I voted no, it has been like this for a long time, and before incendiary grenades you only needed to worry about Grenadier riflegrenades & LMG 42´s sniping the crew members, but they have been nerfed so are the OKW Volksgrenadiers the only reason for this change? (did they smoke and flank, to get close enough to throw the incendiary grenade?)
Wasn't this exact argument why they fixed the death loop on mg42, if you replace "volksgrenadiers" and "incendiary grenade" with "conscript" and "molotov"? |
I don't understand it myself, especially as a business model.
It appears that only 22% of games played are 1v1. Which sounds like about 5% of player base playing 1v1 at any time. Balancing that for only the top 1% of players makes about as much sense as try to sell a word processor which only supports the Welsh language.
If I have read the tone and content of the posts which seek to prioritise 1v1 balance for the top players correctly then this only relates to a tiny percentage of all games played.
It's actually makes sense, Relic wants CoH 2 to become an e-sports game. Pretty much all e-sports RTS is being played 1vs1. If they would succeed making it to e-sports status, it would mean a lot of attention and free advertising for the game => $. |
and i said it has been proven that zooks in fact can do decent damage to even the kt and is on par with the shrek.
While those videos showed that many exaggerate when it comes to the bazooka's (lack of) effectiveness, and that they in fact can hurt heavier axis vehicles, they did in no way prove that they are on par with the schrek. Comparing different units/weapons in a vacuum may be interesting and give you an idea how effective they can be, but it's ignoring way to many variables to produce a realistic comparison. |
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damage_per_second
That link provides you info how to properly caculate DPS and even how major publisher use it...
I actually have to agree with Myself here, accuracy has to be taken into account when calculating effective dps in CoH2. Ignoring accuracy gives you the theoretical dps when all bullets hit, which are much farther from a realistic value. The wiki page seems to refer mainly to DPS in MMORPG games (as stated close to the top of the page), which you realisticly can't translate directly to a RTS game with more/different variables. Quote taken from the wiki page:
Another key factor may be Accuracy (chance of an attack to hit a target), but for most calculations it is assumed the attacks will be hitting. However, realistically most characters in most MMO's need to somehow ensure they hit their intended targets, and most likely will enhance accuracy on their characters, sometimes sacrificing recharge enhancements and the like. This cuts down on theoretical DPS, but increases realistic values as they actually land every hit of their attack chain
On topic: Ignoring the terminological war in this thread, I don't agree with OP - fiddling with assault guns effectiveness against static positions would possibly require a chain of balance changes, especially with brit emplacements which are troublesome already. I don't have too much confidence with Relic's work when trying to balance the game, so creating problems by addressing an non balance - issue doesn't sound good to me. Also, assault guns are effective enough vs most static positions already imo. |
|
Of course it is an exploit, unless Relic intended it to be a feature. That said, it's fair game to use exploits until they are fixed. |
If you had a PG level starting squad..
Actually, they are very similar to vet 0 PG. DPS is almost identical, while SP are slightly more squishy and cheaper. The rest of your points are correct though, and I agree that 9 pop is too high for an engineer unit. |
However, in the game, the Jagdpanzer have a really hard time penetrating the frontal armor of the Comet, and doing damage. By hard time I mean 8 out of 10 shots will bounce.
I'm not even mentioning that the Comet almost never bounces from the sloped (!!!) frontal armor of a Panther, but the Panther bounces pretty nicely from the 90° frontal armor of the Comet...physics at it's finest...
Ignoring the historical arguments, here is the unit stats relevant to the points you are making:
(vet 0, pen at max range)
Comet
Frontal armor: 290
Pen: 170
JPIV
Pen: 170
Panther
Frontal armor: 320
Pen: 220
JPIV chance to pen frontal armor of comet: 58%. In other words, your claim that 8 of 10 shots will bounce is false.
Comet vs Panther
Comet chance to pen Panther: 53%
Panther chance to pen Comet: 75%
Your claim that Comet never pen Panther but deflects the Panther shots nicely is false.
|
Conscripts in my opinion are fine. Penile bars are not and could use a looking at.
Pretty funny...auto correct is as dirty as ever |
If this was microed, the schreks would do even worse. The shreks fire much less frequently and their accuracy is horrible as you can see in the videos. You have to factor EVERYTHING into a comparison, not just saying its got better penetration and slightly better damage so therefore its better.
He didn't state that the schrek is better, he simply made a comparison in a vacuum stating that the results are interesting but not telling the whole story.
And when do we address other inequalities such as the mortars of the russians having 6 men vs the isg having 4 and not being able to retreat?
Make a thread for it, it's not relevant here. |
|
Just some input of the videos above - the cost difference between 2 volks with shreks and 2 rm with double zooks should be considered, as well as the cost and armor difference of the targets. It makes it harder to draw conclusions when comparing them in a vacuum like that. |
Sweden
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
