Login

russian armor

Raketens should lose their received accuracy bonus

PAGES (7)down
5 May 2020, 08:21 AM
#61
avatar of 12ozMouse

Posts: 32

5 May 2020, 08:23 AM
#62
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8


What?


No.
Gun.
Shield.
5 May 2020, 14:51 PM
#63
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


What?


All other At guns are big enough that the hitbox blocks shots.

The AT gun itself is an entity which provides heavy cover, but the crew who is not operating the weapon generally doesn't take cover on it (due to formation and to avoid 1 shot wipes) and the guys who operate them benefit from it in irregular intervals depending at which side the weapon is aiming and from where it is getting shot at.
5 May 2020, 15:17 PM
#64
avatar of strafniki

Posts: 558 | Subs: 1




It has 4.0 AOE compared to 2.5 on the P4.


pz4 still deals way more often magical oneshot wipes to me, than my sherman in reverse.. its just my own experience
5 May 2020, 17:21 PM
#65
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

Medium tanks are not a counter to AT guns

I don't know why people are using the Sherman as a counter, even the Scott struggles vs ATGs and one mistake and you're up in flames.

Sherman is not a brumbar or AVRE

You'll realize sooner or later that it's because sherman's and Scott's have good mobility and weapon profiles to kill infantry that makes them viable to kill ATG (no one ever said they counter their counter, that's BS) same as HMGs and assault squads.
5 May 2020, 19:17 PM
#66
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

No please.
Last "nerf" was what ended up like this, nerf next is gonna cost 300 MP but have 6 man, 60 range and get some damage reduction nonsense, to avoid mortars and grenades from killing the models crewing the gun in one shot or something.
5 May 2020, 19:26 PM
#67
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

No please.
Last "nerf" was what ended up like this, nerf next is gonna cost 300 MP but have 6 man, 60 range and get some damage reduction nonsense, to avoid mortars and grenades from killing the models crewing the gun in one shot or something.


Axis OP
23 May 2020, 22:21 PM
#68
avatar of 12ozMouse

Posts: 32



All other At guns are big enough that the hitbox blocks shots.

The AT gun itself is an entity which provides heavy cover, but the crew who is not operating the weapon generally doesn't take cover on it (due to formation and to avoid 1 shot wipes) and the guys who operate them benefit from it in irregular intervals depending at which side the weapon is aiming and from where it is getting shot at.

Proof?
24 May 2020, 00:02 AM
#69
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

I don't wanna talk about Poltawa. Delete it.

Poltava, Road to Kharkov, Rails and Metal, etc. I agree on the issue with Shadowlink... and telling someone to counter ATG with a medium tank is...
Calliopes also have bad veterancy and take long to vet too and have long cooldown because of that.
24 May 2020, 00:17 AM
#70
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

This change would mostly effect mediocre players who get their AT guns over run. The rak is really survivable in low-level, large-team play due the the "panic button" that is retreat, the lack of flanking options, and the lack of players who can execute said flank. Other AT guns are a guaranteed de-crew if the player doesn't back it up fast enough, which is the norm at that specific kind of play.

Increasing the Received Accuracy of the crew outright would decrease the forgiveness of letting a rack get caught out. This would also ONLY effect small arms vs the rak. This increases bleed, increases chance of decrew, increases damage from MGs, but DOESN'T change results vs tank (unless that tank has good MGs and is on top of the rak, where it SHOULD bleed like crazy).
24 May 2020, 00:47 AM
#71
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

A quick check shows all retreatable team weapons are 1.25 Target Size. Moving the Rak to that would make it equally punishable as other retreating team weapons.
24 May 2020, 00:57 AM
#72
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474


Proof?
sander did the test, he ask him
24 May 2020, 02:32 AM
#73
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


Proof?


sander did the test, he ask him


I did the test, what i found is that it's unreliable.

Load a custom games with cheatcommands and make any AT gun be with 2 models only. Now, you can start by making it aim from left to right and you will see the cover indicator disappears depending on the angle and the type of AT gun.

If this is the case it means that one of the models has no cover whatsoever.

Now, EVEN if the cover appears to be been granted, i can with 100% accuracy kill a 2 model AT gun with a Rifle grenade from any side of it's arc when on neutral position (aiming dead center). At least with a pak40 (same thing happens with all other AT guns but it might change a little bit).

In this case if you are towards the left, center or slightly center right, if you aim towards the left model you can kill it 100% of the time. From center right, to right of the arc of the AT gun, you aim towards the right model.

This is so specific because the Rifle grenade has a smaller AoE. In the case of normal grenades or bundle nades, they have enough AoE that even if you aim dead center frontally you will decrew them.

If both models would be benefiting from heavy cover, you wouldn't be able to kill them as either grenade does 40 or 60 dmg.
24 May 2020, 05:08 AM
#74
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486





I did the test, what i found is that it's unreliable.

Load a custom games with cheatcommands and make any AT gun be with 2 models only. Now, you can start by making it aim from left to right and you will see the cover indicator disappears depending on the angle and the type of AT gun.

If this is the case it means that one of the models has no cover whatsoever.

Now, EVEN if the cover appears to be been granted, i can with 100% accuracy kill a 2 model AT gun with a Rifle grenade from any side of it's arc when on neutral position (aiming dead center). At least with a pak40 (same thing happens with all other AT guns but it might change a little bit).

In this case if you are towards the left, center or slightly center right, if you aim towards the left model you can kill it 100% of the time. From center right, to right of the arc of the AT gun, you aim towards the right model.



This is so specific because the Rifle grenade has a smaller AoE. In the case of normal grenades or bundle nades, they have enough AoE that even if you aim dead center frontally you will decrew them.

If both models would be benefiting from heavy cover, you wouldn't be able to kill them as either grenade does 40 or 60 dmg.


Probably implemented like how Tanks become cover when stopped. Incredibly inconsistent, and to be ignored.
24 May 2020, 11:02 AM
#75
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



,,,,
https://www.coh2.org/topic/103793/why-does-rak-need-retreat/post/803735

It's not to be ignored cause "aAXISSS OPPP 11!!1!"
25 May 2020, 00:32 AM
#77
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

https://www.coh2.org/topic/103793/why-does-rak-need-retreat/post/803735

It's not to be ignored cause "aAXISSS OPPP 11!!1!"


Just to note, i tested it again before posting it. I didn't check what happens when the cover icon disappears completely but in a normal scenario it looks like always 1 of the 2 models doesn't benefit from cover.
25 May 2020, 06:36 AM
#78
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3596 | Subs: 1

I don't know why this topic turned into tank vs atgun while my initial point was about rewarding flanking with infantry.

Flanking any other atgun ends up by decrewing it. Why the raketen should be different? Because it has 5 less range than other atgun? It doesn't make sense, it already has 5 crew members and I'm not against the retreat button but the bonus it provides.

Retreat in time and you should save it, get flanked and lose it. This statement should be true for any atgun.
25 May 2020, 07:21 AM
#79
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

jump backJump back to quoted post25 May 2020, 06:36 AMEsxile
I don't know why this topic turned into tank vs atgun while my initial point was about rewarding flanking with infantry.

Flanking any other atgun ends up by decrewing it. Why the raketen should be different? Because it has 5 less range than other atgun? It doesn't make sense, it already has 5 crew members and I'm not against the retreat button but the bonus it provides.

Retreat in time and you should save it, get flanked and lose it. This statement should be true for any atgun.

U're right, especially give its price. If it cost 320, like other at guns, it probably should be as it is. But the 5 (or 10?) less range and the retreat mechanism plus 5 men crew shouldn;t be cheaper than regular non retreatable at gun. (USF at gun is also too cheap btw imo). I'd say that either what you write or just make it more expensive (better option imo).
25 May 2020, 08:58 AM
#80
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486


U're right, especially give its price. If it cost 320, like other at guns, it probably should be as it is. But the 5 (or 10?) less range and the retreat mechanism plus 5 men crew shouldn;t be cheaper than regular non retreatable at gun. (USF at gun is also too cheap btw imo). I'd say that either what you write or just make it more expensive (better option imo).

As mentioned, the solution to other retreatable team weapons is just increase base RA to 1.25. That fixes all the issues.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 0

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

426 users are online: 2 members and 424 guests
Snack_Master, Protos Angelus
5 posts in the last 24h
31 posts in the last week
85 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44637
Welcome our newest member, tridevambulance
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM