I can see it go both ways.
If you check the list, it also mentions other mechanics such as locating enemies through things happening in the fog of war. Window crushing, fences getting destroy, sound, xp kickers etc. Depending on who you ask, ghosting can be fine.
Some people consider blocking retreat path with other infantry or vehicles abusing. Same with pushing.
No one bats an eye if you attack ground to luck yourself and get a scatter hit outside the range of the weapon or try to shoot through a sight blocker like a building.
If the enemy doesn't know to press stop, you can make vehicles phase through each other.
What's consider a skill, mechanic or knowledge to be ok is entirely dependant on what the community believes to be fine.
I'm talking based on experience in SC2, WC3, AoE, FPS and fighting games.
To some degree, sure. At least personally I'd call all the "Fog Mechanics" (Barring perhaps sounds?) to clearly be bugs. I suppose it's up for interpretation.
|
It has already been acknowledge by the community and tournament creators as an abuse in a "mechanic" (it's listed in all the latest tournament rules).
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w8FH7HtM-7CYh54xrK2WQnXeBNuN7E05tYGOD3CQy3U/edit#heading=h.yf2ptvtw94x5
"a possible game feature"
I do have to be honest, I'm not really sure how they could come to that conclusion. |
Is sprinting a problem on conscripts with 3 smgs but not on assgrens who have 50% more dps on top of grenades when upgraded? Also Volks upgrade gives them utility instead of removing it. Quite an interesting logic of buffing something by nerfing it
The thing with Assgrens is they don't have Sandbags, Mines, An AT grenade, or Merge. They're ineffective troops lategame, other than for capping. Cons on the other hand, are very useful lategame, even with worse weapons.
It's really not a great comparison, that's why people are comparing them to Volks instead. |
|
I think the thing about Smoke vs Sprint on CQC squads, as well, is that you can get smoke easily from other sources in your army, even nondoctrinally. If you have a mortar, pack howitzer, Sherman, Cromwell, etcetera, you can smoke enemy MGs to allow your CQC squad to sprint up and murder whatever you might like.
On the other hand, if you throw a Smoke grenade, unless your squad has an inherent sprint (Or your commander has one included, which I don't think is the case for any relevant ones) you can't fire a shell at your own troops to make them run faster.
I'd still prefer Sprint in most combined-arms contexts. |
Just because you don't have half a dozen of X unit on field, does not mean it should be ignored, its a stock unit, its a meta unit, its in every, single competitive game AND it arrives before PPSH as well.
You can close your eyes all you want, it won't make it disappear.
It might be a shocker to some of theorycrafters here, but game is not a set of 1v1s non microed units on a flat map with stripes painted on it.
This "Theorycrafting flat map" thing seems to be what you're doing. The contention we're making is that Pgrens and Spios not being mainlines means that you're not going to have having to fight them anywhere near as often with your PPSH cons. There are other infantry targets for them to go after. such as the aformentioned Grens and Volks.
It's you that's making the assumption that, in the case of Spios particularly, they will be literally everywhere at once, and you won't be able to avoid fighting them at all.
I'm not sure why you find that disagreeable. |
|
The suggestion appears not to be to "Remove airstrikes and artillery bombardments from the game", but to instead merely replace them in doctrines that have them (And are too strong as a result) and the place them in other doctrines as a way to bring their power up to have more parity.
The idea that he's advocating just totally scrapping abilities isnt what he means, clearly.
Though some abilities DO need to be totally scrapped, like Rapid Conscription and Relief Infantry. |
Does not matter, worth the wipe.
PWerfer is good because if your opponent does not realize what is going on withing the first seconds, it's a guaranteed hit.
Grens are more likely to retreat with Conscripts up close anyway, plus Katy does not burst as much. Still works though. Point is that you take a bad fight on purpose to fool your opponent into not retreating
The Katyusha is better for that sort of thing than the Pwerfer, honestly. The Katyusha (Especially close) has a far faster time-on-target for the initial burst of damage than the Werfer. |
|
Regarding Spios and Pgrens, neither of those are mainlines. Particularly not Spios.
I realise someone else has already mentioned this, but I think it's worth reiterating. |
Actually, higher damage is. Detriment to an Mg. Look at the vickers whom notoriously bursts down models. This leads to requiring a target and slowing down pin rate
It has advantages too, like units in buildings and light cars ect but all in all more damage seems to be counter to the primary role of MGs
As Elchino7 has said, this idea that the Vickers does "Lots of damage" is due to it's low suppression. At least according to Stein's chart it does less damage than the HMG42, it's just that it's low suppression means it kills a model before it manages to suppress (Which reduces damage by half)
Reducing it's damage would not strictly be a "buff", it would be a nerf that "fixes" a somewhat unintended side effect.
I mean, the counter to MGs isn't to run squads full of low HP models at them, hoping the delay between killing them will prevent it suppressing you in time, after all. |
It's important to remember here that the heavy cover 0.5 damage reduction does not fully work against tank AOE (or other heavy weapon AOE) because they deal 160-240 damage. 50% of which is still a OHK for infantry models. So at close AOE range they will generally still be lethal (OHK) or close to lethal even when firing against heavy cover. It obviously also won't affect AOE damage (or rather it affects it negatively) when the squad happens to be on the wrong side of cover.
I agree, but i'd word it as "The heavy cover DR isnt as meaningful as it seems" rather than "Doesnt fully work". It still cuts damage in half, it's just that Tank shells do so much damage that in the OHKO zone this is irrelevant. It DOES however reduce the size of the OHKO zone, assuming that damage doesn't drop directly from 160/240 to 79 between the closest damage interval and the next. I don't know the exact curves of various shells though.
I think it's still good to be behind heavy cover. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
