the jumbo is weak

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
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2537
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: the jumbo is weak

Postby MarKr » 29 Nov 2018, 23:05

No, it will not be solved by more range. People argument here with "realism" and so you would need to apply realistic ranges, or at least in some ratio. So if the 76mm gun on a Sherman was able to penetrate Tigers on some range and Tiger was able to accurately shoot and penetrate Shermans at 2x or 3x the range, then if we keep the basic range for Shermans of 60 then the Tigers would need to fire basic shots at 120 or even 180 range. 180 is the current range of Wespe or unpgraded Priest and here comes what I've said already:
MarKr wrote:We cannot give realistic ranges to tanks for several reasons:
1) map layouts are not made for it so the real range potential of these long range units would be unuseable (due to obstacles)
2) map sizes would allow Tigers, Panthers and units with KT guns shoot across entire maps
3) there is no "true sight" in CoH1 so the tanks would either have range of at least 900 (ingame units; for comparison static howitzers have now around 200 range) but not so long vision so you would not be able to use the range without spotters OR the tanks would have such vision and then one tank would spot entire map
(probably others problems too if you thinki about it a bit more)
And you cannot reflect the 2x or 3x better effective range with "+15 range" because then the range ratio is messed up and you cannot apply the realistic penetration at ranges anyway because if for 76mm gun "60 range = 700 meters" but for Tiger "75 range = 2000 meters" then 1 unit range is for Sherman 11.6meters while for Tigers it is 26.6 meters. This consecutively means that if the Sherman gets "in range" to shoot at Tiger, the Sherman is shooting at range 60 which for the Sherman is 700 meters (and thus should be able to reliably penetrate the Tiger but from the perspective of Tiger the range of 60 means 1600 meters and at this range the Sherman should not be able to penetrate it. So you again get into a spiral of "realistic on one side but unrealistic on the other" which again means that people will complain.
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3152
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: the jumbo is weak

Postby Warhawks97 » 30 Nov 2018, 14:48

Shanks wrote:

could make the M10 mandatory to unlock the sherman 105 mm, then the Jumbo would come, could even require that the tank factory is improved ... what do you think?...so it would be delayed to 6 CP, and it would not be so bad, because it only has a 75 mm cannon, unlike the 7 CP of armor doc with the Jumbo 76 mm that has a better canyon , and taking into account that you also say that the tiger needs a 3 CP for better performance


Well, this would solve the CP question in case the Jumbo gets an armor buff against the 75 mm L/48 guns.

But then again think about what inf doc could have else for 7 CP. You could have the new rangers with artillery support for the CP just to get one jumbo.
Furthermore when jumbo will become a good defense breaker and i dont see how inf doc lacks in such capabilities now.
I would rather increase the limit for the 105 from one to two units and you would have the same or even better punch against heavy camping (even better bc the 105 could take out 88 emplacments and panther turrert bunkers, the jumbo cant.

Furthermore the 76 is not simply better than the 76. I would use the word different instead. One better to battle enemie tanks, the other better against inf and emplacments.



@Viper:
Thx for these stats. Given the fact that the US 76 mm gun has 41% pen chance at point blank vs tiger i do think that we have the tiger armor quite correct right now and these over 100 mm armor parts being taken into acc already. I am also not asking for a 76 buff against tigers.



@Pblitz: Thx a lot dude, very interesting paper. I love to study such things.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1592
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: the jumbo is weak

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 30 Nov 2018, 18:23

The jumbo will have an armor buff against all 7.5 cm KwK 40 L/48 or equivalent from the front, to make it more efficient in its role, its in discussion.
Image

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 591
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: the jumbo is weak

Postby Shanks » 30 Nov 2018, 19:08

Warhawks97 wrote:
Well, this would solve the CP question in case the Jumbo gets an armor buff against the 75 mm L/48 guns.

But then again think about what inf doc could have else for 7 CP. You could have the new rangers with artillery support for the CP just to get one jumbo.


Certainly you can have other units with that amount of CP, but that's exactly what it is, is the idea, (you could choose in haste to have M10, mobile artillery + Jumbo or go through the ranger and 105 mm emplacement or an intermediate unlocking) , so I think it would be fine with the Jumbo with 6 CP for inf doc, and there is also a lot of difference between Jumbo of inf doc and armor doc, because the 76mm kills faster to Stug PZ H-F, Hetzer, etc.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 240
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: the jumbo is weak

Postby Viper » 30 Nov 2018, 19:40

Panzerblitz1 wrote:The jumbo will have an armor buff against all 7.5 cm KwK 40 L/48 or equivalent from the front, to make it more efficient in its role, its in discussion.

if there is armor buff, then it should cost more.

maybe the 76 jumbo should become available for 100 fuel and 700 manpower in tank depot and limit of 2.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3152
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: the jumbo is weak

Postby Warhawks97 » 01 Dec 2018, 03:30

Shanks wrote:
Warhawks97 wrote:
Well, this would solve the CP question in case the Jumbo gets an armor buff against the 75 mm L/48 guns.

But then again think about what inf doc could have else for 7 CP. You could have the new rangers with artillery support for the CP just to get one jumbo.


Certainly you can have other units with that amount of CP, but that's exactly what it is, is the idea, (you could choose in haste to have M10, mobile artillery + Jumbo or go through the ranger and 105 mm emplacement or an intermediate unlocking) , so I think it would be fine with the Jumbo with 6 CP for inf doc, and there is also a lot of difference between Jumbo of inf doc and armor doc, because the 76mm kills faster to Stug PZ H-F, Hetzer, etc.



viewtopic.php?f=15&p=28523#p28523

There is simply no point in a heavy tank for 6 CP to be available in an infantry doc. There are already complains about inf doc being not enough inf.

We could just as well add churchills to RAF doctrine, same logic.


And the word "different" is whole different to the word "better". The 76 mm is not better, but different. First you said its better, now you said different. And bc its different it would be a good reward option switching between 76 mm gun and 75 mm, depending on player style and expections of the game.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests