Final initial list! v4.95/v5.00

[Eldrak1911]

I know Sukin, and you're right about that, i should. But >

Everything down there is just a proposition, to see if we can think of it

I'm just doing this to "start" the reflexion about those subjects.

[MarKr]

Since Wolf said few post above that Scout Car could get price reduction, I guess it is only question of "when" (with what building or upgrade).

@Wake
Jumbos are weaker than Churchills in terms of armor.
Emplacements - sure that 76mm are cheaper than 17pounders...17pndr is way stronger. I'm not sure but I think that Vickers is slightly better than .30cal nest. .50cal nest has very low suppression iirc. MOrtar pit...yeah, 107mm is better but the 3-inch mortar pit of CW is helpful indefense too.
CW is not a spam faction. Therefore it lacks spam capacity. You're comparing two doctrines with different purpose.

Terrence will hate me for this but:

Playing def doc in 1v1 is probably suicide.

BK is not balanced for 1vs1. Basic balance is aimed at 2vs2 and 3vs3. Somebody once wrote here that there is huuuuuuuuge difference between 1vs1 and team games. The difference is actualy so huge that it is impossible to make the game balanced for both 1vs1 and teams. Sorry guys but that is the way it is.

defense stregth was stroghly reduced ( permanent mg bunkers limitation + bunkers more vulnerable to satchels, flaks got range reducing and lesser arty resistance as well )

Well, limitless bunkers with immortal MG gunners was simply messed up and bunkers vulnerable to satchels...I can specifically remember someone posting here something like "When you see a bunker, somewhere you can simply write GG and leave because they are indestructible." satchels were made stronger but you still need to get close enough to use them.
For 88 nerfs send thanks to Warhawks, if he didn't started his crusade against 88s people wouldn't complain about them.

Talking about def doc...they have a HT that can field 88mm Paks...This is just an idea but would anybody be interested/would it change anything if the 75mm PaK emplacement was replaced by 88mm PaK emplacement?

But for that, we need some real big tank. Churchills are those tanks, but they are still way too easy to destroy. I don't mean that they should be the allied PzkW Tiger, but, imo, they should be almost unpenetrable at long range. At medium range, they would be penetrable, and at close... Well, if a tank is at close range with an at gun, we know what it means for the tank ^^

They actually are very sturdy - frontaly armor at least is. 75mm L/48 have at max range have about 15% chance to penetrate at max range.The closer they get the higher the chamce of penetration. Anything weaker than 75mm L/48 has veeery little chance to go through frontal armor. Anything stronger on the other hand has a very good chance though (Not talking about croc now). But that is an intention. It would be stupid if even Panther or KT would bounce off of basic Churchills. Croc is stronger, having better chance against stronger guns but its weapon is weak so it still needs support.
I don't think that buffing churchill's armor anywhere beyond this point is a good idea.

Otherwise yes, some units seem to be too expensive considering what they can do.

[Eldrak1911]

Talking about def doc...they have a HT that can field 88mm Paks...This is just an idea but would anybody be interested/would it change anything if the 75mm PaK emplacement was replaced by 88mm PaK emplacement?

You mean, the one with 6 or more guys ? It would interesting but.. Why would anybody take this one, if they already have the AA-AT one ?

They actually are very sturdy - frontaly armor at least is. 75mm L/48 have at max range have about 15% chance to penetrate at max range

Ah ? It never felt like that, but if you say that l/48 got only 15% chance to penetrate it, i believe you.

[MarKr]

You mean, the one with 6 or more guys ? It would interesting but.. Why would anybody take this one, if they already have the AA-AT one ?

Hmmm...good question. I guess that it would be cheaper because compared to Flak it wouldn't have 360° automatic rotation, no barrage and no AA capability. It would be kind of stronger 17pounder. Anyway it was just a thought it would most probably be not used much often than the current 75mm AT emplacement.

Ah ? It never felt like that, if you say that l/48 got only 15% chance to penetrate it, i believe you.

They do. However "frontal hit" is kind of relative term in CoH engine. For vehicles in CoH "frontal armor" is simply forward half of the vehicle and "rear armor" is rear half of the vehicle. As on this picture (I posted it before but a reminder):So in this picture, both Shermans in green zone and the one on the right side of the red zone - these three can hit either red part of Tiger or green part which means they can score either frontal penetration or rear penetration. Only the Sherman directly behind Tiger is in such position that cannot hit the green zone, therefore if it hits, it will be rear hit every time.
However if the Tiger faced the opposite direction, only the Sherman that is on top in the picture could never score a rear hit, while all others could score both front and rear.
So always turn your tanks directly to the biggest threat. If you are flanked, chances of penetration go up (of course the closer you get the higher the chances too).

[Eldrak1911]

So always turn your tanks directly to the biggest threat. If you are flanked, chances of penetration go up (of course the closer you get the higher the chances too).

As a WoT player, that's a thing that i know ^^

In fact, i was thinking that the coh penetration system was closer tot the wot than that. I mean, i always tried to face the biggest threats, but with a certain angle, to increase size of the armor in front of my threats. Seems that it was kind of useless ^^

[MarKr]

In fact, i was thinking that the coh penetration system was closer tot the wot than that. I mean, i always tried to face the biggest threats, but with a certain angle, to increase size of the armor in front of my threats. Seems that it was kind of useless ^^

Yeah.CoH engine is not that sofisticated.

Also guys, as I asked about prices of HE mod upgrades and HE/AP switch. I was working on it and ran into Wirblewind and Ostwind. It seems to me that the same prices as for tanks with cannons would not be adequate here. Any opinions on costs + reasons?

[Warhawks97]

You mean, the one with 6 or more guys ? It would interesting but.. Why would anybody take this one, if they already have the AA-AT one ?

Its the pak 43 and uses a 88 mmL/71 gun. So its the gun being used by Nashorn, Jagdpanther, KT, Elephant. Actually the best 88 in game (actually even best anti tank gun in ww2)

But your concerns are justified. There are three tanks that would maybe make the pak 43 preferable over stationary flak 36 with 88/L56 gun (the "weaker" one).

If you face churchill crocc the pak 43 is clearly preferable as the stationary (L/56) will bounce off mostly. Also maybe when facing super pershing.

But in all other situation the stationary is preferable. The damage for the supposed "stronger" pak 43 is 125-165 (just as KT etc). The stationary weaker 88 has 150-200 (To compare: Tiger has 110-140 using the same gun).

Range is 80 for pak 43, 85 for stationary (for naked at least). The naked stationary 88 is cheaper if you dont consider the fuel cost. It takes less damage from arty and has 360 degree fire arc.


So:

naked stationary 88 pros over pak 43:

1. Way more damage
2. Can fight all targets (inf, airplanes, tanks)
3. Taking less damage from arty
4. cost less in MP
5. Can be used as arty and thus able to counter arty (def doc)


pak 43 pros over stationary 88:

1. Ambush
2. mobile
3. Can punch through any armor pretty well, even SP


Generally i prefer the stationary as long as i dont face a churchill crocc. The stationary offers more for the cost.

[Wake]

Also guys, as I asked about prices of HE mod upgrades and HE/AP switch. I was working on it and ran into Wirblewind and Ostwind. It seems to me that the same prices as for tanks with cannons would not be adequate here. Any opinions on costs + reasons?

I think a cost of 75 to switch back and forth is fair, because with these tanks, they go from anti-infantry rounds to super anti-infantry rounds. The Wirbelwind sucks vs vehicles even with "AP" rounds loaded, and the Ostwind's "AP" shells are only effective against something as big as a Greyhound. Most players just switch to HE once then never switch back because these are strictly anti-infantry or anti-air tanks. By the time they come out, halftracks and Greyhounds are rare anyway.

[Butterkeks]

Also guys, as I asked about prices of HE mod upgrades and HE/AP switch. I was working on it and ran into Wirblewind and Ostwind. It seems to me that the same prices as for tanks with cannons would not be adequate here. Any opinions on costs + reasons?

I wouldn't mind 75 ammo for Ostwind and 50 ammo for wirbelwind.
WIrbelwind is worse vs planes, vehicles and buildings/emplacements. Also it seems to me like nobody ever builds it anymore, mayb because they think it'S too expensive?

[Warhawks97]

I would really, really, really like to see the quad 20 mm to be changed. The "AP" rounds are just horrible. Even greyhound can pass two quads and taking not more damage as from a normal HMG.

In fact, Mg42 with AP rounds shreds greyhound/HT/M20 much better as quad 20 mm..... that just sucks.

[Xalibur]

Ladies and gentlemen, here i am once again:). It has been a very long time i know. But i guess Wolf has done very well so far... The problem is that i have more likely forgot everything by now so i will not speak about the balance as for current. But maybe i will have the admin rights back from Wolf soon, cheers to all of you.

[Butterkeks]

Omg, I just can't believe what I'm seeing here

Xalibur, is that really you?

Nice to see you around after this long time^^

But maybe i will have the admin rights back from Wolf soon, cheers to all of you.

Does that mean that you are going to start developing again?

[Panzer-Lehr-Division]

Welcome back man!

[JimQwilleran]

I guess it's like seeing ur little child after 10 years of being apart . Nice that u are comming back, although I know you only from legends.

By the way I am also back but who cares xD.

[Butterkeks]

By the way I am also back but who cares xD.

I do

So is this the night of the return of the lost forum mebers and devs?

Ok, where's Erich, Ruhrpottpatriot, Leepriest and all the others?^^

[Panzer-Lehr-Division]

Can still not realize you back shit nice man !

[JimQwilleran]

Can still not realize you back shit nice man !

Thx xDDDDDD. Ily2!

[Panzer-Lehr-Division]

I mean Xalibur but hey mate You too even if we meet in game already:D!

[Erich]

it seems like everyone is coming back,after a person had to be absent (yeah,I like to watch the world burn.)

[JimQwilleran]

This topic is hot now! This is my time to promote my arts! Thx Xalibur!

[Krieger Blitzer]

I doubt that this is really Xalibur to be honest.

[Panzerblitz1]

If its Xalibur we will tell you, if its a joke we also tell you, trying to found out if its Xalibur indeed or somebody who register with his name.

[Xalibur]

I doubt that this is really Xalibur to be honest.

Hello Tiger1996! You are an active forum user recently, i didn't know you since i left, but the reason i have chosen to type my first post here on your topic is to just prove to you how i liked you, yes i am Xalibur.

[Panzerblitz1]

Could you please answer my PM to prove that you are Xalibur mate? thank you.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I doubt that this is really Xalibur to be honest.

Hello Tiger1996! You are an active forum user recently, i didn't know you since i left, but the reason i have chosen to type my first post here on your topic is to just prove to yoj how i liked you, yes i am Xalibur.

Once again, I highly doubt u r real anyhow.


If u r really Xalibur, then plz log in at ModDB.com NOW! So that we could all see it...
U have been offline there since last April 2015.
http://www.moddb.com/members/xalibur