Profile of elchino7

Again, factically wrong. Its called conditional probability. You assumed JLI have grenades and that only happens when a player has chosen a JLI AND a assault grenade commander, each being 2/7 of the OKM commander pool.
The chance for OKM to have grenade JLI from a raw pick is (2/7)(2/7)= 8%
That is way too low to consider them having nades...

Before i get a stroke, at most you could say it's a 33% chance to see them. You can actually look at the loadout of people before a match. But because commander selection is not RNG, you can deduce whether or not you would see them depending on your own picks and map.


Ontopic: the problem with JLI is that they are overbloated with abilities/passives. I don't think the RA is the biggest issue.

-In fact you are wrong about Guards been the "best" with on the move dmg ratio profile. That still belongs to the G43 upgrade for either faction.


-M3A3 rear gun should be doing more damage than the front one.

-IF all vehicle weapon stats are parsed correctly, there are several inconsistencies regarding the "damage all in hold". When set to true, a vehicle hitting a garrison should do it's far damage to all models despite the location the shell is hitting.

For example: JT/ELE/Su76/Su85 are set to false. All other type of TD and tank hunters are set to true (Stug-G, JPIV, Jackson, M10, PV, Puma, Firefly, Aec, etc.)
For normal tanks, i think PIV for some reason is set to false.

-Several inconsistencies regarding friendly fire for similar caliber or type of weapon.


Several inconsistencies regarding different weapons damage against cover.
-Pios and RE SMGs are the only small arm weapons with a different profile against garrison for no apparent reason (which i can remember justified in any dev comment or patch notes). This does not count IR STGs.
-All infantry based flamethrowers deal extra damage against heavy cover n garrison. Vehicle based ones only do it against garrison. FHT does no bonus dmg (probably part of the balance changes done accounting it has 2 of them). Grenade flame ones only do it against garrison as well.
-USF Pack Howitzer is a strange one. The barrage has a modifier against light cover (0.9) doing less damage but it has a normal dmg against garrison. Auto attack has normal damage against light, but reduced damage against garrison (0.35)
-Centaur who doesn't care about light cover.

no 1 doc doesn't change anything the average is still 4, for allied is 5 even for call in units

With the amount of people playing OKW and skipping OH, it's closer to 5

Incremental accuracy (and why not add incremental suppression) should work based on number of squads in the arc of fire on an MG and not based on models. Then you could bump it up and adjust it without fearing that an MG performs differently if it's facing 4 model Infantry sections or 6 models Conscripts.

Small sample size

Final offtopic from me.

You can try, guess and do whatever test you want. That won't change how the game is coded.
Because it seems math is hard.

IF:
16 x 0.598 x 0.2365 = 2.263
16 x (0.598 x 0.5) x 0.2365 = 1.131
(16 x 0.5) x (0.598 x 0.5) x 0.2365 = 0.566

That's the DPS done for a Gren's Kar98 at 35 range against 1.0 RA model. Guess what's the correlations between the different colour values.
Little hint, each colour represents how the weapon behaves against cover.


Also, i feel like someone should jump here at this point to explain you guys how statistics work. It's like talking with people who believes the earth is flat or vaccines are bad.

Can we come back to Cons now?

Show Spoiler

^What i said before.

-Nerf STG Volks, 2x BAR rifles, 2x Bren IS.
-Shift some power from Penals to Conscripts. Make Molos come for free, make PTRS require AT nade research.
-Replacing Molotov slot and similar cost, after T3 is made they have an upgrade mutually exclusive with both PPSH or PTRS which replaces 3 Cons mosins for 3 Guards Mosins and reinforce cost is reduced by 1mp for each tier built.

Cons/Guards DPS for 0/20/35

3.614/1.984/1.060
4.734/2.569/1.423