Profile of Mr.Smith

because US mortar was meant to fight garrisons and put smoke in early game, to counter MG's in buildings, unlike other factions mortars, note also that US has pack howie, which is a rampage to infantry so they already have two indirect units

What Barton said.

I would only add that USF will have access to 3 indirect fire units when the M8 Scott stops sucking. There needs to be some differentiation so that we don't have cheaper units (mortars) overshadowing units that require specific tech paths (pak howitzer).

I would only maybe consider buffing barrage range. However only if officers don't come for free, and still maybe.

The USF mortar is supposed to be an early-game unit. USF problems are late-game, and USF is a problem early game. Buffing an early-game unit won't make either problem go away.

Yeah, satchel charges use tp_homing. Is there any reason why I wouldn't want a Molotov to be tp_thrown, or is this completely safe to change?

Also, Churchill grenades are sticky? Didn't know that before.

tp_thrown/to_homing etc only control what objects the projectile will collide (and stick) with and nothing else.

Yeah, satchel charges use tp_homing. Is there any reason why I wouldn't want a Molotov to be tp_thrown, or is this completely safe to change?

Also, Churchill grenades are sticky? Didn't know that before.



I tried setting obj_cover's cover_type to tp_light, and it displays nothing.

Have a look at how commando light smoke grenades work, and try to do the same for your wirefields. First with light cover, and then with negative cover.

i think Ele and JT should be viable in 1v1 however rarely viable they might be.

I think that Ele/JT should be nerfed to the point that they remain good units in 4v4, but not completely dominate those modes (when allied cheese gets toned down as well, ofc). If we nerf those units in a clever way, we could, at least, make them non-meta troll units for 1v1.

The best way to achieve this is turn them less of anti-armour only super-specialists to something more generalist-like.

For instance if JT had access to a stug-e kind of barrage every now and then, then, eh, it could also act as a semi-mobile howitzer.

more and more i think about it, with exception of FRPs, and caches everything really depends on maps.

You cant simply have same number of points as 1v1. The reason why super heavies can dominate and achieve critical mass with only a bit of support is because there is just so little room to fight for. Ele, KT, JT, IS2, whatever heavies become problem because they can simply sit on one of two places where the team has to defend. ONE of TWO places. maybe that is ok for 2 players total but that cant really fly 6 players+ or even 4 players. Walking stuka becomes steadily more of a problem as the gamemode gets bigger because there is simply not much room for the opponent compared to 1v1. Same with all other arties.

solution?bigger size and the whole attitude and template for making 2v2+ maps has to change. for example, in 4v4, no longer maps designed to have two separate 2v2s on separated fuel points. We just simply need bigger maps with more resource points but with each of them with lesser income - again, we need to separate gamemodes to do this.

i'd say the size has to be at least as big as general mud or montargis region but with eyeball design of Hill400 and Hamlet to make distance from frontline to base not too far.

p.s. just remove FRP, make OKW base have 4x higher health so it becomes good soft retreat base. L2SoftRetreat FFS.

That's all nice and dandy. However, that still leaves us with only 1 viable 4v4 map (new Hill400 without watchtowers is amazing). I think it's more realistic to alter how certain mechanics work, rather than recreate a mode's map-pool from scratch.

e.g., walking stuka barrages could become inaccurate when firing into the fog-of-war. That would already make adding trois-points kind-of straight passages in a map kind of viable without completely shooting yourself in the foot.

And a price decrease?

Maybe. I don't know how much price I would attach to them without seeing them in action.

Only for fuel though, not manpower.

Super heavies TD: they have been niche and i don't mind them been SUPER niche on 1v1 but not stupid units on 2v2+.

Would anybody feel that Elefant/JT are getting butchered with the following changes?
- Damage reduced from 320 to 280-300
- Accuracy reduced (by a lot) to SU-85 levels

The idea here is that JT/Elefant will remain marvelous at countering TD-walls (keeping them in the repair pad). They would also punish Comet/T34/85 spam/etc. They would also be amazing at dealing with allied heavy tanks. However, they wouldn't assassinate veteran medium tanks like it was nobody's business.

(This assumes that Firefly's accuracy/moving accuracy also gets nerfed to SU-85 levels, to keep it even. Tulips should give the new blind TWP critical from Puma, rather than deny movement. Jackson is OK since it's brittle and will still go down to 2 shots)

JT has a lot on its plate too, compared to the elefant:
- Nerf mobility stats so that engine-upgraded JT performance will equal live-version unupgraded performance
- Barrage no longer requires veterancy. Costs 30 munitions and projectiles follow an arc so as not to collide with ground all the time
- Range decrease from both attacks to 80 (because increasing 17pounder range would be a terrible idea
- Piercing rounds requires Vet5 (Vet5 currently does nothing since stun-removal ninja-buff)

Elefant:
- Can no longer upgrade to spotting scopes (so that we don't have to nerf scopes)

Then, I would trace Elefant/JT popcap as follows:
- Elefant: around 25-26
- JT around 28-29 (since it's a generalist with the barrage)

CalliOP: it was nerf in the wrong way. They just removed the 3rd barrage instead of nerfing and spreading the damage of the first and 2nd barrage.

CalliOP definitely merits a durability nerf first of all. It could go around Priest level.

Then, range should either be reduced a lot (but kept lethal). In that way, you have to be careful not to have your CalliOP murdered, and that would differentiate it from the long-range priest.

Otherwise, change the barrage pattern from 10-8 to 6-6-6.

FRP: make it have a cooldown.
Ex. Upon activation, for the next X seconds, all units who retreat will do so to the FRP. After that there's a 2X seconds of cooldown til the ability can be used again.

That could be an interesting idea. I think that could work.

I can't give you definitive answers, since I'm away from my modding tools machine. However, I can provide you with hints and hopefully that will help you figure out what you're looking for.

5) Sticky Molotovs like satchel charges?

I was able to create a Molotov ability that mimics the satchel charge when targeting vehicles, but I'm having trouble mimicking the sticky behavior of the satchel charge when I target a position instead of the actual vehicle.

Look under the projectile for the collision type. I don't remember what it was exactly, but it should be different from a normal grenade.

Collision types look like "tp_homing", "tp_artillery_inf", etc.

If you're still unsure compare Churchill grenade projectile with infantry grenade projectile. Churchill crew grenades are sticky, whereas infantry grenades are not.

Recovering Casualties?

Here is an interesting video showing that medics have an animation to recover casualties from the battlefield in what seems to be the NIS editor. Curious to see how it can be implemented in-game?

That's about all I can think of for now, but if there's anything that comes to mind later, I'll ask here.

I've no idea about how or why that works. However, when I was looking at activating medic extentions (activate repair_ext), I also found an aide_ext. I think aide_ext counts for zombie-gren recovering medics.

Try adding aide_ext and see what happens. I've never tried it!