Poll

What is FH2 2.26 version current state of balance?

It is well balanced
44 (20%)
Allied army is underpowerd
4 (1.8%)
German army is underpowerd
23 (10.5%)
Allied army is Overpowerd
21 (9.5%)
German army is overpowerd
6 (2.7%)
Not the Units, but the maps are imbalanced
33 (15%)
Balance problems on BOTH armies
21 (9.5%)
No opinion
12 (5.5%)
Historical accuracy>Balance
56 (25.5%)

Total Members Voted: 172

Author Topic: The current state of balance (2.26)  (Read 34747 times)

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #375 on: 31-07-2010, 12:07:55 »
They just dont understand that german tanks wherent uberwtfpwnall.

Normandy=Allied tank losses 4400. German tank losses 2200. Enough said
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Miklas

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 446
  • Ingame: Calle_XVI
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #376 on: 31-07-2010, 12:07:58 »
And I forsee it carrying on for at least 50 other pages, since Kingtiger has a special "Allies Bias" edition of FH.  ;D
Seriously, there is a difference between whining about German tanks being too weak and pointing out inconsistency when it comes to armour penetrations. Kingtiger is doing the latter, not the former.
Nobody have really answered his questions about the consistency except Theta but his answer was Yes and No.

Offline Miklas

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 446
  • Ingame: Calle_XVI
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #377 on: 31-07-2010, 12:07:58 »
They just dont understand that german tanks wherent uberwtfpwnall.

Normandy=Allied tank losses 4400. German tank losses 2200. Enough said

I agree that German tanks indeed were not uberwtfpwnall but drawing any conclusions from just the number of losses is futile.
There are hundreds of factors that determine this outcome. Individual tank capabilities is one of these but it can't be used on it own.

Offline Limonero

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #378 on: 31-07-2010, 12:07:13 »
Quote
"The crew is the steel,the tank is just metal"

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #379 on: 31-07-2010, 12:07:15 »
And I forsee it carrying on for at least 50 other pages, since Kingtiger has a special "Allies Bias" edition of FH.  ;D
Seriously, there is a difference between whining about German tanks being too weak and pointing out inconsistency when it comes to armour penetrations. Kingtiger is doing the latter, not the former.
Nobody have really answered his questions about the consistency except Theta but his answer was Yes and No.
Both. Because he always start a new subject wich is always about something so called weak on german panzers and something OP on the allies.
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #380 on: 31-07-2010, 14:07:36 »
They just dont understand that german tanks wherent uberwtfpwnall.

Normandy=Allied tank losses 4400. German tank losses 2200. Enough said

nobody said german tanks were like that. and just quoting 2 numbers is quite senceless ... how many of these tanks got blown up by other tanks, how many got killed by aircraft, at-guns, handheld at? - and especially how many got blown up by their own crew on the german side?

and i wouldnt trust these numbers unless i have a source - according to some russian sources of ww2 the russians for example destroyed 1500 tigers at kursk... (although 1350 were made)

and still i read in a history book that i trust that the whole tank losses were about 4:1 on the whole western front and about 5:1 in the east ... but i cant find it so according to my argumentation about sources before you cant trust me :P - and you have to consider what these tanks got killed by.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline kingtiger1891

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #381 on: 31-07-2010, 14:07:27 »
For that question, there's no answer such as "yes and no", what does "yes and no" mean? For me, "yes and no" only means you're fear to say no but unwilling to say yes.

I won't say things like "Oh Churchill survive Panther shells so 2pdr should implement the 1000m distance penetration as well", but consistency should at least keep amoung vehicles appear on the same theatre right? Like in Normandy, if 1000m distance penetration is used, all guns in Normandy should use that distance. So as other cases.

Offline Thorondor123

  • God Emperor
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6.573
  • Lugbûrz-ûr!
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #382 on: 31-07-2010, 14:07:37 »
They just dont understand that german tanks wherent uberwtfpwnall.

Normandy=Allied tank losses 4400. German tank losses 2200. Enough said

nobody said german tanks were like that. and just quoting 2 numbers is quite senceless ... how many of these tanks got blown up by other tanks, how many got killed by aircraft, at-guns, handheld at? - and especially how many got blown up by their own crew on the german side?

and i wouldnt trust these numbers unless i have a source - according to some russian sources of ww2 the russians for example destroyed 1500 tigers at kursk... (although 1350 were made)

and still i read in a history book that i trust that the whole tank losses were about 4:1 on the whole western front and about 5:1 in the east ... but i cant find it so according to my argumentation about sources before you cant trust me :P - and you have to consider what these tanks got killed by.
From R. J. Jarymowycz's Tank Tactics, German tank losses (time period not specified but probably relates to NW Europe 1944-45):

Gunfire..............................43.8%  (both from tanks, tank destroyers and anti tank guns)
Self destruction..................20.7%  (crew abandons a vehicle and destroys it to prevent capture)
Abandonment.....................18.3%  (crew abandons the vehicle intact)
Air Attack............................7.5%  (destroyed by rockets or bombs)
Hollow-charge Rounds............4.4%  (PIAT/Bazooka)
Mechanical..........................4.0%  (crew abandons a vehicle 'intact' following mechanical failure)
Mines/Miscellaneous..............0.9%

In brackets is my interpretation.  I've also reordered it.
Let mortal heroes sing your fame

Offline General_Henry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.460
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #383 on: 31-07-2010, 14:07:37 »
I think the whole tankcombat should be reworkt, it's just ridiculous that you can penetrate the side and top(cupola) from the front.In a real combat situation the shells would only scratch the Tank.
So why not give all tanks more sidearmor and make them much more weak to the rear and enginedeck?
Without a engine that can handle the angle of a hit it's impossible to recreate "real" Tankcombat.



I heard that BF2 supports some kind of angled armour. If that is coded in it would solve the problem to a certain degree.

Offline kingtiger1891

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #384 on: 31-07-2010, 14:07:01 »
I think the whole tankcombat should be reworkt, it's just ridiculous that you can penetrate the side and top(cupola) from the front.In a real combat situation the shells would only scratch the Tank.
So why not give all tanks more sidearmor and make them much more weak to the rear and enginedeck?
Without a engine that can handle the angle of a hit it's impossible to recreate "real" Tankcombat.



I heard that BF2 supports some kind of angled armour. If that is coded in it would solve the problem to a certain degree.

I do feel the angle factor is already working...1 degree shot don't take as much damage as vertical shot in many cases I encountered.

Offline General_Henry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.460
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #385 on: 31-07-2010, 15:07:57 »
I think the whole tankcombat should be reworkt, it's just ridiculous that you can penetrate the side and top(cupola) from the front.In a real combat situation the shells would only scratch the Tank.
So why not give all tanks more sidearmor and make them much more weak to the rear and enginedeck?
Without a engine that can handle the angle of a hit it's impossible to recreate "real" Tankcombat.



I heard that BF2 supports some kind of angled armour. If that is coded in it would solve the problem to a certain degree.

I do feel the angle factor is already working...1 degree shot don't take as much damage as vertical shot in many cases I encountered.

But is it working good enough? for example the top armour problems.

Offline kingtiger1891

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #386 on: 31-07-2010, 16:07:09 »
I think the whole tankcombat should be reworkt, it's just ridiculous that you can penetrate the side and top(cupola) from the front.In a real combat situation the shells would only scratch the Tank.
So why not give all tanks more sidearmor and make them much more weak to the rear and enginedeck?
Without a engine that can handle the angle of a hit it's impossible to recreate "real" Tankcombat.



I heard that BF2 supports some kind of angled armour. If that is coded in it would solve the problem to a certain degree.

I do feel the angle factor is already working...1 degree shot don't take as much damage as vertical shot in many cases I encountered.

But is it working good enough? for example the top armour problems.
Not good enough, never happened in top armor case

Offline Sgt.Radman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 415
    • View Profile
    • Why Should I?
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #387 on: 31-07-2010, 20:07:25 »
No, you don't understand anything Ciupita.

The Panther (with a capital P) is the PRIDE of the REICH ! It can't be scratched by a puny Sherman, that can't be ! This is the Glorious tank that will crush our enemies forever under the command of our beloved Führer !  :P

.....Well this conversation dragged on about 15 more pages then it probably should've.

And I forsee it carrying on for at least 50 other pages, since Kingtiger has a special "Allies Bias" edition of FH.  ;D

Emmm The Sherman, especially the Firefly and also the Churchill were the PRIDE of the Americans and Allies. Actually I more like the Allied tanks than the German "boxes". The only boxed tank in the allied ranks is the Cromwell. And it's STILL cool looking AND fast.

Really some community members should really drop their love and protection towards the Axis forces. If they were so ŰBER they would have won the war and conquered the whole Europe. Not even Napoleon Bonaparte could do that.

Offline Paavopesusieni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.401
  • Spongebob
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #388 on: 31-07-2010, 21:07:50 »
You know Axis had really good chances of conquering the whole Europe there just was this one stupid guy who couldn't think more than 3 years ahead.

Offline Mazz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 331
    • View Profile
Re: The current state of balance (2.26)
« Reply #389 on: 31-07-2010, 22:07:22 »
You know Axis had really good chances of conquering the whole Europe there just was this one stupid guy who couldn't think more than 3 years ahead.

Russia.
Michael Wittmann's gunner, Bobby Woll, was known to be an excellent Marksman.
He could hit targets at range even on the move.