Increase pen on p4

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Hicks58]

Gonna disagree with that Rifle, changing vCoH stats are fine by me considering the environment they are designed for. vCoH is a tiered game, EiRR is not.

[AmPM]

True.

I would love for the STuG to basically get slightly better pen, nerf the MG to normal tank MG levels and 45 range....

[tank130]

OK, so according to you, Price is all we need to adjust to balance the game.

Actually, it could.

Increase price of AT/TDs and heavy tanks, change Med Armor to 10pop, reduce price and you would see a huge swing in gameplay. Imagine that, the price of a unit changing how efficient it is!

Because they don't know how to balance based on price, so toss in pools to keep you from doing anything interesting.

But then that would mean these comments are completely useless............

snip....
If anything, STuG pen should go up, but I would be happy with a rework of HEAT rounds to be a larger pen bonus and smaller damage bonus for STuGs and Mediums.

Could increase pen on the 20mm, make it good vs LVs and infantry, then give the 50mm modifiers vs TD/Med and such to provide a mobile counter.
Snip.....

I don't know..... It's hard to keep track of which side of your face you are using.....LOL


Back on Topic:

The P4 is fine IMO.
M18 is OP

[8thRifleRegiment]

Gonna disagree with that Rifle, changing vCoH stats are fine by me considering the environment they are designed for. vCoH is a tiered game, EiRR is not.

which is why the balance for eirr is will always be tipsy.

[Mister Schmidt]

yes...lets massively nerf the m10 and in order to balance that, we'll give a slight nearly insignificant buff and call it even.

Hardly, it'd make it more similar to a StuG, but able to scout for itself

[Hicks58]

M10 has 35 sight range, +5 would make it 40 still making it unable to fire for itself at max range.

Not only that, you'd be killing one of it's greatest strengths - It's ability to circle strafe.

[AmPM]

OK, so according to you, Price is all we need to adjust to balance the game.

Quote from: AmPM on Today at 11:58:13 am
Actually, it could.

Increase price of AT/TDs and heavy tanks, change Med Armor to 10pop, reduce price and you would see a huge swing in gameplay. Imagine that, the price of a unit changing how efficient it is!

Quote from: AmPM on March 16, 2012, 09:42:01 am
Because they don't know how to balance based on price, so toss in pools to keep you from doing anything interesting.


But then that would mean these comments are completely useless............

Quote from: AmPM on Yesterday at 02:59:01 pm
snip....
If anything, STuG pen should go up, but I would be happy with a rework of HEAT rounds to be a larger pen bonus and smaller damage bonus for STuGs and Mediums.

Quote from: AmPM on March 23, 2012, 02:36:37 pm
Could increase pen on the 20mm, make it good vs LVs and infantry, then give the 50mm modifiers vs TD/Med and such to provide a mobile counter.
Snip.....

I don't know..... It's hard to keep track of which side of your face you are using.....LOL

Pop is not pool firstly. Second, the STuG/Puma changes don't have anything to do with each other. One was a suggestion on how to make the Puma useful, the other is how to bring the STuG in line with other TDs.

The first comment is illustrating that cost (resources + pop + pool) has a HUGE impact on what is efficient in game, and what is efficient is what is good.

So what I see from those quotes is that I:

A: Think the Puma needs a role

B: Think HEAT could be made more useful over a larger variety of vehicles, at least making Medium armor in Blitz good.

C: You fail at reading comprehension. I stated that cost of a unit can be used to balance it, I did not say that you could not change units stats to balance them. What I did state is that you can either change the units roles to make them more efficient, or you can change the price of them. Which is true.

My comment on pools has nothing to do with changing unit stats, it has only to do with you limiting what units people are able to use to make their companies.

Tank, you really need to pay more attention.

[CrazyWR]

Hardly, it'd make it more similar to a StuG, but able to scout for itself

I dunno, I was under the impression everyone agreed the m10 was superior to the stug...

[Mister Schmidt]

M10 has 35 sight range, +5 would make it 40 still making it unable to fire for itself at max range.

Not only that, you'd be killing one of it's greatest strengths - It's ability to circle strafe.

Right you are, I forgot that.

And that is the point, removing that retarded function and replacing it with both the range and sight to be able to kite the heavier tanks as a Tank Destroyer should.

I dunno, I was under the impression everyone agreed the m10 was superior to the stug...

Yes, it is. That is the point

[tank130]

Tank, you really need to pay more attention.

That's the problem..... I am paying attention: to you talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You have clearly stated on more than one occasion that balance can be done with pricing alone. Using your owns words, you have made it obvious that it is an impossibility. Price can not be the only way to balance.


So... were you full of shit then or full of shit now...... your call.

[Jodomar]

So many valid points have been brought up and here is what I like:

Hicks Idea with increasing AT while making handheld AT more effective

Make vehicles stop when they crush infantry (is that even possible) This would be amazing and much needed to stop the lawnmowers of doom that can also rape your tanks all at the same time.

Make the upgun pumma more effective ( Give it the upgun hotchkiss stats, those work great)

Fix the stummel

Add an upgun option to the p4

[Hicks58]

P4 does NOT need an upgun.

If that happens, You'd get high durability AND high penetration medium armour.

The PIV can take shit. The Sherman can deal shit.

[Spartan_Marine88]

So many valid points have been brought up and here is what I like:

Hicks Idea with increasing AT while making handheld AT more effective

Make vehicles stop when they crush infantry (is that even possible) This would be amazing and much needed to stop the lawnmowers of doom that can also rape your tanks all at the same time.

Make the upgun pumma more effective ( Give it the upgun hotchkiss stats, those work great)

Fix the stummel

Love it, only change i would make would be

Make vehicles stop when they crush infantry (is that even possible) This would be amazing and much needed to stop the lawnmowers of doom that can also rape your tanks all at the same time.

If this is possible could it be done instead to be like the C&C way so its not an instant stop, but drastic slow down with each hit, say 1/2 speed with each infantry it hits?

And agreed P4 doesn't need more penatration, and if the STUG was fixed to be at least somewhat effective (this giving Wher a real TD) Then it wouldn't matter.

[tank130]

Make vehicles stop when they crush infantry (is that even possible) This would be amazing and much needed to stop the lawnmowers of doom that can also rape your tanks all at the same time.

Leo would be the best guy to answer this question.

When we have discussed removing crush, the problem noted was that infantry would then be able to block the unit. So in a round about way, yes we could make vehicles stop when they "try" to crush infantry, but that would mean we are just removing crush.

I would think it would be a coding nightmare to find a way for it to slow down the vehicle with each unit it crushes......

This is off topic from the OP, but the problem of trying to balance some tank destroyers is their ability to be also used as AI (crush)

I think you would see less spam of M10/M18 if they could not crush Inf as well. Hand help AT would solve the spam problem.

[PonySlaystation]

Crush isn't a problem. Just like other things in EIR it's something that you can easily counter.

[Hicks58]

If we cant directly affect the crushing unit, why not attempt this in a round-about way?

Would it be possible to have an small, uncrushable entity spawn for about 0.1 seconds upon an infantryman's death?

That should be enough to stop the unit in it's tracks which crushes the inf without affecting anything else.

[Spartan_Marine88]

I would think it would be a coding nightmare to find a way for it to slow down the vehicle with each unit it crushes......

The flexibility of this mod is such that i doubt that such a simple thing would be the case.

If anything why not when a tank hits an infantry have the death of the infantry due to crush cause the crippling trap/ slow mine effect for 1 second. (without the crits that may cause it to be permanent)

This way your gonna be able to still poweslide crush and eliminate an entire squad but your risking a unit

[TheVolskinator]

If we cant directly affect the crushing unit, why not attempt this in a round-about way?

Would it be possible to have an small, uncrushable entity spawn for about 0.1 seconds upon an infantryman's death?

That should be enough to stop the unit in it's tracks which crushes the inf without affecting anything else.

This I like. Might be annoying if it ends up getting clipped by a shot hitting the object. Also, would it lag the game to have the remnants of the object remain on-field in likeness to bodies, even if there wasn't a skin/model there?

[Mister Schmidt]

0.1 seconds

[TheVolskinator]

Touche.