|
Oh what a day. What a lovely day! |
|
Didn't Price lose miserably on Sunday with engie spam 'abuse'?
Their reinforce cost is a little low, sure, but it's a non-issue overall. You can still punish a Brit player hard for an infantry heavy build. |
|
Another _________ Remastered from the golden days of strategy games. It used to be outdated and 2d, but it won't be 2d anymore! |
Well, we will see if the average Axis win ratio reverse. I promise to switch side and defend Axis if that happen.
I just want to play fun and fair 4vs4 matches.
Sorry for the glib thing, unfortunately french is my main langage... i'm just trying to be polite here.
thanks.
4v4 has a slight Axis favor but 3v3 looks pretty even to me. |
|
Too soon. |
Oh, I went full retard. As I read your commentary I had this vision of me drooling on the keyboard while making fart sounds, thinking 'till the brain burns itself out. Forgive me, but it was around 9:00 and I was still waking up.
Oh I fully understand. I shun anything more complex than a toothbrush before 10am and my first 2 cups of coffee. |
I love these abbreviations - in the sense that, not being from North America or Europe, they don't make any sense.
I just googled the meaning of all these, so, if you're a poor soul form Latin America:
PST: Pacific Standard Time = GMT -8 hours
CET: Central Europe Time = GMT +1 hour
Brazilia Time = GMT -3 hours
As I write, the patch should be already been launched 
You obviously don't understand what GMT -8 means if you think it should already be launched.
|
You have your analysis mostly, right.
However, when calculating averages you shouldn't be rounding numbers (neither up or down). The fact that it takes 7.35 shots per average to kill a Comet doesn't mean it takes 7 or 8 shots to kill it. We only know it takes at minimum 5 shots to kill it; that's the only certainty. Everything else is pure RNG and the average gives us an idea about where we are going to be.
Regardless. Let's move to another example, where the Churchill truly shines; the Panzerschreck. Could you repeat your analysis on this one? (it's trickier, since the Panzerschreck also deals damage on non-penetrating hits).
Panzerschreck
Penetration: 170
Damage on Penetration: 120
Damage on Deflection (when not penetrating): 30
You will see why I have been so insistent in pointing out that trading Armour off for an increased HP pool is actually a very generous deal for the Churchill (except for awarded Veterancy).
The only correct way to evaluate the Churchill vs Comet impact would be to look at their average efficiency in-game.
Tanks are not a function of armor and health only. Even if you're looking strictly at survivability, you'd have to consider speed, acceleration, turn rate, size, abilities, etc.
|
Just to make absolutely sure I'm not being misinterpreted.
1) Currently (with bugged Anvil & Vet-Piñata Churchill), there is absolutely no reason to go for Anvil (ok, maybe repair speed for teamgames). This is a no-brainer.
2) With fixed Anvil &-Vet Piñata Churchill there will be good incentives to go for Anvil (the abilities I listed). However, Anvil Churchill will still be doing more harm than good if fielded.
3) With fixed Anvil & Reduced-Vet Churchill (the proposed change), Anvil will be at least as viable as #2. It will also be possible to field a Churchill without shooting yourself in the foot (in my opinion).
I expect that we will soon get to state #2 (fixed bugs, someday). However, I foresee an issue that is already present (Vet Piñata) which will remain present. Thus, I am campaigning for option #3 here.
Going Anvil does not mean that you HAVE to field a Churchill. However, with the proposed change, it will become VIABLE to field a Churchill in certain situations (doesn't have to be ALL situations -- doesn't have to be the first tank you rush, either).
1. I disagree with your proposed change because it would introduce special rules that aren't easily maintained or intuitive to understand. I think Relic simply made an error in calculating its cost/efficiency and it needs a straight up buff.
2. Even after fixing all bugs, there's no reason to build a Churchill over a Cromwell. It fails as a damage sponge, a defensive unit and it fails as a spearhead unit. |
|
I would go even further and say that aside from the Hammer Vs Anvil debate, I would pick a Cromwell over a Churchill any day.
If the Churchill maintains its current speed and acceleration, it needs more armor.
If it maintains its current armor, it needs more speed and acceleration.
|
0
Strategos
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
