These ability are NOT "exactly the same" and actually their quite different:
Ostheer:
Name: "Hull Down"
Duration: None
Cost: Free
-25% received damage.
+25% weapon range.
Vehicle can't move.
KV-2
Name: "Firing Positions!"
Duration: Toggle Ability
Cost: Free
+30 maximum range. (+75% weapon range)
+25 minimum range.
KV-2 is immobile in siege mode.
One one is doctrinal ability taking up a slot and the other is ability always available to the specific unit.
There is no "received accuracy penalty" it has been patched out around three years ago.
Small nitpick here... The kv-2 is also doctrinal and takes up a slot. I think siege mode is more or less fine, since it gives you an ISU that can shoot over shot blockers, but it's as, if not more exclusive than hull down. |
Didn't read any of the thread but the op:
Yiih suck and don't demand nerfs because of that.
Statically speaking the soviet sniper is OP,sonce the fire rate of the ostheer sniper and the soviet sniper are nearly the same yet the soviet sniper fights smaller squads with more valuable targets. OP is just a schmuck. Boo to you.
Ostheer sniper fills a role that allows the favtiom to dictate terms. Respond in kind. Kill the sniper and they are on the back foot. Play their game and suffer. |
Just like the USF redesign being half assed, the OKW redesign was all half assed as well which has been one of the major reasons for balance issues in the game.
I would have liked to have seen OKW tech and trucks separated. For example British can make a forward HQ building (which isn't tied to tech). Battlegroup Headquarters (the medic truck) would have been equivalent to the British FHQ, Mechanized Truck would have just been built in Repair Bunkers that OKW could make and the Flak HQ could have been balanced around being its own seperate emplacement similar to the bofors.
From a design perspective this would have made sense but also would have been easier to balance as well.
The entire point of okw as a whole was risk/reward. This is shown in their tech and their vet. You have to make choices to leverage the advantage of the trucks and accept the risk of losing them or pay for advantages you may not fully exploit but keep safe. It's well shaped after the risks of Germany attacking for Antwerp in an all or nothing hail Mary. Either it works and you win or you lose critical assets for nothing. From a design standpoint It makes sense. |
As a once first-page UKF main player, I'd say it favors OST player by about 7:3 ATM if both players have equal skill.
Mainline inf. not having access to AT nade is very very serious flaw. Unless you are going for some weird tactic where you build 4 or more engineers.
Mainline not having a snare is plenty viable as long as alternatives are available. The problem, in the case of the brits is "balancing" gutted the alternatives. The sniper used to be a snare, the AEC is a snare, tulips are a snare. Tommies jobs was STRICTLY to fight from cover and win in that scenario. Armour was their counter. That in itself was countered by weapon racks and multiple unit snares. Compromise wlin design is the downfall of balance because you are left with the mess that is the brits today.... |
Yup same as why a certain mg wich beats the competition by miles is t0 and costs the exact same.
Why does the okw Panther get 2 extra levels of vet but cost the se as the ost Panther? See also up armoured p4 and lefh and pak43 and any other overlap units I may be forgetting?
Faction design is more than just flavor. It is also balance..Ostheer is unable to match the enemies in a battle of attrition (straight up, tommies are easier per head to replace than grens, despite the clear performance and scaling gaps) thusly Ostheer is better at controlling enemy infantry to reduce losses.
The mg42 is absolutely the best mg in the game, but that isn't freely so. |
your understanding of target size to effective HP for infantry is somewhat flawed. The game logic for infantry combat is depending on dice roll on the Accuracy roll not target size.
The game has a hard cap of 0.61 received accuracy. In other words, a vet 3 god-tier Gren squad will have a hard cap of 0.61 target size when been shot at by a shit accuracy infantry like vet 0 conscripts. Relic hardcoded into the game to prevent matrix RNG dodging infantry.
From my understanding of the game, your arse is doing more talking than your fingers here.
Chance to hit is a combination of accuracy and target size, and target size is not capped. Vetted obers for example have a target size of only 0.5 it's quite simply impossible for an oversight like that to not only exist, 'but for the community at large to be unaware of it. |
ATGs do not make 60 range TDs useless.i never made that claim, i said that zoning is countering. a jp4 isnt going to push into a bunch of AT, because even with its armour, it isnt a risk it should take. If that were the case, Allies would be vaporized every single game. It slightly reduces their performance, but what matters in the end is still that you could threaten a kill to really force the enemy tank to the backline and force instant repairs, otherwise your opponent can just repair at his earliest convenience. This is way harder to do with a JP4 than any other TD. this is what i was saying
The JP4 also has decent support within its faction. Team weapons, quick and available snares and affordable mines are present in all OKW builds. OKW isnt a turtle faction, their tools are not designed to assist with a defensive nature. they are agressive. you look at their roster and its clear as day. they have tools to support, yes, all factions do, but their units are best suited dictating the terms of battle, not reacting to them.
I disagree on most (not all) of this.
In my opinion, the issue is the following: It does not make sense to get the JP4 at the 15 minute mark, because your P4 will do just as well against Allied mediums while giving you AI to counter the increasing strength of Allied infantry. It allows you to not invest into Obersoldaten.
who in the seven hells suggested or even alluded to getting a JP4 at 15 min?
The price difference between a JP4 and at least Cromwell/Sherman is similar to the price difference of especially the Ost P4 with Firefly/Jackson/SU85. Still, Allied TDs do not have a ~15 seconds TTK vs mediums while Soviets and USF can potentially lack an ATG in their tech. This shows that the cost difference is no reason for a vehicle to perform as strong offensively or defensively.
you are completely and entirely missing what i said and are having a shower argument with yourself her friend. you are reading in between the lines of a different book in a different language...
The next reason could be general faction design. OKW does not need to make up for lack of AT in other areas since they have a decent ATG and snares. If OKW lacks AI, keeping the JP4's AT strong is probably not the right way to do it.
The jp4 is good because of OKW design. all of their non light tanks are durable. outside that, the JP4 offers OKW a way to combat the hordes of allied tanks IF they are on the backfoot. think like the way the su76 or stug is, but in the flavour of the OKW.
whats more, their AT gun is often regarded as shit tier, because as a defensive unit, it doesnt match its contemporaries, where it excels, is being used as support AT for your infantry, since it too can retreat. this again, because OKW is supposed to be making the pushes and not taking them.
i have no idea what you are talking about with AI power and the JP4. anyone who isnt codguy knows that the JP4 isnt an AI unit, not sure what you are talking about at all actually in that last chunk nor how it relates to what i said in the least...
What keeps the JP4 "bad" is not its performance, but its timing within the faction. Either you don't need it (P4 is decent enough at fighting Allied mediums as well as makes up for more and more upgraded Allied infantry around the 15 min mark) or you don't want it later on because P4 and JP4 do not synergize as well.
you appear to not understand the JP4 and the role it fills. it isnt a build every game unit. its a "im glad thats there" unit. its timing doesnt matter because you dont rush it, you build it if you need it. it doesnt synergize with the p4 for the reasons i listed above, its a defensive unit on an offensive faction. you shouldnt "want" to build it, you build it when you need to. you get it when the enemy had double fuel and you know your p4 is going to get cock slapped without getting a shot off by tds or swarmed with t34s. its there if you need it and when you need it it is a great unit.
EDIT: P4 is obviously not better at fighting mediums, but the better package overall. Edited the text to reflect that.
|
Is it possible to spawn a dummy unit offmap when researching an upgrade, which is then killed automatically if the parent unit/building is killed?
Or invisible garrison? |
Zoning is countering. You don't need to kill to counter. If the unit is too beat up to stay on the front or at risk of it (armour is just RNG after all) then it's going to gtfo.
The jp4 is a great TD, but it's a defensive one is an aggressive faction. It doesn't have the chase or burst damage nor the self spotting of allied TDs. It doesn't have the support structure that the su85 has, or turret of WFAA.
The jp4 is good because it must be, from a design standpoint.
OKW gets either squishy lights or expensive but armoured mediums+. You simply cannot lump them in with "other TDs are squishy" and ignore faction design. There is no cheap t34 for shock and expendable awe. There is no Sherman HE. there is no cromwell with flanking speed to get up in them guts. Jp4 gives okw a fighting chance against cheap allied armour whilst still holding true to faction flavor and design. |
wow.... how can someone exlplaining so much how JP4 is good as it is, and you only quote that?
im saying it coz he said no TD has AI, and im not pointing it as a balance issue equally
the firefly mg has roughly the DPS as 2 conscript models. that is not AI, its fireworks. it also only shoots out to 35 range, nearly half of its max range.
claiming that ~7 dps at point blank and ~3.5 at 35 range constitutes "having AI" is a fools claim that is grasping at straws
the elefant ALSO has a hull mg, and that hull mg dals about double the damage (~15 short and ~4.5 @35) but nobody claims that the elefant has AI, on the contrary, its universally accepted that the elefant has no AI/ because its insignificant AND requires the unit to be out of position to utilize.
incase you wanna claim the elefant is too slow, the pwerfer also deals nearly double more damage (about 13 close and 4ish at 35) the firefly, yet i have never once seen it fight off a flank nor rush in to stop capping infantry with its tremendous and totally worth mentioning....
no 60 range TD has any AI to speak of (that last bit is implied) |