PPSh is anything but a "highly accurate weapon" with far accuracy of 0.12
The intended use is close range with a vetted acc of 1.14, which SMG vetted or not is more accurate at its intended range? Why are you bringing up far accuracy in a question about short range unit?
Accuracy, damage reduction, armor all have similar effects in the long run because in most small amrs fights the weapon do not fire with 100% accuracy.
But every single example you gave involves RNG, damage reduction for Grens with a target size of 1 completely removes that at short range for Vetted PPSH, VET Para combines, VET SVT as they all have 100% acc or better.
Explosive weapons work different than small arms, since the accuracy of most of these weapon is too low to have a significant impact.
But yes damage reduction would work to protect infatry from these and that is why Grenadiers get it.
On the other hand neither the 120mm mortar nor the Pak howitzer do 80 so they can not kill entities with one shot.
I was talking about the actual howitzer/B4
The Game is RNG based so there is little wrong with RNG in general.
I agree, but the game promotes saving VET, units losing a vetted squad to clumping which has nothing to do with skill is infuriating. Something as minor as 5% damage reduction could stop a full health squad from dying upon exiting a building or turning a corner
1) depends on range
2) depends on enemy being in cover or not.
Damage reduction comes at vet 3 and the problems exist way before that.
They sure do, its just seems to be the one area where the damage reduction probably doesn't help as much as having a better target size.
|
I think we're not really on the same page as far as what the meaning of "capping" is, although I think we pretty much agree eith everything else.
I was just saying that I don't think that "cap" is the right word because while it's accurate for burst damage (grenades and other explosions that have a set amount of damage when they hit a squad & will be reduced by the damage reduction), for sustained damage like squad v. squad it's more of a "dampener" to damage than a "cap".
Your right, for most cases it would just work as a dampener. However I am hyper focusing on highly accurate weapons(Vetted PPSH, Para Carbine, Penal SVT...). Every weapon should have a maximum damage they can do once you hit an accuracy of 1 if the target has a size of 1 which Grens do. AT that point the damage modifier becomes a CAP, again using the PPSh example as it is most relevant, each gun would get capped at 12.8 DPS and there is no way to increase that damage.
If the above is correct, making damage reduction at various levels a VET bonus would have been a better way to balance all units. This would remove a lot of RNG from tank shots/120mm mortar/howi killing an entire squad in one hit giving a chance for counter play(SMASHING RETREAT)
Once say Penals/Shocks get vetted isn't most if not all of the bonus from Mother Russia pointless aside from the rec acc?(Same for other highly accurate weapons for other factions)
Also similar but not completely related, this could also be why OST has such issues with Pathfinders. As the scoped carbine is fairly accurate and Grens have a target size of 1, the shots have a great chance of landing and since they have sniper crit once the threshold is passed it partially negates the purpose of the Gren damage reduction.
|
Maybe this is being a little anal, but I wouldn't call that a cap on damage, per se. More of a squad-wide DPS limiter if anything. It's a cap to *accuracy*, after all. 80 HP, that's your damage cap, since the LMG burst ends when the model dies. At least for Grens MG42 that is.
Not sure best way to say it, but doesn’t damage reduction remove a lot of RNG and just CAP the damage put out.
For arguments sake we use the vet 3 PPSH damage of 16 DPS. As the Gren has a target size of 1, it would normally receive all 16 DPS. But with the Vet3 damage reduction the PPSH would do a maximum damage of 12.8. No boost from say Mother Russia would increase that damage. However, it is possible for Gren to reduce damage taken with aura such as command tank and or air dropped medical supplies. Again, assuming I am understanding it right. |
Values for highly accurate weapons and vetted squads are fairly artificial anyway due to the aforementioned accuracy cap. E.g. the PPSh has a close range accuracy of 0.8. Combine that with the +40% accuracy modifier of Shock troops and you're technically at 1.12. This value will be capped at 1, meaning the calculated DPS gain will only be 25% instead of the promised 40%. But that's not what you will see in game. Your vet3 Shock will likely fight a vet3 Volks or something. The lower RA of the targeted squad will usually push the overall accuracy below 1 (to 1.12x0.77 = 0.86 in our example), which will not be capped and mean that the veterancy accuracy bonuses have the effect that they are intended to have.
