Login

russian armor

FBP V1.1 UPDATE

PAGES (9)down
28 Jul 2017, 11:59 AM
#41
avatar of karolllus

Posts: 172

Any chance for conscripts buff so they dont lose every matchup at every range?
28 Jul 2017, 12:03 PM
#42
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

Any chance for conscripts buff so they dont lose every matchup at every range?


No as they are #OutOfScope :#

But you may try to vet them to vet 3 and buy them push, then they beat grens no matter from what range and throught what cover they charge :D
28 Jul 2017, 12:15 PM
#44
avatar of karolllus

Posts: 172



No as they are #OutOfScope :#

But you may try to vet them to vet 3 and buy them push, then they beat grens no matter from what range and throught what cover they charge :D


vet 3 cons is wishful thinking ^^, you lose early game so hard because of them that its hard to surivive to late game without something like dshka and snipers.

Anyway I have an idea how to balance soviet early game meaning cons, t1 and t2. Cons should be good at short to mid range and rework penals, strip away all their current abilities and upgrades. Make them good at mid to long range, give them some weapon upgrade for inreased sight radius and better long range dps, give them mines instead of nades and a single blinding/dmg shot against vehicles. Let me explain my reasoning. T2 is more static, so you get all the support weapons + cons for pushing or scouting. T1 on the other hand is supposed to be more mobile and scouting so thats why your penals would be able to scout and mine the frontline or fight from a far with sniper support. You could also support penals with cons for a better mix of infantry. So this way both infantry types would serve a different purpose and fit into a different playstyle instead of having useless cons and mediocre, overpriced penals in their stead.

Btw I love lelic reasoning, hmm... nobody wants to build T2 so it must be something wrong with T2, lets buff maxim xD as if this is gonna change anything for real ^^ or those OKW nerfs. Hmm... OKW seems to be winning early game for free all the time, so lets maybe nerf kubel armor, forgetting that most players dont even use kubel spam, because they dont need to because they can push you with sturms and volks (the most cost effective and least micro demanding basic infantry in the game). Yeah the fact that volks get incediary nades without any upgrade so you basically cant stop them is cool with the dirt cheap stgs. Basically if volks are gonna stay the same they should get their price fixed to 280 at least and 28 reinforce.
28 Jul 2017, 12:53 PM
#45
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

...




If you want to play with cons in current patch, try Soviet reserve army doctrine.

In early game go the usual penal (+1 sniper) build and rush t70. You don't have to worry about early luchs/222 because of the dank hunters :megusta:

Later on you will use massed conscription ability to get 2 or 4 free cons (MP wise) upgrade them with ppsh and start rolling. They vet surprisingly fast if you engage and harm few vet 3 (5) squads in the late game.

Instead of sherman spam you have much sooner and much cheaper t34 spam.

Definitely this doctrine is worth to give it a shot.

Also ml20 can break digged OKW players defences like flakHQ
28 Jul 2017, 13:35 PM
#47
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808



Just mutiply accuracy of the jackson by the target size of the vehicle.

E.g.,:
- 60% chance to hit Stug at max range
- 72% chance to hit Panther at max range (ignoring lower penetration)
- 54% chance to hit blitzing OST Panther at max range
- 36% chance to hit blitzing OKW Panther at max range, cause OKW
- 78% chance to hit KT at max range (ignoring lower penetration)
- 39% chance to hit blitzing KT at max range, cause OKW

However, accuracy picks up very quickly, the closer you move.


this is why i think the 60 range is a problem, it will be able to fire at tanks with a good chance of hitting while tanks like the panther WONT BE ABLE TO EVEN FIRE BACK, so you have to close in with its shtty accuracy penatlies which is no longer worth the risk because of jacksons health buff. If jackson is keeping its health buff the 60 range needs to go down.All that for 135 fuel.....cmon dude
28 Jul 2017, 13:44 PM
#48
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2017, 13:35 PMAlphrum


this is why i think the 60 range is a problem, it will be able to fire at tanks with a good chance of hitting while tanks like the panther WONT BE ABLE TO EVEN FIRE BACK, so you have to close in with its shtty accuracy penatlies which is no longer worth the risk because of jacksons health buff. If jackson is keeping its health buff the 60 range needs to go down.All that for 135 fuel.....cmon dude


I think this could be an issue in teamgames where your allies can support you with vision/flares etc. In 1v1 at least USF has difficulty getting vision. They require the m20, rifleman flares from rifle company or pathfinders. They have major recon but it's a pretty quick pass and you'll only beable to get off 1 jackson shot, maybe 2. Even then if it's at max range the pen is just above 50%.

But how is this different from FFs or SU85s? SU85s can even spot for themselves and have higher max range pen than the jackson in the FBP v1.1 update. Yes other stats like less mobility, turretless tanks, slower turret rotation. This has always been an issue for ostheer though as they don't have a 60 range tank.
28 Jul 2017, 16:42 PM
#51
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

The health buff is entirely to make Jacksons able to survive two shots from elefants and jts. Thats been the goal for months here. The consequences aren't being consideted as important as creating a style of gameplay where usf can tank dedicated heavy tank destroyers without having to position or flank.

I don't think the health buff would be considered if Elefants and jts were reduced to just 300 damage or left at 320.

The only way Jacksons would get 640 health is if the heavy tds were only dropped to 300.
28 Jul 2017, 16:50 PM
#52
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808

The health buff is entirely to make Jacksons able to survive two shots from elefants and jts. Thats been the goal for months here. The consequences aren't being consideted as important as creating a style of gameplay where usf can tank dedicated heavy tank destroyers without having to position or flank.

I don't think the health buff would be considered if Elefants and jts were reduced to just 300 damage or left at 320.

The only way Jacksons would get 640 health is if the heavy tds were only dropped to 300.


they did not just buff the jacksons health becuase of ele and jagd, that would be stupid on ther part but it was done to improve its surviveability in general which was poor. If they seriously going to leave the jackson as it is now, they better at least increase the cost. 135 fuel is a complete joke
28 Jul 2017, 17:18 PM
#53
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Still no Ostheer Panther buffs? That thing isn't worth its cost and will never be if it gets no attention.

28 Jul 2017, 22:19 PM
#54
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262

Still no Ostheer Panther buffs? That thing isn't worth its cost and will never be if it gets no attention.

FTFY
28 Jul 2017, 23:07 PM
#55
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 2983 | Subs: 3

i seen mostly only buffs for allies and nerfs for axis units.

self spoting jagdpz4? When did u last time played SU-85?

firefly now deals much more dmg to infantery with tulips? i thought its a antoi armor unit? Why in the hell get all allie unit a anti everything performanche?

and now 3 fireflys destroy all units on field, while jagdpanzer has no turrent, no tulips alpha dmg, can´t deal vs infantery...can only sneak around (which was nerfed hard)

looks good.


well my 1st reply to your post has been invised (which is fine since it was off-topic), but maybe this one is better:

Maybe if you read through the patch notes again, your text comprehension "skills" might help you to understand that tulip damage vs infantry which has been changed from 100% to 33% is actually a nerf. :)

Ok, they didnt mention that the inf dmg was 100% before, tho I don't see what there was to missunderstand about the small text before and made you think that they buffed the firefly:
Tulip damage against infantry is being adjusted. Previously a player could use the Firefly’s rockets to kill weapon teams and infantry from long-range due to their AOE and damage radius, despite this ability being meant for AT work


And 2nd, OKW JP4 having no "turrent" and only being good for sneaking? Don't know if I should cry or laugh tbh :')

Btw yes the SU85 is self spotting too, but unlike the JP4 it gets 50% movement speed penalty during that, and the sight range is long, but the radius super small compared to vet 2 JP4 lmao.
28 Jul 2017, 23:15 PM
#56
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2017, 13:35 PMAlphrum


this is why i think the 60 range is a problem, it will be able to fire at tanks with a good chance of hitting while tanks like the panther WONT BE ABLE TO EVEN FIRE BACK, so you have to close in with its shtty accuracy penatlies which is no longer worth the risk because of jacksons health buff. If jackson is keeping its health buff the 60 range needs to go down.All that for 135 fuel.....cmon dude

It's hilarious really.
28 Jul 2017, 23:31 PM
#57
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 2983 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2017, 16:50 PMAlphrum


they did not just buff the jacksons health becuase of ele and jagd, that would be stupid on ther part but it was done to improve its surviveability in general which was poor. If they seriously going to leave the jackson as it is now, they better at least increase the cost. 135 fuel is a complete joke


I see your point and you seem to be right, but funniest detail here is that the Jackson in 1.1 is kinda exactly as lethal vs tanks as the live version JP4 has been since release -equal range, fairly equal penetration vs the counterpart units, Jackson has better speed but JP4 has better accuracy, armor and smaller target size-, and also for 135 fuel (now 145 in FBP), and nobody ever complained about that. So why now the complaints about changes that havent even been really tested yet? ;/

About the topic: With HP buff and 60 range, Jackson should have same fuel cost as JP4 = 145 I agree.
28 Jul 2017, 23:45 PM
#58
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jul 2017, 13:35 PMAlphrum


this is why i think the 60 range is a problem, it will be able to fire at tanks with a good chance of hitting while tanks like the panther WONT BE ABLE TO EVEN FIRE BACK, so you have to close in with its shtty accuracy penatlies which is no longer worth the risk because of jacksons health buff. If jackson is keeping its health buff the 60 range needs to go down.All that for 135 fuel.....cmon dude


Like, what the actual fuck?

Panther far accuracy: 0.03 (OKW Panther is 0.35)
Panther target size: 24
AI capabilities: kinda ok

Jackson far accuracy: 0.03
Jackson target size: 24
No target-shrinking capabilities
AI capabilities: inexistent

Jackson far penetration has been LOWERED too.

If the Jackson wants to fight vs Panthers at max range, while kiting, multiply the numbers I gave you by 0.421875

The chance to score a penetrating hit vs a non-blitzing panther at max range while moving is 30%. 30 fucking per-cent. Now, go play the mod before you make another post about the Jackson.



I see your point and you seem to be right, but funniest detail here is that the Jackson in 1.1 is kinda exactly as lethal vs tanks as the live version JP4 has been since release -equal range, fairly equal penetration vs the counterpart units, Jackson has better speed but JP4 has better accuracy, armor and smaller target size-, and also for 135 fuel (now 145 in FBP), and nobody ever complained about that. So why now the complaints about changes that havent even been really tested yet? ;/

About the topic: With HP buff and 60 range, Jackson should have same fuel cost as JP4 = 145 I agree.


Should jackson also get the same HP, armour and accuracy as the Jagdpanzer, too?
29 Jul 2017, 00:26 AM
#59
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742


The chance to score a penetrating hit vs a non-blitzing panther at max range while moving is 30%. 30 fucking per-cent. Now, go play the mod before you make another post about the Jackson.


If it's out of range of the Panther, those odds are still pretty good. I think that's his point.

But you're getting heated about this I can see so I'll just leave it at that.


Should jackson also get the same HP, armour and accuracy as the Jagdpanzer, too?


Only if you lock it's turret facing forward. :P
29 Jul 2017, 00:30 AM
#60
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



If it's out of range of the Panther, those odds are still pretty good. I think that's his point.

But you're getting heated about this I can see so I'll just leave it at that.



Only if you lock it's turret facing forward. :P


He gets heated because the people who make these complains never play the Balance mod, they just complain about Allies being buffed and Axi getting nerfed, you'd lose your temper too after awhile.
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

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

670 users are online: 1 member and 669 guests
Farlon
2 posts in the last 24h
36 posts in the last week
136 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45066
Welcome our newest member, Fid McSauce
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM