Sherman bug NOT fixed

New topic

New Reply

Posts: 393

Relic did fixed the following bug:

-Crew/decrew using USF Radio Net ability will no longer stack reload times on all Sherman tanks.

But the "Veteran training: Tank 5% faster reload" bulletin also stacks which leads to the exact same result as the bug stated before, so another hotfix from Relic would be appreciated.

Posts: 4559 | Subs: 2

Got any replay?

Playercard of Marcus2389

1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: None
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 1653

Relic...

Posts: 974 | Subs: 2

Posts: 33

lol

Posts: 393

6 Oct 2015, 15:28 PMMarcus2389

Got any replay?

Here you go: http://www.coh2.org/replay/42456/sherman-bug-not-fixed

Posts: 224

I even stated this (5% reload bulletin) in the first thread about the topic.

Playercard of I984

1v1: None	2v2: P	3v3: None	4v4: P
1v1: None	2v2: 520	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: 491	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 4559 | Subs: 2

Moving the thread to bugs forum then.

Playercard of Marcus2389

1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: None
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 4559 | Subs: 2

Checked the replay btw, confirmed (sadly)

Playercard of Marcus2389

1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: None
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 473

Permanently Banned

6 Oct 2015, 16:04 PMI984

I even stated this (5% reload bulletin) in the first thread about the topic.

Me too

Whenever I face USF as OKW, it feels like I have been strapped down into a mental hospital wheelchair, with legs that can't reach the floor to move myself forward and a nurse is trying to move the wheelchair backwards whilst I have to race a formula one car for a best of three laps.

It feels handicapped from the start

No thumbs, cute and a lot of furry fluffiness, I am the ultimate kitten and by the heavens, am I angry!

Multi Quote

Posts: 224

6 Oct 2015, 16:26 PMAngryKitten465

Me too

I know

Playercard of I984

1v1: None	2v2: P	3v3: None	4v4: P
1v1: None	2v2: 520	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: 491	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 219

Video proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FJEj1XJI2U&feature=youtu.be

I think I stacked it about 20 times, so it's possible to go higher and have a much faster reload than that.

Playercard of Ace of Swords

1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: None
1v1: P	2v2: None	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: None	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 36

this bug also working in e8, and 105mm bulldozer xD

Posts: 474

6 Oct 2015, 17:11 PMwafive

this bug also working in e8, and 105mm bulldozer xD

Did someone say... BULLDOZER?!

I'm gonna go test that.

Posts: 473

Permanently Banned

6 Oct 2015, 16:40 PMI984

I know

Multi Quote

Posts: 2742

Testing in custom match, reload bulletin stacks. This only seems to apply to Shermans.

Jackson bulletin for reload does nothing, and bulldozer sherman, and the easy 8 seem unaffected by the stacking as well, so it just appears to be stock shermans.

Posts: 224

6 Oct 2015, 17:13 PMSpaceHamster

Did someone say... BULLDOZER?!

I'm gonna go test that.

beware of the banhammer...kek

Playercard of I984

1v1: None	2v2: P	3v3: None	4v4: P
1v1: None	2v2: 520	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: P	3v3: P	4v4: P
1v1: P	2v2: 491	3v3: P	4v4: P

Multi Quote

Posts: 48 | Subs: 23

Thanks guys, I have passed this on to the game team and they are investigating now.

Posts: 403

6 Oct 2015, 16:43 PMAce of Swords

Video proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FJEj1XJI2U&feature=youtu.be

I think I stacked it about 20 times, so it's possible to go higher and have a much faster reload than that.

Turbo sherman and yet still takes ages to get vet 3

13 Jan 2016, 11:57 AMJohnnyB

My place in the ladder is irrelevant as long as I am matched with opponents of the same rank and play all factions (balance at place 1000+ is no different from balance in top 100 if we consider what I said before the brakets) so I don't care about your assertion which is also irrelevant.