[2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

User avatar
Boogie Van
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4212
Joined: Fri 17 Feb 2012 03:45
Location: Some crappy North American desert
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby Boogie Van » Wed 4 Jul 2012 13:28

I'm intrigued by how the Sheridan line will be post patch, likely quite interesting.

Chieftans are going to be interesting, too.

I hope the incoming maps have enough LOS barriers to allow for cheaper units to still be plentiful, though.

aftokinito
Corporal
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu 10 May 2012 10:40
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby aftokinito » Wed 4 Jul 2012 13:30

Weren't the modtools going to be released with this DLC?

I bought the game because you said you'd release modtools...

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby Azaz3l » Wed 4 Jul 2012 13:37

aftokinito wrote:Weren't the modtools going to be released with this DLC?

I bought the game because you said you'd release modtools...

I hope that they will be released after this DLC. But anyways I'm (we are?) going to enjoy this wonderful update.
Image

User avatar
wekwek_noob
Lieutenant
Posts: 1385
Joined: Wed 28 Mar 2012 15:48
Location: Earth.
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby wekwek_noob » Wed 4 Jul 2012 14:17

Azaz3l wrote:
wekwek_noob wrote:And yes! T-64s are now gonna be a epic buy for me!

Well tbh T-64 missile has poor accuracy, so I'd rather buy T-72B instead.


1 vet ;) But yeah T-72Bs I'm gonna use often the buffed 2626 range and faster firing rate and 14 AP would be a good buy for 125 points though (Im quite sure people will range and counter me with this saying :lol: )
Image

User avatar
DiabloTigerSix
Colonel
Posts: 2581
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 21:06
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby DiabloTigerSix » Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:12

[EUG]MadMat wrote:Have you read the patch log in the first page?

Silly me, I haven't. I thought this was an old thread and that you were replying in it.

Now that I have, I think the changes regarding ATGM are drastic. I already use 2.4 - 2.6 km ATGM's and consider them to be very effective. The only ATGM's I don't find effective are 2.2 km ones (guess why), especially RaketenJagdPanzers.

ChrisJ wrote:I'm not sure yet what to make of the insane ATGM modifications. Even the cheaper ATGM helicopters will be seriously dangerous.

Don't think so, sams aren't getting nerfed :/
Mukip wrote:I appreciate the realism aspect of it, but you just never see American infantry in games at the moment. If not a stats change then a cost change is needed. Given that other NATO infantry have much better transports and more attractive stats for the same price (looking at Chasseurs FAMAS and Fusiliers here) you could drop the price of Riflemen to 5 points (you pretty much have to buy them a 15-point APC to make them useful anyway so they cost more for less in the end) and the unattractive Dragon ATGM could use a small prive buff too. They'll never be the most attractive units based on their own merits but they can at least cost what they're worth.

This. I also think that 5 pts price jump among the values of cheap units does a lot of mess.

IMO, Riflemen and Motostrelki should cost 10 points, but Jagers, Fusiliers and Chasseurs should cost 12 points.


M113A1 should cost 4 points
M113A2 should cost 7 points.
M113A2 should cost 10 points - yes, just as expensive as VAB or Fuchs, as it trades a lot of speed for that little bit of extra protection.

It's the same story with BTR-60/70. Their prices should bt tighten up. 20 points for a poorly armed transport vehicle is ridiculous. The most expensive BTR, the BTR-70A should cost no more than 14 points as it's essentially the same thing as the FV103 SPARTAN, but with a better machine gun.
OT-64 SKOT prices should also be tighten a bit.
DarrickS wrote:The worst problem i see actually is the chance to hit buff what include this range up.
For exemple :

now, T55AMV1 et T62M have 2600m range ATGM with 12 ap.
So, 3 T55AMV1 (135 pts) vs a LEO2A4 (145 pts) deal x3 ATGM at 40% chance to hit (6 ap damage).
Cause, if LEO2A4 want to hit them, he must come to 2200m. So, considering max range of Salsh is 2600m, they will have a hugh buff to hit chances.
So the problem will be like this now : The LEO2A4 will need 6 shots for killing all his opponent at 2200m. And only if they just fire on his front armor and they miss often. So, we are actually supposing if the T55AMV1 are not well managed, cause if they are 3, they can easily spread and fire on his side armor (and they now take 7 hps on 5 armor).
The LEO2A4 will be also stressed very fast cause of numerous hits.

