Although I do not disagree you numbers might be a bit high given the smaller target size even if one add collision hits.
Mediums get hit usually by half to two thirds of the scatter shots frontally.
If we assume the T70 gets only hit by a third of all scatter shots, this gives us a hit chance of ~81% at max range and ~85% at range 50, being higher at every point closer to that. The one third scatter hits is obviously an assumption, but I think the 85% hit chance is overall fairly realistic. |
just uploaded a replay. it was like the 4th game like this on that day. Watch the pak40 and p4 accuracy
https://www.coh2.org/replay/109724/pak40-accuracy
I can't watch at the moment, but
1. it would be helpful to point to certain time stamps if you really want people to watch it.
2. There is no inherent inaccuracy of either of these units. Also not a bug that lowers it. They are fully in line within their faction and even with other factions. If you got a lot of misses, it was probably moving your tank and/or bad RNG. I highly doubt that after years of playing the game, we've just found a severe issue with one of the core stats of two of the most frequently used units.
This is a "grass is greener on the other side" issue. You even stated that T70 is causing issues. Obviously it does, because that's what it was designed to do and priced for. Your 222 and upgraded infantry were dominating before, if you're able to easily shut down the only unit that has carried Soviet early-mid game for years now because Soviets do not have any main line upgrades at that point, that's the definition of wanting an OP faction. If your PaK misses, that's maybe a lost battle, not a lost game. If your PaK hits (let's be real it hits >85% of the time on an open field), that's maybe a won battle because Soviet infantry at this time won't stand up to yours. |
|
If only there was an ability that would make LVs almost immobile. Or some type of buildable to kill them... Should really be a thing in CoH3. |
It shouldn't have this issue because unlike regular casemates, the Elefant and Jagdtiger can not fire on the move and thus (afaik) don't have a moving accuracy penalty.
The main reason the Elefant misses relatively often is simply because it has relatively poor far accuracy for a TD at 0.03, while most regular TDs have 0.04.
That's a good point though, I stand corrected. |
at maps such as Baku pack howie can actually deal solid damage from a very safe distance. But in damage from the same range 120mm is decently better (checked it with Scatter this!).
Howie is also easier to decrew because it needs 1 guy less to kill (4 guys vs 5 guys) and the squad seem to be more clumped on pack howie. I kind of agree with Gachi that it is way easy to get away with stupid stuff with 120mm vs pack howie. But if you do decrew and capture it, it makes it easier to steal as well (which is very rare, because it is that hard to be decrewed)
Yeah, I had MMX's calculations in mind (the same thread that Vipper posted) but forgot that this data is outdated, at least for the Howie (and 120mm?).
I also agree that the 120mm is more survivable by a fair bit. And although autofire is still important, balance team put more value on its barrage, on which it has 20 more range.
Performance is not the point, its merely a reference point. We might aswell bring all mortars and look at them in this context but its rather pointless because closest units to 120mm are Paks\IGs.
Point is being that 120mm mortar surviability is blantly unjutified by anything aside from it being a commander unit, sure its more expensive then regural mortars by so are the closest units, sure it take more pop-cap but so do closest units awell. Sure 120mm might be marginally more expensive and take few additional pop-cap or be marginally weaker in certain situations, but its blantly a mile away when it comes to staying power and being countered.
Even if we forget about other units completly, even in a vacuum, I still cant find a single reason why 120mm actually needs its surviability or what its compensated for, thats the point.
I partially agree.
However, I would not call 1-2 pop more "marginally", at least not when you're below 10 population. The difference between 9 POP (120mm) and 8 POP (Howie) is a 12.5% increase. For every more typical resource, this is quite a lot and we have seen lots of changes on smaller scales. It won't break your strategy, just like a cost change of 20-30 MP would not break the strategy. Yet, paying 360 MP (=320*1,125) would be considered overpriced for the unit.
