Log for "Ultimate Patch"

User avatar
DiabloTigerSix
Colonel
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 21:06
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DiabloTigerSix » Sat 20 Apr 2013 20:37

solvens wrote:Only series were buffed (except for tanks that differ a lot but are in the same slot like Sheridan/AGS or MBT 70/Kpz 70) ; since this isn't a stat available in the armory, I think it's better if the players don't have to remember exactly which version of the T-80 aims in 3s and which one aims in 2s.

That's completely unecessary. There are many things that aren't in the armory anyway. The focus should be on balance. I can't make any sense out of why certain tanks still take 4 seconds to aim.

IMO what you should've done is leave aiming times of tanks alone and just nerf aiming times of ATGMs back to heavy meta. Tanks would aim faster than ATGMs and infantry in forests wouldn't suffer.
solvens wrote:Maybe we could have done that with the range, but there wasn't more time available to test another change and tune the prices accordingly before release.

Done what with range?


Also, according to FLX, the AMX-30 line takes 4 seconds to aim whereas the patch notes say otherwise:
- AMX-30 series's aiming time reduced to 3s.

Any word on that?

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DeuZerre » Sat 20 Apr 2013 20:43

@ElPeletas

Opinions then.

I was only giving the advice to give that patch a chance. The things you mentioned in your initial post are things that aren't new, and didn't need a fix before. No changes in the aspects you are talking about, these are facts.

I won't do you the insult of repeating my opinions on the matters you're talking about. It's just sad to see you don't like it.

@tiger6
IMO what you should've done is leave aiming times of tanks alone and just nerf aiming times of ATGMs back to heavy meta. Tanks would aim faster than ATGMs and infantry in forests wouldn't suffer.

It helps against infantry rushes. In that respect, it worked really well when combined with one-hit kill against APCs. It also works a bit more than we thought/realised against infantry in forests, but not to a huge extent. Infantry alone doesn't work very well anymore, but IFVs do well/better.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
DiabloTigerSix
Colonel
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 21:06
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DiabloTigerSix » Sat 20 Apr 2013 20:53

Fair enough, but I don't see why there should be any 4 second - aiming tanks at all. If a certain type of units requires buffs, why make exceptions?

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DeuZerre » Sat 20 Apr 2013 21:01

DiabloTigerSix wrote:Fair enough, but I don't see why there should be any 4 second - aiming tanks at all. If a certain type of units requires buffs, why make exceptions?

Vintage tanks, in order to keep cheap tanks "Bad". Basically kept the initial aim time.
Mind you, I wasn't a fan of Leo1s aiming fast :?
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
DiabloTigerSix
Colonel
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue 14 Feb 2012 21:06
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DiabloTigerSix » Sat 20 Apr 2013 21:17

DeuZerre wrote:
DiabloTigerSix wrote:Fair enough, but I don't see why there should be any 4 second - aiming tanks at all. If a certain type of units requires buffs, why make exceptions?

Vintage tanks, in order to keep cheap tanks "Bad". Basically kept the initial aim time.
Mind you, I wasn't a fan of Leo1s aiming fast :?

4 second aiming time feels out of place on the mid/high-end T-62 variants, BMP-685 and some others, though.

dzimmu
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 827
Joined: Sat 15 Sep 2012 13:00
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby dzimmu » Mon 22 Apr 2013 09:10

Do not be surprised. Who sincerely believe that the object685 and later versions T62 did not have the fire control system.
Last edited by [DAY]Topspin2005 on Mon 22 Apr 2013 09:33, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Inflammatory
panzersaurkrautwefer wrote:Nor has there been a decent explanation why US debt is relevant to the fact the panzersaurkrautwefer are unable to focus on his own problems. Mental exercise: total Russia collapse. Like literally. Customs union falls into a black hole..

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DeuZerre » Mon 22 Apr 2013 09:28

dzimmu wrote:(From the words the developer patch)

Sources? Otherwise this is just flaming and defamatory. Stop trolling and get beaten.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10429
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby ikalugin » Mon 22 Apr 2013 09:36

DeuZerre wrote:Sources? Otherwise this is just flaming and defamatory. Stop trolling and get beaten.

It is not a troll, merely questioning the patch in the terms of why T55 got aim time buff and not the T62.
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

dzimmu
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 827
Joined: Sat 15 Sep 2012 13:00
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby dzimmu » Mon 22 Apr 2013 11:32

DeuZerre wrote:
dzimmu wrote:(From the words the developer patch)

Sources? Otherwise this is just flaming and defamatory. Stop trolling and get beaten.


FLX wrote:
dzimmu wrote:Funny, it seems the curator patch lacks the courage to put a log discuss whether to amend hogs, and to answer questions. Not surprising.
You know how you sound to me ? Like someone totally biased that seem to think the marshals is a conspiracy to make NATO better than PACT, so no I don't have the time and will (call that courage) to answer all your accusations, especially when they have very poor credibility. I prefer to let people judge by themselves.

dzimmu wrote:Incidentally, if the purpose of realism (high power 70mm rockets) to increase the power of rocket pods, why respect for realism not entered a realistic amount of ammunition for mi24? I'm talking about 124 (128 I guess) rockets (57mm caliber) placed in four launchers (64 missiles in two launchers)
It's a shame that wasn't brought to my attention because more rockets and more price would have been a good solution to make helicopters less efficient in spam but more efficient in a support role.
I'm no military expert, I can't make things up if they are not brought to my attention by those who have this knowledge.
I'm sure a topic about that exists somewhere, mixed in the middle of 50 pages of NATO bias and ERA lacking on this or that model.
There are hundreds of changes, I don't have time to dig up the information in the middle of all this for each change. This is what I said earlier, by hammering things too much you become counter productive. If you carry on saying the same thing all the time you're not read anymore and I have to say that I read your messages less and less everyday.

I'm no military expert, I can't make things up if they are not brought to my attention by those who have this knowledge.

I'm no military expert

:o

Now we have a biased moderation truth. Keep it up!
panzersaurkrautwefer wrote:Nor has there been a decent explanation why US debt is relevant to the fact the panzersaurkrautwefer are unable to focus on his own problems. Mental exercise: total Russia collapse. Like literally. Customs union falls into a black hole..

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Log for "Ultimate Patch"

Postby DeuZerre » Mon 22 Apr 2013 11:46

So, one of the marshals isn't a military expert. 29 (28 if you count me out) to check.

The term Developper would mean Eugen otherwise. Marshals are not part of Eugen, they are their slaves/fanboys/moderators/etc...
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests