|
not even sure if it was ever figured out what exactly caused the bug, but i'd say it's rather unlikely the 64 bit update fixed it by accident. or maybe it did, that would certainly be a welcome change to the usual introduction of new bugs with each new patch |
|
iirc the maphack wasn't removed because it was op, but rather because there was an unfixable bug that made it permanent for some units under certain conditions. so unless you came up with a fix to prevent it from being abusable again i doubt it'll make a comeback in any form... or maybe you have a different proposal that doesn't involve the same mechanic in which case i'm all ears |
By soft targets I meant 222, 251, flak truk etc, sorry for the inconveniece. I am fine with it's current damage vs infantry, but I think that AT damage should be increased to 200 and then AI should be adjusted to be similar to what we currently have. You can even cap the damage to 3 models per squad, so even if it manages to kill 3 models, you will always have time to retreat. The tank should be more all-rounder that we have now.
those soft targets you mention have 320 hp, so they'll still need 2 shots to kill even with 200 dmg per shot (or 240, like the kv-2). same for mediums with 640 hp, which will also still need 4 shots to kill after your redesign. and with a concurrent rof increase to balance out the net dps gain against other targets, you're suddenly looking at an even less powerful is-2 against the targets you mentioned than before.
hardly worth it in my book... |
[...]
I don't see anyone complaining about ISUs randomness, and those tanks even get the same penetration.
IS-2's description even says that it has a powerful gun. I don't think that it's performance against soft target resembles powerful gun. 
the is-2 has 50% more pen than the kv-2 and even on armor piercing ammo the isu barely has a 10 pen advantage (and that only at close range, which is not exactly where you'd want to be with a casemate tank).
also, while i can relate to the sentiment that the AT performance of the 122 mm feels kind of inferior to what you'd expect from such a large caliber, its effect vs soft target is acually quite well represented in the game.
the d25t has double the AoE area of the tiger's 88mm and is significantly more effective against infantry on a per-shot basis. only the lower rof is what keeps it in check compared to its axis counterparts. sure, the 152 mm projectiles of the isu and kv-2 make an even bigger boom, but that's also pretty much in line with expectation.
all in all, i'd wager the is-2's main gun is in a good spot and kind of the middle ground between the 88 and heavier calibers.
|
[...]
Even if you'd like to accept that Ostheer snares should be "better" against mediums, and Soviet/other allied snares should be "better" against heavies, why does there need to be a penetration calculation, and why is none of this explained at all in the game?
not to take anything away from your reasoning above, which is valid, that last part is a pretty poor argument given the overall quality of the in-game descriptions as a whole.
|
|
i don't think snares dealing less damage on deflection is necessarily a bad thing as is (and i'm not talking about failing to kill on deflection, that should be fixed obviously!).
penetration and deflection damage are integral parts of the game, and even though it may not be directly communicated to the player most will be familiar with the concept that damage may vary based on rng, as it does for every weapon in the game.
it's more the current implementation which makes it meaningless in all but fringe cases, as pointed out by hannibal earlier, that creates an issue, if at all.
i wouldn't mind if all medium tanks required a minimum of 3 hits for a guaranteed crit at full health, but could also be snared by 2 penetrating hits. after all, this would mean that positioning (i.e. near vs far, front vs rear) would play a more significant role in determining the success of a snaring attempt.
that is, of course, assuming that snares do even differentiate between front and rear armor and that it is actually the activation range (not the distance when firing the projectile) that determines the pen value. |
|
kübel is fine as is. it can dish out quite a bit of dps against lone squads but falters quickly when pressured with multiple units. a force multiplier in the early game but at the cost of another volks or sturm that offer much better scaling into the later stages of the game. i personally find them a nuisance to deal with as usf, but still easy enough to chase off until i can field a proper counter (e.g. a light vehicle).
as for their late-game utility, the detection ability is sure useful, but not exactly a game breaking maphack that needs to be nerfed. if anything i'd like to see more (ultra) lights having a bit more purpose after the early game that is not tied to their (by then mostly irrelevant) combat stats. |
[...]
About the IS-2, the wipe potential could be reduced by limiting the number of models it can damage per-shot. For some reason the developers rarely use this feature even though they used it on, of all things, the bloody 45mm gun on the T-70. I just think the IS-2 would fair better if it were to at least gain 200 damage, but 240 would be preferable. Lowering the rate of fire is not preferable because when it was slow, it often had the problem of shooting at the wrong target and having to wait, and misses with the gun were more painful.
effective or not, i hope this AoE model hit limitation approach doesn't find more widespread application in the game. it feels kind of arbitrary to see 3 models bunched up behind a bush getting blasted to smithereens by a 120mm shot to their faces, while another one sitting right on top of them shrugs it of as if nothing happened at all.
there are more elegant solutions to limit the one-shot full-health squadwipe potential (which is the only problematic issue imho; if you park a clumped, half health squad in range of an is-2 or similar, you deserve to lose it if the rng gods are against you), as the recent adjustment to the AoE profiles of heavies demonstrated. overall dps went down just slightly, while the occurrence of one-shot kills of full-health models (and squads) is much lower than before.
this could easily be done for a 200 or 240 dmg is-2 shell as well, as it has already been done for the kt's 240 dmg shell. but if it's the AT department that people feel is somehow underwhelming, i'd rather just tinker with the pen values or introduce a bit of deflection damage (maybe less than 50%) instead
|
Yes. KV-2 is much much better at AI than IS-2 but is also less agile. Furthermore, it's penetration values are quite low so on the off chance it penetrates... sure. You do 240 dmg. But unless the enemy is throwing a P4 at your KV2, KV2 ain't that great at AT.
KV2 at AT is some sort of support. It won't do the job on it's own, but it will scare off if there is a zis nearby. IS-2 on the other hand is more agile and can "solo" enemies easier. Don't neglect the IS-2's [much] higher penetration values, especially in team games where Panther/Tiger/KT spam is a thing. Having SU85, KV2 and what not on the field leaves you wide open to Panther dives. That is, if the enemy is not 90% of COH2 players and actually uses the margins and flanks to flank and go behind you.
while it would be logical to assume the is-2 performs better against heavily armored targets than the kv-2 due to higher penetration values, it is actually the opposite in reality.
both tanks are pretty much on par against mediums where pen is almost guaranteed and the lower base damage of the is-2 is offset by greater rof. however, against a kt for example the kv-2 pulls ahead quite comfortably. the reason is the 50% (120 dmg) deflection damage the kv deals with every non-penetrating hit, which will guarantee a much higher and consistent base dps versus high armor targets. granted, this doesn't factor in things like mobility, accuracy and scatter but it's safe to say that, against anything above panther-level of armor the kv-2 will be the better choice. |
|
saw the video the other day and it kind of gave me coh1 flashbacks...
deflection damage not being able to kill sounds like a relic from the past (!) and should have no place in the here and now. hence i'm all for standardizing handheld AT and tank deflection damage alike.
also big shoutout to tightrope for the detective work and video! |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
