Login

russian armor

The devs did it again... Buffed B4 into the heaven

PAGES (13)down
28 Jun 2021, 07:02 AM
#201
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1714

i am a fan of rng and progression

i am thinking

vet0 : 25% chance of suppression per shot
vet1 : 35%
vet2 : 45%
vet3 : 60%

i dont think it is hard to get b4 to vet3 now.
MMX
28 Jun 2021, 07:51 AM
#202
avatar of MMX

Posts: 877 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jun 2021, 07:02 AMmrgame2
i am a fan of rng and progression

i am thinking

vet0 : 25% chance of suppression per shot
vet1 : 35%
vet2 : 45%
vet3 : 60%

i dont think it is hard to get b4 to vet3 now.


"Progression" wouldn't be a bad idea i'd say, though I'd approach it differently. Let the B-4 start with zero suppression as well as substantially higher base cooldown (+15 to 30 s) at Vet 0 and allow it to regain suppression upon reaching Vet 2 or 3. Maybe a bit of cooldown reduction at higher vet levels would be fine as well to bring it closer to the current performance again if you manage to keep it alive. That way the B-4 can remain a very powerful and somewhat unique arty piece, while decrewing the weapon without outright destroying it becomes a bit more rewarding as well.
28 Jun 2021, 13:21 PM
#203
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 414 | Subs: 2

As many have already suggested, B4 feels like a straight up better ML20.

I think the old single shot barrage w/suppression coupled with the new direct fire is the way to go, and ML-20 be designed around slower firing but larger aoe (not necessarily as strong as new B4 barrage).

I second the notion that ML-20 be reworked to function similarly to new B4, although without suppression and a smaller fx/aoe to keep it distinct from LeFH and B4.

The ML20 smoke feels unnecessary and underwhelming. As far as historical theming goes, the B4 was actually forbidden to be used in the direct fire role (soldiers famously did it anyway). However, in Soviet military terminology, "Gun-Howitzers" (like ML-20) were howitzers that were also deemed suitable for direct fire roles. A weaker ISU-like direct fire (maybe 240dmg without worldpierce) would be awesome as new vet ability.
28 Jun 2021, 14:12 PM
#204
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5268



Someone clearly didn't play during the Pak Howie/ISG suppression patch. lol

I think it would be fine to remove the suppression on B4 and call it a day. Right now the the suppression is just a cherry on top on what is otherwise fine damage. I don't think anyone thinks current damage on the 3 shells is bad by any means so the supression isn't really needed.

In that patch AUTOFIRE had supression. So you had long range, auto tracking indirect supression. That's a lot different than barrage applied supression. In timing, in duration and in counter play.

I actually thing supression on late game indirect would do well
28 Jun 2021, 14:27 PM
#205
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3249 | Subs: 1


In that patch AUTOFIRE had supression. So you had long range, auto tracking indirect supression. That's a lot different than barrage applied supression. In timing, in duration and in counter play.

I actually thing supression on late game indirect would do well

Yeah I agree, and I think it's uniquely suited to the b4 due to the low number of shells

I'm not so sure about the other howies just cause their # of shells is so much higher that brings back memories of the autofire suppression

Add to the fact that people often get multiple lefh/ml20s in team games and it feels like there might be suppression everywhere again. If they were fully reworked I would like to see suppression as a part of that though, it just makes too much sense
Pip
28 Jun 2021, 14:34 PM
#206
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1555

Rather than removing suppression from artillery, I'd instead suggest improving their suppression abilities, while actually becoming less damaging. Additionally; grant each artillery piece unique support abilites on top of this. Smoke, WP barrages, the ability to place that yellow-cover granting smoke that UKF have in a doctrine, etc.

Make them all /significantly/ less vulnerable to callins on top of this, and potentially reduce their population cost, due to their reduced lethality.

I think they'd be more interesting as utility units, rather than the terribly binary "Obliterate infantry unopposed (no callins)/ Laughable waste of resources (you have a callin)".
1 Jul 2021, 15:29 PM
#207
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12403 | Subs: 1

Here's a questions for the community as people argue about the B-4 203mm;

1. Would you prefer it to be tuned in its current iteration with stat adjustments. 3 shots with lower damage over a period of time.

or

2. Revert it back to what it was. 1 high damage shot.

Tuning the cooldown and the maybe reducing/removing the suppression would likely be priority on question 1.

Imo what one should try to create a unique unit with unique abilities and game play instead of an ML-20 ver2.

There are many way to do that, thing that one can test:

Change the "wipe" machine design by adding a hard cap to entities killed

Remove suppression but add other critical like:
"shell shock" a debuff to entities that could effect accuracy/ROF
driver/loader/commander injured

Add different play style like direct AT/antibuilding fire

Experiment with reducing range but allowing the gun to dismantled and rebuild.
....

The aim should to create a unique with a unique design other than if get lucky I will wipe squads.
1 Jul 2021, 21:21 PM
#208
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 307

the B-4 is extremely overpowered because you got three shots, and the axis horde blobs are so big (and oblivious) that they cannot miss
2 Jul 2021, 20:34 PM
#209
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12403 | Subs: 1

Another thing that should be look at imo is the friendly damage of the B4 that seem to be set very low. Friendly squads can get hit by multiple hits and not suffer any loses.
2 Jul 2021, 22:46 PM
#210
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 485

Most on map weapons friendly fire at 5%, I believe B4 has that. Classically, i intentionally charge through my own barrages due to this. Theres a handful of weird exceptions though.
2 Jul 2021, 23:10 PM
#211
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12403 | Subs: 1

Most on map weapons friendly fire at 5%, I believe B4 has that. Classically, i intentionally charge through my own barrages due to this. Theres a handful of weird exceptions though.

howitzer_105mm_le_fh18_artillery_mp
friendly damage 50% of damage


m1937_152mm_ml_20_artillery_mp
friendly damage 5 HP

4_howitzer_artillery_commander_mp (old not updated)
friendly fire 16 HP

sexton_spg_squad_mp
friendly fire 14 HP

m7b1_priest_squad_mp
Friendly fire 5 HP

Do you play mostly allies?

In an case this friendly damage should be increased.
2 Jul 2021, 23:46 PM
#212
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 776

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Jul 2021, 23:10 PMVipper

howitzer_105mm_le_fh18_artillery_mp
friendly damage 50% of damage


m1937_152mm_ml_20_artillery_mp
friendly damage 5 HP

4_howitzer_artillery_commander_mp (old not updated)
friendly fire 16 HP

sexton_spg_squad_mp
friendly fire 14 HP

m7b1_priest_squad_mp
Friendly fire 5 HP

Do you play mostly allies?

In an case this friendly damage should be increased.

Yeah I've been blown up by teammates who didn't think carefully about their LEFH 18 targets, ppl you do an AT with even. A consistency issue that should be fixed, Damage friendly near 80 is a squad gone within 2 distance units. I did not know the other arty pieces had such low friendly damage, but explains a lot of what I thought was 'suicidal' pushes through their own shells.

Should we be looking at increasing friendly fire damage across the table or just reducing one? Not a fan personally of ppl ignoring huge shells going off next to them but gameplay is gameplay.
3 Jul 2021, 00:05 AM
#213
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12403 | Subs: 1


Yeah I've been blown up by teammates who didn't think carefully about their LEFH 18 targets, ppl you do an AT with even. A consistency issue that should be fixed, Damage friendly near 80 is a squad gone within 2 distance units. I did not know the other arty pieces had such low friendly damage, but explains a lot of what I thought was 'suicidal' pushes through their own shells.

Should we be looking at increasing friendly fire damage across the table or just reducing one? Not a fan personally of ppl ignoring huge shells going off next to them but gameplay is gameplay.

Increasing if you ask me, I agree with you.
3 Jul 2021, 03:55 AM
#214
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 485

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Jul 2021, 00:05 AMVipper

Increasing if you ask me, I agree with you.


OST has basically all the big exceptions, with the leFH being the biggest one.

The Walking Stuka does minor FF, as does the Panzerwerfer. Seriously, Pwerfer your MG next time someone rushes it and it'll walk away.

Off-maps have full Friendly Fire to my understanding

Interestingly, the UKF Base Howis count as off map, not on map and as such have full FF. I've wiped a few of my own squads with those 25 lber rounds. That's how I ended up digging up the stats you now have.

FF should be standardized. Either let us charge through the fire, or make FF a real threat. The issue is, on-map artillery is already standardized against FF and off-map artillery is standardized with FF. Mostly. That would make the game more consistent.

I'd advocate FULL DAMAGE. Bombs don't have an allegiance. Don't forget that Grenades ALSO deal minor to negligible FF.
3 Jul 2021, 08:10 AM
#215
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12403 | Subs: 1



OST has basically all the big exceptions, with the leFH being the biggest one.

The Walking Stuka does minor FF, as does the Panzerwerfer. Seriously, Pwerfer your MG next time someone rushes it and it'll walk away.

Off-maps have full Friendly Fire to my understanding

Interestingly, the UKF Base Howis count as off map, not on map and as such have full FF. I've wiped a few of my own squads with those 25 lber rounds. That's how I ended up digging up the stats you now have.

FF should be standardized. Either let us charge through the fire, or make FF a real threat. The issue is, on-map artillery is already standardized against FF and off-map artillery is standardized with FF. Mostly. That would make the game more consistent.

I'd advocate FULL DAMAGE. Bombs don't have an allegiance. Don't forget that Grenades ALSO deal minor to negligible FF.

No they do not, use the 240mm USF barrage and see.

UKF base barrage used to have minimal FF but was patched.

Glad to see that we that FF be standardized.

Full damage would be an excess imo that would only be useful to people who attack team member base.
3 Jul 2021, 15:14 PM
#216
avatar of thekingsown10

Posts: 232

The B4 is in a shockingly OP state .. I am shocked that this change actually made it into release.
3 Jul 2021, 18:56 PM
#217
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1156

The B4 is in a shockingly OP state .. I am shocked that this change actually made it into release.


Multyple streamers tested it. Most of not all came to conclusion it was good but not op, some even thought it would nerf the b4.
Not sure if they ninja buffed some stats but people where probably sleeping and are now suprised.
3 Jul 2021, 23:12 PM
#218
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 485

There was no sleeping, it was even nastier in the preview. No suppression, just ludicrous damage. The current version forces players to build forward bases further back and retreat when barraged instead of lotto wipes of OG. Also, it lost SIGNIFICANT AT consistency from its preview version with near aoe range going from .5 to 0. Players just needed time to learn to play against it (counter pick commanders, respect the barrage) and for B4 spam to slowdown,which it has to the best of my understanding.

Its potentially problematic in small maps where it can easily barrage bases, but all howis have that issue.

Its current situation is due to an attempt to not homogenize it into a ML/20, leFH knockoff while preventing it from hammering tanks. So its shock arty now. Everyone hates being on the receiving end of shock arty, and as such complaints. I woukd like to see play/winrate numbers before major nerfs.
4 Jul 2021, 05:41 AM
#219
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1156

There was no sleeping, it was even nastier in the preview. No suppression, just ludicrous damage. The current version forces players to build forward bases further back and retreat when barraged instead of lotto wipes of OG. Also, it lost SIGNIFICANT AT consistency from its preview version with near aoe range going from .5 to 0. Players just needed time to learn to play against it (counter pick commanders, respect the barrage) and for B4 spam to slowdown,which it has to the best of my understanding.

Its potentially problematic in small maps where it can easily barrage bases, but all howis have that issue.

Its current situation is due to an attempt to not homogenize it into a ML/20, leFH knockoff while preventing it from hammering tanks. So its shock arty now. Everyone hates being on the receiving end of shock arty, and as such complaints. I woukd like to see play/winrate numbers before major nerfs.


Yes the seem to try and set it apart from the rest. Yet most other chances seem to make most things more the same via commanders.
MMX
4 Jul 2021, 06:18 AM
#220
avatar of MMX

Posts: 877 | Subs: 1

There was no sleeping, it was even nastier in the preview. No suppression, just ludicrous damage. The current version forces players to build forward bases further back and retreat when barraged instead of lotto wipes of OG. Also, it lost SIGNIFICANT AT consistency from its preview version with near aoe range going from .5 to 0. Players just needed time to learn to play against it (counter pick commanders, respect the barrage) and for B4 spam to slowdown,which it has to the best of my understanding.

Its potentially problematic in small maps where it can easily barrage bases, but all howis have that issue.

Its current situation is due to an attempt to not homogenize it into a ML/20, leFH knockoff while preventing it from hammering tanks. So its shock arty now. Everyone hates being on the receiving end of shock arty, and as such complaints. I woukd like to see play/winrate numbers before major nerfs.


+1, good post.

i'd still say some adjustments may be necessary. suggestions like higher base cooldown and, maybe, suppression getting removed or gated behind vet 2 or 3 would probably be a good start, but i don't think the unit needs any bigger nerfs beyond that.
PAGES (13)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

Board Info

162 users are online: 2 members and 160 guests
Sturmpanther, VonIvan
52 posts in the last 24h
452 posts in the last week
1344 posts in the last month
Registered members: 26888
Welcome our newest member, Amicorum_CA
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM