Login

russian armor

Recon Support this patch

13 Feb 2019, 20:21 PM
#21
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1370 | Subs: 1

Only semi-related - but after the Tactical Support and Recon Company changes I feel like the Ostruppen Supply drop could maybe get a similar treatment.
13 Feb 2019, 21:28 PM
#22
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1


If its like aoe, then that would be the case. Like for the ST the AOE is 14 (I think). The far aoe is 8. This means that theres the standard linear falloff from the mid (forgot the number) aoe distance to the far aoe distance of 8. From 8-14, the far aoe distance values are used. It just so happens that for most explosives, the aoe distance and the far aoe distance are the same.

So yeah, if raw range works the same way (with a general range value, in addition to the close, mid, and far range values) and the vet bonus only applies to the general range value, then derbyhat would be correct. Cruzz's DPS spreadsheet, at least, claims that this is how the range increase is implemented.

The question is weather the modifier applies to max range or far range and if small arm actually fire up to max range or to far range (or what ever is higher than the 2).

So the situation is a bit unclear.
13 Feb 2019, 21:31 PM
#23
avatar of Stark

Posts: 477 | Subs: 1



The point of this thread is to discuss if earlier timing should come with higher prices for Recon Support.


^ +1

What is also good to point out that after the patch pathfinders (all versions) and jeagers become a new mainline infantry. Everything would be fine expect the fact that they are also the recon units. Recon squad features longer sight (pathfinder has +55 range at vet1) which gives them huge advantage in longer run.

If i may suggest to add them a new simple ability - recon mode like in T70 for example. Unit has free ability that can be turn off and on which increase unit sight from common mainline infantry to that +50/55 that features the recon units.

what do you think?
13 Feb 2019, 21:34 PM
#24
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 763 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Feb 2019, 21:28 PMVipper

Units like the Tiger have a max range of 45 for auto-fire but only auto-fire up to far range which is 40 (until the get the vet range bonus)

So you're saying the tiger wont automatically fire on units at ranges 41-45? Is that really true, I haven't noticed it, but could obviously be wrong.

Anyway, the way cruzz's sheet has these ranges set is consistent, makes sense, and lines up with what I have observed about the game.
13 Feb 2019, 21:47 PM
#25
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1


So you're saying the tiger wont automatically fire on units at ranges 41-45? Is that really true, I haven't noticed it, but could obviously be wrong.

Anyway, the way cruzz's sheet has these ranges set is consistent, makes sense, and lines up with what I have observed about the game.

(I was looking at KT and not Tigers so that was incorrect)

In most cases far range and max range for auto-fire are the same but there are few exception like:

m5a1_stuart_m6_37mm_mp max range 40 far 30
Thompson max range 35 far 30
Mp 40 max range 35 far 30
Sten max range 35 far 30
Ppsh max range 35 far 30
King Tiger max range 45 far 40
13 Feb 2019, 23:15 PM
#26
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2109 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Feb 2019, 21:28 PMVipper

The question is weather the modifier applies to max range or far range and if small arm actually fire up to max range or to far range (or what ever is higher than the 2).

So the situation is a bit unclear.

It 100% works to increase the accuracy on ballistic weapons, I see no reason why it wouldn't technically work the same for small arms.
14 Feb 2019, 00:12 AM
#27
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Feb 2019, 23:15 PMTobis

It 100% works to increase the accuracy on ballistic weapons, I see no reason why it wouldn't technically work the same for small arms.

It a bit more complicated both in ballistic weapon and in barrages with explosive weapons...

For instance the M1 vet 1 ability (m1_57mm_at_gun_vet_mp) has both max and far ranges listed as 60 while it should be able to fire at range 70...
14 Feb 2019, 04:44 AM
#28
avatar of Clarity

Posts: 171

Or honestly tie the M8 Greyhound to tech and require either the LT or Capt + Motor Pool upgrade in order to build the Greyhound. That way it might work better in team games but not be as spammy in 1v1.
14 Feb 2019, 05:44 AM
#29
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 1764 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2019, 04:44 AMClarity
Or honestly tie the M8 Greyhound to tech and require either the LT or Capt + Motor Pool upgrade in order to build the Greyhound. That way it might work better in team games but not be as spammy in 1v1.

I quite like that. Gives it the flexibility of doctrinal but not the cheese of a call in.
14 Feb 2019, 07:55 AM
#30
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 687

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2019, 04:44 AMClarity
Or honestly tie the M8 Greyhound to tech and require either the LT or Capt + Motor Pool upgrade in order to build the Greyhound. That way it might work better in team games but not be as spammy in 1v1.

Best solution
14 Feb 2019, 09:41 AM
#31
avatar of DerbyHat

Posts: 151 | Subs: 1

The meta is already M20 into M8 spam. Tying it to a motor pool upgrade would result in people skipping the M20 and going straight for the M8's. This would mean Axis has to fight pseudo T70's with far cheaper tech at a far earlier point in the game. Or do you mean something else?
14 Feb 2019, 09:53 AM
#32
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2324

Yeah the idea to tying the M8 to tech is a bit silly on its own. We'll probably see a "command M8" poping out next patch.
14 Feb 2019, 09:58 AM
#33
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 11715 | Subs: 6

The meta is already M20 into M8 spam. Tying it to a motor pool upgrade would result in people skipping the M20 and going straight for the M8's. This would mean Axis has to fight pseudo T70's with far cheaper tech at a far earlier point in the game. Or do you mean something else?

Puma.
M8, even a pair or three can do literally nothing to it.
14 Feb 2019, 10:07 AM
#34
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1043

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2019, 09:58 AMKatitof
Puma.
M8, even a pair or three can do literally nothing to it.


This doesn't work as well in practice because the M8s are protected by the cheap (basically free) and tech-less ATG from the drop. Leading me to believe the problem with the doc is actually not the M8, but the ATG.


Good example of this is this game:
https://youtu.be/4kwFr0AyR6c?t=595

OKW had very good map control, had all the counters out (both Luchs and Puma) but couldn't win because of the USF's huge advantage of having that ATG for practically no MP cost.
14 Feb 2019, 10:11 AM
#35
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 687

^This doesn't work as well in practice because the luchs are protected by the cheap and tech-less ATG.
But somehow no one spam luchs evrytime.
Light tank and at gun combo means nothing. Its like saying panzer and at gun combo is op.
Grayhound need to be in tech and bulid time must be slow thats it
Or like i suggest before swap at gun with 75 howtizer and make it cp4
14 Feb 2019, 10:16 AM
#36
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1043

But somehow no one spam luchs evrytime.
Light tank and at gun combo means nothing. Its like saying panzer and at gun combo is op.
Grayhound need to be in tech and bulid time must be slow thats it


I don't know why you are drawing this comparison. The Luchs isn't nearly as powerful AI wise and OKW's ATG will cost them 270 MP while the dropped ATG is basically free (only some muni cost).

Tying the M8 to tech is not the solution as that would make it come way too early. Or it would still have the 4 CP requirement on top of requiring tech, but that would make things weird since all other commander units tied to tech are at 0 CP.


I don't think there's anything wrong with the M8 at 4 CP as long as the ATG drop is removed so the doctrine has way less synergy and snowballing potential.
14 Feb 2019, 10:27 AM
#37
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 687



I don't know why you are drawing this comparison. The Luchs isn't nearly as powerful AI wise and OKW's ATG will cost them 270 MP while the dropped ATG is basically free (only some muni cost).

Tying the M8 to tech is not the solution as that would make it come way too early. Or it would still have the 4 CP requirement, but that would make things weird since all other commander units tied to tech are at 0 CP.


I don't think there's anything wrong with the M8 at 4 CP as long as the ATG drop is removed so the doctrine has way less synergy and snowballing potential.
What about mg drop instead at gun and dont touch grayhound
14 Feb 2019, 12:20 PM
#38
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1563 | Subs: 2

What about mg drop instead at gun and dont touch grayhound

I really like this suggestion.

I wanted to try out zooks upgrade on paras, but it felt unnecessary as I already had AT gun with them.
MG drop should also work well with going Cpt for AT gun against medium tanks and pack howie against team weapons, both have great synergy with pathfinders' sight range and camo.
14 Feb 2019, 12:43 PM
#39
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1

Actually since the USF tech has become cheaper there little reason for dropping weapons in this commander.

Airborne can have both weapon drops in one ability that is brought inline with similar abilities (like the osttruppen one)and thus gain a free slot and reduce overlap.
14 Feb 2019, 12:46 PM
#40
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 1943

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2019, 12:43 PMVipper
Actually since the USF tech has become cheaper there little reason for dropping weapons in this commander.

Airborne can have both weapon drops in one ability that is brought inline with similar abilities (like the osttruppen one)and thus gain a free slot and reduce overlap.
maybe add soem plane related ability or vehicle drop
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
  • Soviets flag Talisman
  • U.S. Forces flag |GB| The HS H[oo]ligan
  • Soviets flag VonAsten
  • The British Forces flag RedT3rror
  • Ostheer flag Dzaraa
  • Oberkommando West flag RUKAclNoggano
  • Oberkommando West flag Insane DevM
  • Ostheer flag Luvnest
uploaded by Sturmpanther

Board Info

144 users are online: 6 members and 138 guests
Sturmpanther, DonnieChan, SweetrollNearTheDoor, Farlon, Crecer13, empirescurropt
353 posts in the last 24h
1818 posts in the last week
6153 posts in the last month
Registered members: 29939
Welcome our newest member, Steffaniaq6
Most online: 805 users on 28 Oct 2018, 01:04 AM