Worst Defeat EVER

[Krieger Blitzer]

17 lbs emplacement (libras:lbs:pounds):17 pdr, with sandbags and camouflage net,and I think that a discharge of the maultier should damage it in 75% or 70%, in the doctrine RA, to this emplacement, and in RE, in 60%, when it is improved...you understand me? maybe I express myself in an unconventional way in English,or maybe the google translator sucks hahahha,also abbreviated, pounds, but in Spanish,"lbs",sry

On the other hand, the comet is not the big thing, you tell me it has HE ... perhaps the tiger does not have it ???, the only difference would be the speed of flanking, which in my opinion, is fine .. ..you want to balance it against WM, and you'll end up making it useless vs. TH, or rather vs PE (vs all doctrines)

Now do you understand my point?

Yes, now I understand you very clearly ^^ And I agree with what you say about Maultier vs 17pdr emplacement.
This is pretty much similar to what I'm thinking too!

About the Comet... Hmm, I am not very sure to be honest. Maybe you are right... I think the Comet is a secondary point anyway. So perhaps it's fine if it would just stay as it is after all. The main problem however.. was the 17pdr empalcements in the first place, so yes

[Viper]

No doubt that having 2 out of 12 doctrines focused on defensive play style is "genuine camper heaven".

i said in general about the mod, mark. but defensive and royal engineers are on top of camping, and royal engineer is on top of the top. but i did not play bk since a long time so maybe it is now better as tiger say.

About the Comet... Hmm, I am not very sure to be honest.

tiger, make up your mind, and decide what you really think about comet. i say it should not reflect pzshrecks.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Well, previously I said the Comet armor is too much but then I said that it might be fine to stay as it is. So in order not to sound like If I were saying one thing but then later the opposite.. at this point, I guess I would then have to clarify my viewpoint about the Comet.

The reason why I am a little bit confused about the Comet, is because the Comet in Bk Mod actually shares the same armor_type as Churchill tanks.
I mean that the Comet does not actually have a special armor type in Bk Mod, so.. even though I firmly believe that the Comet armor is in fact over-performing, I still have to keep in mind that any changes to the Comet's armor would also affect Churchills... Also, creating an entirely new armor type specifically for the Comet, would be a hell lot of work for the devs to do. As they would need to adjust it against every single weapon in the game from the scratch! And I don't think they have the time for that, neither I do think that it's really worth it in the first place.

As a result of this, I am not exactly sure what to suggest about the Comet.. maybe it should stay as it is, but the flank speed should require veterancy.

[Jalis]

Trying to dont say one thing, then the opposite to clarify your point ... you did about an other subject.

You seem to think comet armor is overperforming. Because it is the same than the Churchill ? is Churchill armour overperforming ? imo no.

conclusion ; It seems clear, that really you think comet value are over performing from an historical point of view. But you also said many time historical accuracy have not to interfere in bk balance. It is know that the comet is over performing, not only on armour but also on gunnery (from historical point of view), it is a long time I pointed it.

Now is the comet overpowered, is it a balance breaker or is it too cheap or available too early compared to combat value ? This would be the real question.

[Warhawks97]

Actually Seha is right when he said that campy style gameplays are favoured a bit in BK due to several factors like the BK damage system, cost of units and certain strenght of quite cheap defensive tools. But that has changed at least in so far as that AT guns have to aim a bit and thus mobile warfare became more appealing rather than to sit behind of tons of guns and MG´s and waiting for arty.


The thing about Maultier vs emplacment is that you cant say "it should have 60% damage left after a barrage". There is something called scatter. So you want it to have 60% left (or 40%) when all 10 missiles hit? But then again shooting from long range would be quite ineffective as most rockets will drop arround it and not on it.

Missile arty is there to cluster an area, kind of suppressing enemies, and not clearing out a certain defensive point. So either way, that "60 or 40%" left after barrage would be either OP or too bad. 40% left when shooting from max range would be OP as it would instant kill it from mid range. 40% left when shooting from closer ranges wouldnt change much as most shoot (and where most complains come from) shoot from the distance.


