That isn't a thing in either COH1 or COH2. Armor works off of a simple value that is binary, either an incoming shell hits your front armor or rear armor. Angling just makes it more likely for a shell to hit the back half of your tank, IE rear armor. You want to face your targets head on in basically all situations, regardless of tank.
If you want some example of Games where angling is somewhat represented:
Men of War
Profile of comm_ash
Game Name: comm_ash ★
Game Name: comm_ash ★
Post History of comm_ash
Thread: Secret Deflect12 Oct 2022, 03:01 AM
In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Soviet partisan doctrine 6 Oct 2022, 18:07 PM
I really don't get what would be wrong with 'the whole doctrine being carried by one ability.' At the end of the day, commanders are selected based on what they bring to the table. Looking at faction win rates, basically every game mode and faction is balanced (except crazy 4v4s), which means that the most powerful Soviet commanders are not out of the overall strength curve.
In other words, there is no reason to nerf good Soviet doctrines to make weak ones better. Its a stupid argument. Thus, the fix to partisan doctrine would require the doctrine to go to the level of other commanders it competes with, or atleast to be strong enough at a niche to compensate for what it lacks. You can either do this by shoring up the doctrine's weakness (giving it a better lategame), or by making the unique aspects of the doctrine stand out more.
In my opinion, the Partisan doctrine hinges on the idea of superior intelligence and planning. As such, I think all the abilities fit the doctrine very well (except maybe the ATG ambush).I believe mark target + spy network are more than enough of a lategame edge. Stacking more has a risk of making the doctrine OP.
Thus, the obvious fix appears to be with the partisans themselves. They need to bring something to the equation to make up for the lack of elite infantry in the doctrine. Currently, after the initial call in, partisans fall off hard, as they have terrible received accuracy and reinforce cost (thus bleeding hard when fighting German squads that have high DPS). I think an interesting change would be to allow a way for partisans to reinfiltrate. Maybe add a 'tunnel' that partisans can build in friendly territory, which allows them to move around the map faster. It should be fairly easy to find and destroy for the opponent to make it fair. As an easier and less insane fix, I think partisan reinforce cost could be changed to be based on a full 5 man squad, rather than the starting 4 man squad (210/(2*5) = 21)
Thread: since we are adding prototype tanks in game27 Sep 2022, 05:56 AM
27 Sep 2022, 05:47 AMCrecer13
Because why shouldn't the Brits have a heavy lategame tank that can frontally engage the Germans? It doesn't have to be the Black Prince, but more options allow for more varied playstyles on all sides. In 1v1s, that kind of asymetric balance works. But in teamgames, even to this day, we can see that balancing a game where one side only has to micro a small number of units vs. another side having to micro more individually weaker units makes for an imbalance.
In addition, it is quite silly to me that Axis factions always seem to need to have the heaviest units in the lategame. Hell, in COH3 the 'light and aggressive Africa Corps' looks like it gets a stock Tiger just to appease certain aspects of the Axis playerbase. Seems boring to me to want to go with the same old design yet again in COH3, especially when this weird idea of German lategame superiority isn't even authentic.
Thread: since we are adding prototype tanks in game27 Sep 2022, 05:12 AM
Authentic is a matter of opinion. Some people might think just having units that fought (regardless of numbers) in the war as all equally viable units for an authentic experience. I personally think COH is already pretty far off the mark when it tries to represent units like Infrared searchlights or Comets as core components of factions. To me, that is about the same level of sin as seeing the Black Prince as a doctrinal unit.
But at the end of the day, units are just skins. The stats we see in game rarely align with what said units were capable of in real life (IE having tanks like the Sherman having worse armor than a P4, or Comets having more armor than Panthers.) If it would make the community happier to see something like a Churchill with a HV 6lber with the same stats as this 'Black Prince,' then that is what Relic should probably go for if they believe the British need a heavy tank capable of slugging it out with other heavies. But removing the Black Prince should not mean that the British faction loses out on having a heavy tank that can fight toe to toe with Tigers or the like.
