Uh okay but Tank B gets just as many side hits: http://i.imgur.com/6RcrLxK.jpg
Sure, I don't see what you're disproving... It affects the attacker and defender equally. My point is that it would be strange and unbalanced if side-armor were able to be hit when facing a tank from the front.
I believe this would go a long way in terms of making flanking more intuitive and rewarding (Blue=rear, Grey=front): http://www.mediafire.com/view/?58jmml6yesj2bt9
EDIT: I see now. You're talking about Quinn's post on how side-armor aids the attacker. |
This is the problem as I see it: http://www.mediafire.com/view/?9h3a38ap8h9f85c
Tank A doesn't even have to flank Tank B to have the possibility of scoring some side-armor hits. This problem is amplified by the extremely short ranges at which tank engagements take place in coh. |
|
@Kolaris: I don't think the system would work out too well with those numbers. I.e. late game army of 55 pop and 7 (Kholodny has 11) sectors held would net a MP output of 266-280mp depending on whether sectors yield +3 or +5 mp, which imo makes upkeep too insignificant.
I would try -1.5 per pop rounded up and +5 per sector, since in the same scenario this would result in 242mp. This would shift the focus towards map control, and also penalize a player for over-investing into tier 1, which I find is probably the only good feature of coh2's current upkeep system. It also allows a behind player to mount a comeback by cutting off the ahead player from his sectors, severely decreasing said player's mp income.
Finally, in no competitive game will any player reach pop cap, so it's senseless to argue that 150mp income at 100pop (territory control notwithstanding) is too little. |
They have made it fast paced early game I believe because they think the masses find this period boring. If this is their reasoning I am very angered.
This is the sad truth. It would also explain why they added so much indirect fire...
@Crawler: How about no upfront cost just upkeep cost for the caches? |
|
Well the problem with side armor is that tank combat ranges are extremely short in coh2, so if you're slightly to the left or right of the center front of a tank, chances are you'll hit the side armor instead of the front. The only way to mitigate this problem is to add a multiplier for angle of impact, but that would make the system needlessly complex and very difficult to integrate intuitively.
I believe a better solution would be to shift the border, where front and rear armor meet, a bit forward, so that when a tank is being pelted from the side, the chances of rear hits are vastly increased. |
Please explain why they would show off an inferior version of their game to the world then... The closed beta "build" got a lot of attention once the NDA was lifted.
I presume for stability reasons. |
what makes you think that?
I thought that was made clear in my post... The Beta build was months behind what Relic were testing in-house. And in all honesty, barring some performance and ui improvements, there really wasn't a difference between beta and alpha. |
|
Relic should change it so that heavy weapons such as LMGs, Flamethrowers, and sniper rifles can only fire out of a clowncar while it's stationary. That would make more sense and add an interesting microing element. Furthermore, Panzerfausts shouldn't cause engine crits, and rifle nades and at nades should be dodgeable and cause engine crits. |
|
I think this might have to do with the fact that the beta build was +3 months old when it came out. Seeing as the alpha came out late December and the beta early April, it'd be logical to assume that the two builds were only a month apart in terms of development. |
|
Did anyone else noticed that in the 7th picture it lists the Red Army and the Wehrmacht as the two players? |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
