4.9.6 Beta

If there is something new, it will be posted here.
User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 05 Dec 2016, 10:14

The SturmTiger will be a reward unit for the V1, its final and there will be no discussion further more regarding this unit who only can fit as V1 replacement, at least for us Devs.
Image

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1859
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 05 Dec 2016, 10:15

seha wrote:i am afraid this is not correct. the 75 can't deal with jumbo. can't deal with churchill. which are early_mid game allied tanks.

both 57 and 75 should have 65 default range. and +5 when ambushed. in my humble opinion.

I am affraid you are not completely correct. Churchills are considered heavy tanks - they have heavy armor and weak guns. Jumboes are one "tier" (or at least half a tier :D ) above medium because they have stronger armor than normal Shermans (not sure if these would be heavy, but definately above normal medium). And even if they belonged to the medium category, 75mm HTs can deal with: All Shermans (that is for US: 75, 76(w), Croc, Calliope, 105,and for CW Firefly, V and those Call-ins from RE), Cromwells and anything weaker than that. They cannot deal with: Churchills, Jumbo (75, 76)
On the other hand the 57 cannot effectively counter ANY medium tank in the game, only other halftracks and light vehicles...and even here when I say "effectively" I mean in terms of damage because at the max range they often miss.

Anyway, as I think about it, my reasons for keeping the range of 57mm HT is that it is otherwise useless unit but Axis have 37mm HTs that suffer from the same problem + PE aslo has the armored car with 28mm AT gun which has the same issue too...how about these Axis units get same range as the 57mm HT? Abilities would need to be adjusted because the WH 37mm HT has HE mode without upgrade and the PE one has treadbreaker...but the basic range could be buffed.

Thoughts?
Image

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 05 Dec 2016, 10:48

Jumbo's and Churchills are considered heavy armor Seha, not medium tanks.
Image

User avatar
seha
Posts: 116
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby seha » 05 Dec 2016, 11:14

yes they are heavy. but they come as early as axis mediums. that's what i meant.

@mark
i don't think you should change any other vehicles. i think best is to equally adjust the range of both halftracks. like i said. 65 default range for both. and 70 from ambush. just a viewpoint.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 840
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 05 Dec 2016, 11:39

MarKr wrote:
seha wrote:i am afraid this is not correct. the 75 can't deal with jumbo. can't deal with churchill. which are early_mid game allied tanks.

both 57 and 75 should have 65 default range. and +5 when ambushed. in my humble opinion.

I am affraid you are not completely correct. Churchills are considered heavy tanks - they have heavy armor and weak guns. Jumboes are one "tier" (or at least half a tier :D ) above medium because they have stronger armor than normal Shermans (not sure if these would be heavy, but definately above normal medium). And even if they belonged to the medium category, 75mm HTs can deal with: All Shermans (that is for US: 75, 76(w), Croc, Calliope, 105,and for CW Firefly, V and those Call-ins from RE), Cromwells and anything weaker than that. They cannot deal with: Churchills, Jumbo (75, 76)
On the other hand the 57 cannot effectively counter ANY medium tank in the game, only other halftracks and light vehicles...and even here when I say "effectively" I mean in terms of damage because at the max range they often miss.

Anyway, as I think about it, my reasons for keeping the range of 57mm HT is that it is otherwise useless unit but Axis have 37mm HTs that suffer from the same problem + PE aslo has the armored car with 28mm AT gun which has the same issue too...how about these Axis units get same range as the 57mm HT? Abilities would need to be adjusted because the WH 37mm HT has HE mode without upgrade and the PE one has treadbreaker...but the basic range could be buffed.

Thoughts?

So a lot of small vehicles with have bigger range than heavy long barreled tanks? No thx. I agree with Seha, 65 range will be fair.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1859
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 05 Dec 2016, 11:43

So a lot of small vehicles with have bigger range than heavy long barreled tanks? No thx. I agree with Seha, 65 range will be fair.
You see, that is what Illa was talking about - your "bias" towards your playstyle. Once something steps out of the "plan" it is wrong.

