Allies suggestion

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Henny
Posts: 55
Joined: 02 Aug 2016, 04:30

Allies suggestion

Postby Henny » 04 Aug 2017, 00:10

Buff americans? Brits are way better than americans in every way

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby JimQwilleran » 04 Aug 2017, 01:11

Armor doc is already gonna be buffed

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 65
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 04 Aug 2017, 02:56

Henny wrote:Buff americans? Brits are way better than americans in every way

let's do this

kwok
Posts: 1042
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby kwok » 04 Aug 2017, 03:03

Actually this was made for balance reasons.

mofetagalactica
Posts: 113
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby mofetagalactica » 04 Aug 2017, 04:10

Its true when you say that brits are way better than americans in every way

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3090
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Tiger1996 » 04 Aug 2017, 08:00

Brits are way better than US for sure.. but to be honest; I like US more than WH the other way around. US is more dependent...
I mean at least the US faction is more comprehensive, US doesn't lack airplanes for example, but WH does! Also, US still has heavy tanks and even super heavy tanks just like the WH faction, and US also has enough elite and specialized inf units in both AB and inf docs. WH has elite inf only in Blitz doc.. therefore I believe that WH might be in fact even worse.

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 458
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50
Location: Italy

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby sgtToni95 » 04 Aug 2017, 11:06

Nerf Poppa? I think other players are much worse in every possible way

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 04 Aug 2017, 12:20

Tiger:


WH has elite inf in every doc. Grens are simply elite. With basic values they are better than enfield commandos and whatever. In Terror they get buffed (not just stgs fo free) and in def doc they become literally immortal. Been testing it. You can just like that run into HMG´s, shermans and a bunch of AB´s and throw a grenade on the HMG.

Yes, WH has elites in every doc. Just they dont "sound elite". These WH grens are way more powerfull than PE heavy assault grens (which only advantage is the repair ability later and slightly faster exp gain rate after upgrades).

AB´s can be killed by pretty much any basic inf. They are dangerous later because they cost less than 400 MP to get and supported in late games.

Then you once again just do one to one comparisions. Just becase "there is something" it doesnt mean anything. When comes which units, what can be combined, adapted etc. Furthermore what kind of suprises contains a doctrine. CW has suprises during any stage. From dingo and bren carrier, recce, 75 mm HT, gliders combined with airstrikes and so on. Churchills. Surprises are things you can get access quick enough and in combination that it can completely overthrow defenses. For US the only thing doing so in recent times was funny calli jeep slavo with sudden 101 drop in the target location stealing a weapon or something.

Mostly such surprises are placed among the tec lines. And brits have till max tier some of these "suddenly occuring" things that cause chaos and overthrow the build order and defense of the opponent. The units i consider as those: Dingo/Bren, Recce, 75 mm arty HT, staghound (best allied vehicle), daimler car (speed and killing vehicles), Glider/cluster bomb airstrike,cromwell, churchills.

Then what really powerfull units exist in a faction you have to count with. For CW we find comet (and all 17 pdr units), recce, staghound, upgraded commandos (let alone that they can ambush makes them way better than AB), Churchill (at the time they come, later crocc), Boys AT. Either taking punishment or giving a punch or both and which cause headache to the enemie when they reach the battlefied. WH has here clearly all sdkfz 234 vehicle types as dominating vehicles in their stage and tank IV H/J as dominating medium tanks.

For PE its Luftwaffe inf and hetzers for PE in general. Quick acces and powerfull.

Then how good can factions deal with such powerfull suprise units. Here CW PE and WH are way ahead of US. Let it be the vehicles with AT weapons (28 mm sdkz 222 vs any vehicle, 75 mm stubby or 50 mm on puma or the 20 mm) or inf (Boys AT vs vehicles, schreck vs slow churchills or faust) or anti tank tanks (17 pdrs, 75 mm L/48). I am not counting AT guns to that bc its the nature of these surprises to deal with this static type defenses. Here its about how can factions react following the first event when the enemie rolled over the defenses. In Both scenarios US has it very hard. Either by really surprising the enemie bad ass like and when it comes "how to counter react" and throw back that first surprise. At best what US can do: Get second defense line and hold what you still have. They cant really "throw them back to sea". That changes first with late game when enough upgraded rangers are avaialble, Jacksons pr pershing. However that enables to throw enemies back but they are no "tec line surprises" as that all requires many CP´s.

US may throw simply masses. But that has also many downsides. Such as enemie get veterancy, micro managment or you wont get many gains from your own veterancy which multiplies the basic values. 0x2=0.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 241
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Redgaarden » 04 Aug 2017, 15:41

I mean at least the US faction is more comprehensive, US doesn't lack airplanes for example, but WH does! Also, US still has heavy tanks and even super heavy tanks just like the WH faction, and US also has enough elite and specialized inf units in both AB and inf docs.


I mean at least WH faction is more comperhensive, WH doesn't lack actual trained soldiers, but US does! also, WH has heavy tank in every doctrine they choose, sometimes only super heavy tanks kinda like US armour, And WH also has basic core units that beat US specialized inf in both AB and inf docs.

In all honesty. I feel kinda cheated having the m1 Garand being the worst basic rifle there is. And alos that you have to beat the axis by being in higer numbers combined with close range and a veterancy system that actually doesn't do jack shit to the stats and only upgrades your abilities. I mean rifles become almost as useful as volks at vet 3.

So combined with garbage basic weaponary that results in the veterancy being shit makes US infantry the actual worst in the entire mod.


Edit: Do note this isn't a weakness about US doc only my complaint about their infantry.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3090
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Tiger1996 » 05 Aug 2017, 03:22

I would just like to promote this recent post by Sukin from another topic, as I believe this post still fits here:
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2176&p=20980#p20979
Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:I've never said that Allies are OP or something, RAF, AB, Armor and Arty have always been very fun to play, as SVT team we were up to play allies anyday, because they have way more cunninng instruments and there docs fit each other way better ( AB + Arty + Armor as Hawks already mentioned was pure fun, mainly because of how good this docs could сomplement each other), Axis were more about rough power and that was fine, difference between gameplay approach. Now Allies got skyhigh buffed while Axis became super boring, they have nothing, best units can be killed by click to kill abilities or countered by spezialized units which cost nothing (Super effective HE m4, M10 Achiles), generally, all their stuff is far away less cost effective than allied units. Last doc which could give me at least some fun before I quit BK was SE, Luft wasnt that bad as well, TH...we all know and WH is a crap faction entirely, terror doc turned to "start to get benefits from your doc choice tree after 40 minutes", BK is only about tigers and panthers, Storms have completely lost their value after multiple direct and inderect nerfs: evasive manevures disabled, vet. lvl exp increased, Handled AT nerf, HE shells buff.

If devs will not change their approach BK will die completely, I mean, you should fix things which dont work, not other way arround, last changes regarding AB ( 1 Hellcat, seriously? after you turned recoiless rifles to useless shit?) Raf and Luft are bullshit, you d better revise TH, Def and Terror, they seem to be completely off.

I pretty much agree with everything he said, and I just highlighted his statement about the WH faction.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby JimQwilleran » 05 Aug 2017, 03:32

I also agree with sukin. Allies are fun and easy - axis are hard and frustrating. Just buff axis a bit and it will be much more fun for everybody.

User avatar
Medic Truck
Posts: 69
Joined: 15 Jun 2017, 19:31
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Medic Truck » 05 Aug 2017, 11:04

Everywhere I see upgraded Axis infantries charging from the front like Rambos. Infantry vs Infantry battles need preparations for Allies, especially US. With Def doc buffs, terror buffs, top class grenadiers, stormtroopers, it fails me when I am reading Axis need buff.