And imagine the T62M1... 2801m, 12 ap, 50% chance of hit. How many at 2200m?

And this problem will work for all ATGMS now.

Other pb is for T80U.
Pact only have 2, and they can be one shootable by HOT2/F2/ITOW2 on flank.
And we all know a T80U is the only good stuff for facing a LEO2A4 in open area fight. So, if u loose your 2 T80U, it will be free area for LEO2A4 and other huge tank.


Those two bold'd parts kind of contradict each other.

It's official. Heavies are going to be less present. But, the thing I don't like is that they're going to be less present because of ATGM tanks and vehicles. Non-ATGM medium tanks are going to be just as useless as ever.

Boogie Van wrote:Side armor is more important; I wish PACT had some tanks with side armor greater than 5, I might play them more often then.

I hate when people make suggestions that would push us into mirror balancing territory.
DarrickS wrote:Yep, we can said what now the T80U wont be necessary considering the T55AMV1 / T62M spam will do a better job.
But its a turn back at my eyes.

How can you spam units with such a low availability?
ikalugin wrote:Poor tanks (in general) would get one shot (even in frontal armor).

Mmmhh, the more I think about it, the sadder it makes me. Wouldn't range buff be sufficient? Do we really need ATGM's with this much AP? I'll have an ATGM jeep in every bush, although I'm not sure how fun this is going to be. And let's not forget about this buff either:
[EUG]MadMat wrote:=> Aiming time for all ATGM decreased.

JBravo wrote:I have a feeling we will see a decline in the use of the widely popular rise patton, for one...

If you're considering dropping the best medium tank, just imagine how useless the others are going to be (Leopard 1A1-3, T-62 obr 1975, T-72, T-72M, T-72G T-55AM-1, M60A1, not to mention T34) :roll:

I wonder if the T-72A range buff applies to the T-72M as well which is already useless as it stands right now.
Last edited by DiabloTigerSix on Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:23, edited 1 time in total.

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby ikalugin » Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:18

I think T64A still is a valid choice for a cheap tank, especially against cheaper vehicles (considering ROF of 10 and ok accuracy).
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby ikalugin » Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:19

Updating database would also be nice.
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby Azaz3l » Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:25

ikalugin wrote:I think T64A still is a valid choice for a cheap tank, especially against cheaper vehicles (considering ROF of 10 and ok accuracy).

and range buff.
DiabloTigerSix wrote:not to mention T34

Well T-34 can be used in infantry support role and in defense against VAB rushes, it's more of a support tank now.
Image

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby ikalugin » Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:28

Azaz3l wrote:
ikalugin wrote:I think T64A still is a valid choice for a cheap tank, especially against cheaper vehicles (considering ROF of 10 and ok accuracy).

and range buff.
DiabloTigerSix wrote:not to mention T34

Well T-34 can be used in infantry support role and in defense against VAB rushes, it's more of a support tank now.

Hm I wonder if it would still work in massive push role.
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

User avatar
DiabloTigerSix
Colonel
Posts: 2581
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 21:06
Contact:

Re: [2012-07-03] Patch log for incoming DLC & patch

Postby DiabloTigerSix » Wed 4 Jul 2012 15:29

Azaz3l wrote:Well T-34 can be used in infantry support role and in defense against VAB rushes, it's more of a support tank now.

ZSU Afganskii + Su-122 > T-34

for that role

ikalugin wrote:Hm I wonder if it would still work in massive push role.

Don't forget that less range means less AP as well.

Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests