|
Tulip posted:Which has taught me a few things: there are currently 660 weapons in game, using 512 ammo types ("ammo" here being a term of art - units are just assemblages of turrets, which are just vessels for weapons, which are in turn merely vehicles for the glory of ammo). I have learned that suppression values are all over the goddamn map, and that units for Poland, Canada, France, US_AB, and so on are in. And for CoH fans, the Kangaroo is in. We've already got one of the Kangaroos, the CMD Stuart transport. As already discussed, they're great APC/IFV's. And we get both types of Tiger II? 
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 10:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:44 |
|
|
Tulip posted:So I have to admit that all I'm really bringing here is enthusiasm. Forgive me if I'm not understanding what you're asking for. Those tables, they're for a single shot. I would like to see % chances for a series of shots. Example: Ap +6 Accuracy 8 shot has a 48% chance of impacting and penetrating if I understood your tables correctly. When you fire a series of two shots, you have a chance of 1 - (0.52^2) that at least one shot penetrates (ie. 72%). 1 - (0.52^3) for three shots (86%) and so on. Let's call this "kill percentage for X" or KPx. The point of this is to determine what are "good bets" when going 1v1 in a fight. You want the highest possible percentage for a series of 3 shots because that's typically all you're getting before someone backs out, planes arrive, you die or something else happens. At the very least you want a better KPx than the other guy, because in the long run that means you'll kill more of them than they kill you. If you have KP2 50% when the other guy has KP3 50% (ie. you need two shots for their three to get a 50% chance of penetration), the prices should clearly reflect that. KPx values for AT guns are also very interesting, because AT guns are essentially disposable. You get one good engagement out of them before something bad happens, so they must pay their price back in that timeframe. If you have KP3 50% for a given gun, the gun should be priced somewhere around 50% of the target it's expected to kill to be "even". Feel free to adjust the price for the amount of "hard counter" effect you want to see in the game. At some point the "counter" becomes so effective you never see their intended target on the field, though. This happened in Wargame more than once. This is of course only meaningful against targets with armor. Most vehicles are thin-skinned which means AP isn't that big a deal but accuracy matters a lot. That's why KP1 is especially valuable series against AV1 vehicles.Americans have a ton of M3 halftracks in every engagement. Finding the most cost-effective gun to deal with them is a pretty big thing and makes it a must-pick, essentially shaping the metagame. Note that a gun might only be useful for one niche and still have a massive impact on the overall fight. A 50 point AT gun killing consistently 100 point worth of vehicles is a very good pick indeed. The mere threat of it is enough to shut down some deck builds, once again reducing the amount of choices available. This is probably the largest theoretical problem in balancing the game: how do you make things enough of a counter without completely shutting down some choices?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
So one of the Eugen devs confirmed on the Paradox forums that only 3AD gets Jumbos: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/2e-division-blind%C3%A9e.1011324/#post-22646058
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
After doing some thinking and reflecting on how I'm using my tanks, I must agree that the M4A3(75)W is kinda poo poo. If you want something to be a distraction/poo poo brick then you take the Jumbo. If you want something to actually shoot and kill things, then you go for a M4A3(76)W. If you want to stomp infantry and ATGs then you should take the M4A3(105)W from the support tab. JyCz0rPxtmKz4bThtgG3cbYhtVG1Mbcxt2G2obcStAG1wbchtZG0QbbBuHGzUbOxs8G1AbVhtYG2UbaCthG1cbXx The loss of the M4A1 command is a bit tough, but can be compensated for with CMD M20 or command infantry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
NoNotTheMindProbe posted:So one of the Eugen devs confirmed on the Paradox forums that only 3AD gets Jumbos: I'm still surprised they put Jumbos in the game at all, considering that they didn't even show up until October '44.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 12:47
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:After doing some thinking and reflecting on how I'm using my tanks, I must agree that the M4A3(75)W is kinda poo poo. If you want something to be a distraction/poo poo brick then you take the Jumbo. If you want something to actually shoot and kill things, then you go for a M4A3(76)W. If you want to stomp infantry and ATGs then you should take the M4A3(105)W from the support tab. The M4A3(75)W should be the generalist option but it's priced way to high for that. I'd guess that earlier in testing they were probably significantly cheaper, like 120 or 130, similar to the command Sherman and were too dominant. At 160 and 6 per card they are in the "well, if you really need a tank and you've used up all the better options" role.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Murgos posted:The M4A3(75)W should be the generalist option but it's priced way to high for that. 150 seems like it might be a good price point for the 75s. I know the M4A1 is 130, and the Sherman IIs in the Scottish deck are 120. 140-150 seems right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:I'm still surprised they put Jumbos in the game at all, considering that they didn't even show up until October '44. I'm surprised they put the Luftwaffe in the game, considering they didn't show up at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I'm surprised they put the Luftwaffe in the game, considering they didn't show up at all. the amount of Henschel attack runs in your average game is probably close to the total number during the entire Battle of Normandy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
power crystals posted:Ok so it turned out all I really had to do was upgrade the bundled moddingSuite to one that understands the new int64 type in Steel Division. In testing it though I noticed it actually spits out some weird proprietary XML that vintage 2014 power crystals decided was useful. I mean, I guess Shanakin somehow figured out how to use this, but it didn't seem all that useful to me. So now it spits out a csv too in addition to that weird XML thing! With the caveat that the csv version is kinda useless if you encounter lists because the NDF structure is inherently hierarchic. Excell has a very handy import data from XML function which worked quite well for the tables I needed. Anyway it's good to get this updated and all properly. I can probably get some preliminary RoF/DPS tables done in the next few days. I'll need to poke around and re-remember how it all works first but it's fairly simple stuff. Mukip, if you find me on steam/discord/mumble I can probably help you out a bit once I get a grasp on the basics again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 16:07
|
|
). I'm not gonna touch the patcher until I find out what the official mod tools are like.
