First off, excellent changes! You've made underused abilities like Medical Kits and Coordinated Barrage useful, and made underappreciated units like Conscripts and Valentines more viable! Do you have a release date in mind?
Feedback:
USF
Sherman HP: I suggest a decrease from 800HP to 720HP. 720HP already allows it to survive another shot (provided it did not get snared) which is enough to make it more survivable. It's bigger brouthers, the Bulldozer and the Easy Eight also both have 720HP (yes, they have more armor, but are specialized and cost more as well).
UKF
Bofors cost adjustment seems over-the-top; 120FU is too much fuel, and would result in too much rarity. It's more expensive (in terms of fuel) than the 17-prd (the last time I saw one was in a 3v3 Sim City), which would almost make it not viable in any situation. I suggest an increase to 60FU, just like an AEC. A 33% increase is already a massive amount; going for more than 1 would slow down your tech and tanks down significantly, while not making it prohibitively expensive.
All emplacements:
Is it possible to modify the Brace ability? Personally, I'd like to see a 30MU cost, a 30 second cooldown, and damage reduction to -75% (from -95%), but I can't seem to edit it from Attribute Editor. Could it be upgrade\british\abilities\base_building_braced_mp?
the soonest is this weekend. modtool just got updated and I need to rebuild the entire thing
Sherman: the bulldozer will definitely be looked at in the future. I also wanted to use 800 hp since it's the same hp as the comet, t34/85, and panther. the difference between 800 and 720 is basically one schreck round.
I am looking at the emplacement and trying to figure out how the brace work.
|
-snipped
valentine: the vet 1 sounds nice in theory but I agree with your statement. That's why I give the valentine the same ability as the tommies and sniper artillery flare.
I want to see how does the new PIAT and bazooka fare after my changes before further changing them.
Also I think Churchill mk7 also needs some changes, currently it got meh gun and crap speed and its smoke ability does not work at all so at your proposed change Comet still better. Furthermore Forward Warning from Anvil does not work either. Commandoes' Sten in the new patch still not work properly so nerfing Light Gammon Bomb can make them useless, especially now that PzGren and Falls/Obers also got nuke nade.
the gammon bomb nerf was there before the last patch buffed the bundled nade. I kept it in since it's justification for the cost decrease on the commandos. The 35 mu gammon bomb is also cheaper than the 45mu bundled nade.
and I added back in the smoke buff for the churchill. It got lost in the reshuffle. |
Ok, I won't bother spending ammo to sight for any indirect fire anymore then, except for stuka bomb.
the panzerwerfer and stuka probably fire faster enough to avoid the fow penalty.
you can probably get 1 or 2 "sighted" howitzer shell before the fow return |
|
"sighting" work as FOW modifier. your weapon gets a (negative) modifier if it's firing into FOW.
For a Slow firing barrage, you will need to maintain Sight on the target for each individual shell. |
updated a pending change list:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PmjzZ77TVnD09iHRi3Yn7wObnAz-UlUloUqIl_iNd94/edit
-snipped-
-snipped-
On bren guns:
I would rather not touched the tommies' bren gun. I used single bren extensively and they are fine. Sappers bren and commandoes bren are a different matter but I'm not concerned about them right now.
I also want to leave the possibility of mixing bren and PIAT upgrade.
on PIAT:
I'm going to try a non-option PIAT before going for the safe option. The PIAT is going to be always "accurate" against stationary target but can still be dodged through human input. |
|
how about waiting until the USF mortar get nerfed?
the usf mortar would have been overpowered in any of the five factions. It's even more powerful than the ost mortar, and they are suppose to have the best support weapons in the game.
(best, meaning having the best or tied for the best). |
That's what I'm saying as well.
However, what I am starting to believe is that the chance the shot lands either on front half or rear half depends entirely on the angle. That is to say, the angle determines the probability function to use; it's not fixed.
Thus, say you have a gun with 160 penetration.
Front Panther armour is 320. Rear Panther armour is 110 (doesn't matter since your pen is higher than rear).
This means that your chance to penetrate is:
- 50% if hitting front
- 100% if hitting rear
If the angle is 90 degrees, this means that the split between front and rear is 50-50. Thus, you have a 75% chance to penetrate a panther, shooting at a side, with an 160 weapon. This means that Panther's effective armour from a 90-degree angle becomes 213-ish; it's neither 320 nor 110.
Different angles will yield different results. I don't know the exact relation between angle and effective armour though.
That's what real world physics implies. That's not necessarily what relic implemented for their game. Real world also doesn't have heat-seeking projectiles for instance (direct hits).
I know that I have seen enemy tanks facing 10-degrees angles for me and I have still scored rear armour hits (however rarely). So, let's see how this turns out to be.
shot home in at the center of a tank when the tank roll a hit. If a tank have 100% accuracy, the shot will hit the closer side of the tank.
however, tanks rarely have 100% in this game. If the tank roll a miss, the scatter takes over and stray shot might hit the farther side of the tank. |
What Sinthe has found, and I now believe to be correct, is that there is no such division line such that:
- Beyond that, 99% of the hits are front armour (and 1% are irregularity)
- Before that, 99% of the hits are rear armour (and 1% are irregularity).
Instead, the angle determines the probability of which half of the armour will be used.
If you fire from a 90% degree angle, there's 50% chance of hitting rear, 50% of hitting front.
Thus, statistically, there actually exists the notion of side armour on the game.
However, everyone sit tight and wait until Cruzz verifies this.
It's not as easy to say that the armour of the Panther is (320 + 110)/2 (it depends on the penetration of the attacker), but:
- Attacking angle does matter
- Those rear armour hits from the front were not a bug; they were a feature.
the working of front and rear armor is already known.
there's front half and rear half of a vehicle/tank. enemy shooting at your "side" is bad because the shot can potentially land at your rear half but it's not a guarantee.
Yes, and as I explained it to you earlier it is because the division line between front and rear of the unit runs through the middle and due to scatter or accuracy some shots are registered as front and some as rear armour shot. What is more the game will quite often produce irregular results (not sure if due to bug or glitch or some unknown factor) and shot that looked like a front shot will end up being rear one and vice versa. All this due to lack of side armour.
|
|
what's this nonsense about an autoloader on the panther? those never even go into production
If we start adding in never existed upgrades for the panther, then the british should be getting their centurion and the soviet should be getting the is-3.
and before someone mention pershing, those actually fought. |
|
(posted in wrong thread) |
Firesparks
CPU - Easy
Firesparks
Relic Entertainment
