Login

russian armor

Elite Mod Continues - Version 2.2+

PAGES (9)down
16 Feb 2014, 22:31 PM
#61
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1


Cool idea!


thx (:
17 Feb 2014, 19:58 PM
#62
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1

Let's talk Assault Nades

I can fix the building bug, and I can probably make it interruptible and/or refundable. I can even cut out some of the delay before the first volley. But it still sucks imo.

You're paying 25 more munitions for a bunch of extra grenades you don't need and a flashing warning light that tells your opponent to move and/or retreat.

How would you make them viable? Or admit Blitz is a one-tree wonder and leave them be?
17 Feb 2014, 22:14 PM
#63
avatar of Symbiosis

Posts: 862

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Feb 2014, 19:58 PMKolaris
Let's talk Assault Nades

I can fix the building bug, and I can probably make it interruptible and/or refundable. I can even cut out some of the delay before the first volley. But it still sucks imo.

You're paying 25 more munitions for a bunch of extra grenades you don't need and a flashing warning light that tells your opponent to move and/or retreat.

How would you make them viable? Or admit Blitz is a one-tree wonder and leave them be?

Change it into a bundle nade ability for every wehr inf unit? The bundle nade is some high risk/high reward stuff that is actually quite worth a try in situations.
17 Feb 2014, 23:26 PM
#64
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1


Change it into a bundle nade ability for every wehr inf unit? The bundle nade is some high risk/high reward stuff that is actually quite worth a try in situations.


I had this idea before aswell :p BUT

I don't like that idea ONLY because you can't tell which one the Grenadiers will throw. So you can't act accordingly the grenade thrown.

Bring back Grenade motorcycle from COHO ftw :bananadance: /joke
17 Feb 2014, 23:34 PM
#65
avatar of Pepsi

Posts: 621 | Subs: 1

Could be some actual stunt grenades. No damage dealt to the us squad, only suppression.
17 Feb 2014, 23:55 PM
#66
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

haha, was talking to Kolaris of adding suppression.

He however said it doesn't really fit in the spirit of the doctrine since it would be used more defensively then.

But your idea (no damage) is indeed even more interesting. It would have to be something that only suppresses though. I really want to avoid G43 suppression fire circumstances.

Stealing away PE incendiary grenades is another idea ..
18 Feb 2014, 00:43 AM
#67
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1

I think suppression fits the idea of "Assault Nades" really well actually, although Bundled Nades would probably be more useful.

I was referring to taking Assault Nades early on, if you take them in the early game it would be for defense rather than offense. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The question is when would a suppressing (pinning?) grenade be useful. If the AoE was large enough and your aim was good enough you could stop flanks with it. If it pinned you could stop territory captures.
18 Feb 2014, 01:49 AM
#68
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Feb 2014, 00:43 AMKolaris

The question is when would a suppressing (pinning?) grenade be useful. If the AoE was large enough and your aim was good enough you could stop flanks with it. If it pinned you could stop territory captures.


The good old 5 pio flamers 1 volk?

The nade could be very strong if the other nade doesn't go on a cooldown, suppression insta bundle nade after, no way for rifles to dodge, only retreat.
18 Feb 2014, 10:41 AM
#69
avatar of Tommy

Posts: 742 | Subs: 2

I would say just get rid of the whole barrage thing, because that was always a fairly useless point of the ability. A single 'stun' grenade that suppresses with good AoE though, that could be useful. Should probably tie cooldowns to any other nades though lest it become a bit silly.
19 Feb 2014, 07:26 AM
#70
avatar of kafrion

Posts: 371

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2014, 18:20 PMKolaris
Opening up Pandora's box with regards to...the Puma, or the idea of buffing T4?

I don't think that any T1 changes are simple. Rifles and Jeep are buffed, if you nerf WM at the same time you run into the same "double buff" that got us into this situation to begin with.

I take it you're of the opinion of reverting the Rifle/Jeep in favor of Volks reinforce nerf?


I think buffing t4 can be done essentially by buffing p4 because the other choices are strong and specialised enough for what they do . So i would give topgunners to the p4 from vet1 with 3/10s of their damage and then max them out at vet 2 .

Another thing that can be done is reducing the price of the tier 3 and 4 upgrades and adding the respective cost to the building instead rewarding some t1/t2--->t4 as alternative to t1/t2--->t3
19 Feb 2014, 15:44 PM
#71
avatar of EFDreamerBG

Posts: 76

About the Assault nades:
Can you try to make enemy units in a range around your units that are going to throw those needs been slowed like slowed from PE g41/3's .
So you will have time to land more than 1 nade and if the enemy inf are not microed fast enought even a retreat cant save them from 1-2 hits.
19 Feb 2014, 19:34 PM
#72
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1

I think a suppression nade sounds good, but how much of the Assault Nade aesthetic do we want to keep? I.e.

1. One squad member throws one grenade exactly where you click

2. All squad members throw one grenade at another squad (Volks could have a weaker version)

19 Feb 2014, 19:55 PM
#73
avatar of Darc Reaver

Posts: 193

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2014, 19:34 PMKolaris
I think a suppression nade sounds good, but how much of the Assault Nade aesthetic do we want to keep? I.e.

1. One squad member throws one grenade exactly where you click

2. All squad members throw one grenade at another squad (Volks could have a weaker version)


It's called "assault", not "throw supression grenade"... Making it just another grenade sort of destroys the purpose of the "assault" factor in it. So, option 2 is better by default. Because version 1 misses the entire point of this ability.

Imo you should focus on making Assault equally effective on all axis infantry units. Smaller squads should use their grenades in faster succession, i.e. more squad members throw it at the same time or the overall amount of grenades thrown is increased or something similar.
19 Feb 2014, 20:35 PM
#74
avatar of Tommy

Posts: 742 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2014, 19:34 PMKolaris
I think a suppression nade sounds good, but how much of the Assault Nade aesthetic do we want to keep? I.e.

1. One squad member throws one grenade exactly where you click

2. All squad members throw one grenade at another squad (Volks could have a weaker version)



Making it a single precision nade imo. That way you can throw it in anticipation of where a flank might be coming (if the AoE is large enough to justify it), throwing one into empty space to cover your ass on retreat, lots of skill tricks to pull off there. Might be worth considering how it'll work against garrisoned units too.
19 Feb 2014, 22:02 PM
#75
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2014, 07:26 AMkafrion


I think buffing t4 can be done essentially by buffing p4 because the other choices are strong and specialised enough for what they do . So i would give topgunners to the p4 from vet1 with 3/10s of their damage and then max them out at vet 2 .

Another thing that can be done is reducing the price of the tier 3 and 4 upgrades and adding the respective cost to the building instead rewarding some t1/t2--->t4 as alternative to t1/t2--->t3


Your first idea is absolute horrible crap.
Vet 1 tank upgrade is the best upgrade on tanks anyways, crappy mg just doesn't make sense.

Your second idea however I do think is very interesting.
That would make it more doable if you just want the upgrades for flammenwerfer, lmg and Stukas.
The con of this would be that destroying buildings would become (even) more rewarding for the US player.

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Feb 2014, 19:34 PMKolaris
I think a suppression nade sounds good, but how much of the Assault Nade aesthetic do we want to keep? I.e.

1. One squad member throws one grenade exactly where you click

2. All squad members throw one grenade at another squad (Volks could have a weaker version)



3. All squadmembers throw one grenade at another squad (Volks could have a more expensive version)


But i'm following Tommy on this one.
An ability like number 1 would be better in the sense that it performs more reliable.

I do really think that blitzkrieg needs a reliable tool in the early game. Defensive has tons, Terror has free zeal.
Maybe 'assault' should have a passive ability besides w/e grenade type it receives.
19 Feb 2014, 22:07 PM
#76
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

19 Feb 2014, 22:09 PM
#77
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1


It's called "assault", not "throw supression grenade"... Making it just another grenade sort of destroys the purpose of the "assault" factor in it. So, option 2 is better by default. Because version 1 misses the entire point of this ability.

Imo you should focus on making Assault equally effective on all axis infantry units. Smaller squads should use their grenades in faster succession, i.e. more squad members throw it at the same time or the overall amount of grenades thrown is increased or something similar.


The problem is the "assault" factor is more or less worthless. The extra grenades are superfluous and units with rifles don't want to get close, while units with Mp44s don't want to stop to throw extra grenades.

The "point" of the ability. Hmm. I think the point is a grenade that allows you to close with the target. Throwing a stun grenade into a building and then storming it, that sort of thing.

Suppression clearly works better than the dubious "stun" mechanic, so that change is obvious.

Losing control of your squad is never a good thing in the competitive environment, so the "forced move" portion of the ability is really unnecessary. I suppose what we could do is keep the suppression immunity for the "assaulting" squad, but that would probably mean keeping the obvious flashing ability marker.

So the last part of it is the # of grenades. I tend to agree with Tommy that if we want something useful for the high-level player, a precision grenade makes the most sense. The problem with multiple grenades is they need to be imprecise (to scatter) which may add some unnecessary random element to the ability.

Basically I don't think renaming them to "Assault Grenade" really loses the core idea of the ability, especially if it becomes something you'd actually use.

Tommy brings up a good point about buildings though, I have no idea how they'd interact with them.
19 Feb 2014, 22:13 PM
#78
avatar of 12ocky

Posts: 508 | Subs: 1

I do believe suppression does work vs targets in buildings, but every weapon has a 0x suppression modifier vs garrison cover.

Edit: the stun mechanic might work okayish for a single nade, NOT SURE THOUGH
19 Feb 2014, 23:58 PM
#79
avatar of Aimstrong

Posts: 133 | Subs: 7

Don't forget Assault also makes the squad break supression.
20 Feb 2014, 00:05 AM
#80
avatar of Kolaris

Posts: 308 | Subs: 1

Yeah that should stay, the remaining questions are basically:

1. One precise grenade or multiple grenades with scatter?
2. Keep the flashing ability icon or remove it?
3. What effect should they have on garrisoned units?
PAGES (9)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

81 users are online: 2 members and 79 guests
CartoonVillain, SneakEye
21 posts in the last 24h
139 posts in the last week
655 posts in the last month
Registered members: 28231
Welcome our newest member, peterson.stella.93
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM