Crush or not to Crush - That is the question

[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

[tank130]

So lets get an idea where everyone sits on this topic.

Explanation of options are:

Don't fucking touch it !!!!! = No changes at all required
Remove all crush = Removing crush from all vehicles
Apply Crush Modifier = Applying (or amending) a modifier that would gradually slow a vehicle as it crushed each manz in a squad.
Remove crush from specific vehicles = Only specific vehicles we have their crush removed. Those vehicles can be discussed and poled at a later date.


I will be deleting rage posts, theory crafting, and off topic comments.

[Mysthalin]

No, crush should be left as is. It already applies a crush multiplier - which people seem to be, for whatever reason, forgetting - and although it may be annoying on units such as the M10 removing crush is simply not the optimal answer - with price changes and changes to innate Tank Destroyer accuracy vs infantry being far more efficient at doing what is intended (making TDs less powerful relative to medium tanks) without creating problems such as infantry being able to outright block a tank that's trying to, say, circle-strafe an AT gun.

[tank130]

without creating problems such as infantry being able to outright block a tank that's trying to, say, circle-strafe an AT gun.

I believe that issue was addressed in the other thread? The AI will make the infantry move out of the way (because there is no crush) which would result in that tactic not being viable.
Unless I read that wrong.

If we just amend the modifier, then I assume blocking could theoretically be a problem?

[Mysthalin]

I touched on that in that very same thread. Reason why units get out of the way of greyhounds and pumas (and not always successfully, mind you!) is because greyhounds and pumas are 2-3 times smaller than the tanks which, I believe, could be caused problems to.

Not to mention the sheer speed/acceleration differential of the tank compared to the light vehicle which also has a strong effect on the infantry's ability to block units.

Yes, amending the modifier could also create an issue - which is why I propose leaving crush as it currently is and using the long-standing method of price changes to relieve the situation (and you know I hate being conservative for the sake of being conservative). A reduction in innate accuracy vs infantry of the M10/M18 would also be a much more plausible solution.

[GORKHALI]

cush does not apply same to every tank so make that tank can crush inf easily and same for everyone or remove them, coz ally vehicle can crush axis inf with out any delay they just run over them but when axis tanks try to runover them they get slow before crush and even pinned inf r difficult to crush coz they just slides away from the vehicle.

[WildZontar]

It's a goddamn tank and should be able to crush whatever the hell it wants to.

Leave it as it is.

[tank130]

@ Myst

I didn't want to push this topic in the direction one specific unit, but I guess the reality is it is only a couple of units causing the issue.
That being said:

Isn't the M8 just as fast, and have just as good accel as say the M10?
I honestly don't know how you could "Price" adjust a unit like the M10 to account for it's great TD abilities and equally good AI abilities (crush).
With very little skill (let's face it - even tank130 can do it)  you can crush almost an entire squad in about 1.5 seconds. That is about the best AI in the game.

So if you price adjust the M10 to account for its great AI, wouldn't it make it not cost effective as AT? It is a glass cannon, so you would have to increase it's AT power, or Armor, or a slew of other attributes to make it valuable again.
It just seems like you would have to make a shit ton of stat changes to it just to make it's OP AI ability balance - where as removing crush would solve the issue.

I am not trying to push that removing crush is the only answer, but it appears that is the best answer.... resulting in the least number of changes to the unit.

[tank130]

Actually it is a Tank Destroyer

Not all tanks can crush tank traps either.

It's a goddamn tank and should be able to crush whatever the hell it wants to.

Leave it as it is.

[Mysthalin]

The M10 is just as fast as the M8 - yes. The other tanks, such as the Sherman, the P4 and a slew of others, however - aren't. And ALL of them, including the M10 - are bigger.

How to price adjust it? Simple, pop it up to Sherman levels and raise the range to 47.5, like the panther. It'll then be a very clear trade-off when compared with the sherman - you get the ability to hound enemy tanks with a longer range, better penetrating and damaging gun and better speed while sacrificing some (not all) anti-infantry ability and armour. A simple trade-off between versatility and pure ability to hit hard.

I think having to work slightly harder on one, singular unit is just flat out better than putting a blanket "fix" on a bunch of units that don't even require fixing.

[Groundfire]

I think having to work slightly harder on one, singular unit is just flat out better than putting a blanket "fix" on a bunch of units that don't even require fixing.

+1

[tank130]

I think having to work slightly harder on one, singular unit is just flat out better than putting a blanket "fix" on a bunch of units that don't even require fixing.

I agree with this. I am under the assumption that we can remove crush from specific vehicles, not a blanket on all vehicles.

Sherman has crush, but it is hardly an issue.

How to price adjust it? Simple, pop it up to Sherman levels and raise the range to 47.5, like the panther. It'll then be a very clear trade-off when compared with the sherman - you get the ability to hound enemy tanks with a longer range, better penetrating and damaging gun and better speed while sacrificing some (not all) anti-infantry ability and armour. A simple trade-off between versatility and pure ability to hit hard.

More expensive with a longer range sounds fair.
The gun on the M10 has very little AI worth, it is the crush that makes it the best AI, so I don't see this as a very good solution. You have made the TD a better TD for more cost, but left it's AI ability essentially untouched.

[Mysthalin]

A more expensive tank is something you're less likely to use recklessly - and crushing does involve being somewhat reckless - I mean, you don't really see fireflies charging in to crush some shrecks - even though it technically could.

[tank130]

A more expensive tank is something you're less likely to use recklessly - and crushing does involve being somewhat reckless - I mean, you don't really see fireflies charging in to crush some shrecks - even though it technically could.

I don't think the FF is a good example. It really could not get up the speed to be anywhere near as efficient at AI as the M10 is.

So i guess we could reduce the M10 speed to reduce it's crush effectiveness and increase it's range to make up for that....?

But wouldn't it just make more sense to get rid of the awesome AI ability that is causing the issue in the first place? It would just be the exact same TD, with the exact same stats but with out the unintended AI ability.

[Ahnungsloser]

Without crush we will see some trollol-blocking-tactics with Infantry Squads. When the crush is removed the Panzergrenadiere can charge into a Vehicle, stop it and will be able to shot some awesome close range shots against the vehicle. Infantry bases AT is at the Axis sight a bit stronger that they will have the biggest profit from non crushing vehicles. They can still insta gib squads with the splash damage.

I'm a big M10 fan, but sorry i don't want to see Infantry blocking vehicles on the battlefield. At least: Remove it complete or let everything so as it's now is.

[CrazyWR]

gettin rid of the m10s speed will be nerfing its most valuable asset...

[tank130]

gettin rid of the m10s speed will be nerfing its most valuable asset...

yup, totally agree

[Hicks58]

Tbh, increase range, penetration and price.

The TD's are there to make the heavy armour GTFO. However, things like M10's, M18's, Marder's, StuG's and the likes are notoriously poor at penetrating the front of heavier armour unless you have some doctrine investments.

At the minute, M10's and M18's have a 55% chance to penetrate Tigers (Any other heavies are worse). That's without range modifiers. To take down heavy armour you either have to kite, zerg or get help. Which basically means single TD's are there to put down medium armour... While it's cheaper than medium armour.

Oh, and can we finally give the M10 and M18 distinct roles? They overlap far too much for my liking tbh...

[Mysthalin]

I don't think them being able to crush is an issue at all. The problem is the fact that, with the crush and the main gun they're more cost effective than their medium tank counterparts.

I say let them keep their crush, but make them pay for the efficiency that they do bring to the field.

And we always have the option to make them go up in popcap costs as well.

[tank130]

Without crush we will see some trollol-blocking-tactics with Infantry Squads.

That appears to be the rumor floating around.......

What is interesting is, that tactic can be used on Marders, geschutzwagens, priests, hummels, or any light vehicles, but absolutely no one is doing it.....

It would be easier on a larger vehicle like a M10, but seriously, not THAT much easier. You make it sound like it would be a "click and forget" function......lol

[Spartan_Marine88]

Without crush we will see some trollol-blocking-tactics with Infantry Squads.

You can't block vehicles with infantry, hence why you can use a jeep to push them around