|
Yeah, cant find it anymore, was hoping to catch the 24h stream and all. What happened, is it coming back? |
|
Well, if the bunkers are in fact broken as stated, I.e. models wont fire out of it, then a fix for that would be enough I think.
I would like to see costs shifted to say 75-100mp for base bunker and 50-75mp & whatever munitions cost is currently there for the upgrade. |
|
+1, bug fix, faster.
For my part, not line deployment, too much of a 1 click counter to too many things. |
Seriously awesome to see this thread still going! Great work CasTroy.  |
|
Hey guys, I was thinking of getting the Ardennes campaign, cant find any dlc on steam with just that though, seems to be bundled with WFA. Anyone got a good tip for this? |
Hello all.
I'm trying to find and view the critical tables, in essence, the chances of scoring different types of Criticals on different health bands for the target types Infantry_Critical, Soldier_Critical, Heroic_Critical.
I've got "Corsix Studio" and have been learning it slowly.
Can anyone help me by either explaining how I find these and view them in Corsix, or direct me to some link, document or anything like that.
Thank you all in advance for any help |
|
This thread fills me with much sadness, for many reasons.
Relic really does seem to try, they try to improve, they try to communicate, they try to please and meet demands. Many of the changes to date (dlcs etc) demonstrate this. Their heart seems to be in the right place.
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, they don't get it right. Either their timing is off, or their execution falls way short. There are real and present issues here, worthy of discussion and notice. It might be that they are understaffed, trapped by bad/rigid clauses in various agreements (with employees that they can't fire or reassign) they may be lacking the funding they need. More than this though, relic seems to lack flexibility and a unified vision to work towards. The most pressing issues are definitely on the organisational, staffing and priority level. A lot of this might be to do with Sega.
Another pressing issue is community. With a mindset like this community has, no amount of change or trying hard will result in the positive momentum relic needs. This is on us. Inverse has a great point regarding the general balance know how around the forums. 95% of all threads throw around unsubstantiated hyperbole. When actual figures and maths on the stats are introduced and nuances presented that contradicts the common "gripe of the month" it's ignored or drowned in a sea of stupidity. What we can do then to aid the situation is to present issues in a measured way with facts and numbers to back us up without superfluous negativity. I deeply sympathise with anyone working at relic actually giving their all to make a difference, faced with a wall of ... Us. |
|
I agree about call in meta, it has to change. I'm hesitant about tying it to structures though.
The best (and simplest) way to go about it without a complete reworking of how the callins function is to significantly raise the cp requirement to match intended role. Super heavies coming very late indeed, dominating heavy/mediums (t34/85, e8) coming late and the designed "medium counters" coming a little later than intended targets. This would punish simply waiting.
I am very much for making all dual tank callins single callins.
I also really like the upgrade 76 to 85 idea, but that is in the complete rework category. |
|
This is a tricky question I think. Personally I believe that no commanders should be banned in tournaments except temporarily if clearly broken (old elite troops with tiger ace for example).
Assault support Opel blitz was likely corrected because it benefited both the OH player and the OKW player equally with no real downside. This is clearly not the case here. I like team games precisely because several commanders and strategies are viable that are never used 1v1. The fast KT leaves the axis mp starved for the early game and should be easily recognizable, foregoing standard AA trucks and the like should leave the allies able to respond with several ATGs after a dominating early game.
There is also the "sliding slope" to consider. Where does this thinking go next? Soviet industry too powerful? Abandoning of us tanks allowing an otherwise support focused ussr partner quick vehicles? Not saying that either of these are necessarily a problem, simply providing possible examples.
I for one am for anything that moves away from the "tiger is the only doctrine to use" meta. |
|
Slightly dissapointed in some of the usually excellent posters contributions in this thread. Lets try not to be so very one dimensional and take a closer look.
Edit: Due to the differences in stats between OKW and OstH panthers, with the former being much better, the following mostly applies to the osth version.
Lets first establish what the test does show: A panther fighting at close range with most allied tanks is mediocre at best. If caught close in any situation, whether due to mines, suprise, stun shots from other abilities and the like it is in a lot of trouble. Even if it tries to escape, most allied tanks keep pace and the best the Panther can hope for is both shooting at each others rear armor. In which case the test shows the results.
The test does, as was quickly pointed out, not show the Panther used at range, moving, or used against units with a relative equal cost until aquisition. What this means is;
- The Panthers higher penetration at all ranges would mean an advantage at long range.
- Very bad accuracy even while standing still is not represented in these point blank engagements, an accuracy issue that due to scatter modifiers is worse the farther away the panther is. As has been pointed out a straight "hit" is always a hit. As stated by Pqumsieh in an instructional video (which I fail to find at the moment) most tank vs tank "hits" are actually scatters hitting the target size box. Should the Panther be forced to move for some reason, such as trying to kill anything which is backing away when hit by a stationary panther at long range, this already bad accuracy becomes even worse (0,5).
-When paired against likely opposition within the Panthers arrival timing window, most battles depicted would be fought with two of any variety of allied medium tank vs the one Panther. The highly RNG based nature of armor penetration and the evidently low percentage of HP retained in any 1v1 fight renders Panthers unlikely to be very successful in any of these larger engagements.
- At least two allied tanks are not shown at their best either, most notably the M10 and the Jackson. The Jacksons higher range and lower scatter paired with very good penetration and damage gives it a clear edge at range. The M10 on the other hand sports faster speed, much better acceleration and therefore mobility along with faster turret rotation. The classical "turret turnabout strafe" is not an impossible scenario when cost is taken into account.
So, despite the satirical (I assume the video was meant as demonstrational satire) presentation, the video does paint a picture of a mediocre panther for cost no matter how one turns the issue.
Of course, under optimal circumstances given scopes, commanders or forward spotters not under fire, while sitting still versus opponents kind enough to do the same at a range beneficial to the Panther the tank shines if given enough time. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