Regarding Comet: It does not have churchill armor anymore. If anyone has noticed it
So it should do quite ok now. It simply does what its supposed to do.



Last but not least, yes, again (i have to push my agenda:P), get rid of doctrinal mass production upgrades. Honestly. If RE couldnt spam emplacments out they way they can do now it all would be fine. We probably wouldnt have to talk about invincible emplacment spam anymore.

And same goes for all other issues linked to mass production. I am not repeating everything again here. I have made a huge topic about it already. This discussion just reminds me on the general "errors" that occure with doctrinal mass production upgrades.

[Krieger Blitzer]

You seem to think comet armor is overperforming. Because it is the same than the Churchill ? is Churchill armour overperforming ? imo no.

When the Churchill armor is used for the Churchill, then it's not over-performing.. but when it is used for the Comet... Then it is over-performing.

Now is the comet overpowered, is it a balance breaker or is it too cheap or available too early compared to combat value ? This would be the real question.

Balance wise or in terms of game-play, currently the Comet is pretty much more like a Panther Ausf.D but also with flank speed and faster turret rotation.. which is a bit too much if u ask me.

The thing about Maultier vs emplacment is that you cant say "it should have 60% damage left after a barrage". There is something called scatter. So you want it to have 60% left (or 40%) when all 10 missiles hit? But then again shooting from long range would be quite ineffective as most rockets will drop arround it and not on it.

Shanks meant that in case all rockets hit, then about 60% damage should be dealt.
Currently, in case all rockets or most of them hit.. it's hardly 10% damage or even less. So, we are speaking about the damage dealt per rocket here!
Generally, I think each rocket should be significantly more harmful than now against the 17pdr emplacements...

Regarding Comet: It does not have churchill armor anymore. If anyone has noticed it
So it should do quite ok now. It simply does what its supposed to do.

It used to have the Churchill armor back then. Haven't checked it recently though.. but if it doesn't have the Churchill armor type anymore now, then I wonder how does it often bounce off Shrecks, 88s, and also 75mm Pak40 AT guns???

Also, I am not sure if it's really doing what it is supposed to do... I mean, is it supposed to quickly reach AT teams, kill them with 1 HE shell then escape in a blink of an eye, thanks to the flank speed ability?? I honestly don't think so.
Even the basic speed of the Comet is already fast by the way, and with flank speed.. it's nearly impossible to hunt!
Specifically in the hands of a good player.

Last but not least, yes, again (i have to push my agenda:P), get rid of doctrinal mass production upgrades. Honestly. If RE couldnt spam emplacments out they way they can do now it all would be fine. We probably wouldnt have to talk about invincible emplacment spam anymore.

Or how about this; instead of buffing the Maultier damage vs 17pdr emplacements.. then what if the 17pdr emplacements would not be able to turn around or rotate?! Keeping all their current advantages of course. Not to mention they already have very wide cone of fire anyway...
This is an idea that has crossed my mind lately!

[Warhawks97]

It used to have the Churchill armor back then. Haven't checked it recently though.. but if it doesn't have the Churchill armor type anymore now, then I wonder how does it often bounce off Shrecks, 88s, and also 75mm Pak40 AT guns???

so far it seems that it uses the M36 jacks armor type. Which is lets say just half as good as churchills. The comet is stopable way easier, esspecially for schrecks and at guns and even medium tanks like that TNK IV. Hetzers from ambush and AP should have a pretty good chance to deal with them when they want to "rush in, shoot and run".

Also, I am not sure if it's really doing what it is supposed to do... I mean, is it supposed to quickly reach AT teams, kill them with 1 HE shell then escape in a blink of an eye, thanks to the flank speed ability?? I honestly don't think so.
Even the basic speed of the Comet is already fast by the way, and with flank speed.. it's nearly impossible to hunt!
Specifically in the hands of a good player.

Havent checked how good the HE is on comparision to similiar calibre guns. But regarding mobility: Its the only really mobile tank RE has. Thats important in late games when churchills might be too slow in all that fast engagment that can occure and when M10 is just too much paper to offer an RE commander a "battle tank" made for its task. Its the only tank that gives a bit of all necessary attributes required. And since the armor is considerble weaker than those of Panther tanks (and less spotting range), esspecially vs hendheld stuff and medium calibre guns, it has the mobility advantage over the panther.

Or how about this; instead of buffing the Maultier damage vs 17pdr emplacements.. then what if the 17pdr emplacements would not be able to turn around or rotate?! Keeping all their current advantages of course. Not to mention they already have very wide cone of fire anyway...
This is an idea that has crossed my mind lately!

Ehm. What shall it solve? And why should it be the only emplaced AT not capable of doing that? All other suggestions are better than this one.

[Jalis]

so far it seems that it uses the M36 jacks armor type.

I presume it is a Jackson made in bk and not the real one that in about no more than a Sherman with a 90 mm gun.

It is a bit funny because about armour the comet is comparable to a late Sherman production (t23 turret iirc). They have the same weight, however comet is faster and not as high as the Sherman (making it a less easy target). Last comet gun is not a 17 pdr but a 77 mm so called hv that worth only a bit more than a 76L55.

Roughly the comet is a remnant of a time when bk was a multipurpose game. Each time a new model was available, it was immediately included at bk to attract peoples (understand pve players) with a wonderful ; new unit available !!!

It is like that bk included lot of light vehicles arguably useful, but also vehicles like the comet which had to be magically blessed/upgraded to make a real difference with the firefly for example.

For pvp a comet can be as powerful or comparable to a panther G as long it is as costly and as long to be available. Fact comet was really very inferior is not important in pvp as long it is balanced compared to a rival facion counterpart. Comet is not alone in obvious exaggeration, FG 42 is probably a far worst exemple.

[Krieger Blitzer]

@Hawks
Something might be wrong about the Comet then, because currently the armor performs just too good.

Anyway, despite this... I would still say Comet armor can stay as it is.. but the flank speed should require veterancy.

Regarding the 17pdr emplacements, well... Maultier should deal some more damage then!

[Warhawks97]

Ok. To clear things up.

Jackson A uses sherman armor (i knew that but i am still confused about it)
Jackson B uses Jackson armor
Comet uses Jackson armor with 0.85 received pen modifier.

Hetzer max range pen without Special AP rounds or ambush VS:
Jacks: 85%
Jacks B: 40%
Comet: 34%


You can argue and judge arround now but its not that the comet is somehow unstoppable. For me its just not really comprehensible which led to the making of these new stats.

Generally the armor strenght would be more like M18<M10<M36(slightly better only)<Cromwell<Comet<Shermans<E8/M36B1<Pershing<Jumbo


But anyways.

[Shanks]

the comet or rather, the RE doctrine, is not the big deal, compared to TH, Narshon, Jagdpanther, Hetzer, Hotchkiss, tank armor improvements, blah blah blah, etc.

[MEFISTO]

Tthe solution could be:
-remove 17pdr emplacement from RE doctrine (it is an offensive doctrine, no a defensive doc!) BK doctrine doesn't have AT emplacement and american Armor doc neither.
-increase Opel Maultier damage against emplacement.
-Comet flank speed should require veterancy.
I'm sorry if my English is not enough good.

[Shanks]

Tthe solution could be:
-remove 17pdr emplacement from RE doctrine (it is an offensive doctrine, no a defensive doc!) BK doctrine doesn't have AT emplacement and american Armor doc neither.
-increase Opel Maultier damage against emplacement.
-Comet flank speed should require veterancy.
I'm sorry if my English is not enough good.

El amigo,de mi amigo,es mi amigo...que grande son los Cubanos!!!

Soy Shaka de Virgo en steam, BEREM ya me hablo de vos

[MEFISTO]

Thank you!! My friend!