|
Shanakin posted:Excell has a very handy import data from XML function which worked quite well for the tables I needed. Anyway it's good to get this updated and all properly. I can probably get some preliminary RoF/DPS tables done in the next few days. I'll need to poke around and re-remember how it all works first but it's fairly simple stuff. Oh. Huh. Shows what I know for always writing my own tools instead of bothering to learn what's already out there! Either way if there's something I can add to make your life easier just let me know (ideally, PM me, there's no guarantee that I'll read this thread with any regularity in the future).
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
One thing I just learned is that with the way the deck system and points accumulation works, it's crazy super effective to have an infantry player cover a decent chunk of the map (2/3rds say) and let rest of the team play armor and focus on drive up a flank. As the infantry player you can spend all your points on trash infantry, MGs, and AT guns and set up behind where the clashes normally happen so you'll be well prepared when people start pushing. And with the high phase A income, you should have some mobile forces ready to cover any gaps or reinforce where you are getting pushed. So long as you are losing ground at a slow clip and your teammates are doing their job and owning a flank, by the time you get under a decent amount of pressure they should be crashing into the flank of the next player in line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
wins32767 posted:One thing I just learned is that with the way the deck system and points accumulation works, it's crazy super effective to have an infantry player cover a decent chunk of the map (2/3rds say) and let rest of the team play armor and focus on drive up a flank. As the infantry player you can spend all your points on trash infantry, MGs, and AT guns and set up behind where the clashes normally happen so you'll be well prepared when people start pushing. And with the high phase A income, you should have some mobile forces ready to cover any gaps or reinforce where you are getting pushed. So long as you are losing ground at a slow clip and your teammates are doing their job and owning a flank, by the time you get under a decent amount of pressure they should be crashing into the flank of the next player in line. Yeah, that went swimmingly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
a single player cannot cover 2/3rd of the map except maybe in a 2v2. if you did this in a 3v3 or 4v4 and won, it's not because it's "crazy effective", it's because you played against bad players. there is simply not enough points in the starting callin or in phase A for you to hold 2/3 of the map against competent players
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:After doing some thinking and reflecting on how I'm using my tanks, I must agree that the M4A3(75)W is kinda poo poo. If you want something to be a distraction/poo poo brick then you take the Jumbo. If you want something to actually shoot and kill things, then you go for a M4A3(76)W. If you want to stomp infantry and ATGs then you should take the M4A3(105)W from the support tab. How important do you find the A-Phase M4A1 to be?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
Generation Internet posted:On a post tiled "Wow.. the Allies are strong!" I can't wait to play as the 2nd Armored Division
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:a single player cannot cover 2/3rd of the map except maybe in a 2v2. if you did this in a 3v3 or 4v4 and won, it's not because it's "crazy effective", it's because you played against bad players. there is simply not enough points in the starting callin or in phase A for you to hold 2/3 of the map against competent players I think he means more that the infantry player buys the infantry and the tank player buys the tanks and they spread them across the map
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:a single player cannot cover 2/3rd of the map except maybe in a 2v2. if you did this in a 3v3 or 4v4 and won, it's not because i's "crazy effective", it's because you played against bad players. there is simply not enough points in the starting callin or in phase A for you to hold 2/3 of the map against competent players Counterpoint: Most pubbies are bad players. Infantry in this game isn't exactly mobile, so if they get out of their trucks near where the fighting normally happens, setting up a bit back from where you'd normally deploy buys a decent amount of time. Additionally, screening most of the map with units prevents the frontline from moving up much as they approach, so people need to actually probe rather than just charge forward. Certainly if the pubbies had been more aggressive it would have been more difficult, but in the first game we tried it, I lost a lot of men but was able to continually backfill more units to make taking ground slow and painful. Setting up further back means you can stick your AT guns in much more unexpected places, so the next two games were a lot easier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:I think he means more that the infantry player buys the infantry and the tank player buys the tanks and they spread them across the map No, I was fighting a 2:1 all three games. You can buy basically a fully company of infantry to start with the Scots e.g 2x(leader, 3 infantry, 1 mg, 1 atg) and 1x(leader, 1 infantry 1 mg, 1 atg). That's 60-70% of the defensive hitting power of my normal 3rd armored start in two different lanes plus another strongpoint. wins32767 fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Apr 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Effectively countered by 'the game is set in 1944'. Effectively countered by history
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
Tulip posted:That first point is one that is really lost on a lot of people. Hedgerow hell is apparently not real? Hey Tulip -- in the Penetration % spreadsheet it says: quote:AP is set at 1000M Does this mean that, for example, an 11AP gun with a 1200m max range actually has 11AP at 1000m and 9AP at 1200m (in other words, is the AP all normalized to 1000m)? I thought listed AP #'s were AP at max range, not AP at 1000m.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
something I've noticed in my last few games -- can the 88mm German AA gun not utilize hedgerows?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:something I've noticed in my last few games -- can the 88mm German AA gun not utilize hedgerows? I don't think so, I think it counts as a vehicle in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 05:35
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:something I've noticed in my last few games -- can the 88mm German AA gun not utilize hedgerows? No, but it does seem to be able to use yellow cover, such as brush or orchards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:Those tables, they're for a single shot. I would like to see % chances for a series of shots. Example: So there's still miles to go and whatnot, but I produced these charts: P/KPx(x) refers to number of shots. Max accuracy:  Bef. Panther Accuracy:  Panther G Accuracy:  Jumbo Accuracy:  Panther G at max stress, I think (-4)  Jumbo at max stress, I think (-4)  Hubis posted:Hey Tulip -- in the Penetration % spreadsheet it says: I don't see that in my sheets - I think they're all listed at max range, and I've been behaving as if they are i.e. I'm treating 1200m range weapons as +2 AP for 1000m encounters (and same for accuracy - treating 1200m weapons as +2acc at 1000m). I'm sure I can contrive a test easily enough. Do you have the sheet in question? Shanakin posted:Mukip, if you find me on steam/discord/mumble I can probably help you out a bit once I get a grasp on the basics again. Show me what you got. But Monday. I want to see what you got. Tulip fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
Tulip posted:So there's still miles to go and whatnot, but I produced these charts: Oh! Those charts are neat. The sheet I was referring to is the one you linked earlier: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kMbYZe30_PAWR97Bmp55RsrPKz4fBM-awwLX481FIh0/edit#gid=1992750318 (the "Pen" sheet at the bottom). I think It Came From Reddit (tm).
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Hubis posted:Oh! Those charts are neat. Yeah it came from reddit. I missed the "pen" chart, I think that particular person is Just Wrong about AP. The numbers otherwise work. And thanks, I hope they're helpful!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 08:05
|
|
|
wins32767 posted:No, I was fighting a 2:1 all three games. You can buy basically a fully company of infantry to start with the Scots e.g 2x(leader, 3 infantry, 1 mg, 1 atg) and 1x(leader, 1 infantry 1 mg, 1 atg). That's 60-70% of the defensive hitting power of my normal 3rd armored start in two different lanes plus another strongpoint. Not only is wins right, I think we've all forgotten that this was the standard goon tactic for wargame. Get one person to go firm over 1/2 the map with a deck dedicated to that purpose while the other two players drive hard on one of the enemy and knock them out of the game. It works really well because what you lose from the defensive player you more than make up for on the power drive. We've stopped doing this and we should do it again. The two decks each side gets for the beta perfectly complement this strategy. e: if you aren't doubling up on one player then you'll never hit the mass you need to properly push unless they gently caress up massively. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Apr 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 09:37
|
|
|
Tulip posted:So there's still miles to go and whatnot, but I produced these charts: Right, this is exactly what I meant. Looking at how stuff is priced, has anyone tried driving SdKzf 250/9 or PzII rush among the enemy halftracks? Close up they have almost 75% KPx(1) and 90% KPx(2). Another odd one to test would be Honey Stuarts en masse against enemy armor at close ranges. If a map with long lines of sight shows up, high AP/acc is disproportionately valuable. One Panther at 1000 meters should be able to deal with a whole bunch of Panzer IV. Strangely enough these seem to be roughly in line with each other. There's no obviously mispriced single tank. A systemic problem exists, the problem Mukip pointed out, but that should be fixable by making medium tanks a bit cheaper all around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 11:42
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:e: if you aren't doubling up on one player then you'll never hit the mass you need to properly push unless they gently caress up massively. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 11:55
|
|
|
This game looks fun, is it worth getting? E: Does it have as many angry wehraboos as warthunder? underage at the vape shop fucked around with this message at 13:26 on Apr 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 13:22
|
|
|
underage at the vape shop posted:This game looks fun, is it worth getting? The beta is MP/AI skirmish only and just has 2 divisions per side and 2 maps, so it'll get stale fairly quick but I think it may be the best offering from Eugen yet and will be great with full content. underage at the vape shop posted:E: Does it have as many angry wehraboos as warthunder? As many? No. But what it lacks in volume it makes up for with intensity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
Hubis posted:As many? No. But what it lacks in volume it makes up for with intensity. Hell yeah I enjoy the total war games, so I think I might give it a go. Crushing pubbies in 4v4 with goons in shogun 2 owned. E: Do the aces do anything special? underage at the vape shop fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Apr 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 13:40
|
|
|
underage at the vape shop posted:E: Do the aces do anything special? Just a skin, no pay2win in the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Not only is wins right, I think we've all forgotten that this was the standard goon tactic for wargame. Pushing in this game is different from wargame. You dont take a command sector and guarantee a win, every inch matters now. And Im not saying divide the map into lanes and every man for himself, I have always promoted the gang up strategy. But leaving 2/3 of the map to a single player in anything but a 2v2 has pretty much never been a good idea, and is not what we did in WG anyways. By leaving 2/3 of the map to a single player in a 3v3 or 4v4, you are also giving the other team the critical mass needed to push on 2/3 of the map. There are ways to double up on people without leaving literally 2/3 of the map to a player in a 3v3 or 4v4 lmao.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 14:22
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:Pushing in this game is different from wargame. You dont take a command sector and guarantee a win, every inch matters now. The mobility vs firepower balance is much more shifted to firepower than it was in wargame. Infantry by itself can't advance against dug in opposition and basically nobody brings more than 2 tanks at start. All the infantry player has to do is prevent a breakthrough and massive territory loss. Since you can pick where you setup (holding 51% of the map in your sector isn't your goal), you end up with a stronger than typical defensive posture for the number of units you have. Unless the opponent is doing the same doubling up in a narrow area, it's possible to hold in the high 40s over your part of the map for the first 10-12 minutes of the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
wins32767 posted:The mobility vs firepower balance is much more shifted to firepower than it was in wargame. Infantry by itself can't advance against dug in opposition and basically nobody brings more than 2 tanks at start. All the infantry player has to do is prevent a breakthrough and massive territory loss. Since you can pick where you setup (holding 51% of the map in your sector isn't your goal), you end up with a stronger than typical defensive posture for the number of units you have. Unless the opponent is doing the same doubling up in a narrow area, it's possible to hold in the high 40s over your part of the map for the first 10-12 minutes of the game. you're holding 2/3 of the map with this: Scots e.g 2x(leader, 3 infantry, 1 mg, 1 atg) and 1x(leader, 1 infantry 1 mg, 1 atg) and you're telling me that they can't wreck this and take a huge amount of territory? Those are some bad players, dude. Literally at any of those points, they could advance with a line of infantry backed by a mortar, and you'd be hosed. If they are doing any kind of combined arms advance, they can even overwhelm your ATGs pretty quickly, because it's not like you have multiple ATGs backing eachother up--you're spread out over 2/3 of the map. By holding 2/3 of the map as a lone player so your teammates can focus on one area of the map, you are actually at about the same numerical disadvantage as the player that your teammates are now focusing on. Except that you have a much broader front to pay attention to and your units will have to be quite spread out and unlikely to mutually support eachother. By your own logic, the player who is facing your teammates should have an easy time holding back the spearhead. Easier than you holding 2/3 of the map, in fact, because now all your teammates are advancing on a smaller corridor than you, where the opponent will have a much easier time funneling them into the hedgerows where he could do work with his own ATGs and mortars, and use AOE suppression to stall the advance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
The one thing that disappoints me about the game. Where is my 16" Gun Battleship support fire? Immersion ruined. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:The one thing that disappoints me about the game. It's in 6th Airborne and it's called the Willys OP because it is OP
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:44 |
|
|
How should I be using Infantry in this game? It seems impossible to actually move into a city that's held by enemy infantry even if I outnumber them. Most of my guys will end up getting pinned on the way there, not to mention the transports seem to move pretty fast up until you want them to turn into a building to drop off, then they crawl over there while being shot at by tanks n stuff. Are conscripts worth anything? For some reason I thought airborne infantry would actually be airdropped in but they just come in on trucks. And one last thing, how do you deal with an AVRE? The tooltips mention that you need to have an AP value equal to the armor to do anything to it. Nothing seems to have 20 AP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 16:39
|
|
