Regarding DPS:
I'd also like to have a "proficiency" value for each squad that scales the damage of the weapons in this squad. Conscripts with a picked up MG should be worse than Obers with a picked up MG since they do not have as much training.
This could fix different implementations for the same weapon in game as well as special modifiers for picked up weapons like Osttruppen have.
Technically, you could further complicate this by increasing the proficiency value the longer the squad uses its weapons, but this would probably be too much for a game like CoH. |
A) Don't we have this already? Implementation is a bit sub par at points, but overall this scheme already exists, mostly scaled by penetration for AT vehicles and scatter/MGs for AI vehicles.
B) Also exists, just not as extensively used. I personally like switchable rounds, however they should come with longer reload times in my eyes. It would mean that the game must focus on small engagements though (as it currently does), because this system will get overwhelming should CoH3 aim for larger battles than CoH2.
C) I am happy with the minimal use of target tables in CoH2. Target tables will make actual calculations and cause-effect relations obscure unless someone really remembers most of them. Which basically means that developers at Relic need to 100% remember their special modifiers and have very good understanding of what changing a base value means for basically every unit.
They should only be used when absolutely necessary. It makes the game very hard to read for normal players, since damage modifiers against certain units only do not make sense from a logical POV.
D) This part is not necessary on a technical level. Both target size and accuracy can already be chosen as a decimal in CoH2. For some reason, everyone stuck with full numbers for the target size and "uncomplicated" numbers for accuracy. I agree though that there should be more variance in target sizes.
Regarding ballistic weapons, Relic should implement a smarter way how tanks fire at infantry. I think it is more likely that a gunner would try to fire into the middle of the formation instead of one particular dude. This should be implemented as well and would remove some unnecessary micro management.
To be honest I'd like to try a system where everything is solved by scatter shots and the actual size of the hit box determines if a shot hits or not. |
I could add the RTS it should be easy. Btw isn't there any other statics method which could take in count the amount of games?
https://web.pdx.edu/~newsomj/uvclass/ho_z-test.pdf
That's a short and quick "how to" without background though.
The other option would be to to calculate probabilities based on Bernoulli's distributions (i.e. "how likely is it that I observe a say 550 or more Axis wins out of 1000 games, although I hypothesize perfect balance"). |
Great unit, only thing holding it back is the horrible moving accuracy + scatter which causes it to miss a lot directly after turning. It's just really undervalued because people are used to spamming Panthers.
I thought about mentioning this, then decided against it for brevity but now that you mention it... I had a thought about fixing this: Afaik rotating does not count as movement, so normal accuracy should apply. I also remember that someone once "quantified" here on the forum that casemates more often miss their first shot if they have to turn into the enemy. This makes me assume that the problem stems from the casemate already shooting when only the edge of the opponent is in front of it, meaning that scatter shots have a higher chance to miss.
In this case, a fix could be to move 0.125s from reload to fire aim time. This would lead to casemates turning another 2-3° before firing, thereby being more centered towards their target (with minor side effects to responsiveness and reload veterancy). |
I could only speculate that this makes up for its virtually 0 sight radius outside the forward 140 degree arc. Sneaking up on it, esp if overstretching, is a very real possibility.
There is usually infantry behind the JP4 to make up for that lack of vision. If an enemy approaches from outside the cone, any casemate would have a big problem. I personally never had issues with the sight cone and rather saw the 45 vision range as a nice bonus
It's good at bullying TDs and can work vs mediums, but mediums is a double edged sword since they can flank you. I wouldn't use it vs heavies because of the low pen (mitigated by HEAT) and it can chase as well as an SU-85, so not at all. The panther is a safer choice and more forgiving.
Vet 5 = still useless
FF can kill jp4 in ~11-12 seconds. I abuse the hell out of JP4s with FFs when I see OKW players dumb enough to buy them.
Again, that is my point: Unless your opponent will get a heavy (Although not ideal, you can even deal with a Pershing and Comet decently well, the biggest problem are the Soviet heavies which are not played that often from what I see), your JP4 will do just about anything it needs to.
The kill time also only applies if the JP4 is not vet2 yet or you hit both Tulips. It's not impossible, but it also works the other way around: a JP4 will finish a Firefly (or any Allied TD) within 12-15 seconds, depending on vet and assuming all shots hit (which you did as well). |
Cromwell is probably observer bias, but for the Comet I agree. This thing is very strong, but I think this is due to lacking proper late game AI options, so something in the Brit faction must be OP to compensate... |
The unit has high Pop and cost so I do not see how it is "op".
When pays extra for armor when all one needs is a gun...
High pop cost is the case for all TDs, however the JP4 performs better against almost all Allied stock units than Allied TDs do against Axis stock units. Especially if you regard faction context.
Indeed the JP4 is a very good unit. While I agree it may be deserving of a nerf, is it really all that problematic?
In the recent past there was alot of backpeddleing on certain units, and as long as it is not broken I dont see why to change the JP4. Especially since we are allegedly done with patches anyways.
I mean that's the question that I wanted to open up for debate. Stat wise, performance wise, this unit is top notch in almost all regards, and the few weaknesses it has can fairly easily be worked with or are fixed with vet. |
Since no one has complained about that unit in a long time, I'll take the step forward and go ahead.
I've been testing the JP4 a lot recently, and I find it either OP or at least very close to it. I am talking from a team game perspective (2v2/3v3), and seriously this thing is amazing.
The stats are good to great. Small target size, good armor, but most importantly: very good ROF.
If I had two complaints about the unit, I'd say it is its mobility. It feels a bit janky to use, but at least after vet3 this problem is solved as well. Penetration is a bit low, I don't necessarily recommend it vs Brits. Still, the pen is high enough to 100% penetrate every other stock unit apart from Churchill and Comet. Against Soviets and USF the JP4 works like a charm.
The vet is SO strong on it. +160 HP at vet 2, making it a 5-shot vehicle. Unless you really screw up, it practically does not die from this point onwards. And even if it does, your opponent has pushed so far that you'll at least get a trade from it. The accuracy bonus at vet3 will basically guarantee you a hit against all mediums and above as long as you stand still. The 60 range will also guarantee to shut down enemy TDs, against which the JP4 will almost guarantee a win in a shoot out.
vet4-5 usually come fairly late and are often not game deciding anymore, but the second vet level is easily reachable, and as I said you won't lose the JP4 from there on, so it is only a matter of time for the rest of the vet to kick in.
ROF is great, even at vet0 (5 seconds) and just gets better at vet4 (4 seconds).
The lack of mobility can often been counter acted by good scouting (I often play Pfusiliere with it) and 1-2 mines on the most obvious flanking paths. As for repairs, I usually play T2 (with my OST team mate donating a med bunker) to get the repairatrons, which also counter acts the increased repair time with 800 HP.
The only real weakness that I have not managed to overcome is the difficulty to really finish off enemy vehicles. That's a clear disadvantage compared to the Panther. But apart from this, you get so much out of this unit it is crazy. |
And even then it wouldn't have much of an effect on g43's or kar's as the real damage boost comes from the 3x burst length which both kar's and g43's don't have.
Yes, you're right.
I'd say your idea is worth a try. G43s have exceptional moving DPS so the only thing to be aware of should be high wiping capabilities. On the other hand, (non stealth) PGrens can do similar stuff too. So it might not be an issue.
|
M8 I know you are the mod but did you read the title not being an asshole or condescending or anything m8, but you should read the full title. Or have you simply forgotten that tactical advance only comes with the m40 upgrade.
Whoops. Yep, I seriously forgot that the tactical advance needs MP40s. My bad. |