4.9.6 Beta

If there is something new, it will be posted here.
User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1730
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 20 Dec 2016, 19:34

But MarKr, doesn't it seem a little bit weird to you that a 37mm cannon or a 28mm gun would actually have more range than most tanks such as the 76 Sherman with its long barreled gun for example?
From historical point of view? Yes it would be weird but I am not talking history here but gameplay and in this way it would be better to for them to have at least some range advantage because with standard attack range they are hardly able to be used against vehicles.
My point is: Opponents builds an early force - infantry squad, AT gun and some HT with MG as support. He moves them till he meets your units. He uses the range advantage of AT gun and keeps back, outside the range of your infantry fire. Your and his infantry start a shooting each other, he supports them with his MG HT. You use your 28mm/37mm vehicle to destroy his MG HT but when you get into attack range you get shot by the AT gun and thus it makes little sense to even use these vehicles in the game to do what they should do - attack light vehicles. In the end they are used just for their abilities, which makes the PE 37mm HT the most useful while PE 28mm armored car quite useless. And faster reaload in these situations doesn't matter much if you manage to fire one shot and then you lose the vehicle or you are forced to retreat it in order not to lose it.
Hmm... It seems that you REALLY want to implement that ^^
Yes, I would like to see it because some logic was applied when giving the range buff to T48 but the same logic does not apply to these units. Though I don't insist on it. There was Sukin, you and seha speaking against it...illa was only for keep T48 as it is and none else actually expressed their thoughts on this change so I will not insist on it if it has no support within the community.
me too. i think both arguments are correct. now t48 has 75 default range and 65 after camo? suggestion is 70 default range and 75 after camo. both are good. but maybe the suggestion will make it better. 70 is still more than the new 65 default range of 75mm halftruck. it will reach 70 only after camo. this when t48 can reach 75 after camo too. with this suggestion the t48 will always have 5 more range advantage. so you choose about t48. the suggestion or to keep like now.
My point was that giving it camo range boost is pointless because using the camo ability is sort of pointless with this unit anyway.
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3051
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Tiger1996 » 20 Dec 2016, 20:40

Alright, I am fine about giving more range to the Axis 37mm and 28mm gun half-tracks... I guess you can consider the same about Seha as well. And it's also ok from my side if the T48 would stay as it is. But if the ambush ability really makes no sense.. then why not to just remove it perhaps!
At the end, I would say; just do what you think is best ;)

User avatar
seha
Posts: 111
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby seha » 20 Dec 2016, 21:06

I guess you can consider the same about Seha as well.
yes. why not.

Paso95
Posts: 26
Joined: 28 Jul 2016, 09:19

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Paso95 » 20 Dec 2016, 21:42

MarKr wrote:In the end they are used just for their abilities, which makes the PE 37mm HT the most useful while PE 28mm armored car quite useless.

So why not giving to 28mm armored car the camo ability like the T48? Since PE doesn't have light AT HTs with camo ability and this feature could make it more useful than now.

PS: The only AT HT is the 75 mm armored car which I've noticed that is not used a lot, probably because it doesn't have camo ability, it has standard range and a very high price. So it will lose any 1v1 against tanks, even if it has wolfram shells which are almost never used and a bit useless (like the HE rounds of the wehr pak 40 HT). Maybe if you want to leave it as it is now it should cost a bit less.

kwok
Posts: 1023
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby kwok » 20 Dec 2016, 23:45

Personally I like the PE 75mm HT, so reliable in damage and penetration. It ain't a Churchill killer but I use shreks and panthers for those.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3051
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Tiger1996 » 21 Dec 2016, 00:00

From what I understand, MarKr already decided to give more range to all Pak40 half-tracks... From 60 to 65 :) I think this will also apply to the PE armored car! However.. the WH Pak40 half-track also has ambush ability; which will allow it reaching a range of 70 when ambushed.

kwok
Posts: 1023
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby kwok » 21 Dec 2016, 00:50

And so the stug becomes more obsolete...

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1730
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 21 Dec 2016, 02:23

I just said I wouldn't mind giving 75mm HT extra range but it doesn't mean they will get it...as with any change, the final decision is up to Wolf.
Image

kwok
Posts: 1023
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby kwok » 21 Dec 2016, 02:34

Whether it happens or not, doesn't change the fact that what the ask is is to remove decision making as an axis player.

Look as is now: at T3 two forms of AT are available for WM. A heavier power punching but lighter armor dealing half track or a 50mm weaker but tougher stug. Each unit has risk and reward. Adding range to the half track removes risk, because true it doesn't have armor but it has range to use defensively. Why bother making a stug when you have a higher reward lower risk unit?
This is not an equal to the USA AT halftrack which has a tradeoff of long range defensive bonus but lower penetration and high miss chance aka low offensive capability. Seriously the counter to AT halftracka t2 is just a scheck team or I dunno a goddamn t1 pak. T3, a stug can chase it out because it can absorb one shot, probably "dodge" the second, and one shot the AT halftrack. if the stug still hasn't gap closed the AT halftrack after two shots then it deserves to die.

It's another typical example of making axis units just blanket good at everything (example reg 5 had high damage, so changes made it high defense too, what is the tradeoff? Makes the unit skill-less).

Sometimes it feels like axis players think only the tiger and panther are the only tanks in game.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3051
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Tiger1996 » 21 Dec 2016, 02:55

I think that giving slightly more range to the Axis 75mm half-tracks won't affect the usefulness of the Stug at all... Stug still has much better armor. It can frontally rush 37mm or 57mm AT guns.. half-tracks obviously can't do that! Stug also can't die to AT rifle boys. So, you get better armor for less range (Stug) or less armor for better range; Pak40 half-tracks.

Blitzkriegrekrut
Posts: 28
Joined: 15 Dec 2016, 09:20

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Blitzkriegrekrut » 21 Dec 2016, 13:00

I had a game yesterday when the panzer IV failed to shoot a Hellcat, while he needed only one shot.
And the Hellcat was not disguised.
Also the Panther I find for these costs meanwhile quite underpowerd, Bazookas can head him front even though he had a better armor than the Tiger.
Do not get me wrong, I love bk mod, but it's not what it used to be.
The somewhat "overpowerd" German tanks have made this mod for me and many other players.
After version 4.25 this has drastically changed.

Other things:
Will it be possible to add the Stuka "Kanonenvogel" with 37 mm cannons as an reward unit for the Henschel?
The Henschel came only on the eastern front to the deployment as far as I know.

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

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby JimQwilleran » 21 Dec 2016, 13:16

Blitzkriegrekrut wrote:I had a game yesterday when the panzer IV failed to shoot a Hellcat, while he needed only one shot.
And the Hellcat was not disguised.
Also the Panther I find for these costs meanwhile quite underpowerd, Bazookas can head him front even though he had a better armor than the Tiger.
Do not get me wrong, I love bk mod, but it's not what it used to be.
The somewhat "overpowerd" German tanks have made this mod for me and many other players.
After version 4.25 this has drastically changed.


And you judge the whole mod after that one encounter? First of all, what kind of Panzer IV was that? Also mind that Hellcat is a light and fast tank destroyer with a gun capable to pen panthers. Is that so strange it killed panzer IV? Also do u think that axis tank can't miss a shot? Your sentence: "My tank missed and enemy killed me, so op this is not a true Bk now." seems a bit ridiculous, doesn't it?

Also you are wrong about Panthers armour. Even though that effective frontal armor of panther was around ~145 mm, it was because it was slopped. The actual thickness was only 85 mm, which was just only a bit more than in the late sherman versions. And Bazooka could penetrate up to 100mm of armor. The thing that matters here is the slop. Although the hollow charges do not "penetrate" armor the same way like ordinary ammunition, those rockets may also bounce off or "slip off" the armor plate. But this is not always the case like it happens with normal gun shells
Last edited by JimQwilleran on 21 Dec 2016, 13:44, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Jalis
Posts: 269
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 04:55
Location: Canada

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Jalis » 21 Dec 2016, 13:17

Blitzkriegrekrut wrote:Other things:
Will it be possible to add the Stuka "Kanonenvogel" with 37 mm cannons as an reward unit for the Henschel?
The Henschel came only on the eastern front to the deployment as far as I know.


Who will make the 3d model and offer it on free use for BK ?

Perhaps it is true the he 129 dont saw many actions on the western front. However, at coh time, chance for a bomber or ground attack plane to achieve its mission on the western front would probably be around 5 per cent so allied domination in the air was overhelming.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 22 Dec 2016, 11:28

The HS 129 were mostly active in North Africa & during the Russian campaign, but some HS129 were also in France:

Hs 129s in France at that time were with II. Gruppe/Schlachtgeschwader 101, an advance training unit, that was based far to the south at Clermont-Ferrand. But SG 101 was bombed on the ground by 117 8th USAAF B-17 Fortresses on 30 April 1944 losing 38 aircraft including 10 Hs 129s. The danger from the air even that far south had become so severe that right after this attack SG 101 departed France with its II. Gruppe moving to Brünn (Brno) in central Czechoslovakia. As far as is known, there were no Hs 129s left in France by 6 June.

Previously they were stationed at Reims and Paris-Orly until the Gruppe moved to Clermont-Ferrand in March 1944.

They went into actions in Poland, Russia, Africa, and end of 1942 had been replaced by FW190, in France hs129 has been destroyed by us fighters, one crashed near the French village carpiquet, but i doubt they had any efficient impact at that time.


http://www.ww2.dk/air/attack/sg101.html

http://www.sepsy.de/lf-HS-henschel-129-B2.htm
Image

Blitzkriegrekrut
Posts: 28
Joined: 15 Dec 2016, 09:20

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Blitzkriegrekrut » 22 Dec 2016, 13:18

JimQwilleran wrote:And you judge the whole mod after that one encounter? First of all, what kind of Panzer IV was that? Also mind that Hellcat is a light and fast tank destroyer with a gun capable to pen panthers. Is that so strange it killed panzer IV? Also do u think that axis tank can't miss a shot? Your sentence: "My tank missed and enemy killed me, so op this is not a true Bk now." seems a bit ridiculous, doesn't it?

Also you are wrong about Panthers armour. Even though that effective frontal armor of panther was around ~145 mm, it was because it was slopped. The actual thickness was only 85 mm, which was just only a bit more than in the late sherman versions. And Bazooka could penetrate up to 100mm of armor. The thing that matters here is the slop. Although the hollow charges do not "penetrate" armor the same way like ordinary ammunition, those rockets may also bounce off or "slip off" the armor plate. But this is not always the case like it happens with normal gun shells


No, it is a bit ridiculos that two Panzer IV Ausf. J with Skirts can't shoot down a Hellcat, because they either failed the shoot or can't penetrate him. While the hellcat penetrate both Panzer IV in a 1 vs 1 easy frontal. Hellcat amor was like paper, so It should be the other way round.

Also no, panther had 120 mm and Tiger 100 mm frontal amor. A T34/85 could not be penetrate a panther frontal, so it can be a little Bazooka, seriously?
After BK 4.25 you need to build some units like the Panzer IV actually no more, and its fell like the Panther is now just a standdardtank that was before then Panzer IV.
Even the Tiger is cheaper than a Panther and can build earlier, wtf?

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 22 Dec 2016, 13:22

Well i was testing this panzer iv j actually, and i had absolutely no problem to take out shermans 76... u sure u didn't bumped into a bug?
Image

Blitzkriegrekrut
Posts: 28
Joined: 15 Dec 2016, 09:20

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Blitzkriegrekrut » 22 Dec 2016, 13:24

Maybe the player hacked or it was just bad luck, it was on 2 vs 2 on map "Duclair".

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3051
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Tiger1996 » 22 Dec 2016, 13:33

Even the Tiger is cheaper than a Panther and can build earlier, wtf?

Tiger tank is not cheaper! But yes; earlier available.. which is historically accurate... Tigers came out in 1942, while Panthers were available in 1943.

And I have never seen a Hellcat bouncing off anything.. it just dies to 20mm cannons... Your Pz.IV must have missed the target, which is only considered a bad luck; nothing more or less!

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 22 Dec 2016, 13:50

Blitzkriegrekrut wrote:Maybe the player hacked or it was just bad luck, it was on 2 vs 2 on map "Duclair".


Im 100% sure if you play the J again, you'll rekt m18 and shermans! ;)
Image

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

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby JimQwilleran » 22 Dec 2016, 14:04

Blitzkriegrekrut wrote:No, it is a bit ridiculos that two Panzer IV Ausf. J with Skirts can't shoot down a Hellcat, because they either failed the shoot or can't penetrate him. While the hellcat penetrate both Panzer IV in a 1 vs 1 easy frontal. Hellcat amor was like paper, so It should be the other way round.

First you said that it was 1 panzer, now u say it was 2 of them. You were just unlucky. Or you are just simply overplaying the whole situation.
Blitzkriegrekrut wrote:Also no, panther had 120 mm and Tiger 100 mm frontal amor.


"By August 1943, Panthers were being built only with a homogeneous steel glacis plate. The front hull had 80 mm (3.1 in) of armour angled at 55 degrees from the vertical, welded but also interlocked for strength."
panther_armor_scheme.gif
panther_armor_scheme.gif (3.43 KiB) Viewed 804 times


Please, learn the facts before you post.

Blitzkriegrekrut wrote:A T34/85 could not be penetrate a panther frontal, so it can be a little Bazooka, seriously?


Enlighten yourself about what hollow charge is and don't compromise yourself further.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 22 Dec 2016, 14:33

And it would be nice jim to cool down, and be more friendly here, the community is made to help each others, not the contrary, thank you.

Blitzkriegnut, you're not right on this one, but mistakes can be made ;)
Image

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

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby JimQwilleran » 22 Dec 2016, 16:41

Ok, sorry.

Just think about it. If tiger had 100 mm of armour, and it was classified as heavy tank, how could 120mm panther be classified as medium tank? As I said before, the effective armor value of panther was high due the the angle, the idea copied from T-34, but the actual thickness was smaller than Sherman Jumbo, Pershing and Churchills.

User avatar
Jalis
Posts: 269
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 04:55
Location: Canada

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Jalis » 22 Dec 2016, 19:35

heavy or medium is not only a question of frontal glacis tickness, nor even to a certain extend a question of weight. It a question of function, probably also agility, gun, and ... subjectivity.

Despite its 45 tons the panther is usually classified as medium, when the m26 Pershing with simalar weight is classified as heavy.
Really looking at both each share the same particularity in their countries, but at the inverse. Point the JS is also classicfied as heavy, with a weight similar to panther and M26 Pershing

Panther is the one the rare german panzer to not be undermotorised. It reached the 15 hp/tons.
For the Pershing USA used the classical german method ; use the same egine than lighter tank, like the Sherman, on an heavier one. Here a ford V8 GA serie. for germans the same engine was used for the panther, Tiger II and Jtiger with consequence you can imagine add up to 30 tons.

The tiger with 55 tons, heavy gun and short range was automatically classified as heavy tank.

User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 207
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby XAHTEP39 » 22 Dec 2016, 22:01

Jim, heavy tank or medium tank is a question of classification in concrete country. It is different slant.
Generally,
in USSR & USA "heavy" means "weight";
in German "heavy" means "gun`s caliber" (<75 is medium, >88 is heavy),
Britains didn`t have heavy/medium/light tanks, they have 'infantry" and "cruising".
Therefore, if Russians measures Pz.V Panther, they says "heavy", becouse "weight", but Germans says "medium, becouse "the gun`s caliber".

Moreover, at start (1939-41) , in German classification early the Pz.IV ("stubby", 75-mm L/24) is heavy, and early Pz.III (37-mm L/45 and 50-mm L/42) is medium, although this tanks have similar armor,

Blitzkriegrekrut
Posts: 28
Joined: 15 Dec 2016, 09:20

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Blitzkriegrekrut » 24 Dec 2016, 15:26

New release as christmas present? :P


Return to “Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests