goreblimey

TIER 1 armour BALANCE need looking at

185 posts in this topic

13 hours ago, merlin51 said:

Why?
And nothing i said was any part of the development production plan, i said that right off, was very 1st thing i said.
I dont even do anything with tiers and TOE.
But still, why?

Say its late T2
Axis field a low amount of tigers (they only had a very small amount ready at that time)

Ok now where are they?
Well, they aint at every garrison.
As i said, some kind of mechanic to localize it.
For sake of argument lets call it a modifier flag, and lets say there are only 2 of them.
And lets say that once applied to a garrison, it is real time days before you can remove it to apply someplace else.
And lets say that modifier flag provided units can not be overstocked to try to game the game to produce extra.
They always return home when RTB'd.
And when killed they run a separate specialty rebuild/resupply time which is longer.
And lets also say that you can see where the modifiers are placed, maybe a flag on the garrison that shows reinforced by 501st heavy panzer

So you got 2 axis garrisons on the entire T2 map, that have a small amount of tigers, that cant be magically increased or spread all over.
(and change Tiger to any other unit of similar circumstance)
They are not immortal, you can kill them as a team, heck you could take one out with a T0 TD, if you can set it up for the fall and roll the TD in that close (though that would definitely not be my 1st choice of things to do because with my luck, it would turn around before i got close and i'd become the wacky laffly weenie roast)

It's literally a situation of
Axis has sent tigers to dinant!!
Well good then there wont be any at brussels or maube or waterloo or......

Or flip it
Allies deployed 5 mattilda II's west of dordrecht
Good, then we know 100 places where there wont be a single matty 2
The mattys have just become an event if you will.

And then as tier/equipment situations change, the localized units migrate to genpop under what ever supply setup
that is suitable for them.

 

Because I already had to deal with Tigers with the Cru3 and M10... and I don't want to do it again. Been there, done that.

T-2 only 6pdrs for the BEF... 17pdr ATG don't come till T-3 as a counter AND its only counter - MB you guys should give it, its historic round to boot? The one it currently has is the rare and worst performing round it ever fired. Kinda like how the 88 got its pzGr39 round upgrade... a tad over kill for T-0 don't cha think?

The Matty will be up against the 88 I presume in ALL axis garrisons. Something it cannot even see to kill at the ranges it can be killed at.  I'm not looking for immortality, you are friggen crazy to suggest such a thing..  For someone who stuck through the first tiger debacle and the StugG/tiger parity till now, no I think I have a VERY good idea about mortality in this game. Sorry that in it self is a reason to doubt balance in the future.

The other issue is that the allies will not have improved weapons platforms from T-2 to T-4.5.  Just a CS tank and possibly as very large open topped SPG you have to put into reverse with limited traverse to get into position. I think if you ever use the wacky to any extent you will see how difficult it is, so its bearly an improvement. Better than nothing, I could agree, but hardly one. ALL the good stuff will for the allies will require the map to actually LAST till a T4.5 RDP...   Can you tell me where the map stands usually when we hit T3?  Usually IF we get to a T-3, one side is just on the outskirts of the buffer towns around the factories.  All that good stuff the allies get to look for.. Eh we still have intermission I guess because the odds of getting there are slim.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, delems said:

.

So, if tier 0 is 300 brit rifles and germans get 270 rifles and 30 SMGs, not sure that really kills the game that much. (just making up numbers for example)

 

That's not what he said.  He said basically this.

BEF 600 riffles, 50 Grenaiders, 0 SMGs

Axis 600 riffles, 50 SMGs, 0 grenadiers.

IF the allies wanted 50 smgs, they would get 167 LESS riffles.. that's this.

BEF 333 riffle, 50 grenadiers (and we know how awesome the BEF grenadier is especially without the infantry damage model fixed) and 50 SMGs.

Axis 600 riffles, 50 smgs, and 0 grenadiers.

That's the price.. 433 BEF infantry for 650 infantry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, XOOM said:

This should be resolved now, correct?

So you all dropped the Tiger/StugG parity with the S76/M10 if we get to T3 this map? If that's the case, the current situation has been resolved.

Adding a Tiger to T-2 the problem gets worse as the tiers go until T4.5 for the allies.. not sure how that resolves anything.

You might think I'm getting all pissy at you and the guys working on all this. I'm not, but I have been around way too long NOT to say my opinion on going 100% historical. I'm trying to warn you guys that this move is disasterous and not from a bias position but in a position that trying to save the bridge captain. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jwilly said:

Hatch said earlier in the thread that the forthcoming discussion would include whether to base TOEs solely on historical data, or solely on play balance, or on a hybrid.

You seem to be arguing that CRS is foolish to already have decided to base TOEs solely on historical data.

I don't think anyone from CRS has said that's the intent.

That's because they are floating the idea and when there is opposition, they are defending it. You know good and well that they are moving to a historical time line or they would not be selling it.  We tried that back in the day and it was an epic fail for the tanking game that impacted the entire allied side so negatively, the allied side still has not recovered the squads or bench because of it. It was such a huge lesson safe guards where put into place. DOC even posted data on how bad it hurt the game in the forums to show us why he was limiting the Tiger numbers. So logic tells me, that even bringing up such a scenario with the lessons about how it effects this game as a knowledge base, this IS the direction they are heading.  Otherwise there is zero reason to get all our panties in a jumble.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dre21 said:

Goreb  take the stats page with a heavy bag of salt please . I have been playing since 2001 and look at my stats , you are aware the old CRS lost a shiat load of stats when they played around and switched Stat pages. 

Even as we speak the stats are wonky killed 4 as a Sniper yesterday only 2 show up in stats page. The guy that I killed in Binche doesn't show at all . Was a lost soul green tag running around in town shooting his rifle off till I found him and put an end to the noise disturbance . How he got lost in that town is beyond me there was no AO on it and I figured I check the EWS out just to be sure.

I'm having stats that are not showing up either.  I have in my BEF sorties IIRC 5 sorties that show some kills but those I killed don't show up and after killing about 10 guys from a FMS I was cutting I got 3 kills listed instead. There are probably more I did have not noticed but I wanted to see who kept spawning from the FMS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stankyus said:

T-2 only 6pdrs for the BEF

6 pdr kills the tiger,  (even frontally, if said tiger commander were to pay no attention to whats at his nose.)
So all i gotta do is keep his attention tied up while you maneuver something for a kill shot, so i get a couple guys and we get some expendable tin cans, and tie him up for you with a confusing game of shoot N scoot.

No, it isnt a solo affair, but a tiger really wasn't outside of ambush hunting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

6 pdr kills the tiger,  (even frontally, if said tiger commander were to pay no attention to whats at his nose.)
So all i gotta do is keep his attention tied up while you maneuver something for a kill shot, so i get a couple guys and we get some expendable tin cans, and tie him up for you with a confusing game of shoot N scoot.

No, it isnt a solo affair, but a tiger really wasn't outside of ambush hunting.

I had a dream once that I had a 17pdr on a hill and caught several tigers rolling to town I a column and I blew them all away. Right spot right moment.. Man I felt like a hero in that dream thinking about all the Axis tears.

That's how you present the solution.. its in your head as if its a dream. Its because that's the only place your solution can exist and keep the Allied pb happy or satisfied is in dreamland. Given the amount of allied players locking on to this idea and getting excited.. I mean our tanker corp has been growing by leaps and bounds after the Tiger/StugG parity decision how many ppl do you think we can sacrifice those tin cans to deal with the Tiger and the rest dealing with all the other threats like the 4G and StugG? 10 tankers? 30?

The 2pdr can kill the tiger if you are in the right spot at the right time at the right distance... however the 2pdr platforms get accredited to less than 10 tiger kills per map and that's probably way generous..

As for working out HOW to kill a tiger with 6pdrs and 75mm armed guns, its not like we don't ALREADY do that.. even with the M10 and S76 and they still get whipped.  

Now please enlighten us how to kill Tigers with Cru3s working together to set up a Tiger tank defending a town?  Sneak up to under 800m, bypassing all the RPATs, StugGs, 4Gs, soon to be 4Hs, Pak36s, Pak38s, Pak40s, PzHs, Soon to be 3Ls to 95% of all the towns that are probably 1k or less in size?  I am truly interested because its already extremely difficult with CH7s, M10s and S76s but at least we don't have to get under 800m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** Now please enlighten us how to kill Tigers with Cru3s working together to set up a Tiger tank defending a town?

Guessing the same way axis kills matties for the last 17 years for every tier 0..... ?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, delems said:

*** Now please enlighten us how to kill Tigers with Cru3s working together to set up a Tiger tank defending a town?

Guessing the same way axis kills matties for the last 17 years for every tier 0..... ?
 

Oh goody does that mean , allies are getting an Atg that can kill the tiger from twice the distance the Tiger can see it at?

 

Speaking of which, when will 6pndr and 17 pndr be given their historic 3x sights?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, goreblimey said:

Speaking of which, when will 6pndr and 17 pndr be given their historic 3x sights?

17 Pdr has a no51c mkI sighting scope, 3.0 magnification and 13 degrees FOV in game 

though if they came into game earlier (and had some kind of sub progression) they could start with a no41 1.9 magnification 21 degree FOV

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, stankyus said:

That's because they are floating the idea and when there is opposition, they are defending it. You know good and well that they are moving to a historical time line or they would not be selling it.  We tried that back in the day and it was an epic fail for the tanking game that impacted the entire allied side so negatively, the allied side still has not recovered the squads or bench because of it. It was such a huge lesson safe guards where put into place. DOC even posted data on how bad it hurt the game in the forums to show us why he was limiting the Tiger numbers. So logic tells me, that even bringing up such a scenario with the lessons about how it effects this game as a knowledge base, this IS the direction they are heading.  Otherwise there is zero reason to get all our panties in a jumble.

Historical timeline could work, if it was history-as-it-would-have-been-without-Dunkirk-and-the-Armistice

The British would have 50:50 six pounder cruisers in T0.5; full six pounder towed AT in T0.5; full six pounder cruisers in T1; and six pounder infantry tanks for T1.5, as soon as the Valentine model is ready. The Germans correspondingly might skip the 50mm L/42 and go directly to the L/60, but not sooner than the various historical arrivals of the L/42. So, in T1, the British would have a considerable advantage. Then the Tiger, where available, would reverse the imbalance for T2.

The French would get B1(ter) and S40 in T1, and G1 in T2. As the only army in 1940 with a completed, contract-ready design for 75mm APCR and the raw materials and production capability to manufacture them, maybe the French would get that ordnance for the G1's 75mm in T2. I'd think they'd be able to hold their own in T1, and, assuming that the Germans would get Tigers at limited locations, also in T2.

Of course, maybe the intent instead would be continuation of historical-timeline-with-the historical-effects-of-the-British-and-French-being-defeated-in-1940. If so, then yeah, you're right, historical-timeline wouldn't work.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm, yep my bad looks like it is the early 17pdr
so yea no 41 mkII 1.9mag 21deg fov is right for t3 inception
Is historically correct for when the gun comes into game

I hope at some point with sub tiers, we can have an item simply supersede and earlier version of itself 
when its a minor change, like a switch in optics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, jwilly said:

Historical timeline could work, if it was history-as-it-would-have-been-without-Dunkirk-and-the-Armistice

The British would have 50:50 six pounder cruisers in T0.5; full six pounder towed AT in T0.5; full six pounder cruisers in T1; and six pounder infantry tanks for T1.5, as soon as the Valentine model is ready. The Germans correspondingly might skip the 50mm L/42 and go directly to the L/60, but not sooner than the various historical arrivals of the L/42. So, in T1, the British would have a considerable advantage. Then the Tiger, where available, would reverse the imbalance for T2.

The French would get B1(ter) and S40 in T1, and G1 in T2. As the only army in 1940 with a completed, contract-ready design for 75mm APCR and the raw materials and production capability to manufacture them, maybe the French would get that ordnance for the G1's 75mm in T2. I'd think they'd be able to hold their own in T1, and, assuming that the Germans would get Tigers at limited locations, also in T2.

Of course, maybe the intent instead would be continuation of historical-timeline-with-the historical-effects-of-the-British-and-French-being-defeated-in-1940. If so, then yeah, you're right, historical-timeline wouldn't work.

I read your previous post and hit the like button.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

hmm, yep my bad looks like it is the early 17pdr
so yea no 41 mkII 1.9mag 21deg fov is right for t3 inception
Is historically correct for when the gun comes into game

I hope at some point with sub tiers, we can have an item simply supersede and earlier version of itself 
when its a minor change, like a switch in optics

88 is using got upgraded to the pzgr39 ammo.... its in t0. Why not make the site allowance for the 17pdr?  Or are allowances not for the allies? You never answered the 17pdr ammo being its historic and most common ammo either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** Oh goody does that mean , allies are getting an Atg that can kill the tiger from twice the distance the Tiger can see it at?

Uh huh...  a whole 35 matties killed with 88 after over 2 weeks of playing.....  That is about 4% (7% by sorties) of the matties available over that time period; yep, 88 sure makes a difference.........

Why do you think it fine for the allies to have dominate armor, but for axis is not?
How about we try some map where there is no mattie tier 0, but axis gets Tiger tier 0 in mattie numbers?    Then you face what axis faces every map.

 

Oh, and wasn't the 88 using like 1934 or 1936 ammo?  It should get upgraded.  Was way behind the times.

Just like the Flak 30, a 1934 AA gun when the Flak 38 was accepted into service in 1939.......

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, stankyus said:

That's because they are floating the idea and when there is opposition, they are defending it. You know good and well that they are moving to a historical time line or they would not be selling it.  We tried that back in the day and it was an epic fail for the tanking game that impacted the entire allied side so negatively, the allied side still has not recovered the squads or bench because of it. It was such a huge lesson safe guards where put into place. DOC even posted data on how bad it hurt the game in the forums to show us why he was limiting the Tiger numbers. So logic tells me, that even bringing up such a scenario with the lessons about how it effects this game as a knowledge base, this IS the direction they are heading.  Otherwise there is zero reason to get all our panties in a jumble.

But DOC doesn't know anything he killed the game remember ? ;)

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CRS is baby-stepping back into development by adding models that are clones of existing models, but with parameter changes to make them perform like a different version.

Why not do that same thing for ammo-tiering? The 88 model in T0 would have PzGr AP. The 88 model in T1 and beyond would have PzGr 39, which historically was first fielded in 1941. Ditto with other weapons that were significantly upgraded after introduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, delems said:

*** Oh goody does that mean , allies are getting an Atg that can kill the tiger from twice the distance the Tiger can see it at?

Uh huh...  a whole 35 matties killed with 88 after over 2 weeks of playing.....  That is about 4% (7% by sorties) of the matties available over that time period; yep, 88 sure makes a difference.........

Why do you think it fine for the allies to have dominate armor, but for axis is not?
How about we try some map where there is no mattie tier 0, but axis gets Tiger tier 0 in mattie numbers?    Then you face what axis faces every map.

 

Oh, and wasn't the 88 using like 1934 or 1936 ammo?  It should get upgraded.  Was way behind the times.

Just like the Flak 30, a 1934 AA gun when the Flak 38 was accepted into service in 1939.......

 

look at your Stug B stats , roughly same amount of missions , roughly same amount of tank kills , roughly same amount of deaths as the matty. Interesting hey.

How about you get the Tiger in only 3 Divisions in matty numbers :)

 

Edited by goreblimey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** But DOC doesn't know anything he killed the game remember ?

howdy doc!  wb.

bah, i think doc knows stuff, but knowledge in of itself is neither good or bad, it's in its use.

btw, how is retirement? (if there)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** look at your Stug B stats

Sure you want to go there?
I see same number of sorties roughly, but one has 1500 kills to 400, and a KD of almost 9 compared to 2.........

All I see is 1 mattie is equal to 4 StugBs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, delems said:

*** look at your Stug B stats

Sure you want to go there?
I see same number of sorties roughly, but one has 1500 kills to 400, and a KD of almost 9 compared to 2.........

All I see is 1 mattie is equal to 4 StugBs.

 

I said tank kills, learn to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jwilly said:

Historical timeline could work, if it was history-as-it-would-have-been-without-Dunkirk-and-the-Armistice.

Dunkirk doesn't exist in the game unless you guys make it happen. Exactly the kind of open minded thinking we are counting on from you guys. S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HATCH said:

Dunkirk doesn't exist in the game unless you guys make it happen. Exactly the kind of open minded thinking we are counting on from you guys. S!

 

That's why I thought of a system for you guys that would have a pretty open minded 'historical' aproach, combined with a 'gamey' system for a video game.

The 'historical' discrepancies would be 'circumvented' by the players themselves - for example there could be a situation where 5 guys in matildas approaching a town would meet a tiger...... an unexpected situation, but it would create a situation where you on the fly have to come up with a new tactic.

 

rH0McIy.png

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.