Profile of elchino7

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

General Information
Steam: 76561198076231535


Thread: The maxim thread5 Nov 2020, 20:21 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Nov 2020, 20:09 PMgbem yes but if MG1 has the same DPS as MG2 but has less suppression the fact that its doing "less damage" is a disadvantage as opposed to an advantage in this case... You don't get it. If 2 units have equal DPS, the unit doing less suppression will do more dmg. MG "A" does 1 DPS MG "B" does 1 DPS. MG "A" suppresses in 1s MG "B" suppresses in 4s Both shoot for 4s. MG A does 2.5 dmg over 4s. (1 + 0.5x3) MG B does 4.0 dmg over 4s. "A" is clearly better, even though it's doing less dmg with the same DPS. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Lack of friendly fire5 Nov 2020, 20:13 PM There is basically no reason, just not enough physical man power to correct all abilities of similar units to perform equally. Consistency is not a CoH2 strength. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OST clubbing UKF like a baby seal5 Nov 2020, 20:12 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Nov 2020, 15:27 PMSander93 I'm not sure if the cover bonus is applied first before the object is destroyed by the same shot. I do know that when cover is destroyed (by something else) the cover bonus is removed pretty much immediately. It has happened to me that I held a squad in heavy cover behind a truck to take -50% damage from a grenade before retreating when the truck got destroyed by an ATG shot a millisecond before the grenade detonated, which made the squad take full damage. I think i'll do some tests later, but i think i have a couple of scenarios in my mind. Grenade goes over cover, cover is destroyed by grenade. G goes inside multi directional cover, cover is changed to light. G goes over no cover but squad moves perpendicular into cover In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The maxim thread5 Nov 2020, 20:04 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Nov 2020, 18:11 PMgbem thats a terrible argument though... DPS isnt the primary job of MGs its suppression Read again, i'm not describing an argument. Just stating a fact. When a unit takes longer to suppress, the damage is not cut down in half. That doesn't mean it's good for an MG to be doing dmg as opposed to be suppressing. Which is why i said most MGs have similar DPS though the performance in how much dmg they do in avg varies. Jump back to quoted post5 Nov 2020, 16:00 PMVipper That sound about right but the Dshk has ridiculously high close DPS once vetted, generally speaking there are differences in DPS with veterancy (Dhsk has around double the DPS of Hmg42). That's an exaggeration. Unfortunately serealia does a poor job at taking into account vet weapon profiles or it's missing several non main weapon such as grenades. Unless you were comparing vet 0 MG42 vs vet 3 Dhska the DPS discrepancy is nowhere near close. If the guide is correct, they have equal vet values outside of vet 1. The difference between DHska and MG42 is between 25% at the far ranges and then floating between around 35% to 45% In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OST clubbing UKF like a baby seal5 Nov 2020, 15:16 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Nov 2020, 10:36 AMSander93 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 should know this but does cover applies even if it gets destroyed or transformed into light at the moment of impact? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The maxim thread5 Nov 2020, 15:10 PM MGs which fail to suppress quickly end up been doing more damage. I think the difference in DPS ends up been minimal with only the MG34 on the lower end and the Dhska on the higher end. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OST clubbing UKF like a baby seal3 Nov 2020, 21:12 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2020, 17:22 PMJibberJabberJobber Ye, it feels stronger than it was before against units in the open. Also gets used constantly by pretty much everyone now, so I wouldn't call it a nerf. I'm not sure how it's calculated, the answer lies somewhere here (functions at the bottom): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7gwy65JLbSRMEJ3M2ZPandMMW8/view I assume the AoE score is some kind of representation of the average damage done to the center point the weapon is aiming at, if taking into account the AoE and scatter profile. I'm more concerned that a higher near damage might inflate the AoE score, while it wouldn't help much against infantry. That's why it's probably better to only compare units with above 80 near damage with units that have the same near damage. Ye, and the better scatter. OHK radius is overrated anyway. 1 n 2: You got the point. What i'm trying to say that the value per se is not good as long as you don't compare units which have similar damage profiles. On it's own the AoE value has no intrinsic merit. That's why i made the comparison between a single mortar round vs a single Zis shell. They both have 80 dmg but completely different damage profiles. 3- I think you are confusing the patches. Zis gun saw extreme use and deem OP when they move cost to 35 from 60 when reducing the amount of shells from 6 to 4 (on top of the pop reduce). It was basically lobbing grenades (lethal AoE) from 60 range. The nerf was a bandaid cause it still lobbing pseudo mortar shells for 35 muni and still lethal and leaves almost no reaction time for support weapon if used in pairs. 4- Same as point 1. 5- 0HK is simple another metric. I mean, mortar meta was killed the moment they no longer 0HK models. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OST clubbing UKF like a baby seal3 Nov 2020, 16:30 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Nov 2020, 14:04 PMJibberJabberJobber I always look at Cruzz's AoE score on his dps sheet as a quick and dirty way to check how good an AoE weapon is against infantry. I take it at face value, because it's usually in-line with my own experience, altough I have no idea what the exact calculation behind it is. I only know it takes all AoE damage values and scatter values into account, but not accuracy and reload time. I think it can be kinda misleading. It's better to understand how to read AoE profiles than rely on that number. Why? Well, i'll start with a simple question. What do you think it's more lethal. A normal mortar round or a Zis barrage round ? The AoE chart gives the mortar a better value, but that's only because the mid to far AoE damage is better. Now, do you think the the pre nerf Zis barrage was roughly 40% worse than the current one even though it was nerfed? Mid to far dmg masquerades the AoE value. If i were to give a weapon with a huge AoE radius an improvement on the far damage from say 5 to 10, the AoE value will rise drastically. Even though we both can agree it's pretty much negligible. If you were to cut down the dmg of a grenade in near dmg by 2, the effects are great even though the change is minimal. The reason why the Comet is far better than the T85 while having a smaller 0HK is due to the far damage not been meaningless at 32 vs 8. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The maxim thread2 Nov 2020, 03:24 AM Next time just report and move on. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The maxim thread31 Oct 2020, 22:44 PM Jump back to quoted post31 Oct 2020, 17:20 PMGachiGasm Well 50cal has same problem, but in lesser extend, I dont think honestly its a deliberate feature, but even if it was, it was made for old maxim which is long gone. Honeslty some of pro-modders should comment on this in one final statement. Because coh2 mod tools is a mess, and a lot of people think something is possible\impossible to fix, me included. Because it might possible to fix, or think of a gimmic to fix it. 50cal has a different timing which makes it "impossible" to spam and it also has really good stats which offset the possibility of any kind of deathloop from frontal assaults. You could ask directly but (IIRC) Mirage, Sander, Smith, Janne, etc. have at some point or another tried to tackle the issue and was prompt with a negative response from part of Relic or themselves. Jump back to quoted post31 Oct 2020, 17:51 PMPip Really? I'd be interested to hear what WFA changed exactly that precluded female partisans, was there some animation system change, or was some functionality/animation removed? Genuinely quite interested in a history lesson, if you can find the time. Also: Regarding MGs; I think, really, in the same way that AT guns arent supposed to directly slug it out with tanks, MGs weren't really intended to directly "fight" infantry. They significantly outrange them for a reason, after all. I guess this doesn't really work in practice, though. I wonder if MG teams will change in functionality at all for CoH3(if that ever arrives) or if they'll just do away with deathloops entirely (or at least standardise them) Also: GachiGasm: The agreement seems to be that the only way to really fix deathloop issues would be to give Soviets/USF an MG42/34/vickers model with different stats. That isn't going to happen. It'd be great if someone found a hacky workaround that slipped others' minds (Or Lelic would just let the balance team fuck around with the animations/underlying code just this once), but it's all seeming unlikely. Limiting harm is seemingly the most that can be done. I think it was a problem of not having the proper animations for either recrewing support weapons or pick up dropped weapons which defaulted in many T position or simil, models. MG: the difference is lethality compared to AT guns vs Tanks relationship. After 5s a medium tank can almost be at 50% HP. Infantry behind cover can slug it out with MGs for quite a long time or render them ineffective if they have enough DPS. It might be by design, but vetted units fair way too well against MG, because the crew doesn't get RA to offset the natural gain most infantry squads get at either vet 2 or vet 3. In: COH2 Balance