Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and HE 4.

Do you have a bug to report? Do this right here.
Post Reply
milekh
Posts: 28
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and HE 4.

Post by milekh »

Hi.

1. Altilerry and caliope always overshot targets.

2.
Sometimes i have lower income that i should have. (mostly fuel and ammo)
I dont repear anything in this time. sometimes recapturing points solve this problem.
also i didnt have "vampire halftrucks" on my teritory.

3.
i think that APCR doesnt work. in 4.9.3 it was clearly difference in penetration, but now it doesnt work.
Also HE single shots mostly fail, just hit ground in half of way.

4. jackson m36b1 dont attack infantry. even in nor fast-AT mode. it just dont shot main canon.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 869
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by Sukin-kot (SVT) »

1) Thats called scatter
2) Thats called upkeep, deployed units eat certain amount of MP\fuel (USA can reduce this by supply yard upgrades)
3) They do work.....
4) Auto aiming at infantry got removed because often TD was wasting a shot at random inf squad just a second before enemy tank came in range, you still can atack infatry by clicking at them.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 3129
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by MarKr »

1) Some arty units have very big scatter - Calliope is one of them, some units have smaller scatter however the scatter is reduced when unit gets veterancy. Globaly speaking the circle that is shown on the ground as "target area" is mostly just "informative" to give you an idea of how big area is going to take a hit but some shells will always hit outside the circle.

2) As Sukin said this is caused by upkeep each unit lowers by a certain amount your resouce income - every unit consumes Manpower, tanks consume Fuel too (this was already in vCoH but only for Manpower, Fuel upkeep is BK feature). I am unaware of any unit that would have ammo upkeep :? Keep in mind that sectors that are not connected (they are blue but flashing) do not provide resources.

3) APCR ammo boosts basic penetration by certain percentage, let's say 40% so if your basic pen. chance is e.g. 70% that makes (0.7x1.4=0.98) 98% penetration chance but if your basic pen. chance is low e.g. 20% then it is (0.2x1.4=0.28) 28% which is not that much. So the boost depends on the target you are attacking. But generaly speaking active APCR doesn't mean that next shot 100% penetrates.

HE shot ability - well, I tried to improve them in the last patch, some people say there is a slight improvement, others say that they perform just as bad as before the last patch. I really don't know what else to try to make them work correctly.

4) Again what Sukin said - TDs do not auto-target infantry anymore. This change was introduced after players requested it. Same applies to AT guns. You can still manualy order (right-click) the unit to fire at infantry.
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3984
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by Warhawks97 »

MarKr wrote:1) ...however the scatter is reduced when unit gets veterancy.


exception US calliope (jeep and tank) iirc.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1107
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by JimQwilleran »

milekh wrote:1. Altilerry and caliope always overshot targets.
I always order arty to fire a little bit before target ;).

milekh wrote:4. jackson m36b1 dont attack infantry. even in nor fast-AT mode. it just dont shot main canon.

Is it supposed to do so? Generally Americans and Brits built tanks that had specific tasks on the battlefield: there were separate tanks for fighting as fire support, there were tanks designed to fight of other tanks (tank destroyers) etc.
Brits invested in their effort in diving their armored forces in more or less two groups: "cruiser tanks" - fast, light, designed to outflank and chase running enemy; and "infantry tanks" - slow, well armored, with guns meant to help infantry and destroy fortifications.

TL;DR

M36B1 is meant to shoot tanks, not inf.

milekh
Posts: 28
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by milekh »

all jagpanzers/panthers/jagtiger shot infantry. so maybe jackson shoult too?

APCR in 4.9.3 is much better. i play mostly us, and i can say shermans apcr doesnt work, it cant panetrate jagpanzer, where in 4.9.3 it penetrates it at every range.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3984
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by Warhawks97 »

milekh wrote:all jagpanzers/panthers/jagtiger shot infantry. so maybe jackson shoult too?

APCR in 4.9.3 is much better. i play mostly us, and i can say shermans apcr doesnt work, it cant panetrate jagpanzer, where in 4.9.3 it penetrates it at every range.



The Jagdpanzers use not all the same armor type and they have different modifiers etc. The IV/70 from PE is basically the strongest of them in terms of armor. The shermans and 76 always struggled against that one. The other Jagdpanzer IV´s are eaiser to pen.

User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 216
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by XAHTEP39 »

Warhawks97 wrote:
milekh wrote:all jagpanzers/panthers/jagtiger shot infantry. so maybe jackson shoult too?

APCR in 4.9.3 is much better. i play mostly us, and i can say shermans apcr doesnt work, it cant panetrate jagpanzer, where in 4.9.3 it penetrates it at every range.

The Jagdpanzers use not all the same armor type and they have different modifiers etc. The IV/70 from PE is basically the strongest of them in terms of armor. The shermans and 76 always struggled against that one. The other Jagdpanzer IV´s are eaiser to pen.


OMG, Jagdpanzer IV/48 (awarded PE & WH Def) and Jagdpanzer IV/70(V) (PE TD) has completely analogic armor (sloped 80-mm at front/30-40-mm at side/thin rear), it is just analogic base (latest Pz.IVs) with different cannons! Why in-game Jagdpz IV/48 & IV/70(V) has different modifiers? :?: It must to be same! :!:

Spoiler: show
P.S. About WH def Jagdpanzer IV/70(A). It has really differ high superstructure (part of plate is without slope), with worse shell-resistense, with differ modificator than Jagdpanzer IV/48 & Jagdpanzer IV/70(V) .

milekh
Posts: 28
Joined: 14 May 2016, 23:09

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by milekh »

pjagpz has 60mm (it is the same as hetzer), jagpz70 has 80mm. i meant sherman 76 apcr cant pen normal jagpz at long range with apcrs, but it should.
i think apcrs should also pen jagpz70, cause these apcrs has 220mm of pen at close range and about 170-180mm at longer distance. 80mm armour after slop is about 160mm effective.

User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 216
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by XAHTEP39 »

milekh wrote:pjagpz has 60mm (it is the same as hetzer), jagpz70 has 80mm. i meant sherman 76 apcr cant pen normal jagpz at long range with apcrs, but it should.
i think apcrs should also pen jagpz70, cause these apcrs has 220mm of pen at close range and about 170-180mm at longer distance. 80mm armour after slop is about 160mm effective.

It is wrong description in game. Only few early 0-series JgpzIV/48 was 60-mm at front, the majaority of other JgpzIV/48 and IV/70(V) had 80-mm sloped plate.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3984
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Bugs. 1. artillery, caliope. 2. resources 3. APCRs and H

Post by Warhawks97 »

And you also have to consider a lot more factors. Not just looking at the theoretically values.

Is it RHA or FHA armor? And a slopped armor that equals to lets say 100 mm effective armor is not the same as unslopped 100 mm armor. There had been lots of different shell types against certain armor types.


You for example get a shell against FHA armor because your opponent used that and then he comes with RHA armor and so on. Overmatching factors etc.


Also the HVAP had issues when fired against targets farther than 500-700 yards away. So it not always penetrated armor at distances beyond that mark even if it "should pen".


Then angles that occure in combat. Even panthers could bounce from shermans when the angel was too bad.
And finally comes the game engine. Since i started working with it i figured out how complex it is when you want to get "perfect". Things get multiplied with each other and some of the values are against specific targets (the target table) and then lots of modifiers that affect all targets when you change them. So some things never going to be as they should from the theoretic point of view.

And the Jagdpanzer IV/70 is weaker against US 76 guns as the Panther which frontal armor is quite well represented (or lets say as good as possible) in that game.

Its more or less just as effective in terms of US 76 gun resistance as the Tiger.


Sure you can argue about cost efficency and balance etc but do you really want a german turretless jagdpanzer being as cheap as a sherman coz of realistic build cost etc?

Post Reply