Yup good thing you asked that, reminded me. Someone made a bug report thread about it sometime back and I never got around to addressing why it wasnt actually a bug.
Hang on so it doesn't actually buff vet 3 rifles offensively? Since through vet 3 they have -20% reload and +30% accuracy anyway, so it just ends up giving them more LoS?
Sounding worse and worse now... |
I'm pretty sure; I've never seen a Jackson bounce on a vet0 p4(now at vet 2 and vs OKW p4... Different story)The thing with coh2.hu is that it uses the mid range penetration across far/mid/near.
Your math must be off somewhere, I got a 109% chance for E8 vs P4 at mid, not 91%.
However I got 96.9% for Max range e8 vs p4.
Don't forget the chances change depending on distance, at 'near'(point blank) the E8 has 200 penetration I think(I'm pretty sure penetration jumps up or down 20 between the far/mid/near intervals), but at at FAR(Max range) it's only 160.
Ah right. Err I derped i was supposed to write the easy 8 has pen of 165 and p4 armour of 180 which then gives my result (the reciprocal of yours). Max range e8 would be 80.5% which is a huge difference.
Yeah a drop off at long range would go quite some ways to fit those numbers better to my experiences...thanks!  |
quick reference of all Tank and AT gun penetration is on coh2 http://stat.coh2.hu/
I dont know of any penetration % lists/google docs however.
Calculating pen chance is just pen/armor x 100.
Just to check, is that formula actually true? So an easy 8 pens the frontal armour of a ost p4 (180 pen v 165 armour) 91.7% of the time and a jackson ALWAYS pens an ost p4 whatever the facing (220 pen)?
My initial reaction was that couldn't possibly be true but on reflection the jackson mainly just misses a lot and shoots sloooow as fuck and quite frankly I barely ever use them so can't even remember any games of jackson v p4 to think if I'd ever seen a bounce... |
quick reference of all Tank and AT gun penetration is on coh2 http://stat.coh2.hu/
I dont know of any penetration % lists/google docs however.
Calculating pen chance is just pen/armor x 100.
I can't find any mention of penetration values on the tank stat list on that site?
EDIT: Hang on, I found them- thanks! |
Actually to add to that, do you know if anyone has created a list of tank gun penetration values and tabulated %chance to pen of penetration of gun v target armor? |
Fire up just affects movement posture. No actual debuffs once its over, except movement speed obviously, and no buffs like accuracy or damage when its going on.
Stats for alot of stuff is in the commander guides here now.
For combined arms, the stats are
Infantry: -20% Reload +30% Accuracy, +35% sight
Vehicles: +35% sight, -30% Reload, +5 range"
OK fantastic, thank you!
Good to know that fire up doesn't actually penalize you in other ways besides movement afterwards- I've never used it because I was afraid it would do something like that like heroic charge used to in coh 1 or something. |
|
Can anyone tell me the actual effect of these skills? Wish the game would just clearly state buffs/penalties to be honest...
Thanks! |
(first, whats does OP mean here?)
But anyway, thank you for your information. But you write: "your strat falters against proper light vehicle play and mine sweeping from any of the allied faction..."
Yes, that could be true. First, yes, I haven't played against 200 till 400 Level players yet in 1vs1. But: certainly as hell, the enemy will never have a light vehicle. Because he has no fuel (or he has a light vehicle, but I have TWO anti-tank-guns!!). Even the infantry blobs can easily defeated with the pzgren halftrack and an agren with grenades, BECAUSE the enemy has no ammo to have infantry AT or grenades to counter.
I will see. I'll just try it more and more.
Y u no add me?  |
I see you are as incapable of understanding mathematical notation as you are at effective argumentation. Your ad hominem attacks only indicate the weakness of your position, they don't prove your point.
As to the maths, N is a numeric variable, it can take on the value of any number. N-1 is one less than N, for example if N = 5, N-1 = 4. When I say N vet 3 Riflemen w/zooks beat N-1 LMG Obers, while being cheaper, available earlier and retaining anti vehicle capability, I am not comparing squads 1 on 1.
Thus endith the remedial algebra lesson.
Joseph
I just ignored your rather pretentious (and logically fallacious) algebra tbh. If you had any quantitative reasoning in you you'd realise multiple squad comparison depends on ratios of squads involved and not absolute differences ( for instance there is a huge difference in outcome between the N=2 case where two rifles would trash 1 ober and the N=6 case where 6 rifles are trashed by 5 obers since in one case the rifles have 200% as many squads as the obers and in the other only 120% despite both adhering to your faulty R(N)>O(N-1) formula).
Also any understanding of how power density influences match ups with increasing numbers involved even with ratios kept the same would make you understand further why your 'formula' was so bad. The unit with greater power becomes better relatively to weaker units as numbers increase because the power is more concentrated and the weaker more numerous unit can not all simultaneously get in good position and shoot simultaneously whereas the more powerful less numerous unit can. This is demonstrated well in COH 2 where for instance 3 222s may trash an AEC by swarming it but as a few AECs are gathered (say 3) even an ever increasing amount of 222s become less and less effective as they just get one shotted by the AECs whilst trying to get in range whilst the AECs just kite backwards and the horde of 222s are just getting jammed all over the place on various terrain because there are so many of them.
In any case you are still wrong about zook rifles beating obers and are clearly a noob at this game.
Have a good day sir. |
Do RE's over perform for their cost? I'd say so. Is this a bad thing? Not really.
I think it's healthy for the brits and other factions to have options and strong units to diversify themselves. For example the MG42 is by far the best MG in the game and makes ostheer stand out with it. RE's being tough synergize with their emplacement strat, and is a fun unique thing.
Besides, I've yet to see any serious brit players use nothing but RE's. I mean I think if mainline infantry over perform that becomes a serious problem. at the end of the day you can never go RE only because that fucks you up at the start of the game and you'll have no way to heal. As such it's ideally 2*tommies and I agree despite the over performance of REs for standalone cost, the mix in nature and balance and lack of ukf elite infantry makes for an interesting and non-OP combination. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
