salan
Synergies TL2 mod!
 Posts: 6290
|
|
« on: July 14, 2009, 09:19:22 pm » |
|
This fixes issues with 006p, and adds one bonus item.
* Commando sniper and Commando Ambush squads work.
* Commando sniper (spotter sight range fixed)
** 57 AT guns now have hold fire. Will not shoot until you target, and only shoots once, unless you disengage it.
* Bren and IHT tweaked. Infantry can not take damage from small arms while in the HTs, but explosions will still damage infantry inside, as well as fire. its either this or immunity and lowering of unit hitpoints/armor which will result in units dieing when the bren/IHT blow up.
* Churchill MkVI 260 F (from 225 F)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 14, 2009, 09:25:20 pm by salan »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
salan
Synergies TL2 mod!
Posts: 6290
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2009, 09:33:18 pm » |
|
you know you love me..
now UPDATE YOUR LAUNCHER!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
 Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2009, 09:41:45 pm » |
|
Churchill is probably too expensive now, but will try it.
It's a fun tank that can actually do something now. I would put it on par with the performance of a STuG or STuH type weapon. The biggest upgrade to it is not the gun, its the speed boost combined with the cheap mine plow.
It about ties with a P4 in a one on one, but its slower, can't upgrade, and only available at 3.
I would say that the price difference over the base version may make the slight gun upgrade (which while slight, does make it at least able to do something with the gun now) overpriced. Perhaps 240 or 245 fuel would be a better price choice, but its minor either way.
At the new price why take it over a Croc for 15 more fuel and much better all around performance?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 . . . . . . . . . . . |
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2009, 09:42:32 pm » |
|
Why did croc get fuel price reduced, that is the question. This thing was already very good.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
SlippedHerTheBigOne: big penis puma
SlippedHerTheBigOne: and i have no repairkits
SlippedHerTheBigOne: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2009, 09:43:39 pm » |
|
Because while good at anti infantry it still loses to a P4? I'm assuming for the same reason all single purpose vehicle costs less than dual use vehicles.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
salan
Synergies TL2 mod!
Posts: 6290
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2009, 09:45:21 pm » |
|
don't shoot me, ampm might have a point, time will tell  the big thing is the difference in population that really makes it need to be on par price wise. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
gamesguy2
Honoured Member
Posts: 2238
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2009, 09:48:33 pm » |
|
Because while good at anti infantry it still loses to a P4? I'm assuming for the same reason all single purpose vehicle costs less than dual use vehicles.
Croc can beat the P4. It just takes forever. Lots of single purpose vehicles cost more than dual purpose ones, for example panther. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
gamesguy2
Honoured Member
Posts: 2238
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2009, 09:49:53 pm » |
|
Argh this forum needs edit button.
How about we remove the gun from the churchill croc? Then it would be just a really uber anti-infantry vehicle.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
salan
Synergies TL2 mod!
Posts: 6290
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2009, 09:55:53 pm » |
|
Argh this forum needs edit button.
How about we remove the gun from the churchill croc? Then it would be just a really uber anti-infantry vehicle.
lol unless flanked... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 14, 2009, 09:56:58 pm » |
|
The Panther does cost less than tanks in its neighborhood that are dual purpose, like the Tiger.
The Tiger costs more because of its Anti Infantry Anti Tank ability.
You can remove penetration from the gun on the Croc, and it would still work just as well as it already does.
275fu is probably too cheap still, and 260 I think is too much more than the 200 the normal Church costs.
I would say 290fu for the Croc, 245fu for the MKVI and keep 200fu for the IV (its only good for mineplowing)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #10 on: July 14, 2009, 10:02:06 pm » |
|
Croc is pointless to engage armor with as it cant burn and turn at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
salan
Synergies TL2 mod!
Posts: 6290
|
|
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2009, 10:03:19 pm » |
|
balance is always going to have changes in it, pricing will fluctuate for a bit and then settle down and be ignored again |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2009, 10:29:55 pm » |
|
Argh this forum needs edit button.
How about we remove the gun from the churchill croc? Then it would be just a really uber anti-infantry vehicle.
a t3 anti-infantry only tank? Really? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
1. New tactics? it's like JAWS, first one in the water dies
RCA-land where shells fall like raindrops and the Captain is an invincible god
|
|
|
gamesguy2
Honoured Member
Posts: 2238
|
|
« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2009, 10:51:39 pm » |
|
Argh this forum needs edit button.
How about we remove the gun from the churchill croc? Then it would be just a really uber anti-infantry vehicle.
a t3 anti-infantry only tank? Really? Sure why not? If its super cost effective? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| spinn72
|
|
« Reply #14 on: July 14, 2009, 11:03:33 pm » |
|
The Panther does cost less than tanks in its neighborhood that are dual purpose, like the Tiger.
The Tiger costs more because of its Anti Infantry Anti Tank ability.
You can remove penetration from the gun on the Croc, and it would still work just as well as it already does.
275fu is probably too cheap still, and 260 I think is too much more than the 200 the normal Church costs.
I would say 290fu for the Croc, 245fu for the MKVI and keep 200fu for the IV (its only good for mineplowing)
I like. The tiger is dual purpose from long range, which makes it almost as deadly as the KT. Maybe someone should try a 1v1 battle with a P4 v Churchill VI. A p4 at vet2 or above however will blow almost anything out of the water due to the range bonus. Also, is the vet for the VI the same as the IV? Or will it get sherman like vet now??? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Warlight
Donator
 Posts: 304
|
|
« Reply #15 on: July 14, 2009, 11:06:28 pm » |
|
The Brit MG pit is taking up 4 pop in game, I think, I'll screenshot it next time I see it.
I think its only supposed to be 3 pop, though I wonder why its not two pop like the german one?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| spinn72
|
|
« Reply #16 on: July 14, 2009, 11:21:33 pm » |
|
The Brit MG pit is taking up 4 pop in game, I think, I'll screenshot it next time I see it.
I think its only supposed to be 3 pop, though I wonder why its not two pop like the german one?
the brit MG has massive range and spread unlike the Whermact one. It can actually shoot inf without them seeing it if its set up properly. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
gamesguy2
Honoured Member
Posts: 2238
|
|
« Reply #17 on: July 14, 2009, 11:51:48 pm » |
|
The Brit MG pit is taking up 4 pop in game, I think, I'll screenshot it next time I see it.
I think its only supposed to be 3 pop, though I wonder why its not two pop like the german one?
The german mg bunker is terrible, very limited arc of fire and only 35 range. The brit MG pit has 55 range and 45 sight as well as a huge arc of fire, plus its more durable than the American one. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #18 on: July 14, 2009, 11:55:41 pm » |
|
It's also in a faction that has very limited long range arty, meaning they are easier to remove for Axis than the MG bunker is for Brits.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
salan
Synergies TL2 mod!
Posts: 6290
|
|
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2009, 12:14:32 am » |
|
The Brit MG pit is taking up 4 pop in game, I think, I'll screenshot it next time I see it.
I think its only supposed to be 3 pop, though I wonder why its not two pop like the german one?
the brit mg will be an upgrade sooner or later... don't worry about it |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
