Profile of elchino7

TBH, most of the latest post are barely inconsistencies, in the sense that all those units are supposed to have different performances.

Mobility, popcap, accuracy, etc. If you think that is a balance issue, open a thread specifically about that.

Inconsistency would be, 2 EQUAL abilities having completely different performances even when they are meant to do the same and are acquired in similar fashion. You should also take into account the CONTEXT, if not, we would be listing the whole game which would dilute from ACTUALLY fixing things.

Ex: mark vehicle/target on vehicles across the board (after further thinking and comparing, this could be brought to equal level in same fashion as changing sprint + acc buffs abilities). Blitz/Combat blitz/Light vehicles overdrives. AP vs IR. HVAP vs AP rounds vs Heat shells. Etc.

Explaining it.
LMG Paras suppression is an ability acquired through purchasing the 1919s. Comparing to Obers suppressing ability is like comparing OKW volley grenade to say Assault grenadiers same abilitiy.

Hmmm. I guess it's a 50-50 between some guy who insists that everything USF is woefully underpowered and statistics mined from tens of thousands of games which generally corroborate top players' sentiments.



Credit: Siphon X

Outdated, specially when 2 major patches changed the meta completely.

This could be a really "oddball" conclusion but MAYBE this is the reason we had armor instead of received accuracy at the release of the game.

Units were not "harder" to hit but rather deflected some bullets damage. This meant that suppression would apply more evenly across cover and veterancy.

snip

You are really missing the point of the discussion.

It's not about formulating a equation which reveals what is the time required for a unit to actually kill a vehicle (which is easy to make) rather than DPS as a metric been pointless when using tank vs tank combat.

IF 2 infantry squads have X and Y value of DPS, it's easy to compare and analyse cause the amount of "rolls" and HP difference makes the whole RNG "fair". Tank combat is more binary and with less margin.

Yes, this is not SC2. Which is to analyse tank combat you add into the mix the % for penetration and accuracy into the mix. Accuracy been a bitch cause you can't really calculate scatter hit at all.
That been said, with TTK, you can easily add acc + pen into the variables as the only thing you are taking into account is how much more shots on average you are going to spend due to misses and fails on penetrations. If i have 75% acc and 50% pen, i can expect to increase the amount of shots required by that amount and then easily multiplied that value by the RoF of the weapon in question.


Another point: you are missing that most weapons have similar damage "calibers" and similar HP pools.

We don't have arbitrarily 17dmg on rifles and tanks doing 182 dmg per shot.
640HP is the magic number for mediums. Magic number for AT damage is 160dmg. Guess what, it requires 4 shots to kill a tank. Most changes on dmg and HP are done taking this 160, by either full, half or quarter values (320/400/560/720/800/960/1040/1280)

You just skip 1 cicle of reload, if you want move "math" to "real" you can make like that (if pen and accuracy is 100%):
(640-DMG per shot) / (DMG per Shot / Time of Reload)=TimeLife of Armor
(640-160) / (160 / 6) = 480/26,6 ~ 18,04 seconds

You can make any equation to accommodate the values you want, it doesn't mean that the variable is valuable at all to make comparisons with.
Specially when you have vehicles which can't either kill or die with no overkill dmg.

Let me make it more clear.

Unit A: deals 120dmg/6s = 20 dps
Unit B: deals 160dmg/8s = 20 dps

Now: how long does it take to kill a 640HP tank ?

B: 3 Reloads > 24s
A: 5 Reloads > 30s (26s on math)

Tank performance is not balanced around DPS but TTK (time to kill) in conjunction with acc + Pen.