.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   TO&Es (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=108)
-   -   Infantry LMGs (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=51538)

sabresandy March 10th, 2017 02:15 AM

Infantry LMGs
 
Is there a set rationale for statting out infantry support weapons the way you did? Some choices I can understand--the MG3's awesome rate of fire earning it an HE rating of 10--but others aren't easy to fathom. (The M60 with Acc 18/HEK 5, the Bren with Acc 21/HEK 5 despite being very different weapons? The RPK-74 and L86 LSW both having very high Acc 25+ and HEK 4, but the M27 IAR having the same stats as the M1918 BAR at Acc 17/HEK 5?)

Because, correct me if I'm wrong, it appears that the various support-type weapons were coded in without standardization, and now there are some distinct oddities in how they perform. If so, it may be a good idea to plonk down some ground rules on Acc and HEK ratings for them, to reflect how--for instance--a belt-fed M60 can sustain a lot more firepower than an M14A1 SAW.

Suhiir March 10th, 2017 03:09 AM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
Acc is based on round diameter to barrel length ratio.
HEK on rate of fire.

Is it perfect?
No.
Is it something that can be standardized and relatively easily verified.
Yes.

DRG March 10th, 2017 06:28 AM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sabresandy (Post 837717)
Is there a set rationale for statting out infantry support weapons the way you did? Some choices I can understand--the MG3's awesome rate of fire earning it an HE rating of 10--but others aren't easy to fathom. (The M60 with Acc 18/HEK 5, the Bren with Acc 21/HEK 5 despite being very different weapons? The RPK-74 and L86 LSW both having very high Acc 25+ and HEK 4, but the M27 IAR having the same stats as the M1918 BAR at Acc 17/HEK 5?)

Because, correct me if I'm wrong, it appears that the various support-type weapons were coded in without standardization, and now there are some distinct oddities in how they perform. If so, it may be a good idea to plonk down some ground rules on Acc and HEK ratings for them, to reflect how--for instance--a belt-fed M60 can sustain a lot more firepower than an M14A1 SAW.

Open up MOBHack Help and read the section on Formula for Guns. Accuracy is very much standardised on that formula

sabresandy March 10th, 2017 04:16 PM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
I see that, and I'd still disagree with some variables (scoped, almost marksman-like M27 being less accurate than an unscoped RPK-74, and on par with an M14A1 SAW?), but in general I can live with that.

However, MHMBT doesn't say anything about HE kill ratings and how it applies to small arms or machine guns--and matching it to ROF breaks down in implementation when belt-fed machine guns have the same HE kill as an automatic M14.

DRG March 10th, 2017 05:08 PM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
You can disagree with some variables all you like but I try to use the same formula for all guns otherwise we are back to basing weapons stats on "opinion" and everyone has a different one.


OK, here's what we're going to do.

YOU make a list of all the LMG's in the game.....by name and nation and on one side put the data we are using and the date you think we should be using on the other and when you are done I will look at it but you could cherry pick a LMG here and another there and ask why this one is like that and this other one is like this....for YEARS. I know we could because I know I've had the same conversation with others before on similar issues and it comes down to if you want to nitpick my work you need to do your own and present a logical alternative for me to consider. Most new weapons put into this game are put in based on what else in the game is similar and how is this different .....or not..... if it's not significantly different in any way we consider GAME SIGNIFICANT then the old one gets pasted in and the new name gets pasted over the old.

There is WAY too much obsessing over tiny details that mean NOTHING after all the random factors that this game uses to produce combat results are factored in...... and "accuracy" is one of them..... that has to go through the firer morale and experience then the target morale and experience then terrain factors and other things as well.. The REASON this game has lasted this long is BECAUSE if you do 'A' then 'B' the game hardly ever does 'C' every time.


Spend the time and produce a list and I'll look at it...... I may not agree with it and I may not implement it but I WILL look at it otherwise this is just random sniping while cherry picking targets. The M60 and Bren comparison was interesting as I had never compared the two but I know for certain that those were set up before I took full control of the OOB's and now we are faced with THIS reality

Don

Mobhack March 10th, 2017 05:24 PM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
While we are at it - lets move this to the proper sub-forum for the topic, rather than the main game forum.

Andy

sabresandy March 10th, 2017 10:55 PM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
DRG, I'll take that seriously. It'll be an interesting side-project, and I've got just enough of an OCD touch for it to sound worthwhile. Do you want it as a Google spreadsheet, or OBAT files, or something else?

Before I start, I'll lay out my intent, so as to make clear I'm not making changes arbitrarily.

ACC: for now, for the most part, I'll leave them as is, assuming that they're calculated according to the caliber formula in Mobhack.


HEK baselines:

Box-fed: 4
Drum-fed: 6
Belt-fed: 8

Automatic rifle: -1 (penalizing automatic rifles--BAR, M14 SAW, heavy-barrel FALs)
Battle-rifle caliber: +1 (rationale: penetrating light cover to more of an extent than assault-caliber SAWs can)
ROF bonus?: +1

The -1 malus in "automatic rifle" reflects the necessity to fire short bursts to avoid overheating, in lightly-built automatic rifles. This is intended to penalize the BAR, for instance, but not the Bren. There will be some edge cases like the RPK series; my inclination is not to penalize them. (This will also hit the L86 LSW and the M27 IAR, both of which make up for the decreased HEK by their increased accuracy--they are essentially DMRs firing short bursts.)

The ROF bonus gives the MG42/MG3 HEK 10, while most belt-fed GPMGs would get HEK 9. This is meant to reflect the sustained-versus-cyclic rates debate, and the conclusion most armies seemed to have settled on--i.e., the difference isn't great. I'll provisionally say that if it cycles above, say, 1000 RPM, and if it is drum- or belt-fed, it'll earn the bonus.

What's lost in this schema is the portability of AR-caliber machine guns like the Minimi. So, statistically, a belt-fed 7.62mm GPMG is just going to be "better" than a belt-fed 5.56mm SAW. Since moving accuracy isn't really modeled for infantry, the SAW's better portability will be lost.

This also means that similar weapons like the PKM, the M60, and the FN MAG are going to end up with HEK 9.

If these baselines seem reasonable--and I'm open to suggestions--I think I can begin the slog...

SaS TrooP March 10th, 2017 11:13 PM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
I volunteer to do this with all the experience/morale settings in this game. And I am serious by saying this.

DRG March 11th, 2017 06:33 AM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SaS TrooP (Post 837752)
I volunteer to do this with all the experience/morale settings in this game. And I am serious by saying this.

I already know what they are exactly and I am not much interested in changing them.

DRG March 11th, 2017 07:03 AM

Re: Infantry LMGs
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by sabresandy (Post 837751)
DRG, I'll take that seriously. It'll be an interesting side-project, and I've got just enough of an OCD touch for it to sound worthwhile. Do you want it as a Google spreadsheet, or OBAT files, or something else?

Before I start, I'll lay out my intent, so as to make clear I'm not making changes arbitrarily.

ACC: for now, for the most part, I'll leave them as is, assuming that they're calculated according to the caliber formula in Mobhack.


HEK baselines:

Box-fed: 4
Drum-fed: 6
Belt-fed: 8

Automatic rifle: -1 (penalizing automatic rifles--BAR, M14 SAW, heavy-barrel FALs)
Battle-rifle caliber: +1 (rationale: penetrating light cover to more of an extent than assault-caliber SAWs can)
ROF bonus?: +1

The -1 malus in "automatic rifle" reflects the necessity to fire short bursts to avoid overheating, in lightly-built automatic rifles. This is intended to penalize the BAR, for instance, but not the Bren. There will be some edge cases like the RPK series; my inclination is not to penalize them. (This will also hit the L86 LSW and the M27 IAR, both of which make up for the decreased HEK by their increased accuracy--they are essentially DMRs firing short bursts.)

The ROF bonus gives the MG42/MG3 HEK 10, while most belt-fed GPMGs would get HEK 9. This is meant to reflect the sustained-versus-cyclic rates debate, and the conclusion most armies seemed to have settled on--i.e., the difference isn't great. I'll provisionally say that if it cycles above, say, 1000 RPM, and if it is drum- or belt-fed, it'll earn the bonus.

What's lost in this schema is the portability of AR-caliber machine guns like the Minimi. So, statistically, a belt-fed 7.62mm GPMG is just going to be "better" than a belt-fed 5.56mm SAW. Since moving accuracy isn't really modeled for infantry, the SAW's better portability will be lost.

This also means that similar weapons like the PKM, the M60, and the FN MAG are going to end up with HEK 9.

If these baselines seem reasonable--and I'm open to suggestions--I think I can begin the slog...

I'm not sure I agree with the HEK baselines and I DO NOT have the time ATM to consider the issue. Neither am I much interested in changing every LMG in the game :down:AT ALL:down: which is what you are suggesting as there are 531 of them and changing them will lead to upsetting the balance for MMG and HMG as well( and requiring standardization with winSPWW2 ).....and so on and so on all for a relatively negligible change in-game result.

What you REALLY need to do for your own information is build a test OOB with test units using the current numbers and test units using what your new system would use then playtest a dozen games with the units fighting side by side and prove to me that game results change significantly as a result .....and you may have noted there hasn't been anyone else but you complaining about it.

SO....we are back to using the existing system and you proving that a specific weapon is significantly under or over powered and that changing that will not cause a domino effect cascade with dozens of other weapons and I will "simplify" that by providing a CSV of every WC2 weapon in the database that has a Warhead size 1 ....so all LMGs


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2017, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.