Profile of GI Bane

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 4

General Information


Thread: [Patch] February10 Feb 2016, 19:22 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Feb 2016, 18:57 PMMr.Smith You are correct in that I wasn't thinking much about infantry play when I posted this. I was thinking more about weapon teams, and how certain of them are already very prone to being yolo-rushed from the front. Grenadier riflenade pops to mind. Should all weapon teams receive a Maxim pack/unpack times as well to compensate? I don't see any reason why I would ever put an MG team behind cover anymore (if the damage reduction gets affected). Just to prove my point; try playing a game of Brits vs Ostheer and garrison an MG inside a trench (all models bunched up, No damage modifiers). When you see a grenadier approaching, you have two choices: - Instantly ungarrison your MG (and thus don't deal any suppression - what was the point of the MG again?) - Wait until the grenadier becomes suppressed, at which point you have a riflenade inbound at your location (and you're dead) (That's assuming you have a spotter nearby to allow you to fire from max range) I still fail to understand what's wrong with the current system that we have: - If you want your grenade to one-shot squads, you HAVE to flank - Otherwise, you stick where you are and use the nade to turn the odds to your favour. You definitely have some good points. Grenadiers would definitely end up being a bit op with absolutely no dmg reduction with their longer range for sure. I honestly thought it was a 75% damage reduction and that's what made me worried (I haven't played for a bit and I misinterpreted these changes because of that). I thought it over and I guess 50% is a good balance all things considered and flanking squads still end up dominating which is how it should be, which makes securing your MG's flank with another squad really important. Thanks for clearing everything up for me. In: Lobby
Thread: [Patch] February10 Feb 2016, 18:46 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Feb 2016, 18:21 PMMr.Smith Who said it's 75% reduction? All grenades have 50% reduction vs heavy cover and NO reduction vs garrison. This is why riflenades/etc can instakill some garrisoned MG-team members instantly. If you want to have NO reduction vs heavy cover, there would be no reason to use cover again; ever. The squad formation already punishes you for using cover by making all team-members bunch up (and thus make them a prime target for explosives). Relic already trialed this between TBF release and the Leigfest patch, and it was a failure for the reasons I outlined. PS: If you want to insta-gib an MG team that uses cover, you have to flank them first and THEN throw the grenade. Sorry, I must have misread this comment from Cruzz in his "The More You Know" post. "Green cover reduces damage from all attacks that aren't flamebased, including grenades and mortars which people tend to consider counters to cover. Whether the -50% damage is applied to a weapon depends on where it was FIRED from rather than on where the attack lands. UPDATE: Except now it only reduces explosive damage by 0 to -25%. " So is this saying that grenades can do 75 up to 100% damage to a squad in green cover? Because if it is I have nothing to really complain about LOL. In: Lobby
Thread: [Patch] February10 Feb 2016, 18:14 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Feb 2016, 16:32 PMImagelessbean Grenades do less damage in cover to reward players in cover and help weapon teams survive single grenades. The reduced damage provides an obvious play/counterplay option. Flush them out of green cover and you can blast them with nades, otherwise you need to think carefully about when to drop the nade. This is slightly different in buildings where proximity is of critical importance and facing changes, as well as size of the building, also come into play. Nades are for assisting in squad breakthroughs not to be 30 munitions hand nukes. Okay, fair enough, but a 75% damage reduction still seems too steep. With the current mechanics a player using two rifle squads to assault an MG42 along the edges of its cone of fire won't do enough damage for 30 munitions to be worth the cost. How about grenades thrown from the front of green cover do more damage the closer the assaulting squad is to the MG or squad in cover. This would simulate throwing accuracy improving as the assaulting squads approach the enemy position, and reward the attacking player for good timing and initiative. This would also make a multi prong frontal assault more viable for factions like Soviets or Ostheer who don't have ready access to smoke grenades. One squad will draw the MGs fire while the other closes as much as possible before letting loose. This way the defending player will have to be wary about closing squads and proactively reposition his MG. Regular squads in green cover will also have to be microed properly and the risk of leaving them in cover to eat a grenade would be too great. In: Lobby
Thread: [Patch] February10 Feb 2016, 14:47 PM Changing grenades so that they don't do ~~half~~(25%!!!) damage to units in green cover when landing behind the squad in cover would be nice. The whole point of nades are to help infantry assault a position, and I feel this recent change lowers the skill ceiling and rewards players for doing less while making the unit in green cover much too powerful. Also I heard that grenadier rifle nades ignore this aspect of the game, can anyone confirm this? edit: just learned rifle nades act the same as any other explosive. Still, the fact that now grenades only deal 25% damage is absurd, there's no reason to micro your units out of green cover now. What was the reason behind these changes? In: Lobby