Profile of Mr.Smith

That's good work!

Would you consider posting some of the stuff you did on the Bugs Forum section? Hopefully it will aid in the up-take.

Sorry, I must have misread this comment from Cruzz in his "The More You Know" post.

"Green cover reduces damage from all attacks that aren't flamebased, including grenades and mortars which people tend to consider counters to cover. Whether the -50% damage is applied to a weapon depends on where it was FIRED from rather than on where the attack lands. UPDATE: Except now it only reduces explosive damage by 0 to -25%. "

So is this saying that grenades can do 75 up to 100% damage to a squad in green cover? Because if it is I have nothing to really complain about LOL.

I am pretty sure that the current damage modifier is 50% (both from stats files and personal experience on the giving/receiving end)

Cruzz must have been referring to the pre-Leigfest patch I mentioned (the one that annihilated the damage modifiers), and must have forgotten to update his post (Cruzz had taken an extended break around that point).

Just FYI, if you want to make your grenades count, make sure that as many enemies are within 25% of the radius of the targeting reticule. That's the part of the blast radius where the grenade deals maximum damage.

Okay, fair enough, but a 75% damage reduction still seems too steep. With the current mechanics a player using two rifle squads to assault an MG42 along the edges of its cone of fire won't do enough damage for 30 munitions to be worth the cost.

Who said it's 75% reduction?

All grenades have 50% reduction vs heavy cover and NO reduction vs garrison.
This is why riflenades/etc can instakill some garrisoned MG-team members instantly.

If you want to have NO reduction vs heavy cover, there would be no reason to use cover again; ever. The squad formation already punishes you for using cover by making all team-members bunch up (and thus make them a prime target for explosives).

Relic already trialed this between TBF release and the Leigfest patch, and it was a failure for the reasons I outlined.

PS: If you want to insta-gib an MG team that uses cover, you have to flank them first and THEN throw the grenade.

Does someone know why relic didnt Gave them projectiles in the first place?o.O i cant find any reasonable reason for it

I don't know why, but I can only speculate.

My theory is that they wanted to implement "ultra-high velocity shell" effects into the game. If a shell is travelling that fast anyway, they might have thought that it wouldn't make sense to spawn/animate a shell anyway.

The downsides are the following:
- This seems to mess with how collisions are calculated in the game
- It might also have something to do with the fact that non-penetrating hits share the same visuals as penetrating hits

I base my theory on the following:
- I remember watching one of those Relic sneak-peek casts about the Brits. When the devs were talking about the Firefly they were raving about the ultra-high velocity projectile physics they were introducing with the Brits.
- IRL, If I'm not mistaken, the 17pdr, Firefly and Comet all fired the same projectile
- In game, the 17pdr, Firefly and Comet all suffered from the missing-projectile curse for a long time

I am not sure exactly when the 17pdr and the Firefly were fixed - this was mentioned in 2 separate patch notes actually. Nowadays the 17pdr and the Firefly do have a projectile.

TBH, this thread belongs to the Bug Forums section
#CometProjectileMatters

Er - so do we actually have proof that its still broken (since it was patched earlier if I'm not mistaken) ?

1. Attack ground behind any tabk; the shot will just phase through
2. Attribute editor. There is no projectile associated with the weapon (relic did fix firefly and the 17pdr though; both of them were afflicted by the same issue on release)