|
It looks quite healthy to this point - the chart is just a typical feedback chart of system under regulation under changing conditions. Lets just hope it's a negative feedback, not a positive one, as it can't be seen from the graph at the moment. |
|
The mortar is really good. It does perfectly what it was designed for - drops smoke and counters garrisons. Range is enough to deal with team weapons. It is also really easy to reposition and thus hard to wipe - not only can it retreat earlier than other mortars, before being rifle-naded, but also can use the quick set up time to change position and fire back when under enemy mortar fire.
It needs more micro than other mortars though, so don't get it if you cant keep it moving. Do mind that there is not really much need for it if you go nades. |
|
I belive that there are already some mods that make the game much more realistic - like more real range, armour and damage profiles of all tanks. There is no need for a new mod and the idea is tbh ten years old. |
The normal targeting always shoots well beyond its target. I've had better success with it by using attack ground, but it still overshoots its target so you have to manually target short of the intended target. Rather than fix the Bulldozer, I'd rather they copy the ballistics of the Brummbaer to match the Bulldozer.
The Bulldozer would be fine with the fuel dropped to 110 and a slight improvement to targeting.
That's all that is hoped for. Also, it's worth mentioning that due to the more static nature of turetless brummbar and the fact that usf players are used to smaller move penalties the sherman has, the buldozzer will always feel inaccurate, even if it is going to be totally ok after the patch. |
|
I'm not in tournament, just lounched the login screen to see what the app is, but I belive you should change html title and possibly icon of the site. Just to make things look more polished. |
wtf....u can only build one at the same time...
We were discussing relaxing that limit. |
I played a game as usf on steppes where the axis players all constantly overextended their infantry in giant blobs and we wiped the fuck out of their infantry, but then we couldn't destroy their bases because it's such a big map and they just replaced them with panthers and brummbars. They had a pretty small army for a while and it dragged on and on down to like 50 points on their side, but they had caches and marginal field control and by that time they had amassed basically an army of tanks and a couple pios/sturms. So the problem is my BAR riflemen, the other dudes bren tommies, and the other two guys' penals and conscripts were all basically useless, and our tanks eventually got run over by sheer numbers before we could replace them. This whole long anecdote I basically wrote down because I could see the same thing happening, which is a problem because it almost rewards or at least heavily compensates for shitty infantry micro and unit preservation, but with heavies, and increasing the popcap would probably cause this situation, but with heavies: an okw player could just dick around with volks for 30 minutes of a team game and lose most or all of them, and then just call in like 3-4 kts (since I can't see anything over 30 pop for a heavy being balanced for okw) or 2 kts and 2 sturmtigers and it'd just be cheesy as hell. What would you even do against 3 kts? It'd be legitimately unbeatable, but then another or even two other okw players could do the same thing as long as they were backed up by an ost with caches and pios.
I would say that KT being the strongest vehicle in the game could be about 32 pop, so that if you build two of them you are left with only the repair forces and if you try to build 3 you have to rely on teammates/buildings repairing you. Other heavies should be under 30. |
Buffing the Panther is wrong answer to the issues.
Fixing the ludicrously overpowered Comet and buffing the Tiger slightly are what should really happen.
The trick to using a panther against either inf or tanks is using it head on, its frontal armour is insane and its front machine guns do actually hurt inf.
The OKW Panther is crazy expensive but that is because of the overall cost of reaching it at T4. It would make sense to make it cheaper but only if the process of tech up was more expensive.
Another reason for it being more expensive is that okw panther is simply much better than ostheer one. |
All popcap should scale according to a unit's real usefulness. Otherwise, you create no-brainer build-everytime units. If a low-popcap unit has no unit limit, then you've created a spam-monster (see live-version Comet).
I will concede that the Comet popcap looks bad when compared to a list of vehicles. However, I would argue that this is not an issue with the Comet. This is an issue with call-in heavy vehicles in general.
In particular, I am referring to the following vehicles, whose popcap is a complete joke:
- King Tiger (21)
- Jagtiger (21)
- Elefant (20)
- IS-2/Tiger (19)
- Command Panther (18) <-- Note that you can no longer have a CP AND a King Tiger at the same time
- Specialist Churchills (18)
- Sturmtiger (18)
- Pershing (16!!!)
However, if you skim the list, above, each of these vehciles is limited to one. Giving the Comet a bad popcap value means that we would be turning a blind eye to Comet spam.
The popcap of the following vehicles is also a joke, however:
- Stug (8!!!)
- OKW Panther (16) <- The OKW panther is actually a potent generalist, unlike its useless OST sibling
- Callope (12!!!)
^ Those vehicles look pretty bad on the modes you can spam them. This is why we will be fixing them when their time comes and they enter the scope.
Compare each one of the forementioned vehicles to the OST Panzer4, which has 12 popcap, and you will see what I am talking about.
We will also be fixing over-pop-costed vehicles and units. Again, this cannot come without Relic's blessings.
20 popcap is very fair for a durable (and mobile unit) that has access to the utility abilities that it has. Build 1-2 of them, and you will have a fun time. Build 3 or more and you will suffer.
We want to address all popcap-related issues (6 popcap pfussies, lol) as soon as possible. However, we haven't been allowed to normalize popcap yet, by Relic. In the meantime, we can only chip in at whatever enters scope.
What do you think about increasing population cost of all heavy vehicles to the point where having 2 of them on the field would be a bad idea 90% of time and then relaxing the "limit to 1" rule? I feel that sometimes building 2 heavies should by viable option and operating on pop cost we can make it so this is a rare possibility rather than obvious choice like before. Without using artificial limits on unit counts.
Such change would open more posibilities, especially in team games where you could imagine one player choosing a doctrine with heavy and going double heavy and the other covering infantry and spamming mediums - much more of a synergy than everybody going heavy vehicle doctrines just to get one per player. |
Double men soviet snipers, 120mm mortar decrewing at 0 member, raketen being able to retreat, vehicle being able to cap (kubel), sniper being able to cripple tanks (UKF) and so on
No. Apart from soviet 120mm mortar, these are not inconsistencies becouse they are important to unit performance, this is just asymetric design. In case of pack howitzer it doesn't change much, just another thing we have to remember. |
Poland
0
ferwiner
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
