I know what those numbers are. Should've clarified.
By Serelias numbers sherman's AOE damage is 160/56/16 at 0.5/1.25/2.25 ranges. It's just according to numbers from patch note damage at far range should be 1.6, but not 16.
I think it is 16. Relic's patch notes were often incomplete and incorrect. If it ever was 1.6, it was probably reverted quickly. |
It always takes damage it just doesn't show sometimes to the opposing player (players who dont own the FLAK)
The health bar on it seems bugged.
I'm not a fan of it. It costs about a little over half of a bofors for something that often repels one attack and then gets wiped as soon as the other side knows wehr it's located. |
I think that's because PIV, for example, is 0.75/1.25/1.875, while M4A3 is 0.5/1.25/2.25. Maybe Sir MMX can elaborate on those stats. Not in a mood for geometry, lol.
Also according to Serelia M4A3 is 160/56/16. Pretty wierd though
The numbers you have come from three different things. The 0.5/1.25/2.25 are ranges, in the same way that most AT guns have 60 range. It's the distance from shell impact to the individual model. The next set of numbers is 1/0.35/0.1 which is the multiplyer. To get Serelia's numbers, multiply 1/0.35/0.1 by 160 to get 160/56/16, which is the damage that is done for a 160 damage tank. I'd believe Serelia's numbers for the M4A3. |
that'd be my vote as well.
That would probably bring it down to the LEFH's level. I'd rather they took two shells/barrage away from the LEFH and add 20-25 seconds to the B4 cooldown as well as taking away suppression. |
I wasn't playing back then yet, but nowadays sherman has the best AOE, in my opinion, with HE shells out of medium tanks. Guessing it used to be quite a beast.
It's always been good, that was the whole point of having HE and AP rounds. I don't think the numbers I found from that patch are correct, because 0.01 would only be 1.6 damage and it seems like it's a lot more. |
Ez8 use to be great maybe someone should check if they can find what it stats looked like about a year after WF armys came out seemed to be in a good spot then.
It was gutted in this patch:
M4A3 Sherman
The Sherman's HE shells have been adjusted to be more reliable at dealing damage, but also less capable at wiping out squads.
Projectile now bypasses terrain/landscape.
HE shell AOE distance from 0.75/1.5/2.25 to 0.5/1.25/2.25
HE far AOE damage from 0.05 to 0.01
The first sentence was utter rubbish. They decreased the AOE to 20% of what it was, which didn't make it more reliable. It never had a significant problem with colliding with terrain. |
Leave it but limit it to 1 only, or increase it's popcap significantly. All arty should have limits - 1 or 2 per player. Limits should apply to Katy's, ML20, B4, WS, Panzerwerfers, LEFH, and Priests. UKF players should be encouraged to buy at least 5 land mattresses. |
Here's a questions for the community as people argue about the B-4 203mm;
1. Would you prefer it to be tuned in its current iteration with stat adjustments. 3 shots with lower damage over a period of time.
or
2. Revert it back to what it was. 1 high damage shot.
Tuning the cooldown and the maybe reducing/removing the suppression would likely be priority on question 1.
Suppression should definitely go, unless you're using option 2.
The current B4 is about what the ML20 should have been (other than the cooldown being too short and the suppression). The ML20 should hit harder than the LEFH. Instead, it hits about the same or less and fires fewer shells.
I liked some things about the old B4 better, but randomly wiping full health mediums was extremely annoying when you're playing against it. I wouldn't mind seeing a 600 damage B4, with a direct fire that works and isn't terribly expensive. The problem with the old B4 was that it was roughly 1/3 as effective overall as the ML20, and the ML20 was slightly worse than the LEFH. |
Some time ago, I posted a complaint about OKW spam. At the time, I believed this phenomena to be exclusive to OKW. I was wrong. I played several games as OKW and Ost, attempting several spam- based strategies to see if they were viable, if it's a L2P issue on my part, etc...
I experienced mixed results. What I did notice however, was that Allied factions were just as likely to spam in team games. In fact, this approach seemed to dominate team games.
The overall effect seemed to be that games accelerated, with whoever fielded the most infantry and were careful with preservation, generally winning in the end. The only response seemed to be a frantic arms race toward anything that could counter masses of infantry.
In the end, whoever had the largest groups of infantry won, due to winning enough time to field their own heavies, etc...
Question : has anyone else noticed this in team games ? Are longer strategies dead ? Are combined arms strategies now the province of elite players, ie: those that can make them work properly ?
Combined arms is always better, but you have to be realistic. One mg isn't going to hold back five or more squads of anything.
You can call it "blobbing" as much as you want, but high level players "blob" together more than low level players. If you're playing a 3v3, if you can double team one player when they're not expecting it, you might be able to wipe them before the other team reacts and significantly turn the game. A big attack is almost always better than a timid one. If you're in a 4v4, the worst thing that you and your teammate can do is keep attacking out of sync with each other. You'll bleed more and accomplish less. So take you pick - attack with your teammate and have someone call you a blobber while they are surrendering, or get a ggwp from them when you lose.
Lastly, anyone who says that only "allied" players are blobbers just outed themselves as an axis-only player and vice versa. |
i have the same issue, two times, the whole team crash after i activate hold the line.
It just happened to me, and I wasn't the one that was playing Brits. My game crashes even when just playing the replay. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
