4.9.6 Beta

If there is something new, it will be posted here.
User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 210
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby XAHTEP39 » 25 Nov 2016, 20:32

Wolf wrote:
MarKr wrote:OK...I don't know what is happening with the AI colors for you but in my games enemy AI has red color, ally has yellow...I don't know why it is grey for you :/

As for the scavenge and repair abilities of WH Pios - I just tested it and they work...you need to have the ability visible on their UI panel, so if it isn't visible, click on the sub menu button. However as I said before, some wrecks simply cannot be scavenged - in my test games HTs, Armored cars, Stuarts, Greyhounds, StuGIIIs, plane wrecks could be scavenged however Shermans couldn't...this was the case even before the patch so I don't think it is something we messed up.

If you activate the option to see different colors for different enemies, so you can distinguish behind them, they will probably be gray, thats what I was talking about teamcolors. I suspect this is it, I am not at comp with coh.


Set "different colors" - enemy is grey; :?
Set "single color" - enemy is red. :roll:

User avatar
Endro
Posts: 9
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 18:08
Location: Belgium

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Endro » 25 Nov 2016, 21:58

data\teamcolours.lua from BKDataPatch.sga is wrong. all have "colour = { 128, 128, 128 },"

User avatar
Wolf
Administrator
Posts: 965
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 16:01
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Wolf » 25 Nov 2016, 22:28

yep, that will be fixed in next beta, that is exactly what I was talking about
Image

User avatar
Henny
Posts: 111
Joined: 02 Aug 2016, 04:30

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Henny » 26 Nov 2016, 00:02

Love the sturmtiger, would be great if you could add recoil animation
Watman and Autraymond have left the game.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1494
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 26 Nov 2016, 03:52

The bf109 is an F4 with the 20mm cannon.
Image

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 854
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 26 Nov 2016, 06:40

One thing you probably forgot about: accuracy penalty while moving for Quad Cal. its still shreds inf in a blink of an eye even driving with max speed. And any changes regarding BK sabotage squad? Bobby traps, evasive manevures without vet unlock? Satchels? There were a lot of suggestions.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1494
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 26 Nov 2016, 06:44

Henny wrote:Love the sturmtiger, would be great if you could add recoil animation


there is no recoil animation, its a self-propulsed rocket launcher, look at the video.
Image

User avatar
seha
Posts: 142
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby seha » 26 Nov 2016, 07:15

@sukin-kot:
thumbs up.

specifically about blitz doctrine demo team. there is one guy who first talked about this with the devs too many times for tooooo long before he is lastly banned.

will someone finally listen to this?

User avatar
Leonida [525]
Posts: 138
Joined: 26 Jun 2016, 09:25

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Leonida [525] » 26 Nov 2016, 10:55

Has def Pak43 been fixed? :)

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2212
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 26 Nov 2016, 15:13

One thing you probably forgot about: accuracy penalty while moving for Quad Cal.
The gun already has -75% accuracy while moving, nerfing it further would have been too much. The changes that were made instead is that the burst it fires while moving is half the size and the delay between bursts is 30% longer.
Has def Pak43 been fixed?
Not yet, will be part of the next beta.
Image

User avatar
Panzer-Lehr-Division
Posts: 460
Joined: 12 Dec 2014, 14:03

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzer-Lehr-Division » 26 Nov 2016, 17:04

What exactly is the New buff of tankcommanders?
SunZiom: but true is you`re only one man which i know who really know how play PE
CyberdyneModel101: you're unstoppable

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2212
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 26 Nov 2016, 17:11

Tank Commanders:
Vet0:
Sight +15
Vet1:
Weapon reload time x0.85
Vet2:
Weapon accuracy: x1.25
Vet3:
Rec. damage: x0.85
(Topic link: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1408)
Image

User avatar
Panzer-Lehr-Division
Posts: 460
Joined: 12 Dec 2014, 14:03

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzer-Lehr-Division » 26 Nov 2016, 17:20

Nice ok thanks
SunZiom: but true is you`re only one man which i know who really know how play PE
CyberdyneModel101: you're unstoppable

User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 210
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby XAHTEP39 » 26 Nov 2016, 22:07

Panzerblitz1 wrote:The bf109 is an F4 with the 20mm cannon.

I thought it is BF.109G-6 (minimum) with 2*13,2-mm and 1*20-mm... :?
That`s why this Messerschmitt is not so powerful... :roll:

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2829
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Nov 2016, 22:13

Well.... the G would be more "realistic" for BK as it was the standard type of Me109 at that time where BK takes place more or less. There also different versions existed, some of them with integrated 30 mm MK 108 and 13 mm mgs.

But as we have an F model already and since stukas are also there (that saw no combat at the western front at this time) its not really an issue that we have an F 109.

also did you read my first post here where i gave some numbers? I think even with that "weak" armament it is possible to boost its efficency.

Also anyone tested the 109 vs vehicles and tanks already?

User avatar
XAHTEP39
Posts: 210
Joined: 09 May 2015, 12:34
Location: Saint-Peterburg, Russia

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby XAHTEP39 » 26 Nov 2016, 22:24

Eventually, the Fw.190A is prefered for "Straffing run", becouse it uses as fighter-bomber often (many gun barrels: 2 MGs, 2 or 4 autocannons).
Really, it is not a claim for Devs; Bf.109 - it`s ok; if it will be Fw.190A - it` great.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2829
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Nov 2016, 23:20

XAHTEP39 wrote:Eventually, the Fw.190A is prefered for "Straffing run", becouse it uses as fighter-bomber often (many gun barrels: 2 MGs, 2 or 4 autocannons).
Really, it is not a claim for Devs; Bf.109 - it`s ok; if it will be Fw.190A - it` great.


The A was fighter. And usually used to stop heavy US bombers. Had, depending on version, up to 4x 20 mm (2x MG/FF and 2x 151/20) and 2x 7,92 or later 2x 13 or 15 mm. Also underwing canons possible (20 mm and 30 mm). Max it could carry 6x 20 mm... 2 wings and 4 underwing.

The fighter bomber version you are talking about is the F version. Standard armament here was 2x 7,92 or later 13 or 15 mm and 2x 20 mm. In the outer wings it had nothing to spare weight and bombs could be mounted there. The A sturmbock version with underwing 30 mm or 20 or double 20 had also no guns inside the wing pannels. Some had instead of underwing stations the short Mk 108 30 mm inside the wings.


Just saying you shouldnt mistake the A with F. Majority build were F but so far all of them for anti bomber purpose and called "Sturmbock". Those had also heavier armor to survive the US bomber defensive fire better. But they were unable to dogfight allied fighters as they were too heavy and as the FW 190 engine sucked above 6700 meter with huge power drop. Later D versions (finally Ta 152) had water cooled Jumo engine and turbo charger instead air cooled engine with compression that made the fw190 formidable at higher altitudes as well.

And going so far we could might as well use fw190 as bomber that drops either 8x50 kilo bombs or simply one heavy 500 KG bomb. (Stuka max was 1x 1000 kg).

Just saying :P

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1494
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 27 Nov 2016, 01:00

The bf109 F4 will be set to do more damage on infantry, there is no G "legit" model for coh available, and the FW190 is bugged, but as you said, the f4 fit pefectly with the stuka time period use, the Messerschmitt bf109 f series has been definitively replaced by the G series mid 1943.
Image

User avatar
Henny
Posts: 111
Joined: 02 Aug 2016, 04:30

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Henny » 27 Nov 2016, 08:17

The change to the rocket launcher aiming and firing time is quite game changing
Watman and Autraymond have left the game.

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

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby JimQwilleran » 27 Nov 2016, 13:31

I noticed something. I played a few games with various people and every single game was a desync. I think that Sturmtiger call in is causing a desync :(.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2212
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby MarKr » 27 Nov 2016, 13:36

Can anyone else confirm this desync problem? And when you say "few games" how many is that? And last question - what makes you think that Sturmtiger is the source of the problem?
Image

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

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby JimQwilleran » 27 Nov 2016, 13:39

I think that the source of the problem are generally call ins, anything called it - a plane, tank etc. can cause desync. A few games is like around 4.

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1494
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 27 Nov 2016, 16:45

JimQwilleran wrote:I think that the source of the problem are generally call ins, anything called it - a plane, tank etc. can cause desync. A few games is like around 4.


Nope, it is not, its your pc specs, and the server quality, coh + mods are touched by Desync.
Image

Erich
Posts: 101
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 20:51

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby Erich » 27 Nov 2016, 18:38

XAHTEP39 i saw u in PR.

kwok
Posts: 1248
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 4.9.6 Beta

Postby kwok » 27 Nov 2016, 18:53

Not sure how to prove it, but in general I feel call-ins in general lead to more desyncs. They tend to happen around times when there are call-ins. But there really isn't a way to prove that, only some gut feeling.


Return to “Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests