Smoke changes.

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
Post Reply
tarakancheg
Posts: 232
Joined: 26 Aug 2020, 22:19

Smoke changes.

Post by tarakancheg »

After a short dialogue with Kwok (His opinion may differ from mine) i came up with a couple of ideas which i want to share here to see what other players think.
So, smoke currently cuts down accuracy by 75% of the base stat which is a number that allows you to cut down dps of some units but with implementation of suppression/accuracy modes for HMGs this effect became too unnoticable for weapons like HMG42 with its 20 shots per second and 50% base accuracy you hit 5 shots per second which is enough to kill 1-2 soldiers per second from smoke depending on cover. Also while some allied squads have smoke grenades, i doubt any of us had used them more than a couple of games, because of their throw range that is comparable to HE grenades.
The ideas i suggested were:
1)Smoke accuracy reduction increace to 85-90% to make it effective in both infantry and tank combat.
2)Increase infatry grenade throw range for allies and Axis smoke call ins (puma, stug 3, etc, command PZ4)get lower price +some range increase to make these squishy vehicles able to drop smoke from safety to cover advancing inf/other vehics, but small enough not to blind enemy AT guns (you have mortars for that)
3)Slight increase in AoE of smoke (from 8 to 10)
4)Possibly addition of smoke to UAS and command storms as an axis counterpart.
5)If the first idea gets implemented add 10 muni to commando smoke as counterbalance.
What will it change?
More tools for breaking through defensive lines.
Additional tools for city combat for inf.
Fixing WP shot for stags/hellcats/chaffe.

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 454
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

As much as I understand how confusing MG's are sometimes within the game, I can't agree to this proposition.
This is simply make my sugar more sugary thing.

Game does not consist of just MG's and Units that "use smoke", although when we are talking of problems concluded arround it, it may seem so.


Smoke usage had already become much user friendly and responsive in terms of gameplay with years.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

Consti255
Posts: 1141
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Consti255 »

idliketoplaybetter wrote:
28 Jun 2022, 07:56
As much as I understand how confusing MG's are sometimes within the game, I can't agree to this proposition.
This is simply make my sugar more sugary thing.

Game does not consist of just MG's and Units that "use smoke", although when we are talking of problems concluded arround it, it may seem so.


Smoke usage had already become much user friendly and responsive in terms of gameplay with years.
But they consist out of TDs,AT guns, MGs, and empacements often backed up with arty as a defense layer.
Games did soften up a bit when it comes to super campfests, but still, camping tactics are still somewhat too "viable" in team games. While some doc rely on such things, i would like such proposal.
But i would like to add, that smoke should be more available alongside arty units aswell, to counter super agressive playstyle with ur own.
Maybe this will also bring back more mines into play, since raw gun forces arent as reliable as before?

I would support a buff to smoke.
Also, yes to the smoke addition for axis infantry!!
I am one of the maniacs that use smoke grenades, even if they have somewhat short range. Would be a good balance between the UAS and Stormtroops and would be a more clear for the player to see the different task of both of them..
Nerf Mencius

Mood
Posts: 83
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 22:39

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Mood »

Wouldn't this turn the game into "Company of Smoke"? :D Everyone would just be spamming smoke all the time. This (in my humble opinion) would also put units without smoke at a distinct disadvantage, which would force players to constantly accompany them with at least one unit capable of smoke.

On the other hand I think that slightly extending the range of smoke grenades is a good idea!

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 1250
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Walderschmidt »

I wouldn’t mind slightly more AoE for smoke or giving smoke tk a few more units.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 454
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

It all depends what Smoke granades are meant for now. Range for what? There are rifle nades and not throwable. They are different for instance.
There is mortar smoke shelling, which was also sufficient enough, it has that range already.

Again, AoE or any changes not only affect on Core reason problem listed here (mg effectiveness against X rifle unit).
This will affect every unit to unit combat situation.

You have to understand that before making anything stronger.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 1250
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Walderschmidt »

For smoke grenades if they were implemented, I’d give them a very short range so that they were primarily defensive in use and required skill/maneuvering for offensive purposes.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2510
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by kwok »

DISCLAIMER! PERSONAL OPINION AND NOT REFLECTIVE OF DECISION MAKING!

The problem I see with smoke and feedback I often get is how smoke affects units is inconsistent. There is an expectation of how smoke should/could be used but ends up not meeting the expectation. For example given, the common scenario is a small map is played and there is no way to flank. So, people expect that if they drop smoke on an MG42 then it should be relatively safer to frontally charge it with flamers. This is the intended role of smoke to begin with. BUT, as Tarakakakaka mentioned most the time those flamers will die despite the smoke. Meanwhile, when taken on the otherside it's totally a viable tactic to smoke a 30cal HMG and frontal assault it with grenades. In a weird way for this specific scenario of smoke applied to HMGs... allies has a lot more access to smoke that doesn't do what is needed while axis has very limited access to smoke but can successfully execute the intended tactic.

Another scenario in which smoke seems to apply for some tactics but not others is mentioned MULTIPLE times on forum. Panther gun accuracy is scaled much differently than say the 76mm Sherman and 75mm PAK. At the mid-long range, the base accuracy of units are quite different:

sherman = 100-75%
pak = 85-65%
panther = 100-90%

I won't debate whether this should or shouldn't be the case... that goes into a whole other topic. BUT, fundamentally what smoke des not impact units equally. Let's put the two secnarios where the sherman has to face either the PAK or panther. In both scenarios if a sherman takes any of these units head on it is in trouble, so the tactical move is to retreat in the safest way possible. This is where the smoke pop upgrade comes in. The "reality" expectation is that when smoke is popped both untis cannot see and should be missing shots often. However, true reality is that the extent in which smoke is applied is quite drastic. In the case of facing the PAK there is a 1 in 6 chance the sherman still gets hit. In the case of facing the panther there is a 1 in 4 chance of still getting hit. What ends up happening with lower level players is that they will use smoke in both situations and based on probability they will justifiably "feel" that the panther is still outshoots the sherman but not the otherway around. Meanwhile, smoke seems to work "just fine" against something like the PAK. This works two ways as well; if the panther is in trouble and pops smoke to run away that works "just fine" because modifiers on shermans or any other gun just don't hit as hard.

So TECHNICALLY, you can make the argument that if you are using a sherman and facing a PAK you SHOULD use smoke. But, when you are facing a panther you should NOT use smoke because the smoke will more negatively impact you than the panther, whereas if you don't use smoke you actually have a chance of damaging back since you're going to lose the sherman anyways...

A much more experienced player will take the assessment differently and based on these subconsciously learned probabilities. I don't think many people make CONSCIOUS decisions like "oh if I'm using a sherman running away from a panther i won't because the smoke will disproportionately detriment me more than the panther" but subconsciously high level players make these kinds of decisions all the time. This is why newer players get annoyed losing because their expectations are being crushed by subconsciously known nuances of higher level players.

To address the concerns smoke becoming abusable and spammed all the time. Frankly, I RARELY see anyone using smoke at the beginner to mid level and whenever they do they often end up failing. Meanwhile, smoke is used by higher level players but only because they've gone through trial and error of "when does smoke work and when does it not". The time it takes to apply smoke is long enough that it wouldn't be too abuseable other than the RAF which magically popsmoke and get buffed (addressed by tarakakaka)... Using smoke basically screams "I am coming to attack". I personally even use it psychologically to fake attacks that aren't coming (the reactions i hear on discord are great)

That being said, I think we should cater to the expectation that smoke should make units miss significantly (-90% modifier) and we should counterbalance it appropriately through munition costs to any ability where smoke is free.

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 1250
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Walderschmidt »

I’d keep pack mortar smoke free as it already has significant handicaps.

I have no problem with smoke decreasing accuracy that much, though I have one question:

Is it possible for smoke on a unit to affect its accuracy differentlh than if it was in front of the unit?

Say for example, smoke in front of an MG reduces accuracy by 75% whereas smoke on top of the MG reduces accuracy by 90%?

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 5390
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Warhawks97 »

is it possible to make smoke reduce sight range? (I guess not)
I would however support the suggestion. Kwok made a nice analysis of the issue.

The HMG42 is in particlar a death trap. When smoke was advocated everywhere i also tried it for some time but quickly figured out that the HMG42 remains extremely deadly due to its sheer rate of fire.
And not just that, but also that the accuracy of that thing really kicks in hard before the allied get into grenade range. At 35 range accuracy is 0.2 but at 25 range that goes up to 0.6. So even with smoke 4 bullets hit per second out of 25.

So my personal feeling with HMG42 was like: "well, its smoke and my units really stand up well. Maybe lets try to nade it." I charge and all goes as planned but then, shortly before you want to throw the nade it feels like the HMG42 activates "Thermal sight" and snipes you through the smoke.

So what you gonna do: Wait for the last two men to throw? What if the dude dies before throwing? Retreat and get killed during retreat? Or the Nade doesnt kill the crew, thats the worts that can happen.

So unless you got some beefy vet, upgraded high HP inf i dont dare attacking a smoked HMG42 with infantry at all. It ended up in a failure more often than not.

Cal 30 on the other hand can be overruned quite easily with smoke and elite inf can overrun it even without smoke from time to time. As axis i use less smoke as i feel like i am hurting myself more since i try to use the long range superiority of my units.


But speaking about the suppression platforms in general: I think they are all extremely deadly and self sufficient. Their accuracy is sometimes on pair with rifles, just that they fire 9-24 bullets more in a second. At medium ranges their accuracy is skyrocketing.
Build more AA Walderschmidt

Consti255
Posts: 1141
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Consti255 »

Warhawks97 wrote:
28 Jun 2022, 19:51
is it possible to make smoke reduce sight range? (I guess not)
I would however support the suggestion. Kwok made a nice analysis of the issue.

The HMG42 is in particlar a death trap. When smoke was advocated everywhere i also tried it for some time but quickly figured out that the HMG42 remains extremely deadly due to its sheer rate of fire.
And not just that, but also that the accuracy of that thing really kicks in hard before the allied get into grenade range. At 35 range accuracy is 0.2 but at 25 range that goes up to 0.6. So even with smoke 4 bullets hit per second out of 25.

So my personal feeling with HMG42 was like: "well, its smoke and my units really stand up well. Maybe lets try to nade it." I charge and all goes as planned but then, shortly before you want to throw the nade it feels like the HMG42 activates "Thermal sight" and snipes you through the smoke.

So what you gonna do: Wait for the last two men to throw? What if the dude dies before throwing? Retreat and get killed during retreat? Or the Nade doesnt kill the crew, thats the worts that can happen.

So unless you got some beefy vet, upgraded high HP inf i dont dare attacking a smoked HMG42 with infantry at all. It ended up in a failure more often than not.

Cal 30 on the other hand can be overruned quite easily with smoke and elite inf can overrun it even without smoke from time to time. As axis i use less smoke as i feel like i am hurting myself more since i try to use the long range superiority of my units.


But speaking about the suppression platforms in general: I think they are all extremely deadly and self sufficient. Their accuracy is sometimes on pair with rifles, just that they fire 9-24 bullets more in a second. At medium ranges their accuracy is skyrocketing.
You can actually just crawl infront of the .30 cal when you reached vet 2 and throw a normal grenade at it, since your range is THAT far.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 565
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Redgaarden »

IIRC smoke behaves differently if you're shooting into smoke than out of smoke.

So when you're saying it should be 80-90% less accuracy you do mean for mg42 shooting into smoke cover or a 80-90% smoke debuff for units inside smoke.
I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure units in heavy cover under smoke dont get defensive stats from smoke but still get a penalty for shooting.

How is which cover your units use calulated? is it highest defensive bonus or set priority? What makes it so tanks dont get affected by cover?
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2510
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by kwok »

So did some investigating. Learned a couple things but we are still looking into some mechanics. Haven't figured it all out. See picture below on how modifiers works.
smoke_explanation.jpg

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 565
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Redgaarden »

Yeah, that is how I remember it.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Walderschmidt
Posts: 1250
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Walderschmidt »

Redgaarden wrote:
03 Jul 2022, 16:19
Yeah, that is how I remember it.
Oh man. That explains a lot.

Wald
Kwok is an allied fanboy!

AND SO IS DICKY

AND MARKR IS THE BIGGGEST ALLIED FANBOI OF THEM ALL

Consti255
Posts: 1141
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Consti255 »

i suppose that it is only possible that way to implement right?
Because shooting threw something as a modifier dont exist and is not possible right ?
Nerf Mencius

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 2510
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by kwok »

As far as we know. Right now we are trying to find the modifiers of when a unit is in smoke. Effectively there are 2 modifiers:
Cover modifier
Base stat modifier

The cover modifier just means that when a weapon shoots at something in cover, it will apply the following modifiers. Smoke counts as a modifier so the weapon will apply a 75% penalty to a unit in smoke as if it was behind cover. This explains the scenario where if a unit shoots into smoke the penalty applies.

The scenario where a unit is in smoke and shoot out…. Is definitely coming from something but we cant quite seem to find what exactly causes that. We are looking for that now so we know what levers we have for balancing.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 565
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Redgaarden »

I'm, pretty sure that comes from the smoke itself. I think it's under stat modifiers in the smoke ability.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4997
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: Smoke changes.

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

I have an idea which i will later propose for the smoke in Bk Mod.. will do once i have time.

Post Reply