Profile of Cruzz

If I got this correctly, the targeting circle values for Katyusha are under fatality_katyusha_rockets, and the radius of the reticule is 20.

Fatality is for the end of game fatality abilities that hit your opponents base.

abilities\soviet\modal_ability\artillery\artillery_barrage_ability\kaytusha_rocket_truck_barrage_mp
&&
abilities\soviet\modal_ability\artillery\artillery_barrage_ability\kaytusha_rocket_truck_barrage_vet3_mp

The regular barrage has an UI Radius from min 8.33 to 22.5 max (range 50-150)
Weapon stats:
Range min 50 max 150 (200 on weapon because it's also reused for the 200 range vet3 barrage)
Angle 10
Distance max 15
Ratio 0.1667

Angular scatter estimate as in first post: 5 - 15 (50*0.1 150*0.1)
Actual(?) angular scatter: 4.37 - 13 (distance/tan(90-angle/2))
Distance scatter: 8.33 - 15 (50*0.1667 150*0.1667 > 15)

So the Katyusha reticule overestimates angular (horizontal) scatter at all ranges. Error on distance scatter isn't as bad.

While testing this stuff it definitely feels like the explanation for offset in the mod tools is completely wrong. I always expected the hit area to be a half circle at 1 based on that, but instead it seems the offset just moves the entire possible hit area forward (or backward with a negative value). With a value of 1 all targeting is now centered around what used to be the edge of the old scatter area.

Suxton and its 0.3 offset after around 40 rounds or so:
Show Spoiler



Light red circle is ingame UI reticule circle. Light green ellipsoid part is calculated scatter centered around the targeting circle. Blue ellipsoid overlayed on top is an offset moving the entire targeting area forward. Ignoring height differences, no rounds will ever hit in the light green or light red areas, everything will hit in the area overlayed by blue (so dark green+blue+purple areas).

However, what happens when you only focus your fire on only one squad, and a model from that squad dies? Does aiming at another model from the same squad also count as "switching targets" (and thus, gets the ready aim penalty), or not?

No, it's only when switching to a different squad.

Is the following way the correct way to calculate damage?

If the distance from impact is:
- Between 0 and 1.5 (near distance): damage = 80 (base damage; no modifier)
- Between 1.5 and 3: damage = 80 * 1 (near-distance profile) = 80
- Between 3 and 4.5: damage = 80 * 0.5 (mid-distance profile) = 40
- Between 4.5 and 6: damage = 80 * 0.3 (far-distance profile) = 24

(I used to think that the AoE would deal no damage further than the AoE far distance value. However, the AEC debacle proved me wrong - the patch only touched the radius; not the distance profiles)

Multipliers will be adjusted linearly as distance changes. In your example, the damage multiplier at range 3.5 would be:

(0.5-(0.5-0.3)*(3.5-3)/(4.5-3)) = 0.4333

Damage between far distance and the radius, and 0 and near distance are constants.

Actual damage calculations will still need cover multipliers added onto them.

Then there's the massively overengineered garrisonable building damage question which I don't have a clue how to calculate, so many things to take into account.

wait what if shocktroops are 2 pop per man then they are back to 10 from 0..?? and does the m1 garand really does have this crazy damage or theres some catch.also cruzz what are the exact stats on vailant assault ( does it only makes them sprint like before)...also is concenttraion barrage and diabliling arty does still givs no red smoke and requires no los..??? any changes to rest popcaps can you maybe make a list for current popcap for all units with total and per man also its getting really confusing now...?? and last was zeroing arty ninja nerfed becasue it performs way worse than the wfa launch as far i can tell i did not see any nerf in official forums..?? thx in advance

No, that list was for the original popcap changes in December 4 with me removing the ones I knew had already changed without checking, I really don't have the time or motivation to constantly check the patches so I don't know how many of those changes are still left.

Valiant Assault is +25% accuracy and +1 posture speed for all infantry.

No I won't make a popcap list, too much work now that relic has spread all the popcap costs everywhere in the files.

3)the upgrade increase range to 40
4) Even if one does the comparison (and he should not), he will see that contrary to lmg upgrade for infantry that replace a weapon this upgrade add a new weapon. For instance LMg42 for grenadiers increase the DPS of the squad by: 2% to 77% (according to range)
The UC upgrade increases the DPS of the unit from :302% to 60% so it vastly superior.
5)In comparing the DPS of the DP-28 and vickers he is also wrong because:
Vicker is 416% 231% 116% 36% 9% better than a DP-28.

If one wanted to actually do a comparison, that made sense, he should have to compare it with turret mounted upgrade. Even then vickers compared to PZ4 wer is 41% 35% 30% 46% 66% better.

To sum up even though UC might not be a good unit that is not due to the HMg upgrade, the UC vickers upgrade, contrary to a very misleading comment is probably one of the most cost efficient upgrades.

The vickers upgrade doesn't increase the range of the unit, it's still 35.

I don't really have a clue what those percent numbers are supposed to be, but the UC vickers K upgrade really is horrible in terms of DPS. Surely you're not confusing it with the actual vickers HMG?

If volks schreks and gren super range panzerfausts didn't exist it would be a pretty good upgrade purely thanks to the suppression, but because both exist it's fairly useless.

NAME			                                NEAR     MID     FAR  
universal_carrier_bren_lmg_mp:                         7.98    10.487  11.649 
vickers_k_universal_carrier:                           5.09    4.974   4.203  

The British Tank Commander uses a received_experience_squad_multiplier modifier of 1.2 at the moment. Doesn't that increase the experience a squad receives?

It used to use an entity_veterancy_experience_multiplier of 0.8 as I recall. Was the change listed in the patchnotes?

Sorry, it's my mistake. They fixed it (without mentioning in patch notes of course) it in the October 29 patch apparently.