As I said above, I fully agree that the 120mm is very sturdy. Too sturdy? That's what I would doubt. The 120mm is in usually at least 2 very popular commanders. One of them is Guard Motor, which has been the Soviet favourite for years now. I have only irregularly seen the 120mm being spammed though. This likely also has to do with MP constraints due to Shocks and Guards or other causes of not fitting timings, but it might also hint that the 120mm is not as a strong choice as people are making it out to be. |
Not something I am aware of, but wouldn't surprise me. Still, if it's "impossible" for COH2, it's something that should be a standard in COH3. Same for all coh3 indirects that can autofire. Keeping it focused on one arc and disable automatic rotation during enemy screening is something that would go a long way in teamgames.
Especially for CoH3 it would be a good improvement.
I think the editor has some variable to make units auto-target. At least this suggestion might already be possible for CoH2. |
|
This is mostly self-bias. P4 and PaK40 have the same accuracy and scatter values than their Allied counter parts. Elefant has the same issues as every casemate: The first shots miss more often in general, but nothing special to the Elefant itself. |
|
+1 to this.
Regarding the AT infantry squads: I thought this comes with weird behaviour or bugs in CoH2? |
I like how vipper actually believes that DPS is a viable thing to talk about when discussing indirect fire.
Indirect weapons are not measured by DPS, because they do NOT provide reliable damage.
You either get hit or not, rarely can your squad stay in combat once its being hit by any indirect, which makes scatter most important stat and RoF second one.
There is no such thing as "DPS" on indirect weapon, unless you're firing at british emplacement or OKW truck.
The DPS in MMX's analysis serves as a proxy for expected damage per shot and therefore to some degree reliability, although it does not show the variance of the shots.
It's the best "stat" we have for discussing mortar damage, at least way better than AoE values where every argument will be made with anecdotal evidence. |
Lets be honest here pak howi while sometimes can do more damage then 120mm, its clunky AF to use, has hell of lot models for reinforcement and being decrewed with a lot more models being alive. But in any case, you rearely can play super agressive with your pak howi to begin with because of mentioned reasons, while you can do it with 120mm mortar since its generally just harder to lose it resulting more aressive placement therefore less scatter because of the range, so its actually questinable which of the units will deal more over-all damage during the game.
But in any case, even if theoretically or practically Pak howi is better in damage across the board, 120mm godlike (in comparison) survivability is not a fair trade-off, considering damage difference is not that huge as the one in survivability department.
IGs is cheaper I agree, but its cheap cost is the result of its perfomance, since its close to being useless unless using its auto-fire. But my point was that all three units 120\Pak\IGs are units in the same tier, I mean even 120 autofire was nerfed to be in line with them, so I think its kinda fair to look at them as a comparison anyway.
I'm just saying that there are more differences that we shouldn't forget when comparing these units. Survivability is definitely better on the 120mm compared to the Howie and ISG. The pop difference especially to normal mortars is huge (2-3). The 120mm should basically perform like 1,5 "normal" mortars. Compared to the Howie, damage is not really better, rather a bit worse. Especially if you consider that also the Howie has been reworked towards its barrage, which still reaches 20m further than the 120mm.
Clunkyness? I find both of them quite bad in that regard. The 120mm has a larger cone so it needs to reposition less often. But when it has to, it is basically useless. The 120mm needs 3 seconds more to pack, rotate and set up compared to the Howie. I assume this is largely map dependent. On wide, open maps with more flanking possibilities I found my 120mm constantly rotating to keep facing squads, that often run away or break through by the time the mortar can fire again. Howie can be similar, but I personally find it more responsive to enemy pushes. But obviously this is highly subjective.
I personally wouldn't put the leIG into the same "tier" as the 120mm in the sense of expecting similar performance. I find it closer to normal mortars, but in the end they all fill the same role so comparisons to all mortars are fine. I just don't want the discussion to drift to the typical "but unit A has this special feature which makes it too strong compared to unit B", all the while neglecting that there are huge price differences or something similar. Not saying you did that, but you get the point. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