Just think about it, yes, 57mm HT, 37mm HTs and that 28mm armored car with bigger range than long barreled tanks....on the other hand how will these HTs endanger these tanks? They will not because they are not reliable against them. They are only vehicle counters, you will be able to counter these vehicles with oneanother and still keep them at least somehow useful because really, how often do you see these Axis vehicles used in games? Not very much and why? Because they usually get destroyed before they can do anything and why is that? Because of their range.
Image

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 81
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 05 Dec 2016, 12:23

Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:
MarKr wrote:
seha wrote:i am afraid this is not correct. the 75 can't deal with jumbo. can't deal with churchill. which are early_mid game allied tanks.

both 57 and 75 should have 65 default range. and +5 when ambushed. in my humble opinion.

I am affraid you are not completely correct. Churchills are considered heavy tanks - they have heavy armor and weak guns. Jumboes are one "tier" (or at least half a tier :D ) above medium because they have stronger armor than normal Shermans (not sure if these would be heavy, but definately above normal medium). And even if they belonged to the medium category, 75mm HTs can deal with: All Shermans (that is for US: 75, 76(w), Croc, Calliope, 105,and for CW Firefly, V and those Call-ins from RE), Cromwells and anything weaker than that. They cannot deal with: Churchills, Jumbo (75, 76)
On the other hand the 57 cannot effectively counter ANY medium tank in the game, only other halftracks and light vehicles...and even here when I say "effectively" I mean in terms of damage because at the max range they often miss.

Anyway, as I think about it, my reasons for keeping the range of 57mm HT is that it is otherwise useless unit but Axis have 37mm HTs that suffer from the same problem + PE aslo has the armored car with 28mm AT gun which has the same issue too...how about these Axis units get same range as the 57mm HT? Abilities would need to be adjusted because the WH 37mm HT has HE mode without upgrade and the PE one has treadbreaker...but the basic range could be buffed.

Thoughts?

So a lot of small vehicles with have bigger range than heavy long barreled tanks? No thx. I agree with Seha, 65 range will be fair.

Please, before spamming the forum with same meaning-messages, comment to the counter-arguements that was said before.
Or just already say that in your opinion HT AT is not needed in this game.

Akrean
Posts: 14
Joined: 10 Sep 2016, 19:36

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Akrean » 05 Dec 2016, 14:05

and now for something completely different:
while reading through the forum i noticed the mortar smoke ability gives mali to enemy units inside and the assault (bot left) ability of the bk doctrine gives HUGE buffs - i always deemed them to be lower ...

therefore (and to avoid further squabble :D) I suggest improving the tooltips (like they did with dota2) e.g.

Panzer IV H
HP: x
Armor: <front>/<sides>/<rear>
Damage: <far>/<near>
Accuraccy: <far>/<near>
Penetration: <far>/<near>
Range: y
Shots per Sec: z
<old text>

Skirt Upgrade
HP: +x
Armor +<front>/+<sides>/+<rear>
<old text>

Tank commander
HP: x
Damage: <far>/<near>
Accuraccy: <far>/<near>
Range: y
Shots per Sec: z
Aura Allied Accuraccy: +<far>/+<near>
Aura Enemy Accuraccy: -<far>/-<near>
<old text>

Pioneer
HP: x
Damage: <far>/<near>
Accuraccy: <far>/<near>
Range: y
Shots per Sec: z
<old text>

Flamethrower Upgrade
Count: 1
Damage vs Infantry: +<far>/+<near>
Damage vs Buildings: +<far>/+<near>
Range: -x
Shots per Sec: -y
<old text>

V1
Cooldown: x
Damage: y
Radius: z
<old text>

MG42:
HP: x
Damage: <far>/<near>
Accuraccy: <far>/<near>
Range: y
Shots per Sec: z
Suppression: w

Mortar:

HP: x
Damage: <far>/<near>
Accuraccy: <far>/<near>
Range: y
Shots per Sec: z
Suppression: w
AoE: v

I think you get it now ...
The presented values may differ depending on unit and upgrade and may sometimes be only average guideline values, but should make it easier for the players to develop new tactics and use units, abilities & upgrades in a better way.

For me - I used the bk assault ability max 3 times and deemed it useless, but with knowing its actual effects, I am willing to give it more tries and take the fact that i have used it wrong into account.
Also for the AT halftrack - I never knew it had such a huge range - always thought it was the same as the corresponding pak, just with wheels -> thus I used it wrong -> therefore i deemed it useless ...

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 05 Dec 2016, 14:08

?
Image

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1859
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 05 Dec 2016, 14:35

@Akrean: We can make a topic and answer there questions about stat changes for abilities but I don't think it is necessary to add all that information to unit/ability/upgrade describtions.
Image

Akrean
Posts: 14
Joined: 10 Sep 2016, 19:36

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Akrean » 05 Dec 2016, 17:03

well may be not to that extend, but please replace all the "improves" and "reduces" with their actual values

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1859
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 05 Dec 2016, 17:11

I think you don't know how much time it would take to replace that for all describtions in the game + adding it to all supported languages. That would be days of work which could be spent on actual balance issues. It is too much work for not much gain. As I said - if there are questions, you may ask and I will tell you what does what...
Image

Wake
Posts: 302
Joined: 07 Dec 2014, 17:22
Location: USA

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Wake » 05 Dec 2016, 17:22

seha wrote:yes they are heavy. but they come as early as axis mediums. that's what i meant.


This was a problem before, because the Jumbo 76 usually came at the same time as Panzer IVs, and the Jumbo 76 wins those battles. But the devs tried to change this by swapping the Jumbo's position in the Armor Unlock tree with the Calliope, so the Jumbo now comes 2 command points later.

Would you like to delay it further, by making it require something such as a supply depot first? The Jumbo still comes out before the late-game US tanks like the Jacksons and Pershings, so the Jumbo can be considered more of a later mid-game unit. Interestingly, the Jumbo can actually defeat Tiger tanks 1 vs 1 from the front sometimes (that surprised me).
Image

heinrich_fritz13
Posts: 23
Joined: 10 Sep 2016, 23:52

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby heinrich_fritz13 » 05 Dec 2016, 21:20

is it possible to outfit a churchill chassis with a 17pdr. to make a once called ''black prince'' as a reward unit for churchill crocodile

User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 208
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby XAHTEP39 » 05 Dec 2016, 21:28

heinrich_fritz13! No...
Firstly, there is no model of "Black Prince";
Secondly, "Black prince" did not take part in combat operations, it is just a prototype.
He did not place in the BK-mod.

kwok
Posts: 1063
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby kwok » 05 Dec 2016, 22:35

Kinda like the SP... lol. Or even the tiger rarely saw late war combat with America which doesn't align with the context of the game.

Wow, we are really questioning the foundations of the mod here aren't we?
- axis as a balanced faction vs allies as a specialized faction ("all doctrines should have strengths vs weaknesses")
- balances through the different stages of the game ("allies dominate t2" but isn't allies suppose to be good early while axis good late?)
- new units on principle ("black prince never saw combat so shouldn't be a unit")

I've probably made a lot of off-forum comments about all this so I'd really like to get a word in. But these are really really big questions. Any chance we can split the topic to separate threads to talk about all these? I feel like these are big deal topics and it'd be great to get clear direct responses from the devs about the direction they want to take the game.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 05 Dec 2016, 22:48

The SP from the 3rd armored div. saw combat in april 45, the black prince prototype never left the factory.
Image

User avatar
Jalis
Posts: 278
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 04:55
Location: Canada

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Jalis » 06 Dec 2016, 02:12

kwok wrote:Any chance we can split the topic to separate threads to talk about all these?


Simply make a new post in general section.

We will explain tiger must be remove because it rarelely saw action like you said... even I feel this affirmation a bit #light#.
I will add fallschirm cant be paradrop, their f42 must be single shot weapon, LMG 41 and 57 mm rocket launcher must be removed, and finally I will add axis can have tank but cant move it because of lack of oïl... and the game must be disbalanced for axis loose because it is what happened really.
At the end I will affirm BK is ludicrous and dev have to scuttle it, then burn their computers before perform a ritual seppuku.

Well ... It seems it is sometime hard to speak about a new release without cross the balance question, who located on an other forum section.

Quart d heure colonial /off

kwok
Posts: 1063
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby kwok » 06 Dec 2016, 03:14

Lol aka, history is never a good enough reason to accept or reject a "balancing" idea not only because it is an argumentative fallacy but because it would make the game suck.

heinrich_fritz13
Posts: 23
Joined: 10 Sep 2016, 23:52

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby heinrich_fritz13 » 06 Dec 2016, 07:34

may i suggest a reward unit for the sherman calliope

the Sherman Rocket Launcher T40/M17 WhizBang

as the calliope has long range. this one does not but has heavier punch
Attachments
s-l300 (1).jpg
s-l300 (1).jpg (17.47 KiB) Viewed 1207 times

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby JimQwilleran » 06 Dec 2016, 08:59

heinrich_fritz13 wrote:may i suggest a reward unit for the sherman calliope

the Sherman Rocket Launcher T40/M17 WhizBang

as the calliope has long range. this one does not but has heavier punch

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=22

User avatar
Jagdpanther
Posts: 213
Joined: 15 Dec 2014, 03:33
Location: Romania

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Jagdpanther » 06 Dec 2016, 11:08

Jalis wrote:
We will explain tiger must be remove because it rarelely saw action like you said... even I feel this affirmation a bit #light#.
I will add fallschirm cant be paradrop, their f42 must be single shot weapon, LMG 41 and 57 mm rocket launcher must be removed, and finally I will add axis can have tank but cant move it because of lack of oïl... and the game must be disbalanced for axis loose because it is what happened really.
At the end I will affirm BK is ludicrous and dev have to scuttle it, then burn their computers before perform a ritual seppuku.

Well ... It seems it is sometime hard to speak about a new release without cross the balance question, who located on an other forum section.

Quart d heure colonial /off


Is really that hard to make the difference between what is acceptable and not? Do you think the people who are talking about historic accuracy/realism are talking about the things you mentioned? Lack of fuel, tanks breaking down on the battlefield, elefent never fought on the western front so it shouldnt be in the game, axis can win battles but must lose the war, oppression, rape, executions, pain, starvation, disease etc etc? You really cant make the damn difference between portraying the ww2 battlefield realistically and repeating the history in a video game?

Yes some tanks saw little action like the tiger or some never saw it on the western front only the eastern front, this doesnt mean these units shouldnt be in the game, these were iconic tanks, every one and their brother love to use these units, but the SP and the ST are in my opinion just too much on the experimental/prototype side to be added in the game and for who likes to play this game because they feel like a REAL ww2 general leading a REAL ww2 battle these units are ruining that feeling.
Image

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 06 Dec 2016, 11:15

elefent never fought on the western front so it shouldnt be in the game


Wrong.

In 1944 the Elefants served on the Italian front, All units in Bk served in the western front.
Attachments
Elefant_tank_destroyer_worldwartwo.filminspector.com_8.jpg
Image

User avatar
Jagdpanther
Posts: 213
Joined: 15 Dec 2014, 03:33
Location: Romania

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Jagdpanther » 06 Dec 2016, 11:26

Panzerblitz1 wrote:
elefent never fought on the western front so it shouldnt be in the game


Wrong.

In 1944 the Elefants served on the Italian front.


If i put "Wrong" as my signature do you think you'll stop always replying to me like that? :D

The idea that the Elefant never fought on the western front was an idea i took from the BK forums, i haven't done any research. This was an argument people often used against historical accuracy.

But again most of the elefants served on the eastern front, only a few on the Italian front. Same with the SP, only like 1 (ONE!!) was used in the war in 45 as you said. If we add unique unit that ever saw combat in the war we'll have thousands of them.
Image

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 06 Dec 2016, 11:50

Well if you stop telling false informations, i will :D, saying such things put us in delicate situations regarding our "historical home work" all units in bk served in the western theater, so before saying things who aren't correct, check first please, regarding the SP, even if one half of a Super Pershing fought and saw battle, it would be historically acurate to implement it in Bk, there is no 100 SP in game? no, only one, so its correct, same goes with the Elefant, only one unit is represented in game etc...etc...

In short, if one particular unit saw combat in the western front during WW2, its legit.

For the Next Bk version we implemented 2 new units, yes! after all these years, to make things more fun, and you just can't imagine the work to make them right in game... we are not Gods, and you are not in a candy shop either, we work HARD, trying to keep the current balance and improve things, Vcoh wasn't balanced at all, so imagine Bk with more than 100's new models... :? yep take time, a lot of time, but we are pretty happy about the next release ;).

I also want to thanks here Markr who is doing a f***** great job, thanks buddy!
Image


Return to “Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests