Login

russian armor

High rear armor values

Vaz
18 Oct 2014, 22:14 PM
#1
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1098

I think the values on some of the tanks for the rear is too high. I can understand some needs, so that light tanks can't slowly bash out the health of unsupported larger ones. I've noticed a large issue with snares though. Specifically the allied ones, considering more frequently facing heavy rear armor objects, as well as having lower penetration values for whatever snare.

So the question is, should rear armor values be high enough to block anti-tank weapons on ANY mobile coh2 object?
18 Oct 2014, 22:49 PM
#2
avatar of joebill

Posts: 54

Yeah lower rear armor is something i'd like. If you can't support your tank, OR just reverse gear and rotate your ass away from the T-70 (or stuart, or panzer 2, or upgun-scoutcar?) long enough to get those 2-3 shots in to kill it, you deserve to die.

Similarly, it'd be nicer for the poor Amis if sneaking some zooks around the side actually mattered. They still just bounce off a lot of the time. And yes, snare abilities bouncing off of the ass of the tank are infuriating.
18 Oct 2014, 22:51 PM
#3
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2806 | Subs: 6

tbh, tanks had good rear armours, for example Tigers was 80 while front 102, same on others
18 Oct 2014, 22:57 PM
#4
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2691 | Subs: 1

tbh, tanks had good rear armours, for example Tigers was 80 while front 102, same on others


Yeah I pretty much think the armor values of the tanks are perfectly fine at the moment.

The long range super heavy tanks all have relatively low rear armor value of 150 (even the jagdtiger whose front armor is 525). And the short range heavy tanks need some rear armor because they often have to get into the thick of battle.

The only thing that needs fixing when it comes to armor is the jackson penetration. Currently it just bounces too often against the KT from the front, and flanking that thing is made impossible due to the always-present SchrekVolks and the low health of the jackson.
18 Oct 2014, 23:20 PM
#5
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

I still find it annoying that the game tips think side armor exists...

Which would be nice if they existed.
19 Oct 2014, 00:18 AM
#6
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2751

When Tiger I can't penetrate ISU ass at blank point range

I was like, FUCK THIS GAME <444>_<444>
19 Oct 2014, 01:43 AM
#7
avatar of ASneakyFox

Posts: 365

i wish there was side armor. I hate getting to the side of a tank and thinking "alright im going to get some ok shots" but really its no different from hitting it straight on.
19 Oct 2014, 02:45 AM
#8
avatar of TheMightyCthulu

Posts: 127

There definitely should be side armour values. I know it would force Relic to add more algorithms and complicate things, but it's one of the features I most want to see added.
19 Oct 2014, 03:19 AM
#9
avatar of joebill

Posts: 54


There should just be some reward for surrounding a heavy tank, or a decent chance of punishment for driving a heavy right past a snare squad. Instead light equipment really just gets to skedaddle, and plays no role once late game stuff (axis and soviet at least) comes out.

Medium armor is fine, since snares and light armor (from behind) regularly pen it.
19 Oct 2014, 04:14 AM
#10
avatar of Leepriest

Posts: 179

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 00:18 AMPorygon
When Tiger I can't penetrate ISU ass at blank point range

I was like, FUCK THIS GAME <444>_<444>

How can you be this cool?
19 Oct 2014, 05:34 AM
#11
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

the biggest issue with adding side armour is that all of the models would have to be edited, which would be a fair bit of artist time. the other big, but less significant matter would be adding armour tables for the side armour. i don't know if the engine would support using a single box and selecting faces (that would easily give 6 sides) and i kind of doubt it but there are still ways to add side armour. either way, it isn't going to make a significant difference to performance, just time required to make it work.
19 Oct 2014, 06:41 AM
#12
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 00:18 AMPorygon
When Tiger I can't penetrate ISU ass at blank point range

I was like, FUCK THIS GAME <444>_<444>


im pretty sure this never happens
19 Oct 2014, 07:20 AM
#13
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17536 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 00:18 AMPorygon
When Tiger I can't penetrate ISU ass at blank point range

I was like, FUCK THIS GAME <444>_<444>


You know that is mathematically impossible, right?

Tiger even at 50 range got still more then 155 penetration.
19 Oct 2014, 07:21 AM
#14
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 00:18 AMPorygon
When Tiger I can't penetrate ISU ass at blank point range

I was like, FUCK THIS GAME <444>_<444>


ISU Rear armor 155, Tiger far pen 180.
Vaz
19 Oct 2014, 07:26 AM
#15
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1098

haha caught in lie
19 Oct 2014, 08:03 AM
#16
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

I won't say lie just yet, could be a bug or a fluke. After all, I've watched a Kubelwagen bounce an AT Grenade.
19 Oct 2014, 08:41 AM
#17
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

There definitely should be side armour values. I know it would force Relic to add more algorithms and complicate things, but it's one of the features I most want to see added.

Definitely this! Vehicles need to have 3 armor types: front, side and rear.
19 Oct 2014, 08:57 AM
#18
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2751

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 07:20 AMKatitof


You know that is mathematically impossible, right?

Tiger even at 50 range got still more then 155 penetration.


I dunno the maths data, but it happens to me.
Vaz
19 Oct 2014, 09:29 AM
#19
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1098

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 08:57 AMPorygon


I dunno the maths data, but it happens to me.


So are you telling us the game is capable of doing things outside of it's programming? The values indicate 100% penetration at all ranges.
19 Oct 2014, 13:41 PM
#20
avatar of drChengele
Patrion 14

Posts: 639 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2014, 09:29 AMVaz
So are you telling us the game is capable of doing things outside of it's programming? The values indicate 100% penetration at all ranges.
I would not dismiss the possibility that there are bugs in the code. I too have seen Kubels bounce AT riflenades on rare occasions. There are also cases where a t34 triggers a Teller and continues on, undamaged. This also should never ever happen according to the game's programming. Another possibility is that the shot didn't in fact bounce but miss, hit the ground next to the ISU or something and Porygon is just blind with axis fanboy rage :D .

/devilsadvocate
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

203 users are online: 1 member and 202 guests
Protos Angelus
66 posts in the last 24h
409 posts in the last week
2404 posts in the last month
Registered members: 25198
Welcome our newest member, igs123
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM