Heavy rocket arty.

[tarakancheg]

Your say is that this is comparable to off-maps, the sample provided clearly show that it's not.
Obstacles on the way (such as houses) often are crucial. Which is what "Mood" pointed out when u denied.

If there is anything that is a "joke" here or "out of context" then it's comparing them with off-maps.

These units are fine as they are currently, & are important for the docs that have them.. thus; i'm very against any nerf on these.. apart from slower rate of fire on Walking Stuka perhaps, but just slightly slower (Nebel sound could be applied as well) where any other nerf would be greatly exaggerated.

If it will be possible to dodge stuka without full retreating everything via sound cues and slower barrage RoF, i will be glad. Using Stuka is click-to-kill everything in AoE but dodging or countering it without dedicated arty doc is way too hard and denies you a lot of time.

[Warhawks97]

Here is a recent example by Tara of the "OP walking Stuka" killing literally nothing but just 4 soldiers:
https://youtu.be/CNHm_IJepZE?t=2800
He aimed for the immobilized Sherman.. but the rockets ultimately missed, also some hit the buildings.
100+ ammo wasted successfully...

dude, the 82nd was almost killed in an instant. The last two have perhaps 1 HP left each. One missile landing a bit further to the right would have killed them all. A single sherman as target is not the best way to use a walking stuka btw. It was more of a Meme attempt in an already won battle.

And obstacles? Well, if it hits a hedrow it will kill all units in front and behind them. Hit a house? Its kills all inside and in front usually. So i dont see obstacles as a great issue unless you park the stuka right behind a tree so that its going to damage itself. But that can also happen with howitzers sometimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMnWBlSyPcU
check this. The walking stuka literally destroyed entire armies in a single volley. The first hit makes two full unit kills right away.

In total it killed three units in a large area: 1 artillery unit, 1 AT squad and 1 AT gun and almost a captain.




Whats wrong with rocket artillery in BK:

1. They have a high alpha damage (150 for nebler, 350 for stuka) compared to shell arty (100 for medium, 335 for 105 mm)
2. Fast rathe of fire
3. Short time between shooting and impact
4. Cheap (both CP and Res)
5. Huge AoE (15) compared to shell arty (usually arround 10 radius)
6. Deadly AoE Brackets and AoE damage (1/5/9/15) compared to shell howitzer (1/3/6/10). That means that even in an AoE of 9 the damage a stuka deals is still 175!!! Cover does not so much to prevent a deadly blow. Usually yellow cover damage reduction wont save you. You can just hope that the AoE "misses" you when in cover.

Drawbacks? Range perhaps.



I checked vcoh to get an idea how rocket arty behaves in relation to shell arty.

Generally vcoh does it this way:

1. Rocket arty base damage is far lower than that of an howitzer. It stands 100-120 for the stuka (and only 25 for the nebelwerfer) vs 200 for the Howitzer. Howitzer damage right in the center is even 300 there.
2. Rocket arty has better AoE. Nebler AoE is 13.5 in vcoh and stuka is 8. Howitzers stand at 7. Stuka has somewhat better AoE brackets compared to howitzers.
3. Rocket arty is cheap, mass usable arty with good area effect but has much shorter range and damage than the Howitzers.



And Quite frankly, it works million times better than in BK where rocket arty is super dominant and destructive. 1-2 salvos from one unit often decide matches as it whipes all soft targets in one go.



So, why not making it this way:

Howitzers:
Expensive, heavy equipment with high damage right on impact and huge range.

Rocket arty:
Cheap artillery to deal area damage. Alpha damage is far lower than that of howitzers but ideal to damage and cripple an larger area without doing full whipes in that said area. The range is however quite limited.


In my opinion BK mod turned rocket artillery quite literally into tactical nukes instead of maintaing its main function.

[Consti255]

Your say is that this is comparable to off-maps, the sample provided clearly show that it's not.
Obstacles on the way (such as houses) often are crucial. Which is what "Mood" pointed out when u denied.

If there is anything that is a "joke" here or "out of context" then it's comparing them with off-maps.

These units are fine as they are currently, & are important for the docs that have them.. thus; i'm very against any nerf on these.. apart from slower rate of fire on Walking Stuka perhaps, but just slightly slower (Nebel sound could be applied as well) where any other nerf would be greatly exaggerated.

I dont even know where i compared them to offmaps at all, but okay.

And also as Hawks said. The 82. got almost obliterated.
I call a "waste" something different.
And also agreed on tara 100%. If you want to live in a Walking Stuka strike with ur Infantry, you have to retreat instantly.

[Krieger Blitzer]

And also agreed on tara 100%. If you want to live in a Walking Stuka strike with ur Infantry, you have to retreat instantly.

Which is exactly fine.. so u can survive.
280mm rockets falling on their heads & want them to stay??

[Consti255]

And also agreed on tara 100%. If you want to live in a Walking Stuka strike with ur Infantry, you have to retreat instantly.

Which is exactly fine.. so u can survive.
280mm rockets falling on their heads & want them to stay??

Okay at this point we should bring back the old officier retreat outplay button.

[Warhawks97]

And also agreed on tara 100%. If you want to live in a Walking Stuka strike with ur Infantry, you have to retreat instantly.

Which is exactly fine.. so u can survive.
280mm rockets falling on their heads & want them to stay??

Its the damage it deals even in the farthest AoE bracket. Its not to survive a rocket on their heads, its about huge AoE combined with the huge damage in their AoE vicinity that is enough to easily kill any solider except for the most veted and beefed up units.

also, dont use realism arguments. 280 mm doesnt mean anything in this game anymore, did you forget?
And even then 280 mm rockets contain as much HE as an 105 shell which has far weaker damage and AoE stats.

[Consti255]

And also agreed on tara 100%. If you want to live in a Walking Stuka strike with ur Infantry, you have to retreat instantly.

Which is exactly fine.. so u can survive.
280mm rockets falling on their heads & want them to stay??

Its the damage it deals even in the farthest AoE bracket. Its not to survive a rocket on their heads, its about huge AoE combined with the huge damage in their AoE vicinity that is enough to easily kill any solider except for the most veted and beefed up units.

also, dont use realism arguments. 280 mm doesnt mean anything in this game anymore, did you forget?
And even then 280 mm rockets contain as much HE as an 105 shell which has far weaker damage and AoE stats.

was about to say the same, but since realism doesnt count here, i felt it is unneccessary.
Just because the rocket is 280mm, it doesnt mean it hase the TNT equivalent of a 280mm shell, this would be nonsense, since a rocket contains way more stuff than a pure arty shell which is just a primer,powder and HE filling.
So no, the arguement of "280mM FaLliNg oN tHeIr HeAdS" doesnt change the fact, it even supports our statements.

[Krieger Blitzer]

And the argument of "i need to rEtREaT each time" doesn't sound any better.. in fact, if anything; it shows these barrages achieve nothing but 100+ ammo spent for forcing enemy to just retreat.

Stuka rockets current damage potential & AoE work well vs emplacements spam (specifically RE doc after fortifications unlock) so i am against nerfing AoE or damage.. and don't come up with vCoH values cuz that's completely irrelevant here when all stats in BK Mod are different.

Stuka costs 2 CP, 100+ ammo for barrage, 10 smmo upkeep, 4th phase & 400 MP / 50F so no, i don't think it's OP or even that common to begin with.

[Warhawks97]

And the argument of "i need to rEtREaT each time" doesn't sound any better.. in fact, if anything; it shows these barrages achieve nothing but 100+ ammo spent for forcing enemy to just retreat.

Usually, whatever arty is shooting at you you move or retreat. Against normal arty you can often just move away. Rocket arty is different in that it kills everything that can retreat (like weapon crews) and even units on retreat due to its spread. It absolutely nukes everything and clears a path.

I wouldnt mind dropping rocket arty barrage cost if it wouldnt have this nuke like nature. The AoE is 50% higher than that of any other arty and also has a higher damage and better AoE brackets. Its already a lot more destructive than normal arty where most shots dont hit anything since the no one will stand in the target area.


Rocket arty should be good to damage and harm and soften defensive positions in a large area. But in game its a total denial unit. Enemie defending? throw rocket arty and everything gets nuked. Enemie attacking? throw rocket arty in his face and kill everything. Arty is a no brainer in BK, but rocket arty is no brainer to a square.

Stuka rockets current damage potential & AoE work well vs emplacemdnts spam (specifically RE doc after fortifications unlock) so i am against nerfing AoE or damage.. and don't come up with vCoH values cuz that's completely irrelevant here when all stats in BK Mod are different.

Hands down, vcoh got a lot of things right. I know vcoh is different. But i am speaking of how things relate to each other. How comes that normal 105 arty has been nerfed compared to vcoh. In vcoh 105 arty has 200 damage, in BK 335. So damage got upped by roughly 55%-60%. However, rocket arty damage, or at least nebler and stuka, have been increased by 300-400% and more while its AoE got doubled (stuka at least). Nebler damage went up by arround 400%, stuka by 300-400%.

Quite frankly speaking, rocket arty (nebler and stuka), 150 mm guns and tank guns (vs other tanks) have seen the largest increase in every way by arround 400-500%. Small arms damage saw an increase by roughly 200-350%.

Putting this into perspective it would translate to arround 50-60 damage for nebler ( from its 25-30 orriginally) rather than its 100-150 and walking Stuka to arround 200 damage (from 100) rather than its 350 with buffed AoE etc.


So i would go down with rocket arty alpha damage but keeping a nice AoE while howitzer arty keeps a high damage on impact but smaller in AoE than rocket arty. I think that would be a good compromise.

stuka costs 2 CP, 100+ ammo for barrage, 10 smmo upkeep, 4th phase & 400 MP / 50F so no, i don't think it's OP or even that common to begin with.

cost can get adjusted. i just dont like "ultimate rambo nuke units" that remove any skill or tactical use.

[Krieger Blitzer]

cost can get adjusted. i just dont like "ultimate rambo nuke units" that remove any skill or tactical use.

We already have 150mm Nebels in this doc with affordable price... Walking Stuka is a high tier rocket barrage unit & can't be converted to another mediocre arty piece.

[Diablo]

A slightly slower rate of fire would fix the capability to instantly wipe out a broadly advancing infantry force.
Their effectiveness against emplacements or defensively placed infantry wouldn't be lowered.

[Warhawks97]

cost can get adjusted. i just dont like "ultimate rambo nuke units" that remove any skill or tactical use.

We already have 150mm Nebels in this doc with affordable price... Walking Stuka is a high tier rocket barrage unit & can't be converted to another mediocre arty piece.

"Can´t". Decides who? I mean we turned tanks into halftracks and did other crazy stuff. I think it would make sense to have howitzer or shell artillery deal higher damage to the speed of the incoming shells while keeping rockets with lower damage in impact but with wider AoE effect.

Nebler alpha damage would go down from current 100-150 down to 50-75 with 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point.

Walking Stuka damage would go down from current 350 to 180 and also 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point. Cost would ofc go down.
I would actually turn it into an upgrade for the HT just as we did with hotchkiss. Upgrade cost would be 100 ammo and use would be 85 per damage.

So it would still be a heavy rocket artillery. Its good to quickly saturate an area and soften the defense without doing always full unit whipes in one hit.

A slightly slower rate of fire would fix the capability to instantly wipe out a broadly advancing infantry force.
Their effectiveness against emplacements or defensively placed infantry wouldn't be lowered.

well, that would completely destroy the purpose of rocket projector artillery. The whole point is to quickly hit an area and move away.

I think the damage combined with AoE is the main issue. It shouldnt have higher damage AND higher AoE than 105 howitzer arty. So i would opt for a big AoE and a quick salvo while slashing i alpha damage.

Edit:

Stuka rockets current damage potential & AoE work well vs emplacements spam (specifically RE doc after fortifications unlock) so i am against nerfing AoE or damage.. and don't come up with vCoH values cuz that's completely irrelevant here when all stats in BK Mod are different.

btw, Calliope is the best example for a balanced rocket artillery. Its damage is quite the same as in vcoh. In vcoh its 30-50, in BK its 40-60. The only thing that changed is the AoE that got upped from 5 in vcoh to 10 in BK and range AoE brackets beefed up. So calliope is the best example of a working rocket arty. Its saturating an area with huge AoE but the damage is not enough that a single missile kills several units at once even when landing far from them. In a similiar manner could the nebler and stukas work.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

cost can get adjusted. i just dont like "ultimate rambo nuke units" that remove any skill or tactical use.

We already have 150mm Nebels in this doc with affordable price... Walking Stuka is a high tier rocket barrage unit & can't be converted to another mediocre arty piece.

"Can´t". Decides who? I mean we turned tanks into halftracks and did other crazy stuff. I think it would make sense to have howitzer or shell artillery deal higher damage to the speed of the incoming shells while keeping rockets with lower damage in impact but with wider AoE effect.

Nebler alpha damage would go down from current 100-150 down to 50-75 with 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point.

Walking Stuka damage would go down from current 350 to 180 and also 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point. Cost would ofc go down.
I would actually turn it into an upgrade for the HT just as we did with hotchkiss. Upgrade cost would be 100 ammo and use would be 85 per damage.

So it would still be a heavy rocket artillery. Its good to quickly saturate an area and soften the defense without doing always full unit whipes in one hit.

A slightly slower rate of fire would fix the capability to instantly wipe out a broadly advancing infantry force.
Their effectiveness against emplacements or defensively placed infantry wouldn't be lowered.

well, that would completely destroy the purpose of rocket projector artillery. The whole point is to quickly hit an area and move away.

I think the damage combined with AoE is the main issue. It shouldnt have higher damage AND higher AoE than 105 howitzer arty. So i would opt for a big AoE and a quick salvo while slashing i alpha damage.

Edit:

Stuka rockets current damage potential & AoE work well vs emplacements spam (specifically RE doc after fortifications unlock) so i am against nerfing AoE or damage.. and don't come up with vCoH values cuz that's completely irrelevant here when all stats in BK Mod are different.

btw, Calliope is the best example for a balanced rocket artillery. Its damage is quite the same as in vcoh. In vcoh its 30-50, in BK its 40-60. The only thing that changed is the AoE that got upped from 5 in vcoh to 10 in BK and range AoE brackets beefed up. So calliope is the best example of a working rocket arty. Its saturating an area with huge AoE but the damage is not enough that a single missile kills several units at once even when landing far from them. In a similiar manner could the nebler and stukas work.

Those changes sound like Nebel and Stuka will become as shitty and useless as the current Firestorm.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Nebler alpha damage would go down from current 100-150 down to 50-75 with 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point.

Walking Stuka damage would go down from current 350 to 180 and also 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point. Cost would ofc go down.
I would actually turn it into an upgrade for the HT just as we did with hotchkiss. Upgrade cost would be 100 ammo and use would be 85 per damage.

That's total bananas, there is noway such values are any reasonable.

[Warhawks97]

Those changes sound like Nebel and Stuka will become as shitty and useless as the current Firestorm.

Well, the calliope still works. I dont see why nebles etc should not.

Stuka in particular is like a unit that fires six tactical nukes. One salvo, esspecially vs brits, can decide entire matches.

So i would at least try a reduced damage while keeping the AoE and rate of fire. But i see no reason why it should have higher damage+AoE+rate of fire+ better AoE brackets than a 105 howitzer. People already also complain that stuka is usually better than the Sturmtiger and more destructive.

I would try it at least.

One of the reasons i didnt play brits in serious games over the past 5 years was the rocket arty and the fact that it can be very hard to recover from a single salvo. And the main reason i play inf and armor doc 99% of the times is the fact that rocket arty damages my war economy less due to cheaper units.

I think every larger game in the past 2 years or so came down to "soviet style spam". I just spammed enough units to bleed my opponents ammo reserves. I think thats quite a dump way to play games but in my opinion the only really effective one when you face a compenent axis team that uses rocket arty to a large extend.

Nebler alpha damage would go down from current 100-150 down to 50-75 with 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point.

Walking Stuka damage would go down from current 350 to 180 and also 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point. Cost would ofc go down.
I would actually turn it into an upgrade for the HT just as we did with hotchkiss. Upgrade cost would be 100 ammo and use would be 85 per damage.

That's total bananas, there is noway such values are any reasonable.

BK has a lot of stuff that is not reasonable. Like Mortars having a larger AoE than heavy arty, Elite inf units with multiple buffs and vets with abnormal HP pool and damage reducing buffs, tanks that are cheaper than vehicles, Artillery like Grille that fires guided shells......

I think BK is a basically a amassment/accumulation/ aggregation of values that are not reasonable.
Trying to explain BK mod with what is reasonable doesnt work anymore today. And a rocket launcher that fires 6 mini nukes that can essentially whipe an entire army and kick a CW player quite literally out of the game in a single hit is one of the things that are not reasonable.

I´ve never heard of a single rocket launcher that decided an entire battle in history.

Also i think it would make sense to use multiple rocket launchers for maximum effect rather than having one "rocket launcher of doom".

Hence you can buy several HT´s for 220 MP, buy for each a launch system for 75-100 ammo and fire a volley for maximum effect and destruction.

[Walderschmidt]

I think the Stuka is fine is doesn't need to be changed and I reject the changes proposed.

Wald

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

Those changes sound like Nebel and Stuka will become as shitty and useless as the current Firestorm.

Well, the calliope still works. I dont see why nebles etc should not.

Stuka in particular is like a unit that fires six tactical nukes. One salvo, esspecially vs brits, can decide entire matches.

So i would at least try a reduced damage while keeping the AoE and rate of fire. But i see no reason why it should have higher damage+AoE+rate of fire+ better AoE brackets than a 105 howitzer. People already also complain that stuka is usually better than the Sturmtiger and more destructive.

I would try it at least.

One of the reasons i didnt play brits in serious games over the past 5 years was the rocket arty and the fact that it can be very hard to recover from a single salvo. And the main reason i play inf and armor doc 99% of the times is the fact that rocket arty damages my war economy less due to cheaper units.

I think every larger game in the past 2 years or so came down to "soviet style spam". I just spammed enough units to bleed my opponents ammo reserves. I think thats quite a dump way to play games but in my opinion the only really effective one when you face a compenent axis team that uses rocket arty to a large extend.

Nebler alpha damage would go down from current 100-150 down to 50-75 with 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point.

Walking Stuka damage would go down from current 350 to 180 and also 1.5 damage modifier on direct impact point. Cost would ofc go down.
I would actually turn it into an upgrade for the HT just as we did with hotchkiss. Upgrade cost would be 100 ammo and use would be 85 per damage.

That's total bananas, there is noway such values are any reasonable.

BK has a lot of stuff that is not reasonable. Like Mortars having a larger AoE than heavy arty, Elite inf units with multiple buffs and vets with abnormal HP pool and damage reducing buffs, tanks that are cheaper than vehicles, Artillery like Grille that fires guided shells......

I think BK is a basically a amassment/accumulation/ aggregation of values that are not reasonable.
Trying to explain BK mod with what is reasonable doesnt work anymore today. And a rocket launcher that fires 6 mini nukes that can essentially whipe an entire army and kick a CW player quite literally out of the game in a single hit is one of the things that are not reasonable.

I´ve never heard of a single rocket launcher that decided an entire battle in history.

Also i think it would make sense to use multiple rocket launchers for maximum effect rather than having one "rocket launcher of doom".

Hence you can buy several HT´s for 220 MP, buy for each a launch system for 75-100 ammo and fire a volley for maximum effect and destruction.

Dude, sometimes you don’t make any sense at all. Calliope is indeed fine, but it fires like what, x20 more missiles than nebler? Also, it is a TANK with a gun and armor, man.

[Warhawks97]

I had the call jeep in mind. It fires 6 missiles. Nebler and stuka would afterall have 50% larger AoE and higher damage.

[Krieger Blitzer]

And now u r comparing Calliope jeep with Nebels & Stuka ? O.o

You can't just put all rocket arty in one basket like that.. rocket arty are no subject for standardization.
Each one is special on its own.

I agree with Walder & Sukin, as i also disapprove with the changes proposed.. units mentioned in this topic are currently fine. Although i would be ok with "slightly" slower rate of fire, but only that... Absolutely nothing more.

[Consti255]

I think the Stuka is fine is doesn't need to be changed and I reject the changes proposed.

Wald

Disagree here, stuka isnt fine. As for reasons mentioned early.
Slower rate of fire should be the minimum done here.
And as Diabolo said, this wouldnt hit Tigars beloved structure damage, since this things dont move, tanks can still be damaged reliable but the i click i nuke the entire advancing force with one barrage is just as Hawks mentioned a no brainer to a square.

I also want to add to Tigars argument that you should retreat when arty comes down i disagree.
I often move away from arty or try to aslong i dont get a supression effect, this is a risky move since RNG can fuck you up, but also leads normally for more models survive that strike, better combat readyness for the upcomeing enemy attack and aswell cover for your backline.
Rocket arty straight KILLS with bigger AOE, AOE damage, damage and twice or third as fast fire rate.

[Erich]

U guys are basically nerfing Ete and his crew