Against a newly build Volksgrenadier, the calculated value would be true, but when comparing vetted units, they might not reflect the game properly.
A couple thoughts based off what you said, please correct me where I am wrong. (Mainly about SMG units)
Serelia data is fairly pointless even if it was 100% correct in a balance discussion as it uses a target size of 1 despite RA being the 2nd most important value. Hopefully, for COH3 we get a version that lets us test vs different target sizes.
Soviet units in general scale better with regards to RA than USF/UKF. Across the board most Soviet units get 40% or more ACC with VET compared to the 30% or less USF/UKF get. Normally the argument would be that USF and UKF start with better based stats which would take this into account.
For example Rangers start off great with their 4 Thompsons and great RA of .73 which was made apparent when I tested them against AssG and won everytime. However with VET, AssG RA outscales Ranger Acc and AssG Acc outscales Ranger RA bonus leading to a situation where they perform a lot more similarly then expected. As Axis elites usually get larger RA bonus than 25% this would mean Rangers(and Paras) perform better against mainlines unless Paras use Tactical advance.
Penal Acc bonus may not increase max damage but would make them the most consistent performer against axis Elites as Penals could brute force past Axis great RA.
This also means anything less than 10% Target size buff against most Soviet PPSH is pointless which is why most OST players skip G43 upgrade in short range maps. At VET3, the Gren would receive the same amount of damage from a VET3 Shock/PPSH Con/PPSH Partisan or Penal which makes it a fairly lack luster upgrade vs LMG.
On the flip side, the damage reduction removal was a much larger nerf to Rangers than was advertised as no matter what their is a CAP on the damage certain weapons can do per second as seen with Gren example.
|
Not necessarily since accuracy is capped at 1 and it probable that once vetted Penals get higher accuracy than 1 at close range that is "wasted".
But wouldn't that mean they both get a stationary damage of 16.863? Yet, serelia has Penals listed at 16.613 so is the extra accuracy having a negative effect? The increased moving DPS would make sense as the moving acc nerf wouldn't effect them as much as they have a higher value to start with. |
It's less about DPS retention on the move, but about the absolute DPS on mid-long range in my opinion. PPSh and SMGs in general are great on short range, but unless you can body block the enemy or cut into the retreat path, they are not good at wiping. Especially in frontal assaults, where the enemy might retreat straight to the back once you're in optimum range, there is not much they can do because the enemy will exit the most dangerous zone instantly.
Yea you and Vipper are right about that. However do to map design and most users instantly retreating once SMG users get close I have tried really hard to change my approach. Frontally assaulting anything leads to most of the complaints we have as SMG units wont really pay off. I try to attack from the side or behind so I can attempt to get into the retreat path as much as possible which probably led me to confirmation bias of PPSH being better than Thompsons. (Just remembered that I am also comparing them to AssG which only have 3 Thompsons) |
Thompson have good DPS as far as range 20 so that is not very accurate and Ober get 2 IR STG and 2 K98...
You are right about Thompsons, it comes down to in game situation. PPSH/Thompsons do about the same damage on the move close range however with 6 PPSH they do about 72 damage close(up to range 10) with a drop to 24 at 15 range. Paras would do 65.4 DPS at range 4, 61.6 at range 10 but hold on fairly well at range 15 for about 35 DPS. So if you can get a bit of body blocking going PPSH are better, no blocking Thompsons.
One thing I find interesting is Shocks have better base damage with VET vs Penals in serelia but on the move Penals do more damage. So one of the numbers is wrong as Penals should do equal or more damage standing still due to Vet ACC which would make their on the move damage being higher makes sense.
Penals would do 78 DPS until 10 range and 30 DPS at 15 range, which would match them up significantly better vs Paras.
At point blank Obers do 57 DPS, range 8 55.45, range 15 ~ 32 DPS and range 20 24.4 DPS and 15.93 at range 30 which is where all other SMG have fallen off. (Paras do 20.6 DPS at range 20, 6.47 range 30 mostly due to carbines)
All numbers above where using VET3.
Non VET
Shocks close-50.1 DPS range-15 17 DPS
Paras range-4 51.3 DPS range-10 48 DPS range-15 27.6 range-20 15.89 range-30 4.95
Obers range-0 39.85 range-8 38.6 range-15 21.9 range-20 16.66 range-30 10.67
Obers are pretty much the best chasers despite only having 2 IR STGs, it is worth chasing even almost to max range. Paras start off as stronger chasers than Shocks which makes sense as they cost muni and come later but Shocks make up a lot of the difference with superior VET so like I said a little earlier it really comes down to the in game situation.
|
you forget StormStrooper MP40 and Volk MP40, Ass Rifle/Tommy and Pastisan PPsH 
Still, Ranger SMG based on their pure raw power NOT tactical unit like Para, Stormstrooper, osber SMG...v..v.
I didn't forget them I was mainly looking at the elite units, really started as AssG, Airborne and IR Obers and the others joined in for the hell of it. What I said about Falls applies to the Partisan and Storm, you need to test them using cloak and I am not good enough with testing to not effect the performance of the cloak. With Storms you also need to use Tactical Advance to get maximum performance so a lot for a noob like me to get right. Without cloak/ability I would expect them to lose every fight due to sheer EHP of the competition. |
Also, the Thompson is an assault rifle/SMG hybrid. High damage up close and decent damage mid-range.
Yea, I just did the test at close range as I would expect the IR Obers to win at mid range as they are a beefed up PG STG44 which is a true AR where the Thompsons are a SMG with decent better mid range compared to the others.
Looking at the Serelia graphs, IR STG and PPSH are the best on the move. They both keep around 60% or better on the move. Stens/Thompsons/MP44/PG STG seem to do about 55% or less on the move so there chase potential seems to be a lot less. |
|
This is not a balance thread, just testing various SMG units on test map at point blank. I originally got the itch a month or two ago, I was using PPSh Airborne and OKW went IR STG as I kept catching him off guard. Needless to say PPSH got shutdown but I switched to LMG so no big deal. I posted a recent game with 2 scout cars and AssG, OKW this time made IRSTG to counter but it didn't work out as well so I did some testing just to check.
IR STG beat Penal PPSh/Airborne at Vet0, Airborne when both VET3, but loses to Penals with both VET3.
As Airborne need camo to get bonus in real situation the IR detection would shut that down.
AssG/Shocks mop the floor with them.
For the hell of It I tested Shocks vs AssG, at vet0 Shocks win but at VET3 AssG pull the upset more often then not which caught me by surprise. Shocks dominate PPSH Penals, but PPSH Penals can beat AssG when both VET3.
SHOCKS stomp PARAS and Rangers
ASSG lose to Paras and Rangers at vet0, Paras with vet, but goes either way vet3 Rangers.
Edit: None of this testing was scientific in any way shape or form was just testing for fun.
Thoughts:
Even though IR Obers don't really win anything close range their mid-range performance along with ability to negate cover makes them a pretty good choice as real world situations will most likely have at least one squad closing in on the other.
Shocks are beast from the get go, not that was a surprise.
PPSH Penals put out a shit load of damage, they give shocks a run for their money but their inability to get close and clunky upgrade path makes it a nonstarter for most.
Airborne Guards are the weakest if looking from a base damage/durability point of view. However, cloak and smoke can give them the edge although their cloak is the worst. The biggest surprise was even after the PPSH upgrade I noticed that I could give them 2 more weapons. It may never happen but a double LMG cloaked Airborne could be cool.
AssGuards are fairly meh at VET0, but AT Vet3 they gave everything a run for their money except PARAs as a lot of matches had a slim win for AssG or massive win in favor of Paras.
Paras seemed to be fairly good against everything short of Shocks, not good enough with test mods to get a good test with Tactical Advance.
Rangers disappointed me the most, while they did decent I sort of expected them to dominate a bit more since they start off with good Rec Acc, however Soviet VET keeps it closer than it probably should be.
I didn't test Falls too much as they really need their camo to get best performance. They really should not be used outside of cover. |
0
Relic Entertainment