Thread: Penals have the worst mainline infantry target size26 Aug 2022, 04:46 AM
Penals are fine in 1v1s. They just suck in larger game modes, to the point of becoming an active detriment.
My issue with them (that will likely never get fixed), is how they act like riflemen, but without the snare or anti-infantry upgrades. They are so expensive that you do not want to engage outside of green cover or be bled past the 5 minute mark, and don't really fill any important niche in the soviet lineup. They don't even get sandbags. Why should you ever build penals when you can go for conscripts and supplement with guards for PTRS anyways?
Awesome voicelines though.
Thread: My real problem with COH39 Dec 2021, 21:37 PM
9 Dec 2021, 21:20 PMDonnieChan
How about a fun tourney with a 100% abandon chance mod.
Speaking purely theoretically, I actually think 100% abandonment chance would be far superior to whatever low % chance it is in COH2 right now (though obviously I would rather it be 0%).
If a mechanic was consistent, it can be planned around. If a mechanic occurs only rarely, especially when said mechanic also can represent a HUGE resource shift from one side to the other, it is broken. This is why plane crashes were nerfed, because they rarely happened (maybe 1 ever 10 games), and had the potential to instantly lose a player the game.
Thread: Sib's Honest Opinion on the Current State of COH39 Dec 2021, 01:05 AM
8 Dec 2021, 20:46 PMGiaA
Great list. Agree on most of it. One thing I don't personally feel the same way about is grenade dodging, but I've seen umtiple people mention it. To me the bar that appears is almost too obvious, although it is probably a placeholder anyways.
I think what he meant is that the actual animation of the grenade being thrown is almost impossible to catch, in part because of the farther out zoom, and in part because of the animations being very subdued compared to those in coh2 (which were very obvious, with long and animated windups.) In addition, I'm just not a fan of denoting something that used to be immersive (seeing a grenade being thrown and hearing the troops callout) with a simple UI bar. COH to me has always been great because of how alive the battlefield feels; that you don't feel like you are playing with toys on a map, but living soldiers.
I do however, disagree with his point about the audible warnings for grenades. No-one can spend 100% of their time watching engagements, and the grenade callouts make for good gameplay and user feedback.
In: COH3 Central
Thread: Seems odd that JT can nuke heavy at with barrage8 Dec 2021, 16:25 PM
17-lber should be the counter to the JT, as a stationary AT weapon should be the counter to a heavy tank destroyer. Especially now that the Stuka's incendiary barrage was moved from vet 4, OKW has no excuse to complain about British emplacements.
It's not like the JT doctrine doesn't also have an offmap to help attack emplaced positions either. JT barrage range should be reduced so the vehicle can't just sit a mile away and fire (not like it doesn't already have very high armor to protect it when enemies get in range).
Thread: Upgunning the soviets - the IS-2 6 Dec 2021, 21:19 PM
6 Dec 2021, 17:37 PMVipper
You know, except that it had actually garbage AI because it had terrible scatter and couldn't hit either tanks or infantry when it did fire...
The issue wasn't the 240 damage and slow fire rate (in which case people would never use the ISU-152), but the accuracy/ scatter.
Thread: Upgunning the soviets - the IS-2 2 Dec 2021, 23:00 PM
Personally, I think the IS2 is crippled by being originally designed in COH as an analogue to the Tiger 1, when historically it was closer to the Tiger 2 in terms of armor protection and firepower. If I could redesign the unit from the ground up, I would make it a heavily armored, slow RoF vehicle with the same main gun damage stats as the KT (Slower reload obviously.) To compensate for slow RoF, it should instead have faster movement speed than the KT, and maybe a wider AoE on each shell so it damages infantry in a wider radius (but doesn't kill anymore than the KT does.)
It would obviously have to be priced around as much as a KT with these changes though.
Latest replays uploaded by comm_ash
Ladders Top 10