I sort of want to understand what is not working in Axis exactly because I like them. Is it because the gameplay evolved and we don't want to evolve and once winning tactics no longer work anymore? Or, there are really setbacking changes that has prompted this discussion?

I see here and there random comments on "Allies are OP", "Axis is underperforming", etc. Still, what I see in the game replays or personally, I don't find it to be so. I sort of also feel that the initial British Boys have that sort of demorale on the Axis. lol. I bet if only, some changes to the Boys is brought up, this impending sense of doom might be corrected?

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 05 Aug 2017, 12:19

Medic Truck wrote:Everywhere I see upgraded Axis infantries charging from the front like Rambos. Infantry vs Infantry battles need preparations for Allies, especially US. With Def doc buffs, terror buffs, top class grenadiers, stormtroopers, it fails me when I am reading Axis need buff.


During games, axis inf is the most buffed inf. If any its commandos that can stand them toe on toe. PE buffs the inf non doctrinal and doctrinal (Luft in particualar), WH buffs in all three with the largest buffs (def) you can get for any infantry. And due to better basic stats they do gain a lot more from vet. (Axis starting stats) 5x2 (vet boost)=10 (total power), (US starting) 1x 2 (vet boost)= 2 (total power). Let it be accuracy, HP or whatever. A high number modified by a certain value boosts by a higher number than those starting with low numbers.

You can compare that to income of an population. You increase it by 10% for all which sounds fair. Just the dude who already earns 3000 euro will benefit much more from it than those with an income of 300. Thats how it behaves with veterancy for axis and US. CW luckily has already much better stats for core units.

I sort of want to understand what is not working in Axis exactly because I like them. Is it because the gameplay evolved and we don't want to evolve and once winning tactics no longer work anymore? Or, there are really setbacking changes that has prompted this discussion?


Pretty much. Very much this. A few still work whatsoever. Late games, when things become chaotic, the game is pretty much the same. Allis have to beat axis in an organized way most of the time. When things get chaotic, less but therefore more rambo like units pay off much better and most importantly easier to handle than a billion of paper units that require nonstop controle.

I see here and there random comments on "Allies are OP", "Axis is underperforming", etc. Still, what I see in the game replays or personally, I don't find it to be so. I sort of also feel that the initial British Boys have that sort of demorale on the Axis. lol. I bet if only, some changes to the Boys is brought up, this impending sense of doom might be corrected?


Pretty much this. Like usually PE/ WH combo was a mix of vehicles and inf. Now boys-AT have such a demoralizing impact that WH as well as PE just run for inf. You see no schwimms, no scout cars, nothing. Plaing AT spam and infantry bc of dingos and boys. At the end axis stay there with just inf (volks and pe grens) and AT guns while allis have that mix of HMG, jeep, Boys, Rifles, sappers, Pios. And so they lose the early due to worse unit composition. It might be different when PE and WH would combine. PE: HMG, 2 x PE grens and 28 mm car. WH volks, sniper, pios and AT gun.
But for that axis would have to play similiar as allis, each faction with certain starting units instead doubling capabilties.

It reminds me of current european army set up. Second largets military spending world wide, but less effective than the russian army due to doubling capabilties. And thats what is going on in early axis game.

Yes. Thats the largest changing factor which makes the game really feel different. Other changes had rather an almost cosmetic impact. In a 4 vs 4 when there are two CW players, the axis vehicle stage can be almost entirely skipped and denied by four boys AT squads. This combined with a simple recce vehicle or US M16 can ruin any offensive attempt by axis in mid stage. Axis goes defensive, CW picks arty doc and yeah... the rest you can think yourself. At the other hand, when there is lets say just one CW player, US will badly suffer at this stage and have to remain entirely defensive.
The 57 mm HT doesnt change that fact due to poor accuracy at range. I mostly managed to rush and destroy this one with any puma when they dared out of ambush.
Axis can plan the next offensive steps or simply killing US with the most easiest campy defensive style (not saying emplacment or bunker spam, but defensive with tanks, vehicles and stuff).

Thats why i am not blaming allis/axis balance. I rather blame the CW>US balance.



@Tiger: Just like armor doc. You also wont get any benefit within first 40 mins. You just sit there. Sitting out axis vehicle stage, medium armor stage, supply yard upgradding stage and sandbags, somehow try to get your CP´s together (For pershing, calli, jumbo, off map arty). And then wait untill CW creates a situation where you can somehow bring something up and saying like a little child: "Look dad, ive got something to help you". *Child shows his small shovel for children* Dad says: "Nice my son, you can dig a hole there" *Child thinks he really does something usefull* *Dad meanwhile has a several excavators in the garage*
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 05 Aug 2017, 12:28, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 840
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 05 Aug 2017, 12:27

Medic Truck wrote:Everywhere I see upgraded Axis infantries charging from the front like Rambos. Infantry vs Infantry battles need preparations for Allies, especially US. With Def doc buffs, terror buffs, top class grenadiers, stormtroopers, it fails me when I am reading Axis need buff.


Lack of experince my friend...doesnt matter how good your cool-ass Storms\Grens\Luft can shred rifle sections, because pro player simply won't allow you to do that, he will harrass your expensive troops with snipers and super cheap anti-inf vehicles (HE Sherman, Crusader, Quad cal.), denying any attemtps to exploit their toe-to-toe power, which means shit when you only face vehicles and emplacements.

@Hawks

Idk where do you get all this scenarios...all of them are wrong. Tank IV, Ostwinds, Puma's, Storms, Grens..... all units are crap, not because they are bad itself, but because Allies have a cheap and super-effective counter for each of this units.

The real picture and reasons why Axis suck, and, moreover, they are boring.

Lets start with Allies

First of all, they have a very powerfull start, Jeep + 2 rifles at the beginning are very flexible, you can cap points extremely fast and make a short job for volks (thx to Garands) if you will manage to close the distance, then you go for recon and sniper in order to secure the center, at the same time, CW can provide awesome def service at the beginning, their Sappers will always take the most valuable position at mid and AT boys, which are available right away, will deny any axis motorized support, rifle section is the best infantry unit of early game stage, specially when supported by Leutnant.

Now lets look at the docs, my biggest issue is that Axis have no surprices and quick benefits from their doc choice, results that their gameplay is waiting......waiting.....waiting and waiting, so the only working tactic for them is to push forward with defence. US and CW on the other hand can kick germans using their doc benefits almost right away.

Inf doc: For 6 points you can get amazing set of shock instruments, each of them alone can collapse axis front if used in the right hands, of course I mean CQB+Arty strike+HE Jumbo combo.

AB doc: I think everyone knows that it used to be my favotite doc, mainly because of the extremely fast and flexible gameplay, you get huge benefits right away by unlocking 101s and building AB HQ, which have an ability to drop smoke anywhere on the map, combined with flame nades you easily can get rid of annoying mg42 or pak 38 here or there, so you just get 4 AB squads as soon as possible, as support you buy Quad cal. and 57mm truck, usually I was able to deploy this army in 9-10 minutes, this set of units allows you counter pretty much everything axis can throw on you.

RE doc: As hawks already said, they have a surprise on every game stage, this doc is the best for "early gg" 95mm Churchill + HE Churchill supported by AB swarm hardly can be stopped.

Raf: Glyders are available right away, cluster bombs are the most deadly early ability, quick access to M10 Achiles which is the most cost-effective vehicle in game, along with HE sherman in Armor doc.

In this matter, WH loosing to everybody, Terror doc is completely useless for first 30 minutes, doesnt matter which tree path you choose, you simply dont have an instruments to survive an early game there, going for Grens upgrades is silly, they cant win the game alone, Stuka is too far for just a support unit, so everyone just sits behind Mg42s and Paks waiting for Panther G, hoping to score some kills with it and unlock the rest of the tree, however, when it comes allied usualy already have all kinds of 17p behind every corner or hungry Typhoon\Thunderbolt.

BK is pretty much the same, just a bit better due to PZ4 and Ostwind which are available quite early. But entire doc can be locked down very easy by ambushed units and emplacements.

TH even worse than previous 2.

I think its obvious that allies do have MUCH MORE proactive instruments, while axis can only stay reactive in most of the doctrines.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 05 Aug 2017, 12:44

Allis can be proactive mainly bc of CW. Boys AT, Recce, Glider, churchill and early 95 mm and 17 pdr or achilles, 75 mm HT etc. For US its mainly this 6 cp combo that can add to this.

Still, if the shocking instruments are used wrong, advantages not used right away, somehow countered and axis regrouped, the game can turn quickly. Coz the lines of allis are stretched to some point and the knock out of a certain vital unit can cause an collapse as well. AA tanks will deal with inf and airplanes and mobile vehicle/tank defense will make them less vulnerable to these schocking instruments from early-mid stage. At this point again, CW is cruical simply bc of achilles, firefly and good arty units.


US armor is often just like Terror. Waiting.

The scenario you described is correct in terms of teamplay. I think the most important thing is in US/CW combo is that they can stay entirely mobile. Many rifles, Jeep, sniper, Boys AT, inf section and lieutnant. Axis need an AT gun simply for jeeps. Going for schwimm wouldnt make sense against jeep/boys AT combo.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby JimQwilleran » 05 Aug 2017, 13:36

I am glad that sukin has similar point of view with me. Axis really lacks flexibility.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 05 Aug 2017, 14:20

Flexibility in early game. I would say harmony.

Besides what you actually consider with flexibility. Maybe we have different definitions. And can you be a bit more clear what you mean with allis and axis. Sukin makes it more clearly and has many valid points. I think we differ more into US/CW and WH/PE rather than just axis and allis.

It also doesnt help the devs when we keep talking allis and axis. WE have to get deeper into details.

I know the saying: "We know more as we can tell" which probably fits to you illa. But sometimes just a bit more precious details of units, unit combos and docs.

How the sitatuon is looking for me right now and which are my largest concerns:

1. Boys AT could use tweaks. Good defenders but less denial. Its too simple to lock axis mid early/ mid games with just Boys AT, sniper and m16. Boys should not instant kill schwimm. Instead lots of damage and criticals but not instant kill. Vs vehicles also less damage a bit. In return higher rof when vehicle close in. So their role would be more defensive and less complete denial.
2. US cant stand their own. Inf doc has some shocking tools (as sukin said) of which my opinion is that cqc and off map are enough as shocking tools while basic jumbo would go to armor to give them their own shocking combo (off map and jumbo kind of that)
3. Terror and def need reorientation. Trees are confusing. Either nonsense (def doc) in some parts or late igniter (Terror).
4. We have still not found the purpose of rangers except being bit more "spongy" than basic rifles. Somehow called versatile but at the same time worst of all versatile inf. Capabilties exsit on paper mostly. Would be nice to know where the journey goes. My favored way would be they are more elite, excluded from inf doc mass prod inf and inf only with unit cap and in any way superior to Volks.
5. I would kindly ask if the Tank IV H (and J reward) can be also added to Terror doc making this tank IV being the axis work horse in mid stage. Would help Terror mid game maybe.
6. In return for more (and cheap J version) i would suggest slight gun performence changes to help US mid stage. Illa, Tiger and Markr have got the "paper". Poppa i think as well. It effectively affects 2-3 guns. The 76 US gun basic pen chance vs skirted Tank IV versions would raise from slightly less than 50% (between 49 and 50% to roughly 54-56%. That way the engagments would be a bit less a pure game of dice for the sherman. Who wants can ask me to see my full detailed suggestions and current state of art.
7. Slightly buff the PE heavy assault grens K98 stats. Right now their rifle performence is that of Volksgrens. Its the same issue with Rifles and rangers, rangers and PE assault grens are just more sponge than rifles and Volks although units being much more expensive. I would suggest that WH grens and heavy assault grens would be put on one level in terms of rifle stats finding each other somwhere in the middle (instead of assault grens sharing volksgrens stats and WH grens being over enfield commandos). The higher build cost of WH grens are balanced by way lower upkeep compared to PE grens if anyone may asks for cost difference.
8. Can Greyhound and stuart get a slight cost decrease of approx 10MP in US? sdkfz 234 vehicles vastly outclass them in all aspects for lower cost.
9. In connection to point 1 i would also say that 37 mm AT should not always instant kill the bren carrier. For reasons toni mentioned and as schwimms shouldnt die instant to boys AT.


I know that i am repeating all that sometimes. But would say that we may take away a bit from CW early (without making them rushable) by giving US some tools to get through mid game and esspecially vehicle stage. Also a bit better distribution of shocking tools between the three doctrines. Inf doc will in future get another one with calli jeep.

From my point of view thats the crux of matter.

milekh
Posts: 22
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby milekh » 05 Sep 2017, 20:46

I would add M36 to infantry doctrine instead of unlocking wolverine, buff 57mm and 76mm (they are just ridicously weak comparing to axis 50mm and 75mm), maybe add firefly or achilles as call-support for inf doctrine? (brit support, we have image from vanilla coh :D, call in achilles or firefly for 600-700? or maybe two for 1000-1100?)
stickybomb with no unlocking, and upgrade for double sticky bomb, decrase cost of sticky bomb (see, panzer-granadiers have AT granade for 20ammo and can for 40ammo kill sherman, but sticky bomb can immobilize tank for 25-50-75-100 or more ammo? really?). decrease sticky bomb cost to 10-15.
decrase cost of gammon bomb to 30. they are still less effective against tanks than these 20ammo axis AT granades. maybe replace axis at granades with that at granade that WH granadiers have for 50ammo? that would be ok for me. but then it costs more than pzfaust, decrease cost to 35 or 30.
add 105mm sherman for tank doctrine. sherman 105 shot just like stuh or brummbar and have additional artilerry barrage option, costs a bit more than stuh, only one or two in the same time.

anyway the most important is add m36 to the inf doctrine, buff 57 and 76mm, add sherman105 to armor doctrine.

and maybe p47 rocket strike and bomb strike to choose in lobby :) we have p47 model with rockets (i prefer bomb strike but anyway) ;)

nerf me109 straffic run, it is way better than p47 - it have too much damadge or too wide area. 2mgs and one canon have much more damadge at the same area that 8 mgs do.

and here is another for axis:
bring back stuka one 500kg and 4 50kg, that 1000 kg bomb looks hilarious, but add also to choose fw190 with two 280mm rockets that gonna hit directly where you want. :) we have the model of fw190 :)

there are also some cool units in afrika corps mode ;)

and nefr side armor of: panther, jagpanther, pz4/70, basicly make it just like sherman's side so its more realistic and not so frustrating when they bounce 76mm with their 30-40mm side armor.

sturmtiger- its cool but its too op. i play it a lot XD just like suprise v1 with very good accuracy and long range. also great as a shield for weaker tanks. maybe just make it do as much damadge as 500kg bomb of p47?

sorry for writing about axis :(

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 06 Sep 2017, 00:11

the M36 thing for inf doc got discussed. But so far i or we think inf doc has some tools to kill or at least stop armor. Emplacments vs panthers and lots of rangers with sticky and long tom against everything bigger than that. Just accept a little bloodsheet.

The 76 mm is, well.... too weak vs medium armor. Against heavy armor it does what its supposed to do: Nothing. So its absolutely correct against Panthers/tigers and all the stuff bigger than those. That gun was supposed to deal with more advanced german armor than that of north africa, at the end it was good to kill tank IV´s and the one or the other tiger, but failed badly against the then standard axis tank, the Panthers frontal armor. In BK the gun is correct except the pretty bad performence vs axis medium armor (50:50 chance to pen). Regarding the 105 sherman, it actually played an infantry support role. However i sometimes thought to have it as an direct shooting unit rather than arty barrage unit in the inf doc.

the stickies will have higher chance to immobilize. Will see how it works out. But compared to AT nades it really looks overpriced. Maybe the advantage is the cooldown?

The 57 isnt so wrong, but the 50 mm is.

AB was discussed to get rocket raid (several suggestions over years). But currently it was also felt unnecessary due to several hendeld AT for free, hellcat and well. Also, if its not as reward, there is no more gobal ability slot left for this doc.


Regarding stuka i would say we like it. Maybe not mainly bc of the optic (the 500 bomb explosion animation was poor actually) but bc it hits and kill targets. The other bomb combo failed too often and correct aiming wasnt easy.
Btw, didnt the fw190 carry only two 210 mm rockets and not 280?

The M109 strafe is way more deadly than p-47 which is weird. In some small tests the me109 cleared an area from infantry better than p-47 does.

I have too little experience with sturmtiger to give a proper comment.

Side armor doesnt exist in this game. So we are limited by the coh engine in this matter.

milekh
Posts: 22
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby milekh » 06 Sep 2017, 18:09

yes, i meant 210mm rockets for fw190.
ok i thought theres something like side or back armor in the game :(
US and GB 57mm should 50/50 pen pz4h/j and stugs.
76mm should 80-90% pen pz4h/j and stugs, about 50 for hetz and jpz4, and about 20-30 for tiger and panther. that gun isnt so weak, it has 120mm pen with ATBC-HE and 150mm with AT.
but I think 76mm apcrs (220mm of penentration at close range) should have 60-70% chance to penetrate tiger/panther (and about 80-90% at close range).

m36 for infantry is necessary, the only way to stop heaviest tanks is arty that wont even hit where you want.
m36 was the most produced tank destroyer in us army during the ww2 but still inf cant get it? its too op for inf even with its paper armor?

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 06 Sep 2017, 21:36

milekh wrote:yes, i meant 210mm rockets for fw190.


they used 280 mm as well but just for testing. Too inaccurate
ok i thought theres something like side or back armor in the game :(

rear does exist, just not side armor. Its weird to completely explain how it works...

US and GB 57mm should 50/50 pen pz4h/j and stugs.

against stugs it is approx that. Vs Tank IV H/J its 22,4% unboosted (ambush and AP rounds can boost it further)

76mm should 80-90% pen pz4h/j and stugs, about 50 for hetz and jpz4, and about 20-30 for tiger and panther. that gun isnt so weak, it has 120mm pen with ATBC-HE and 150mm with AT.


Its far from that. Or well, vs Tank IV H/J its slightly below 50% with basic rounds. Against hetzer is 54% at max range (funnily the hetzer armor offered better protection as those of tank IV´s). You mean APCBC and HVAP/APCR?

However, 80-90% would be not really realistic and also bad in terms of gameplay and balance. Just bc a shell pens a certain armor thickness on paper it does not mean it always does. There are many factors that can influence that. It should be over 50%, but not really over 70% pen chance. It would be enough to do the job reliable.


but I think 76mm apcrs (220mm of penentration at close range) should have 60-70% chance to penetrate tiger/panther (and about 80-90% at close range).


where you get this from? Its point blank shots at best. I would reccommend to go deeper into this matter. The US 76 largely stuggled to pen panthers frontal armor, even with HVAP. You had to get as close as 500 meters. Ammo, armor type (RHA, FHA, Cast) and quality, shell diamter/armor thickness, angel of impact..... lots of factors that influence the penetration. 60-70% pen chance of HVAP at max range vs panther would be way too powerfull and a way off. Vs Tigers it wouldnt be so unrealistic but generally hard to do in terms of gameplay and short/max range efficiency

Furthermore, the game has simply certain limits. Its hard to explain if you didnt go into the game files. But lets say you want a gun having 90% pen at close and 20% at max range then it would mess up all the other penetrations set against other targets.

m36 for infantry is necessary, the only way to stop heaviest tanks is arty that wont even hit where you want.
m36 was the most produced tank destroyer in us army during the ww2 but still inf cant get it? its too op for inf even with its paper armor?


M10 is the most, then M18 and last is M36. 1722 build/converted. 1298 M36 with M4A3 chassis and M10A1 Hull, 187 B1 with M4A3 chassis and hull and 287 B2 with M4A2 chassis and M10 hull
Idk how many saw combat, but combat debut was in august 44. So no, it wasnt the most produced.

milekh
Posts: 22
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby milekh » 07 Sep 2017, 19:49

Ok, i checked the info :D you are right, m10 was the most produced one, but still i think m36 was enough to let inf doctrine have this one. ;)

y, 70% would be fine against pz4, and 50% for hetz :)
y, 240mm at 100m, and about 170mm at 1000m, i think we can take 1000meters like max range in the game (so "tiger sniper shot" gonna be like 2000m).

i heard m10 was enough effective to fight panthers at range closer than 300m with normal ammo m62(?) (or wasnt effective over 300m ;) )
its quite close, like mid range in game?

i just think inf need anything that can stop panter/tiger. and current 76mm guns even with apcrs doesnt work.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2453
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Warhawks97 » 07 Sep 2017, 23:51

milekh wrote:

y, 240mm at 100m, and about 170mm at 1000m, i think we can take 1000meters like max range in the game (so "tiger sniper shot" gonna be like 2000m).


dont try to "translate" ranges. It wont work. Trust me. I can explain you if you want somewhere.... In corsix, the max range penetration drop is calculated for 1500 meters in relation to 100 meters. But pls belive me if we cant see it as easy as this.

i heard m10 was enough effective to fight panthers at range closer than 300m with normal ammo m62(?) (or wasnt effective over 300m ;) )
its quite close, like mid range in game?


viewtopic.php?f=13&t=329

check the shooting tests and the stuff about certain shells etc.

i just think inf need anything that can stop panter/tiger. and current 76mm guns even with apcrs doesnt work.
[/quote]

Inf can stop them, let alone AT gun emplacments. Attacking isnt so bad either. M6A3C zooks have 50% pen vs tiger. Only panthers can cause headaches.

milekh
Posts: 22
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby milekh » 21 Sep 2017, 17:09

y but still you need to hit tiger 4-5 times with bazooka and with current delay its just really hard. even chaffe is deadly against AT squads now.
ow and current AT guns delay is just like rush gun with scout car.

i know whats the penetration of the gun, i just tell you what US army used to say about M10 vs panther.
well if you see that panther had 100mm armour at the front of turret (at most area of the turret) it seems standard 76mm ammo have no problems with it at this distance.

User avatar
Nieles
Global Moderator
Posts: 70
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 19:43

Re: Allies suggestion

Postby Nieles » 21 Sep 2017, 18:07

Henny wrote:Buff americans? Brits are way better than americans in every way


Mate, i love your ideas, i mean you put so much thought into them.
I mean that part where you totally explain how we should buff the US factions is just astonishing.
However i do not agree on the CW part, can u explain it further.....

I know this is a very old post. But if you have ideas, be constructive and not this kind of bullshit.
Luckily our friend warhawks has put some love in this topic....
"Often you're too afraid!"

Image

One guy gets beaten by a better player in PVP and comes and creates threads about a specific unit being OP.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests