Search found 19 matches

by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 22:06
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Check this out: considering the accuracy bug, it's perfectly ok for those ripples to one-shot your tanks. Also, you should normally have at least elite commanders on these levels, buffing all your units accordingly. There is no bug in the game engine damage calculations and there were no changes in...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 22:01
Forum: Balance
Topic: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like this.
Replies: 17
Views: 6749

Re: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like t

Sort of, yes. While most tanks still have sloped front armor, explaining why it is better is not as easy as "it stops incoming projectiles better" There's another thing that hasn't been mentioned. Sloped armor with a hard enough surface has a higher potential to make a DU penetrator tumble and shat...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 21:25
Forum: Balance
Topic: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like this.
Replies: 17
Views: 6749

Re: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like t

If you examine the picture carefully, you will see that while the sloping increases the effective thickness of the armor, it equally reduces the effective area of protection. If you make both the same size, the increased weight of the sloped armor will exactly equal that of a straight piece with a ...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 20:16
Forum: Balance
Topic: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like this.
Replies: 17
Views: 6749

Re: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like t

Sloping could potentially help with deflection and also increases the relative thickness of a straight shot fairly significantly without adding the equivalent additional weight. *snip* A picture really is worth a thousand words. Thanks for the contribution. Sums up it up much better than my attempt...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 20:14
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

What NoQ is essentially saying is: Campaign is what it is, a legacy from the original game. If the campaign is ever changed, it will be through a mod, out of respect for the original developers. Also, new campaigns are in the making, using the new units & balance. It's the same thing in games like ...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 14:19
Forum: Balance
Topic: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like this.
Replies: 17
Views: 6749

Re: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like t

Hmm fair enough, although my point about deflection is still valid, i.e. penetrators and shaped-charge warheads do not bounce off sloped armor like traditional shells. I can agree with that. I do think that sloping would have small effects, but nothing we could practically apply to any current game...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 14:08
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

It's normal to post a savegame as a .zip archive containing a file and a folder. If you want dev's attention, better make a bug report ("campaign ripples suddenly got overpowered in recent versions"). separate unit design engine for single vs multi-player Stats are different though. so it would aff...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 13:50
Forum: Balance
Topic: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like this.
Replies: 17
Views: 6749

Re: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like t

I study physics at the university so go ahead with the maths ;) Basically, it's Pythagorean theorem. The angled side of a right triangle will have more length than a vertical one, right? So, for the equivalent tank height, you can have more armor "length", which translates to more armor from a fron...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 13:12
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Btw, maybe you post a savegame? Cause i srsly want to see those deadly ripples. I'd love to, but there'd be about a couple dozen .ini files that you'd be missing which could be part of the issue. In fact, I don't even know if the game would load with out them and if it did, whether it would load pr...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 13:07
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Again, i don't see anything wrong with damage calculation from your report. If the unit editor states that it does 190dps and, in actuality, it's doing 16x190dps (3040dp/s), that's a severe misrepresentation. It seems like it's built into the actual unit itself. So, it also falls into your narrow-m...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 12:37
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

There is no such thing as balance in campaign. Also, i don't see where did you take this "190 dps" thing. there is no other bug apart from accuracy issue. 190dps according to the unit editor (either that or I don't understand how damage is calculated in this game). It was a multi-tier bug report. I...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 12:23
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

A single "190 dps" ripple rocket platform should not be able to one-shot a heavy chassis anything from 85 squares away. Never seen anything like that. Can anybody reproduce it? Are you sure it's not a missile fortress? It happens in the Beta campaign. It usually takes 1 or 2 ripple rocket platforms...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 12:00
Forum: Balance
Topic: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like this.
Replies: 17
Views: 6749

Re: Deflective armour, or why the accuracy is working like t

Sloping is still relevant. Angled armor makes shattering penetrators easier and makes the average thickness generally thicker (the math is hard to explain, so you'll just have to take my word for it). The only reasons we allow the sides of tanks to be flat are to make the frontal profile thinner (se...
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 11:51
Forum: Balance
Topic: Anti-missile missile
Replies: 4
Views: 4058

Re: Anti-missile missile

Lasers are also very likely candidates (IRL). I don't know if this would wreck the balance, but they'd actually gotten it to the point they can also destroy artillery and mortar shells with lasers. Could be something to consider.
by manictiger
03 Sep 2012, 11:42
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 42511

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse, but I have to agree that the balance is way off now, possibly due to the way accuracy calculation has been changed. A single "190 dps" ripple rocket platform should not be able to one-shot a heavy chassis anything from 85 squares away. I think the problem is that i...