The absurdity of ambush

[Warhawks97]

I just want to come back to this topic.
I think the boosts or the kind of boosts provided by ambush are kind of absurd.

Let me make this clear in one or two examples.

A Jagdpanzer IV/48 has a 71,4% chance to penetrate a 76 sherman that is 45 range away. Guns max range is 60 at which the penetration is 62,5%.
However, when the Jagdpanzer IV/48 fires from Ambush, the Jagdpanzer has a 78,1% chance to penetrate the a 76 sherman that is even 70 Range away.

That means that Ambush does not only provide a massive boost in range, but also the chance to penetrate the target at beyond the standard range is higher than the penetration chance would be when firing at the target from mid range. Thats pretty big.


A M10 that fires against a Panzer IV H from 40 Range has a 80% penetration chance. However, from Ambush the pen chance from 65 range is 81%. Usually the pen chance at 60 range would be 65%.

Current ambush throws off the balance of guns and units entirely. Weapons can suddenly deal with targets they usually would struggle with from a even greater distance and that for free.

I would really suggest to start thinking about the current ambush system and if it really needs a pen, damage and range boost in the first place.
I would perhaps really add some sort of shock element to the receiving tank when hit from ambush that reduces the crews combat effectivness for some time.

[kwok]

Is this deja vu or necromancy. I can’t tell.
You know where I stand. I know where others stand. I wonder if opinions have changed.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I hold my ground here, same opinion as before.. i don't find it any absurd, the current ambush system is completely fine, also has enough drawbacks already... And it's not meant to be standardised any further, so don't touch it.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

It's perfectly fine, if you want to feel more realism, imagine that tank gunner aims at more vulnerable elements of armor from the ambush. xD

[Warhawks97]

I hold my ground here, same opinion as before.. i don't find it any absurd, the current ambush system is completely fine, also has enough drawbacks already... And it's not meant to be standardised any further, so don't touch it.

what drawbacks? Recons have an ability to spot stuff, thats all.

There is no other ability that boost the stats this much as ambush does. Accuracy, Damage, Penetration, Range, Reload speed, Received accuracy.... did i forget something? Oh, an makes you invisible so you usually have the first shot advantage.


I didnt want to make ambush become obsolete. So compensation would be added like, as said, reducing the enemies combat effectivness by lowering its overall performance for a short while. Hence ambush becomes a usefull tool in combined arms play rather than being a pure maniac power boost.

I mean, what if we add an ability that boosts damage, penetration, range and all that stuff and call it "Steorid package; Makes you better in every way". The only thing this ability would not do is making your tank invisible. Ability is a free use. How would you react to such an ability? Most would probably call it OP right away.

Hull down has far more drawbacks and requires vet or CP unlock.

It's perfectly fine, if you want to feel more realism, imagine that tank gunner aims at more vulnerable elements of armor from the ambush. xD

True. I think thats how it was intended. But even that feels wrong when you consider that the penetration beyond the actual gun range is higher than it is at medium distances.

Compare that to stationary mode or hull down. Stationary mode gives you range and reload boost but thats it. It makes you super vulnerable as it increases the received accuracy by 25%.
Hull down lets you sit there like an armored duck often unable to even fire back at what is shooting at you.

If ambush wouldnt boost the range and perhaps only pen and damage by like 5-10% + increased crit chances, that would already be a big bad ass boost.


But as i said. Imagine we would lets say add an ability to a Panzer IV´s or Shermans that gives it 25% more damage and pen, 50% more accuracy, +10 range, faster reload while reducing received accuracy. But the Tank is not made invisible. the ability would be free ofc. Would that be ok?

[Krieger Blitzer]

Ambush used to be 10 times more effective when TDs used to re-hide quickly, and Axis tank hunters were able to shoot several times before being revealed.. not to mention there wasn't even a spotter ability back then, various other changes (which i can't recall them all now) were also made throughout the course of the docs re-work to tweak the effectiveness of some TDs (for example, now Axis TDs are weaker vs Zookas, and Allied TDs can't go mobile straight away without deactivating ambush first, which means no flank speed for Hellcat anymore) needless to say that adding a "shock" element does not negate the importance of having a range advantage from camo.. specifically for TDs that are turret-less, moreover; such a "shock" element is already available through other abilities such as phosphorous rounds and LMG vehicle suppression.. which all seem nice but definitely not enough to replace the current ambush bonuses which are mandatory for TDs to fulfill their role.. otherwise, TDs can just as well become regular tanks and not TDs anymore.

Hulldown & Static position abilities are just different and should be discussed separately.

[Warhawks97]

Ambush used to be 10 times more effective when TDs used to re-hide quickly, and Axis tank hunters were able to shoot several times before being revealed.. not to mention there wasn't even a spotter ability back then, various other changes (which i can't recall them all now) were also made throughout the course of the docs re-work to tweak the effectiveness of some TDs (for example, now Axis TDs are weaker vs Zookas, and Allied TDs can't go mobile straight away without deactivating ambush first, which means no flank speed for Hellcat anymore) needless to say that adding a "shock" element does not negate the importance of having a range advantage from camo.. specifically for TDs that are turret-less, moreover; such a "shock" element is already available through other abilities such as phosphorous rounds and LMG suppression.. which all seem nice but definitely not enough to replace the current ambush bonuses which are mandatory for TDs to fulfill their role.. otherwise, TDs can just as well become regular tanks and not TDs anymore.

I dont think a range boost is mandatory for a TD to be a TD. Even when turretless. I mean why? You have plenty time to turn the tank, esspecially when we remove flank speed abilities. Units like stug III and Geschützwagen also perform anti tank tasks and they are not all that bad. Geschützwagen only having issue with its inferior aim time.

Range from ambush is not what makes a TD special. Its the ability to combine a strong gun for low cost while sacrificing multirole aspects. M10 costs 320 MP and 35 fuel while a 76 sherman costs 450 MP and 55 fuel. A IV/70 costs far less than a Panther. And i wouldnt honestly mind to drop cost of units like Hetzer and Marder by a lot when losing all the massive boosts. Like Marder coming at 300 MP and Hetzer at arround 370 MP.

So the true strenght of TD´s would actually lay in the ability to provide firepower for a fraction of the cost a normal tank with a similiar or same gun would cost. And not in the ability to literally stall entire games due to massive range and penetration boosts. "Low cost solution" to a certain problem.

Ambush is a pretty offensive ability currently. I mean i see it very often that TD´s move up and instantly activate ambush modes to engage enemie tanks and hence creep forward. I think that should not be the point of ambush, does it?

On top of that i am not only suggesting this for TD´s, but also for AT guns (which also get massive pen/damage boosts).




But perhaps answer simply this question:
Imagine we would lets say add an ability to a Panzer IV´s or Shermans that gives it 25% more damage and pen, 50% more accuracy, +10 range, faster reload while reducing received accuracy. But the Tank is not made invisible. the ability would be free ofc. Would that be ok?

[Krieger Blitzer]

You don't have plenty of time to turn ur TD when charged with 2 tanks.. turret-less TDs also have longer reload time, so the range advantage is justified. Removing the flank speed abilities can make things better or worse.. as i said before regarding that topic, it all depends on the boosts given in return by default for each individual tank.. if the tweaks turn out to be too much, then it would feel like those tanks lost the ability but in compensation received permanent speed advantage instead, and in case the adjustments were very minimal; it would simply make some TDs (specifically Allied ones which rely on speed) becoming fairly useless... So, i'd be very cautious with suggesting to remove the flank speed ability if i were you.

Your question also answers itself.. those tanks aren't TDs and have other advantages that TDs don't, so obviously you can't compare.

[Diablo]

To stop ambush mode from being offensive you could restrict activation to owned territory

[Warhawks97]

You don't have plenty of time to turn ur TD when charged with 2 tanks.. turret-less TDs also have longer reload time, so the range advantage is justified. Removing the flank speed abilities can make things better or worse.. as i said before regarding that topic, it all depends on the boosts given in return by default for each individual tank.. if the tweaks turn out to be too much, then it would feel like those tanks lost the ability but in compensation received permanent speed advantage instead, and in case the adjustments were very minimal; it would simply make some TDs (specifically Allied ones which rely on speed) becoming fairly useless... So, i'd be very cautious with suggesting to remove the flank speed ability if i were you.

Your question also answers itself.. those tanks aren't TDs and have other advantages that TDs don't, so obviously you can't compare.

I wasnt the one coming up with removal of the comic like flank speed ability. I just agreed with others on that. Ofc they would get some sort of compensation, but not as crazy as it would make turretless TD obsolete.


viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4576
See this game? Its one crazy example but one example of a match where TD´s are all over the place in a extreme camp situation. Sometimes games end up both sides fielding lots of TD´s being put into ambush everywhere.

In my opinion this should not be the goal whatsover to put dozens of tanks into ambush mode in every crater and slowly creeping forward. The whole idea of TD´s was to bring up a cheap and mobile solution to massed enemie tank attacks. The whole idea of removing the turret and adding a gun to a basic tank hull for the germans was to reduce the cost and build time by as much as possible. And i think thats simply the best idea to implement TD´s in BK.

Right now TD´s cant be made too cheap because they have such a potent ambush. I mean just look arround how many debates there had been about "cheap M10 killing Tigers and Panthers everywhere". Its not such a long time ago.
So we can either keep TD´s at pretty high cost relative to the normal tanks in order to compensate for their powerfull ambush or we can really try to turn TD´s into what they were designed for: Cheap and easy to produce mobile hard hittig anti tank units. But as of right now most of them cost as much or more than their battletank counterparts. A Jagdpanzer IV/48 or Hetzer costing more than a sherman, Hellcat as much as a Tank IV and so on. I mean even a Marder costs more than a sherman when fighting against an cheap armor doc sherman. Thus TD´s are most of the time bound to sit arround into their Ambush positions because its too risky to move arround with them.

Instead i would drop the massive ambush bonuses (which simply becomes a bonus feature) and in return drop the MP build cost. Like 300 MP for Marder, 350 MP for Hetzer, 380 MP for IV/48, 450 MP for IV/70, 650 for Jagdpanther, 300 MP for M10 and Hellcat, 370 MP for Achilles and so on.


I mean look arround in the topics: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4579
Frost complains about expensive units in SE. And he is damn right about that in general. Over 300 MP for each inf squad and vehicle and every arty or anti tank costs arround 400 MP or more.
Why not begin with cheaper TD? A Hetzer for 350 MP in SE doc would allow players to use TDs in a much more active role instead of just parking them into an ambush all the time since they are too valuable and every "non-ambush" use simply too risky.

TD´s could get a more active role, esspecially during the offense and in support of friendly infantry rather than just units to fill craters.
Doctrines that focus mainly on infantry while struggling with tanks would get a much needed asset to help with their offensive play. RAF wouldnt need SAS with zooks and PIAT right away since they could get cheap Achilles to support commandos.
AB could afford cheap TD that can help during the attack instead of just sitting there and wait for enemie tanks to role in.
SE would get some cheaper tools for a more offensively orientated gameplay.

[Consti255]

Agreed on Tiger and Sukin.
Ambush already got nerfed enough.
I dont feel frustrated when my tank dies because of a ambush.
Well set out of vision, gg wp.

[Warhawks97]

Agreed on Tiger and Sukin.
Ambush already got nerfed enough.
I dont feel frustrated when my tank dies because of a ambush.
Well set out of vision, gg wp.

Its not about frustration lol. Just that like most build TD´s will just sit forever into an ambush position waiting for a prey to pass. The game becomes ultra campy. TD´s are mostly pretty campy. Losing them often hurts more than losing an actual tank.

The funny thing is out of all TD´s the M10 is probably the worst when it comes to "Kills per ambush" and quite often dies to the actual victim. However its in my opinion afterall the best TD out there because its cheap and no other TD is being used actively and offensively as this one. All others mostly just sit the and being extremley passive.

Losing the ambush power but in return being made cheaper as well as some schock elements added when shooting from ambush would allow players to get more, thus cover more area but also being able to use them during the offensive as well since a loss is not as hurtfull. I love how the Stug III works and how you can use it to support other units during attacks. And i love how the M10 works being cheap and hence expendable.


Aside from that, balancing guns would become a hell lot easier. Like a gun being used from ambush and using special AP has literally nothing in common anymore with the actual gun its supposed to be.

[Consti255]

I still dont think ambushes should be touched. TDs are super vurnable against arty and infnatry. You also have the spotting ability to spot them, an disable the ambush bonuses.

[tarakancheg]

I still dont think ambushes should be touched. TDs are super vurnable against arty and infnatry. You also have the spotting ability to spot them, an disable the ambush bonuses.

Range bonus stays even when you are spotted.

[Warhawks97]

I still dont think ambushes should be touched. TDs are super vurnable against arty and infnatry. You also have the spotting ability to spot them, an disable the ambush bonuses.

Even more a reason to make TDs less dependent on their ambush and instead drop cost. Right now when your enemie figures out where a TD is, he fires arty at it and often times gets immobilized. So you got a 400+ MP turretless tank immobilized in the field that has huge range and other bonuses for nothing. So at that point the TD usually retreat backwards to the next best crater untill it gets bombarded there as well. Doing anything offensive and going forward is too risky due to their cost.


Over the past years we have made the experience in BK that a nerf along with cost drops have helped units more than having them extremely strong and expensive.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I still dont think ambushes should be touched. TDs are super vurnable against arty and infnatry. You also have the spotting ability to spot them, an disable the ambush bonuses.

Range bonus stays even when you are spotted.

Thanks god it stays, because most of the time spotted TDs are nothing but sitting ducks.

[Warhawks97]

Great that you guys cant even read.....They are sitting ducks because mostly you have just one. So it gets spotted, retreats to next carter and gets spotted again.

The M10 is overall much more viable and active than any other TD. Often one in reserve and one can operate elswhere. Thats barely possible with any other TD.

And cheaper TD means more of them means you can group them up and one covers another. So while one may gets spotted/struck/becomes a sitting duck, another can still cover the area. M10s cover much more map due to their lower cost. So i would rather have two Hetzer with somewhat weaker ambush stats instead of one that is super strong from ambush but only as long as it is in ambush and not spotted.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Most TDs are already cheap.. you get at least 2 or 3 on the field for just 1 big tank, so i'm not sure what "cheaper TDs" u r talking about, unless u mean JagdPanther? That's a high tier special TD that is meant to snipe and kill at long range.. and not "shock" the enemy or "tease them" somehow.

[Warhawks97]

Most TDs are already cheap.. you get at least 2 or 3 on the field for just 1 big tank, so i'm not sure what "cheaper TDs" u r talking about, unless u mean JagdPanther? That's a high tier special TD that is meant to snipe and kill at long range.. and not "shock" the enemy or "tease them" somehow.

Dont set everything into "Big tank Relation". If you compare TD cost to casual tank cost you pay about the same if not more. Hetzer for a Sherman (pretty much same cost) and so on.

Also where is the difference of having two TD double ambush a heavy with less boost or one TD with massive boosts vs one heavy. At the end the ammount of shots going through will be roughly the same.


And funny that you speak of Jagdpanther. That thing has a gun that doesnt really care about the boosts it gets. Its usually a guranteed pen and massive damage anyway and later get a kill shot ability. Currently it doesnt need AP rounds as long as you fire from camo since camo boost is about as heavy as AP boost.

It also costs a lot more than the tanks it is designed to kill like Pershings, Churchills, Jumbos. Ideally it would cost not more or even less than those while still hitting them hard. As i said, the logic of Tank destroyer units is to get the most powerfull gun on a tank for the lowest possible cost. And right now only M10 Wolcerine and Stug III do follow this logic. All other TD usually cost as much or more than the tanks they combat tanks counterparts with a similiar gun.

[Krieger Blitzer]

You are speaking of TDs while categorising them all in the same basket. That's why i said they shouldn't be all following the same philosophy.. so i am against standardising them, and generally still against touching the current ambush system at all.

You have Hetzers, Hellcats, Wolverines, JPz (L48), etc in one category and those are relatively cheap already.. they don't need to be cheaper and the ambush bonuses they receive aren't "super strong" given their drawbacks in return.

Then you have, Achilles, Jackson, JagdPanzer L70, etc in a slightly higher category, and those are not very cheap but affordable.

Then you have super TDs like JagdPanther & Elefant that DON'T follow the philosophy of "get powerful gun for lowest possible cost" which you mentioned.. but instead they are designed to be heavily armored long range snipers, and that's what they do currently from ambush, so yes; THEY DO NEED the range bonus from ambush.. and other turret-less TDs in lower tiers also NEED to maintain more range in ambush as well due to being slow with long reload time, and the Allied TDs also need the range bonus in ambush due to their weak armor.. and there is nothing wrong with having stronger guns when hitting from ambush either.

Also, the JagdPanther doesn't really cost more than a Pershing.. and it's the answer mainly to the SP or used to snipe other TDs or late in the game to halt E8 spam.

[Consti255]

TD are already cheap as nuts (the allied at least) and no i am against a further cost drop.

I am supporting your MP decdrease and fuel increase on tanks in general, but still even immersion wise, i think ambushes should stay as they are.
The ambush should be rewarded. And no i dont think ambushes are OP in anyway. A located or spottet TD is a dead one or at least a useless one.

[Warhawks97]

You are speaking of TDs while categorising them all in the same basket. That's why i said they shouldn't be all following the same philosophy.. so i am against standardising them, and generally still against touching the current ambush system at all.

As i said, those working the best that can be actively used. And thats in my opinion the M10 currently.

You have Hetzers, Hellcats, Wolverines, JPz (L48), etc in one category and those are relatively cheap already.. they don't need to be cheaper and the ambush bonuses they receive aren't "super strong" given their drawbacks in return.

What drawbacks? +5 to +10 range, reload and accuracy boost, reduced received accuracy, 25% pen and damage boost which is better than what you get for the special AP ammo activation and being invisible without any cost or upgrade required. Hull down positions are by far worse and requires unlocks or veterancy. So idk what drawbacks you keep talking about.

Hetzer and Jagdpanzer IV/48 could be cheaper in terms of MP. 425 to 450 MP is about as much as a sherman and more than most Panzer IV cost but cant defend themselves against inf. The only reason they cost this much is because of their powerfull ambush which often means you dont risk to move them out of cover.

On top of that, like when i play def doc or SE where i always get a IV/48 or Hetzer, i do feel the massive pressure i have on my MP pool since the units arent cheap but very specialised. Playing def doc is one big pain for me to play. And my costly TD getting bombed damn often before i can even fire a shot from ambush. But also i cant attack since i cant afford to lose them not to speak getting two out for an attack.

As SE i kinda feel same. I am glad when i get 2 hetzers out among the other high MP units. But even there i dont dare to attack with them.

Then you have, Achilles, Jackson, JagdPanzer L70, etc in a slightly higher category, and those are not very cheap but affordable.

depends what you understand here. Achilles maybe. The other two are the same as those above. Risking them to support an attack is usually something i dont dare to risk. Once you lose them its hard to recover and your frontline is completely left vulnerable.

Then you have super TDs like JagdPanther & Elefant that DON'T follow the philosophy of "get powerful gun for lowest possible cost" which you mentioned.. but instead they are designed to be heavily armored long range snipers, and that's what they do currently from ambush, so yes; THEY DO NEED the range bonus from ambush.. and other turret-less TDs in lower tiers also NEED to maintain more range in ambush as well due to being slow with long reload time, and the Allied TDs also need the range bonus in ambush due to their weak armor.. and there is nothing wrong with having stronger guns when hitting from ambush either.

Also, the JagdPanther doesn't really cost more than a Pershing.. and it's the answer mainly to the SP or used to snipe other TDs or late in the game to halt E8 spam.

Boy, did you notice the recent Elephant topic? No one uses it. Lmao, gl putting them into ambush to utilize the ambush Power. Artillery is a too great danger if they should notice you go into ambush. Both units have high default range and i wouldnt mind increasing default range a bit further. I see the Jagdpanther go into ambush when attempting to lure a SP. Other than that its mostly used to actively hunt tanks. And for that it doesnt need all the ambush boosts which increases the MP cost to an unnecessary ammount. Both also have a long range shot ability. Those are the once that really dont need the massive ambush boosts at all which are driving their MP costs crazy high.



Allied TD range boost is only +5. So effectively they dont outrange panthers and stuff anyways. So i dont get this "they need range boost to survive". thing at all here.

TD are already cheap as nuts (the allied at least) and no i am against a further cost drop.

I am supporting your MP decdrease and fuel increase on tanks in general, but still even immersion wise, i think ambushes should stay as they are.
The ambush should be rewarded. And no i dont think ambushes are OP in anyway. A located or spottet TD is a dead one or at least a useless one.

exactly for this reason they can lose some of the buffs in exchange for being cheaper and hence less passive in gameplay. Tell me, when did you see a Hetzer actively supporting ground forces during an attack? I cant remember.

And yes, they get spotted and bombed. So wouldnt it be better to have two?

Ambush is also rewarding by default simply because you are the one shooting first.

The M10 would only drop to 300 MP but gets fuel increase.

[Consti255]

Tell me, when was a Hetzer design to do so ?
Has to be in an parallel universe or something.


Seriously it doesnt break any immersion or gameplay for me. No it even makes it better for me.
I just get goosebumbs when a enemy tank drives in my trap and also i am not frustrated driving in one.
Isnt that the most meaningful argument ?

[mofetagalactica]

I mean, i would only suggest to remove the range buff on cammoed units mostly because they will always shoot you first even when you reveal them with the spotter some units like the stug can get a insane range with it.

[Walderschmidt]

No