Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

User avatar
keldon
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2044
Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2014 16:38
Location: Liebe Grüße aus Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby keldon » Fri 8 Dec 2017 17:37

Stillehavet wrote:I never said any of RD's unit is op, and also never mentioned that RD has to be nerfed. But I don't think RD has to be supported by exaggerated Type 69 series RPG. Making 426mm Pen's AP same as 720mm's AP can't be justified just only for balance...

IDK why I have to suggest this, well, let's think about the units will be influenced. Skip the '75 INFs which are using basic Type 69.

Just give Type 69-III to Zhànshì '85(to '90 and maybe with Type 81?) and Liè Rén instead of 69-I. Then with the correction of AP Value, they would get 1 AP nerf, but this is still same as LRAC F1's AP.

And about the NK infs using 69-III, we can give them Soviet's LAW. They already received T-72, T-90, BMP-1, Mi-24 with this alternative timeline, just adding some LAW may not be a problem.

[...]

Type 69-III is 69-III, and PF-89 is PF-89. THEY ARE DIFFERENT. The one can penetrate RHA 630mm is PF-89, NOT Type 69-III. DON'T GET AWAY FROM THE TOPIC.

Just think that your argument, that 69-III is using PF-89's component is right. Then can you said 69-III has to receive higher AP than PF-89? Does it prove your word?


The numbers you gave were not the problem, as i have read your post in full and nothing was wrong. Part of my response was general information in regard to things like pen data in angle, which Grabbed_by_the_Spets seemed to be confused about.

However the points

- There are still inconsistencies among the AP distribution of RPGs, even after the last rather large revision.
- Did i mention inconsistencies already?


are directed at you.

The ingame RPG AP still has them, which involves compression at lower end IIRC. The super Bazooka is just one example.

As for your interest in type-69, it was done for balance reasons. When RD released the type-III had 21 AP IIRC, the same as PF-89, and eugen upped it quite a bit after DLC 1 to help NK. If authenticity was to take priority, then it even should be lower than PF-89.

Also a very important point is: You are way too late to the party! Over the years a lot of thoughts and suggestions were made about RD, which include the type-69. Most recently in the mega thread I brought up the option to switch NK RPG to soviet line, and i also suggested lower Type-III AP two years ago or so, in a thread i don't even remembe now.

As for sources:

PF-89 AP and Type-III using parts from the grenade: http://www.zgjunshi.com/Article/Class38 ... 938_4.html

It is a compendium site, with no clear bibliography, however i have seen them using articles from 兵器知识 and other print media.

As for the real pen number, people needs to understand, that for whatever reason China loves to just give the target plate as the number. As seen in this video from 2:00 min onward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybyI-yzlJ20

How much it really pens, is often not mentioned, especially for stuff from the 80/90s.

TL;DR: 23 AP because of balance reason. You are too late anyway
Image
> Sources for tuning Red Dragons --- Sources for tuning Blue Dragons <
亲们!大国梦哦!
小钱钱,真心甜,鼓钱包,放腰间,大国梦,早日圆 。啷个哩个啷♪

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3062
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby urogard » Fri 8 Dec 2017 18:59

zeeyoo wrote:Translation : "RD is weak faction, so whatever you said about the compensation the components in RD shouldn't have any nerf even though it based lots on exaggeration."

Please don't try to get away from topic. OR you can link this topic to the Main thread. Topics too long also make comprehensive itself enough.

I'm not sure if you're trolling or what.
There's literally only one thread on page 1 with close to 400 pages that has all the information, which deals with everything that's wrong with RD.

You're not talking about some comprehensive change, you're talking about one narrow part of their roster. Makes more sense to put everything in one place.

Their RPGs were already discussed a couple of times, in that very thread with many arguments put forward already in some form.

So basically this thread is opening a debate outside the thread which SINGLE FOCUS lies in discussing RD to discuss an issue that was already discussed in that original thread.

Use the search function next time please.

User avatar
Stillehavet
Sergeant
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu 25 Feb 2016 13:52
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby Stillehavet » Sat 9 Dec 2017 17:58

keldon wrote:[...]


Only "Just for balance" maked the AP buff on 69-I & 69-III seems less reasonable. Because You said yourself that "I brought up the option to switch NK RPG to soviet line, and I also suggersted lower Type 69-III AP two years ago or so," there is already the way to refelect the IRL penetration and get balance same time. So, at this point your and my opinion doesn't conflict with.

And I don't wonder about the PF-89. My point is the situation, "Type 69-III is stronger than PF-89". How matter positively understand about "69-III is using PF-89's component", this can't be read 69-III is better than PF-89, which is using the advanced Chinese technology.

Meanwhile you keep talking about the "Thread", do you really think that everyone can read the whole "mega thread"? And the possibility that Eugen doesn't do the little rebalance, but the main overhaul like that? As we all know, Eugen is pretty lazy at this field :3

Of course, to overhaul of RD like that thread is the good work. But I don't think pointing the remarkble problems first has any problem.
I'm a Scandinavia player, and my game nickname is #SWE JAS-39 Gripen.
Jag älskar Gripen!

User avatar
keldon
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2044
Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2014 16:38
Location: Liebe Grüße aus Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby keldon » Sat 9 Dec 2017 18:38

Stillehavet wrote:Only "Just for balance" maked the AP buff on 69-1 & 69-III seems less reasonable. Because You said yourself that "I brought up the option to switch NK RPG to soviet line, and I also suggersted lower Type 69-III AP two years ago or so," there is already the way to refelect the IRL penetration and get balance same time. So, at this point your and my opinion doesn't conflict with.

And I don't wonder about the PF-89. My point is the situation, "Type 69-III is stronger than PF-89". How matter positively understand about "69-III is using PF-89's component", this can't be read 69-III is better than PF-89, which is using the advanced Chinese technology.

Meanwhile you keep talking about the "Thread", do you really think that everyone can read the whole "mega thread"? And the possibility that Eugen doesn't do the little rebalance, but the main overhaul like that? As we all know, Eugen is pretty lazy at this field :3

Of course, to overhaul of RD like that thread is the good work. But I don't think pointing the remarkble problems first has any problem.


I still don't understand what the goal of this is. The RPG stuff was brought up many years ago and eugen decided to buff the typ-III, it is inautentically better than the PF-89, but so what!? It is in a deck with anemic infantry AT.

You know what else is "Just for balance"? The Kyu-Maru and 23 AP (DM53 instead of DM43) or the many OOTF units across all ingame nations.

And don't you just "make it more plausible by switching to soviet RPG" me. Such effort will require more than just "little rebalance". It involves introdate and hence the distribution of the RPG onto the various CATs, this will inevitably touch upon more units than just the current 2 infantry squad using it. Of course you can just slash the AP down on those 2 NK squads, but it will leave RD deck more defunct than it already is.

So my question fom earlier still stands: RD too OP or what? Urogard's translation of your post is basically spot on.

About the Fine-Tuning thread: The first post is always kept up to date (When a patch relases), it is divided in segments for easier reading and bigger part of discussion or ideas from others are listed under "nice to read" segment. You certainly don't need to read through all of it, but i know for a fact eugen checks it for content, and this is more important.

Finally i'll have to repeat that you are too late to the party. The last big RPG overhaul is like what? almost 2 years ago?

btw. an advice: Try not to call eugen lazy. Aside from the fact that they don't like it, it was FLX who worked alone overtime to bring us the few patches.
Image
> Sources for tuning Red Dragons --- Sources for tuning Blue Dragons <
亲们!大国梦哦!
小钱钱,真心甜,鼓钱包,放腰间,大国梦,早日圆 。啷个哩个啷♪

User avatar
nuke92
Lieutenant
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2016 21:51
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby nuke92 » Sat 9 Dec 2017 20:05

srsly??
How do you restore balance for 2 less AP?
Unrealistic range, better accuracy for what?
Perhaps RD infantry will get dumdum bullets instead.
Image
"Spike MR is more accurate I'll give you that but Konkurs has more range and isn't prototype" - Warchat™ July 2017
"ALB added planes, RD added ships, WG4 will add Ekranoplans" - Warchat™ August 2017

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby FrangibleCover » Sun 10 Dec 2017 13:56

Just buff the Type 67 to have the Kk 62's stats. It's not even unrealistic, the Kk 62 was widely agreed by its operators to be rubbish and I've never heard a bad word said about the Type 67. There you go, Dragons fixed, carry on with your -1AP nerf for whatever reason you want to do that.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6706
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby molnibalage » Mon 11 Dec 2017 11:28

All RPGs are overmodeled comparing to ALB state considering even the absraction. As long as they have range above 400-500 m they should have much lower base ACC especially against moving vehicles is not ACC penalty. Or cut back the range.
It is insane how accurate RPGs comparing to machine guns or any other weapons comparing to their RL performance.
The insane high RPG range prevent to use APCs for fire support.

Same discrepancy is true for MG. On vehicles they have very, very low base ACC comp. to infantry weapons...

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3062
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby urogard » Mon 11 Dec 2017 11:58

molnibalage wrote:Same discrepancy is true for MG. On vehicles they have very, very low base ACC comp. to infantry weapons...

It goes even further ... infantry has better MG accuracy while on the move than a vehicle MG while standing still.

VCG-001 USS Spain
Specialist
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2017 12:08
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby VCG-001 USS Spain » Sun 7 Jan 2018 18:42

urogard wrote:
molnibalage wrote:Same discrepancy is true for MG. On vehicles they have very, very low base ACC comp. to infantry weapons...

It goes even further ... infantry has better MG accuracy while on the move than a vehicle MG while standing still.


Absolute insanity. Also, where did 652 rpm come from? I know it's a balance number, but I don't think I've ever heard of what it's based on. It's not a nice even number like 600rpm either, so it had to come from somewhere.

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Type 69 RPG series are overmodeled

Postby Fade2Gray » Mon 8 Jan 2018 03:37

urogard wrote:
molnibalage wrote:Same discrepancy is true for MG. On vehicles they have very, very low base ACC comp. to infantry weapons...

It goes even further ... infantry has better MG accuracy while on the move than a vehicle MG while standing still.

In all seriousness, a Ma Deuce on a pintle mount isn't exactly very good for accurate fire, and you end up having to walk your rounds in more than anything else. That being said, I'm not exactly sure how the abstraction of infantry movement is supposed to be but being more accurate than a pintle mounted machine gun does seem a bit off.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests