Login

russian armor

Soviet AT-gun

10 Sep 2013, 20:06 PM
#21
avatar of Spetznova

Posts: 29

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 16:25 PMwooof

currently it takes 3.96 seconds for the pak to fire and 5.8 for the ZiS.


Jesus, I didn't realize the pak fired ~50% faster. That ZiS barrage ability and +2 crew really isn't worth 50% extra DPS, especially since the whole point of getting an AT gun is to damage armour.
10 Sep 2013, 20:17 PM
#22
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Closer to 2/3 the speed of PaK.

No need to panic.
10 Sep 2013, 20:47 PM
#23
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

you guys are saying the same thing. pak fires 33% faster. zis fires 50% slower. it just depends on how you look at it
10 Sep 2013, 23:53 PM
#24
avatar of =][=mmortal

Posts: 215

at gun damage isnt bad, its the missing that is just awful.

I believe any AT gun should have a 100% accuracy on a vehicle that is standing still and significant buffs towards vehicles with engine crits.

I've had plenty of my first AT gun shots miss t70s/t34s sitting still, who then realized my ATG was in the area and promptly flanked and killed it.

I'm guessing ATG get decreased accuracy at max range. This is counter intuitive gameplay wise since a competent player will try to keep his ATG as far as possible from the enemy front line while still being in range. If a gun has to be 20 meters from a tank to hit it, the tank will simply bypass and circle strafe it.

Bad enough guns can barely get a shot or two off before they are flanked.
11 Sep 2013, 00:01 AM
#25
avatar of Endeav

Posts: 170


I'm guessing ATG get decreased accuracy at max range. This is counter intuitive gameplay wise since a competent player will try to keep his ATG as far as possible from the enemy front line while still being in range. If a gun has to be 20 meters from a tank to hit it, the tank will simply bypass and circle strafe it.

Bad enough guns can barely get a shot or two off before they are flanked.


All AT weapons have the same accuracy values, namely .05 near and .025 far. Their accuracy is dependent on the target's unit size, so at near range, firing at a stug (size 14), you have a 70% chance to hit. This goes down the further away the unit is. At point blank you should not miss any size 20 units (medium tanks such as the IV/t-34) and above, however anywhere beyond point blank range you will have a chance to miss these units.

Don't increase the Zis RoF when barrage still exisits. If a barrage shot hits a tank, it's hitting a tank "as normal dmg". I feel barrage at 60(?) muni is a fine cost.


Zis barrage does 80 damage and 60 pen, with the shot having to actually hit the tank to have a chance to do damage. It is nowhere near the same as actually shooting the tank.
11 Sep 2013, 00:09 AM
#26
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

at gun damage isnt bad, its the missing that is just awful.


I'm guessing ATG get decreased accuracy at max range. This is counter intuitive gameplay wise since a competent player will try to keep his ATG as far as possible from the enemy front line while still being in range. If a gun has to be 20 meters from a tank to hit it, the tank will simply bypass and circle strafe it.


its not really counter intuitive. weapons are less accurate at range. not making the realism argument here, but thats true in real life and the game. that alone makes it intuitive. even just looking at game mechanics, ALL weapons are less accurate at range. small arms, AT guns, tank guns, mortars, howitzers, you name it, its less accurate the further you shoot. i guess sniper is the 1 exception. i agree its very frustrating to have AT guns miss a few shots in a row, leading to them getting flanked, so many a small accuracy buff is in order, but not too much. i dont think they should hit tanks 100% of the time at long ranges, even if theyre stationary
11 Sep 2013, 00:30 AM
#27
avatar of link0

Posts: 337

Both AT guns need to be buffed. This game is far more of a tank spam fest than it was in vCoh.
11 Sep 2013, 01:00 AM
#28
avatar of panzerjager2

Posts: 168

at least the russian AT gun hits most of the time .... unlike the uber useless PaK which misses against t70 quite regularly.

I have even seen it miss 3 shots in a row against an su85 standing still.
11 Sep 2013, 01:06 AM
#29
avatar of Arac

Posts: 6

at least the russian AT gun hits most of the time .... unlike the uber useless PaK which misses against t70 quite regularly.

I have even seen it miss 3 shots in a row against an su85 standing still.


Sorry but.. isn't that guy whining on every post?
11 Sep 2013, 01:11 AM
#30
avatar of Endeav

Posts: 170

at least the russian AT gun hits most of the time .... unlike the uber useless PaK which misses against t70 quite regularly.

I have even seen it miss 3 shots in a row against an su85 standing still.


... they have the SAME ACCURACY; it misses agianst the t70 because the t70 has 14 unit size, same as a stug, and considered small. SU-85 has 22 unit size, which is considered a medium tank, so you have the same chance as hitting a t34 as you do a su-85 with a pak.
11 Sep 2013, 01:27 AM
#31
avatar of panzerjager2

Posts: 168

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 01:06 AMArac


Sorry but.. isn't that guy whining on every post?


OH look a 5 post wonder russian troll who setup a new account ...
11 Sep 2013, 01:32 AM
#32
avatar of Endeav

Posts: 170



OH look a 5 post wonder russian troll who setup a new account ...


Why do you keep ignoring the fact that they have the same accuracy?
11 Sep 2013, 06:10 AM
#33
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post10 Sep 2013, 20:47 PMwooof
you guys are saying the same thing. pak fires 33% faster. zis fires 50% slower. it just depends on how you look at it


What?

But its doesnt fire 50% slower.
It doesn't fire at half speed of PaK.
It fires at 66&% of PaK, which is 2/3.
11 Sep 2013, 07:20 AM
#34
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

ill just use 4 for pak and 6 for zis since theyre nice round numbers. 6 is 50% more than 4. 4 is 2/3 of 6 meaning its 33% less. 50% more means 50% slower since it takes 50% longer to shoot. 33% less time means pak shoots 33% faster.

it just depends which way you compare it.
11 Sep 2013, 11:23 AM
#35
avatar of c r u C e

Posts: 525

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 01:32 AMEndeav


Why do you keep ignoring the fact that they have the same accuracy?

Probably lack of perceiving reality...
On-Topic: I never use ZiS,like with the MG,better decrew a Pak an there you have it,I need an AT gun,not an vulnerable version of SU 76(which barrage is better and FREE,yay)
11 Sep 2013, 23:38 PM
#36
avatar of =][=mmortal

Posts: 215

Discussion: ATG's first shot always hits? Would make for an interesting combo with camo doctrine abilities and a hold fire function

Regardless small to moderate accuracy buffs are in order against small targets especially, such as t70s.

ATG should always hit a vehicle of any size sitting still. Its too stupid to see a t34 sitting still and miss
11 Sep 2013, 23:52 PM
#37
avatar of geist

Posts: 79

Though it's kinda funny that in battle reports somewhere is stated "ATGs had no problem hitting a 1x1m spot in 800m distance". Yeah, I see that.

Could it be, that somehow (unintended) cover modifier works for tanks, too? Sometimes it feels like Pak misses several shots on T70 standing still in bomb craters.
12 Sep 2013, 00:07 AM
#38
avatar of Endeav

Posts: 170

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 23:52 PMgeist
Though it's kinda funny that in battle reports somewhere is stated "ATGs had no problem hitting a 1x1m spot in 800m distance". Yeah, I see that.

Could it be, that somehow (unintended) cover modifier works for tanks, too? Sometimes it feels like Pak misses several shots on T70 standing still in bomb craters.


We tried. Vehicles do not have cover.
12 Sep 2013, 00:11 AM
#39
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 23:52 PMgeist
Though it's kinda funny that in battle reports somewhere is stated "ATGs had no problem hitting a 1x1m spot in 800m distance". Yeah, I see that.

Could it be, that somehow (unintended) cover modifier works for tanks, too? Sometimes it feels like Pak misses several shots on T70 standing still in bomb craters.


t70s are the smallest vehicles in the game (in stats). they are the hardest to hit with AT guns. you cant argue realism here, tank battles didnt happen at 40m either.
12 Sep 2013, 21:55 PM
#40
avatar of JohanSchwarz

Posts: 409

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Sep 2013, 23:52 PMgeist
Though it's kinda funny that in battle reports somewhere is stated "ATGs had no problem hitting a 1x1m spot in 800m distance". Yeah, I see that.

Could it be, that somehow (unintended) cover modifier works for tanks, too? Sometimes it feels like Pak misses several shots on T70 standing still in bomb craters.


This is due to terrain affecting the height of the vehicle. All weaponry become less accurate in this game when two units are at different heights, even if the height difference is essentially negligible (crater, small hill, etc.). It doesn't make a big difference in small arms combat but it does with slow-loading weapons like AT Guns and tanks.

Is this intentional? Because it's pretty frustrating.
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

660 users are online: 1 member and 659 guests
empirescurropt
2 posts in the last 24h
37 posts in the last week
137 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45064
Welcome our newest member, edmond2003s
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM