You'd basically end up with M36s rushing everything and basically ignoring armor due to their mobility. Right now, panthers, etc. can sort of hold their own against M36s because their armor still works at close range; this would remove that advantage, too.
I disagree. The Panther wins close up because it has extra health, not armour. The Jackson already penetrates it frontally no problem.
Tank Point Blank provides an option to vehicles that struggle to penetrate heavier armour. It's a pointless risk on units that can already penetrate from range.
The vehicle I'd be concerned about is the M10, and it's not like you can't adjust it if point blank makes it too strong. |
According to coh2db/com/stats, elefant has 110 rear armor. The centaur would land 1/3rd of its shots if it got behind it.
I know, I know, "if you got flanked you're already dead and...." but just playing it out in my head.
Behind it at point blank range.
You've also got to consider the damage output of these anti-infantry vehicles: they're crazy powerful against 80 HP infantry models.
Even if a Centaur has 100% penetration against an Elefant, that Elefant is still a massive health brick.
If any modder is interested in making a test mod for this I don't mind calculating all the value changes. |
|
The M5 in that doctrine used to cost 350 MP too.
CoH 2 has very arbitrary pricing. |
Main problem is that there only 2~ doctrines with kv-1 and they all suck
Another thing is that brits get extra repair speed with churchills,so they works even better,while soviets just repairing they kv-1 whole match
Counterattack, Guards Rifle Combined Arms and Conscript Support Tactics?
Guards Rifle Combined Arms is arguably the most meta T2 doctrine in the game. It certainly was before the Shock Troops buff.
Conscript Support Tactics is almost the same thing.
Counterattack Tactics is the B4 doctrine, so your opinion of it depends on your opinion of the B4. |
This sounds like something I wouldn't enjoy, and deflection damage seems much more appropriate... but for the sake of my curiosity, how much would fast firing vehicles like Luchs, Centaur, Ostwind, 222, or t-70 get?
Deflection damage would be a much more radical change.
As for your second question, my current rule of thumb is double far penetration.
So for the vehicles you listed:
- T-70: 80 from 50
- Luchs: 40 from 20
- Ostwind: 70 from 55
- Centaur: 40 from 30
Only when you're pretty much touching the enemy tank, though. |
I think its just too late in the games life cycle for a major mechanical change like this. The core of CoH2 is arguably tank combat and this would be a pretty big change. I'd like to see more range values or something like this in a new CoH though.
Mechanically, it's less radical and less impactful than the tech changes the recent patches have made. All you're doing is tweaking the penetration curve to spike up within 10 metres. Patches make changes like that all the time.
I'm not exaggerating when I say this change'd probably take less than two hours of work to implement. You literally only need to change four numbers for each vehicle.
I think that's an interesting idea, not sure how well it will fare though without screwing over the current balance.
In terms of actually being able to use the point blank mechanic, not much. If a player doesn't want your T-34s at point blank range of his tank, he has a plethora of tools to stop you.
This is by far and away the biggest deal for the T-34 and Cromwell, which are fast tanks with iffy penetration.
For example, take killing Panthers with T-34s.
- You need at least two T-34s, which is already a higher resource investment than the Panther.
- You need a way to keep the Panther from reversing (snare it, button it, flank and block it, ram it with a third T-34)
- You need to clear out its AT support.
- You need to clear out every snaring infantry squad nearby, because one snare will completely neuter a tank.
I think the biggest impact is likely to be the threat of it. It's still going to be almost impossible to kill a supported heavy tank with mediums (or a supported medium tank with lights) but an unsupported heavier tank marauding around the enemy backline with no support is in danger. |
hmm...i seen they B4 onehit the P4. Maybe u should play the vi in 0.25x speed..where you can see that the penal didnt gave the last shot on it that it killed...the PTRS was shooted...but the p4 exploded befor the ptrs shell was at the p4.
so the b4 deleted a p4 and jp and DID massive dmg to all squads, t4, and armor... even on the move.
while the lefh was only a counter to the b4...while doenst make any good dmg to other squads excepts the B4 crews and repairing pios.
If you think it's this good, why not play Counterattack? |
While these mechanic looks interesting and fresh, i think there are some troubles with balance.
In game almost all mediums have equal health pool (640 hp). But there are few tanks that don't follow to this rule:
1. T 34-85
2. Sherman with dozer blade
Tank HP rises pretty evenly with resource cost. A T-34/85 can take an extra hit, but it also costs 130 FU versus the T-34/76's 90. The Panther can take six hits, and heavies can take seven to nine.
If anything, that's a necessary balancing factor for this idea rather than a problem.
Such changes in mechanic will do these units very, very more cost effective than in current. Also soviet t-3476 in other side of these list. If now you need flanking or trying to go from back to enemy armor to deal damage, in new mechanic you could dive staright forward, without any maneuveres to left or right and get your non-deflected hit.
But you've got to get to point blank range and stay there.
That can be countered with any AT gun support. That can be countered with one snare. That can be countered with the Reverse key.
Keeping your mediums at point blank range isn't a trivial matter.
Remember that this goes both ways. Everything facing the T34 will also have this increase, meaning the t34 will suffer again lol.
Closing in already increases penetration for both sides and advantages the lower armoured/lower penetration tank. Amplifying that effect won't hurt the T-34. |
Currently tanks have higher penetration based on how close they are, You need to quantify what the difference in this proposal is from the current system for anybody to reasonably asses it.
I'd say somewhere between +75% and +100%. 200ish for a medium tank, 100ish for a light tank.
For example, the Cromwell currently has:
- Near Accuracy: 0.050
- Mid Accuracy: 0.0375
- Far Accuracy: 0.025
- Near Range: 0
- Mid Range: 20
- Far Range: 40
- Near Penetration: 135
- Mid Penetration: 120
- Far Penetration: 105
Under this proposal, it'd change to this:
- Near Accuracy: 0.050
- Mid Accuracy: 0.0438
- Far Accuracy: 0.025
- Near Range: 0
- Mid Range: 10
- Far Range: 40
- Near Penetration: 210
- Mid Penetration: 128
- Far Penetration: 105
Performance beyond Range 10 is unchanged, but penetration rapidly ramps up within Range 10.
No. This would too heavily favor high HP, high mobility vehicles, and make tank combat even more silly than it already is in this game.
Such as? The only high HP and high mobility vehicle that springs to mind is the Panther, which is also a high armour and high penetration vehicle which doesn't benefit from these changes.
I think he's suggesting to basically have guaranteed pen at a very close range. I think the most important number is just what range that would be
Below 10 metres, same as infantry point-blank.
it will attacking a large tank with a few small or medium tanks much more rewarding.
Good for spectators, and it might be a bit frustrating for players, as you are driven to more "all in" situations.
Only an unsupported large tank. One snare is all it takes for a point blank attack to go horribly wrong.
The difference is lower penetration vehicles now have the option of a dangerous point blank charge instead of just being outright countered. I think it's a lot like the way HMGs counter infantry, but infantry can fight back with flanking. |
I think it's entirely valid. You can have crazy powerful units, like the brummbar, that can insta-wipe squads, but that's only fair when the user input required to get that result is quite high. If we doubled or tripled the brummbar's projectile flight speed, making auto-fire actually useful, it would be incredibly overpowered; and then the subsequent damage nerfs would make it nearly useless.
If you tripled the projectile flight speed you'd make it too accurate. That's not balancing by bad UI, that's directly buffing the unit's stats.
If you hypothetically made the Brummbar's targeting AI smart enough to automatically lead its shots, you haven't buffed the unit, you've just made its performance more consistent across skill levels. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
