 3v3 and 4v4 games. |
|
The national anthem of the ussr always pumps me up when i am about fight the fascists |
So I'm the axis lobby? At what point did I say anything remotely resembling that?
Well, please educate me then. What axis unit is the B4 equal to? What will be the unintended consequences of changing or reducing the B4's vet bonuses?
You are not in the "axis lobby" im just talking about the general state of the coh2.org forums and the official forums. And the B4 is a unique weapon it its own. THe closest thing the Axis have is the Railway Arty, but that isn't on the map and is inaccurate. Vet 3 damage on B4 is kinda silly s i am in favor of changing that, but the core functionality of the B4 should remain the same. It is doing its job of punishing aggressive OKW truck placements and static defenses and heavy tanks that remain stationary.
I was talking about allied units in general in my earlier post and not the B4. sorry if i was off topic.
An example of unintended consequences in nerfing the B4 WITHOUT buffing Soviet units would mean Soviet would have zero chance in 3v3 and 4v4 outside of ISU. Those modes are a mess already, so it would be a big disaster if it got any worse (although one could say those modes are already imbalanced and should not be taken into discussion, but i disagree). |
They should just increase the turning rate for tracked vehicles, I don't see why it has to be so slow. All it does is exacerbate existing path-finding problems. I watched some CoH1 games and the path-finding was no better, the only difference was vehicles turned much quicker.
what do you mean tracked? lie every tank in the game or only case-mate style tanks like the Jagdpanzer 4 and SU85? Increasing the rotation speed could work but only in small increments. |
that has been mentioned several times now. this only works under the assumption that you engage a tank with him being able to reverse/smoke/get away. in a close match between a couple of amored units this might not be possible. same applies to heavy pushes. you can bumrush any vehicle as long as your even in terms of armor, because the +30% dmg will just win you the engagement most of the time (unless you stupidly charge into 2-3 paks and tellers ofc).
again im strongly against anything (abilities, vet bonuses, etc.)that increases dmg of a weapon. it just doesnt feel right to me at all. how is the same payload in a tank shell suddenly going to have a bigger impact on the same target? id also remove it from the leig and pak43(okw) for the same reason
If you get trapped and then marked it is a L2P issue. If you expend munitions on an ability to give you the advantage, then it should give you the advantage. I agree that some veterancy bonuses are loony and over the top |
If you want anyone to take you seriously these posts need to stop.
well i am fuckin sick of having to plead for buffs or nerfs without the damn axis lobby coming in and telling everyone that Axis equipment is superior to everything. if some allied tank let alone unit, is equal to an axis counterpart it is deemed "imbalanced" and not asymmetrically balanced. you can't keep looking at fucking units in a vacuum and nerfing/buffing them without thinking about the consequences it may have. |
|
Well we could always buff those poor core Soviet tanks...but that would probably lead to unintended consequences |
|
Because anything that hurts the Axis are deemed OP |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
