5.1.5 beta v6

If there is something new, it will be posted here.
User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 264
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby mofetagalactica » 22 Aug 2018, 16:21

Been testing this update and everything seems pretty fine regarding the new unit, damage is ok now, the new skins look amazing, just let it go live please.

User avatar
seha
Posts: 155
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby seha » 22 Aug 2018, 17:00

i think changes will be made to tigers first? or already done? cant see on the patch notes.
and kwok told about too accurate arty with veterancy, maybe that need some work too?

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2303
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby MarKr » 22 Aug 2018, 17:32

This last beta was meant to get the new squad to a more playable state which, I guess, it is now.

Kwok also said that he hadn't played enough to tell for fure which units have this problem and since he is the only one to report that then either he's wrong OR not enough people play the beta which means that waiting for him to collect the data will take few more weeks. By my experience during these few weeks of waiting people will come up with bunch of new ideas to implement and it will lead to the fact that we'll be postponing the release for months.

So I would say we can release 5.1.5 and do the other things in the next beta (I can start working on the 5.1.6 beta pretty much right after the 5.1.5 is released so it will not be any huge delay). For the 5.1.6 we would like to focus on:
- flamethrowers rework
- .50cal revision
- adding Hold Fire to heavy tanks with longer reload times
- flank speeds on Tigers + ALRS adjustments
- tuning the arty damage
- possibility for BOYS to deal less damage to early vehicles but causing criticals (weapon destroyed, engine damaged etc.) on them more often
and some other ideas that were mentioned in the topics lately. Don't freak out about those points, most of it is in the stage of theoretical planing.
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2937
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Warhawks97 » 22 Aug 2018, 17:44

What is mean with "longer reload times". Speaking of those longer than 7 sec?

I think thats a nice thing for all tanks but i guess that would be a huge ammount of work. But gameplay wise and for tactics and strategy it would be a great thing for pretty much all tanks or non-autocanons.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3764
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Tiger1996 » 22 Aug 2018, 17:45

MarKr wrote:This last beta was meant to get the new squad to a more playable state which, I guess, it is now.

Kwok also said that he hadn't played enough to tell for fure which units have this problem and since he is the only one to report that then either he's wrong OR not enough people play the beta which means that waiting for him to collect the data will take few more weeks. By my experience during these few weeks of waiting people will come up with bunch of new ideas to implement and it will lead to the fact that we'll be postponing the release for months.

So I would say we can release 5.1.5 and do the other things in the next beta (I can start working on the 5.1.6 beta pretty much right after the 5.1.5 is released so it will not be any huge delay). For the 5.1.6 we would like to focus on:
- flamethrowers rework
- .50cal revision
- adding Hold Fire to heavy tanks with longer reload times
- flank speeds on Tigers + ALRS adjustments
- tuning the arty damage
- possibility for BOYS to deal less damage to early vehicles but causing criticals (weapon destroyed, engine damaged etc.) on them more often
and some other ideas that were mentioned in the topics lately. Don't freak out about those points, most of it is in the stage of theoretical planing.

Good news.. can't wait, specifically for 5.1.6 beta.

Warhawks97 wrote:What is mean with "longer reload times". Speaking of those longer than 7 sec?

I think thats a nice thing for all tanks but i guess that would be a huge ammount of work. But gameplay wise and for tactics and strategy it would be a great thing for pretty much all tanks or non-autocanons.

Agreed... I think just Stupa, Stuh and Scott in particular also need hold fire.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2303
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby MarKr » 22 Aug 2018, 17:56

Warhawks97 wrote:What is mean with "longer reload times". Speaking of those longer than 7 sec?
Pretty much this:
MarKr wrote:Don't freak out about those points, most of it is in the stage of theoretical planing.
Really don't know yet. It wasn't planned at all, out of sudden someone says that "tanks should get it now, when they have longer reload times". But I don't think all tanks will get that simply because some don't have any UI slots free anymore (especially in RE doc), not to mention that people often complain about the game being often micro-heavy and this will only add to it more. Wouldn't it be more convenient (even though it would require more work) to disable auto-targetting of infantry and light vehicles for tank guns? You could still attack them by clicking on desired target and tanks would still be auto-targeted because in most occasions you want to take a shot at tank anyway.
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3764
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Tiger1996 » 22 Aug 2018, 18:10

MarKr wrote:Really don't know yet. It wasn't planned at all, out of sudden someone says that "tanks should get it now, when they have longer reload times". But I don't think all tanks will get that simply because some don't have any UI slots free anymore (especially in RE doc), not to mention that people often complain about the game being often micro-heavy and this will only add to it more. Wouldn't it be more convenient (even though it would require more work) to disable auto-targetting of infantry and light vehicles for tank guns? You could still attack them by clicking on desired target and tanks would still be auto-targeted because in most occasions you want to take a shot at tank anyway.


There is no need to add it for all tanks in the game as Hawks requested.. because it will be too much work on your shoulders I guess, and that's unfair.

So only add it to ALL heavy tanks with long reload time above 7 sec.. but maybe also including Panthers, Comets and Firefly.. in addition to assault howitzer tanks (Stupa, Stuh, and Scott) and that's it... Would be pretty appreciated then.

Oh, and stop pretending that you ignore me by replacing my nickname with the word "someone" :D Cuz it's ******* hilarious... :lol:

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 437
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Shanks » 22 Aug 2018, 18:19

Tiger1996 wrote:
Henny wrote:In my opinion if you remove the flank speed from Hetzer you must remove the flank speed from the cromwell aswell

Actually another good point there. I have always wondered why the 3rd CW truck doesn't require Captain first...
This allows British players to bring Cromwells too early into the game, almost sometimes as soon as Puma specifically in high resources games.
Hetzers were the only true Axis counterpart to racing Cromwells, because flank speed for Hetzers allowed them to chase Cromwells.
Now I have no idea how Cromwells are going to be hunted at all.. just too fast to be caught! The only chance would be if the British player pays no attention to his Cromwell.. or drives it into ambush unwillingly, the Axis player can only be relying on his opponent mistakes at this point.


I have been saying for a while now, they must also remove the FS of cromwell, M10 and Achilles ... not just the hetzer!

User avatar
seha
Posts: 155
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby seha » 22 Aug 2018, 18:25

Tiger1996 wrote:
MarKr wrote:Really don't know yet. It wasn't planned at all, out of sudden someone says that "tanks should get it now, when they have longer reload times". But I don't think all tanks will get that simply because some don't have any UI slots free anymore (especially in RE doc), not to mention that people often complain about the game being often micro-heavy and this will only add to it more. Wouldn't it be more convenient (even though it would require more work) to disable auto-targetting of infantry and light vehicles for tank guns? You could still attack them by clicking on desired target and tanks would still be auto-targeted because in most occasions you want to take a shot at tank anyway.


There is no need to add it for all tanks in the game as Hawks requested.. because it will be too much work on your shoulders I guess, and that's unfair.

So only add it to ALL heavy tanks with long reload time above 7 sec.. but maybe also including Panthers, Comets and Firefly.. in addition to assault howitzer tanks (Stupa, Stuh, and Scott) and that's it... Would be pretty appreciated then.

Oh, and stop pretending that you ignore me by replacing my nickname with the word "someone" :D Cuz it's ******* hilarious... :lol:

:mrgreen:

MarKr wrote:Wouldn't it be more convenient (even though it would require more work) to disable auto-targetting of infantry and light vehicles for tank guns? You could still attack them by clicking on desired target and tanks would still be auto-targeted because in most occasions you want to take a shot at tank anyway.

i think hold fire will be more convenient, because heavy tanks with long reload should not target light tanks too....and not just infantry.
unless the player wants them to do so.

Shanks wrote:I have been saying for a while now, they must also remove the FS of cromwell, M10 and Achilles ... not just the hetzer!

from m10, cromwell and achilles? that's too much. i think no need for that.

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 437
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Shanks » 22 Aug 2018, 18:40

Warhawks97 wrote:
Shanks wrote:i do clarify as 120000000 times, that the daimler was an example !, i dont told you what strategy I use to destroy units with the "daimler", perhaps it is the only AT tool ???? ... then you speak that I compare 1v1 units, Is not it the same as you do ??? .. "The hetzer has this and this, the M10 this and this, the Achilles this and this", at least you have to read what I write, before giving an answer
I speak of the hetzer more than anything, and you deviate the subject



Well, i compare strenght and weakness units in the same role have. Comparing a TD with another. And here Hetzer holds the HP, armor, received accuracy and amount of ambush shots advantage (+ being clearly more powerfull as the US M10 when it comes to destroying common targets due to the ambush pen boost changes that hurt US most). The M10´s do only have speed and the CW one an HE shot. But the CW faction is far less multirole options and its inf isnt such a good support for tanks like PE inf is (simply bc of advanced rep everywhere and much better durability and versatility)

You come up with 1 vs 1 engagments. You had issues with daimler flanking your hetzer and infantry, i told you what could possibly help. But you turned it again into a 1 vs 1 scenario daimler vs 20 mm and i just told you the cons and pros of each unit and for what they can be used. For me it seems that the game stands still and that each side sends one monster into the field against another one in 1 vs 1 like in a pokemon game.
I just told you how i protect slow units against small mobile units and infantry.

And btw. What do you think about the Jagdpanzer IV/48 which gets replaced by hetzer in the reward menu? It uses the same TT as hetzer just with slightly better armor. Instead of 46% chance to bounce 76 guns it has a 52% chance to do so and M6A3C zooks have instead a 100% pen chance only a 90% chance to pen. It costs more and has no top mounted MG. It has 650 HP instead of 600 as hetzer has but in general it has the same weakness. Three zooks that pen would likely kill both while two zooks would perhaps kill a Hetzer only with luck triggering both times max damage.
The IV/48 costs more but holds apparently no real advantage or has at least the same problems. Why dont you propose anything for that tank which costs even more than a Hetzer? Not important right? You didnt have that unit on your screen at all. The Hetzer was simply better which isnt what "reward" units are supposed to be. You trade certain cons on pros. In this case the JP IV/48 was supposed to have actually better survivability due to slightly better armor and HP for slightly higher cost. But the flank speed totally neglected this aspect because the mobility with flank speed made the Hetzer surviving much longer on the field than the armor and HP on the IV/48, plus it gave the Hetzer even much better offensive capabilties and a better versatility in general ....for cheaper cost.

I´d like to hear your unfailable minds to this matter. I think that the IV/48 gets back its reason of existence as reward unit (basically the hetzer is the reward unit, i know). Trading better survivability with cost instead of trading a piece of shit with a super effective and versatile unit.

mofetagalactica wrote:¿Hey war where can i get your mod? I wanna try it.


I am actually not allowed to share it and only a very few of my closest mates have access to it. Unfortunately i hadnt any time recently (since February i hadnt much time) to work on it so it runs on 5.14 version. However arty changes (at least ranges and reduced scatter removal from rocket arty vet) got implemented as well as the current gun changes (ranges, reload times) and some other stuff. It is quite different in many aspects (eg cost ratio between infantry/wepon crews and Tanks/arty) and PE is more or less completely different. But i would have to update it first to be compatibel with latest versions. I can let you know when i got the time for it but you wouldnt be allowed to share it with anyone.

You can pm me for more infos in steam.


Tiger1996 wrote:
Henny wrote:In my opinion if you remove the flank speed from Hetzer you must remove the flank speed from the cromwell aswell


Hetzers were the only true Axis counterpart to racing Cromwells, because flank speed for Hetzers allowed them to chase Cromwells.
Now I have no idea how Cromwells are going to be hunted at all.. just too fast to be caught! The only chance would be if the British player pays no attention to his Cromwell.. or drives it into ambush unwillingly, the Axis player can only be relying on his opponent mistakes at this point.


perhaps you cant chase it accross the map but cruisers are meant to be fast. But just bc you cant hunt something it doesnt mean there is no protection. Its not like the old OP comet combining Pershing armor with cromwell speed and Panther gun.
Pretty much anything can pen it, even the 28 mm guns. So there is a protection against it and the cromwell cant stop your units in case you want to attack. Running only away doesnt make you win a game.

But in this case it follows the same logic. The cromwell would never be able to face a Hetzer unless it has the chance to circle arround or to be simply faster in movment. And whenever a cromwell makes a dance with your mortar HT it becomes automatically vulnerable to possibly hidden Hetzers and 50 mm guns. So using cromwells is always a risk to run into an ambush. The other option is not to attack and to just run away all the time.


Tiger1996 wrote:I have always wondered why the 3rd CW truck doesn't require Captain first...
This allows British players to bring Cromwells too early into the game, almost sometimes as soon as Puma specifically in high resources games.


I think thats in order to bring come versatility. I do like that system and would like to see it more often. The tec lines are often very straight. Only US has one option to either make tank depot first but then having still no access to anything better than regular shermans unltill the supply yard is up.
On axis side there could be something similar. Like you could get your medium tank factory after first HQ upgrade and having only stugs and stubby tank IV availbale but while the second HQ upgrade unlocks long barreld tank IV´s. Just as an example.
I like versatile tec lines like that one.




1-I have no problems with the daimler .... perhaps I said I have it? ..... On the contrary, I use the daimler to destroy the hetzer!


2-"the hetzer is clearly more powerful than M10" .. ¿¿¿? ¿? ... lol .... the Achilles can subtract 40 to 70% of the life of elephant-frontally, in ambush (too have HE)..... What is more powerful clearly ???? ..... can the hetzer do something similar?


3-jadpanzer IV/48...you are deviating from the subject, again

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2303
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby MarKr » 22 Aug 2018, 18:41

seha wrote:i think hold fire will be more convenient, because heavy tanks with long reload should not target light tanks too....and not just infantry.
unless the player wants them to do so.
I meant the amount of clicks you need to make.

I observed that even if you set targetting priority for different types of target, the game sometimes tells units to shoot at lower priority target even when higher priority target is in range. This means even if Hold Fire is added, you need to first click on the "hold fire" button to allow the unit to shoot and then (if there are more enemy units in range) you need to click on the target anyway. So it seems like adding one extra step which will not be hugely beneficial. But I really don't care if it is done this or the other way and I think the rest of the team will see it the same way so in the end will be up to what you guys agree on.

EDIT:
@ Shanks and Warhawks: Take your argument to another thread, please. The whole discussion about how Hetzer can or cannot be countered and who plays PvP and who doesn't is not moving this topic anywhere. Yes, removal of FS led to it but now you're just arguing about your experience and all those quotes (even though I asked you not to do that) are just making harder to find stuff in the topic :/
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3764
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Tiger1996 » 22 Aug 2018, 18:55

seha wrote:
Shanks wrote:I have been saying for a while now, they must also remove the FS of cromwell, M10 and Achilles ... not just the hetzer!

from m10, cromwell and achilles? that's too much. i think no need for that.

Hmm, gotta agree with Shanks on this one. in fact, I would rather flank speed to be removed from all tanks in the game after all.. but I think MarKr doesn't like to hear that so I'm not requesting it :D So eventually, there is maybe no need to remove flank speed from any other tanks.. as long as the flank speed ability is not going to be removed entirely from everything in the game.. and the Hetzer maybe just needs better inf protection.

MarKr wrote:I observed that even if you set targetting priority for different types of target, the game sometimes tells units to shoot at lower priority target even when higher priority target is in range. This means even if Hold Fire is added, you need to first click on the "hold fire" button to allow the unit to shoot and then (if there are more enemy units in range) you need to click on the target anyway. So it seems like adding one extra step which will not be hugely beneficial. But I really don't care if it is done this or the other way and I think the rest of the team will see it the same way so in the end will be up to what you guys agree on.

Don't worry about the clicks, pro players are fast. And we just need them to hold fire completely...

Also btw, you don't need to click "hold fire" in order to allow the tank to shoot.. because even when hold fire is activated, once you order the tank to shoot a target.. it will do that, even when it's still ordered to hold fire!
The unit will obey your "attack orders" for the specified target, no matters what.

So ya, I think everyone prefers hold fire fore sure ;)

User avatar
Shanks
Posts: 437
Joined: 22 Nov 2016, 22:02

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Shanks » 22 Aug 2018, 18:58

MarKr wrote:So I would say we can release 5.1.5 and do the other things in the next beta (I can start working on the 5.1.6 beta


launch it today, I want to play it :D

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2937
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Warhawks97 » 22 Aug 2018, 21:14

I think the option to have hold fire is a great thing for many tanks. Like often i tried to push with my shermans to reach mortars and other high value targets like rocket launchers etc. That way i could go straight on them without having my turrets messed up and pointing in wrong directions. And now, i dont want to shoot tanks always first. Sometimes the HT next to it is a worty target. Sometimes i calculate (esspecially with shermans): Shoot the tank and bounce and causing no damage at all or take out one unit in the enemie ranks. Esspecially support units are often worthy targets. The actual target (eg KT) is often the last one i want to shoot and instead try to clear up everything arround.

perhaps we get that stuff for tanks from stug upwards (idk if stug III has a slot but its less an issue since you can easier avoid that it fires). Smaller stuff with high rof and quick turret rotations are ok or can be done in later patches if its found very usefull.

But yeah, we can release the version probably.

User avatar
seha
Posts: 155
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby seha » 22 Aug 2018, 22:09

yes lets release the patch ..... if any bugs spotted it can be corrected on the next 5.1.6 beta.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3764
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Tiger1996 » 22 Aug 2018, 22:22

Ya, why not... Despite that I actually had some plans scheduled for really special collaboration events after the release of this patch.
Though, I think it's better if I would postpone that until 5.1.6 is released.. waiting the change on Tigers :D

MEFISTO
Posts: 11
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby MEFISTO » 22 Aug 2018, 22:59

for the new at squad, we should remove the 30mm AT grenade because they make the early game and mid game vehicles useless. they are too accurate, long range, and only 50 munitions. they are OP and you don't have a chance to use light vehicles,I think they should still be able to kill units like recces, but they do not need that grenade specifically.

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 264
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby mofetagalactica » 22 Aug 2018, 23:15

Hold fire hability like it was mentioned before would be a great addition to most of tanks if its possible for the next beta ♥ thanks for all the work

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 169
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 23 Aug 2018, 02:59

Actually, just played a game where flamethrower had a very awful expirience, trying to burn out garrisoned building. What's the modifiers against green/building cover?

MenciusMoldbug
Posts: 38
Joined: 17 Mar 2017, 12:57

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby MenciusMoldbug » 23 Aug 2018, 06:51

Even if this new squad coming didn't exist, I don't think it would impact the importance of US light tanks all that much.

Problem with US light tanks like the Stuart is that the cost to performance ratio is messed up. Why does it cost 45 munitions to load HE on this tank? Who saves up 45 munitions(not to mention the manpower and fuel) in the first 5-10 minutes of the game to bank it all on the Stuart? Isn't that the same problem with Rifle Grenades as a counter to scout cars? That they cost too much early on in the game to be useful as a supposed counter? At least the greyhounds skirts are not mandatory to give it a fighting edge over infantry, despite costing a bit more than these HE shells.

In conjunction to the cost, look at its performance in HE mode. Stuarts HE shells do 40-40 damage with 75% accuracy at distant and long ranges; compare it to the sherman which has 50-90 for its HE with 100% accuracy at all ranges. It's why I skip the light tanks and rush the sherman, its anti-infantry capabilities are way, way better for a longer delay on when you get your armor. Some games can be over in the first few minutes depending on how fast you get your first HE sherman.

Only good thing I can point at for the Stuart is that when it hits at least it does good damage thanks to its splash modifiers. This canister round thing is too clunky, like taking way too long to fire and being such a short range weapon when you really want to be shooting from the farthest range at infantry.

I like how Blitzkrieg Doctrine has this Pak 37mm Halftrack. It costs almost the same as the Stuart but loading HE shells on it only costs you 15 munitions. If it was like the Stuart, and it costs 45 munitions to load HE shells on it, less people would use it and more often than not go for the Puma instead. I think tanks like the Stuart deserve the Pak 37mm Halftrack treatment. 15 to switch to HE; then switching back to AP and then back again to HE should cost 15 again(like cromwells).

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2937
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Warhawks97 » 23 Aug 2018, 07:46

MenciusMoldbug wrote:Even if this new squad coming didn't exist, I don't think it would impact the importance of US light tanks all that much.

Problem with US light tanks like the Stuart is that the cost to performance ratio is messed up. Why does it cost 45 munitions to load HE on this tank? Who saves up 45 munitions(not to mention the manpower and fuel) in the first 5-10 minutes of the game to bank it all on the Stuart? Isn't that the same problem with Rifle Grenades as a counter to scout cars? That they cost too much early on in the game to be useful as a supposed counter? At least the greyhounds skirts are not mandatory to give it a fighting edge over infantry, despite costing a bit more than these HE shells.
In conjunction to the cost, look at its performance in HE mode. Stuarts HE shells do 40-40 damage with 75% accuracy at distant and long ranges; compare it to the sherman which has 50-90 for its HE with 100% accuracy at all ranges. It's why I skip the light tanks and rush the sherman, its anti-infantry capabilities are way, way better for a longer delay on when you get your armor. Some games can be over in the first few minutes depending on how fast you get your first HE sherman.


Thank you. I brought that up already a few times. Stuarts have still a bad cost performance ratio. And with that AT-Rifle it might get worse a bit since there is no AT weapon on WH side that cant pen the Stuart anymore. So its "Tanky" part becomes obsolet (it was almost before) and its firepower is poor. I also used to rush for shermans. The Rifle Grenades is the same. Upgrade and costs sums up to over 50 ammo in early game. Thats nonsense.




I like how Blitzkrieg Doctrine has this Pak 37mm Halftrack. It costs almost the same as the Stuart but loading HE shells on it only costs you 15 munitions. If it was like the Stuart, and it costs 45 munitions to load HE shells on it, less people would use it and more often than not go for the Puma instead. I think tanks like the Stuart deserve the Pak 37mm Halftrack treatment. 15 to switch to HE; then switching back to AP and then back again to HE should cost 15 again(like cromwells).


Not a bad idea.

Walderschmidt
Posts: 65
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Walderschmidt » 23 Aug 2018, 13:49

MarKr wrote:This last beta was meant to get the new squad to a more playable state which, I guess, it is now.

Kwok also said that he hadn't played enough to tell for fure which units have this problem and since he is the only one to report that then either he's wrong OR not enough people play the beta which means that waiting for him to collect the data will take few more weeks. By my experience during these few weeks of waiting people will come up with bunch of new ideas to implement and it will lead to the fact that we'll be postponing the release for months.

So I would say we can release 5.1.5 and do the other things in the next beta (I can start working on the 5.1.6 beta pretty much right after the 5.1.5 is released so it will not be any huge delay). For the 5.1.6 we would like to focus on:
- flamethrowers rework
- .50cal revision
- adding Hold Fire to heavy tanks with longer reload times
- flank speeds on Tigers + ALRS adjustments
- tuning the arty damage
- possibility for BOYS to deal less damage to early vehicles but causing criticals (weapon destroyed, engine damaged etc.) on them more often
and some other ideas that were mentioned in the topics lately. Don't freak out about those points, most of it is in the stage of theoretical planing.


I've been playing with Kwok and the one causing him pain with the German AT rifle. In my opinion, it's good now, as it is good, but no where near as good as it was when I first started using it (after you did the first balance changes towards it).

As for Mefisto's suggestion - what about locking the AT grenade behind Assault Phase for Germans? That way it's still a tool in the German arsenal, but not immediately available? Or making it like the panzerfaust? Muni to equip and muni to use?

I've rarely used it to be honest.

I have no issue with Brit at boys and think they need no changes.

Wald

P.S. Second suggestion, what if enemy players can't see how much vet your units have? (or only if they click on the unit?)

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3764
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Aug 2018, 14:00

Walderschmidt wrote:P.S. Second suggestion, what if enemy players can't see how much vet your units have? (or only if they click on the unit?)

Nah, I know that this would make it harder for your opponent identifying your most elite unit.. and thus he won't be always focusing his guns on it.
However, I believe it will be pretty bad on some other aspects.. visually in particular. I can't support this suggestion...

Your other suggestion was good though.. about removing HE icons above vehicles.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2303
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby MarKr » 23 Aug 2018, 14:02

MEFISTO wrote:for the new at squad, we should remove the 30mm AT grenade because they make the early game and mid game vehicles useless.(...)I think they should still be able to kill units like recces, but they do not need that grenade specifically.
They can kill Recce with their basic ammunition (but it should take 3-4 hits). The ability shot is there to keep them viable agaist medium tanks lalter in game. I think it would be good to keep it but if it is available too soon it could get unlocked later e.g. with later Phase upgrade or Light tanks factory.

Mr. FeministDonut wrote:Actually, just played a game where flamethrower had a very awful expirience, trying to burn out garrisoned building. What's the modifiers against green/building cover?
It is as poor as it has been for ages, that is why there is a rework planned for flamethrowers for the next update.

MenciusMoldbug wrote:I think tanks like the Stuart deserve the Pak 37mm Halftrack treatment. 15 to switch to HE; then switching back to AP and then back again to HE should cost 15 again(like cromwells)
This could work, I guess.

EDIT:
Walderschmidt wrote:P.S. Second suggestion, what if enemy players can't see how much vet your units have? (or only if they click on the unit?)
There are certain things that the engine allows to see only to you and your team mates (e.g. the "Kicker texts" - showing up when you activate for example HE shot, saying "HE shot loaded") and then are things are always visible to everyone - this was the case for the "allied warmachine" the "arrow icon" above tanks when the ability was active. The only way to make it invisible to opponents was to remove it completely.
I am not 100% sure now but I think that Veterancy levels are the category that is always visible to both sides.
Image

The New BK Champion
Posts: 111
Joined: 11 Feb 2018, 22:09

Re: 5.1.5 beta v6

Postby The New BK Champion » 23 Aug 2018, 14:11

Walderschmidt wrote:
As for Mefisto's suggestion - what about locking the AT grenade behind Assault Phase for Germans? That way it's still a tool in the German arsenal, but not immediately available? Or making it like the panzerfaust? Muni to equip and muni to use?

Yeah cuz fuck WH so they have to pay 2x more fuel than others or muni for something that other factions have for granted #bestideaever.
Watch the enemy coming with jeeps and cry


Return to “Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest