Mrdamien03

Members - Veterans
  • Content count

    252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

117 Good

1 Follower

About Mrdamien03

  • Rank
    Sergeant

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    All
  • Soldier
    All types

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Mrdamien03

    Prototype test 15/1/19 feedback

    Panzerschreck and M9A1 Bazooka are late war equipment (1944 for both of them). M9A1 Bazooka caliber is only 60mm against 88 or 100 mm (depending on the version) for Panzerschreck. So that explains IRL performances. Plus 100mm Panzershreck could penetrate more than 200 mm... But anyways because that's a game, balance is needed! And for this, my opinion is about buffing Ampulomet a little about IRL performances, and not giving free 160-200 penetration to Panzerchreck. The idea is making it in line M9A1 Bazooka, M1941 Ampulomet and 88mm Panzerschreck. Because otherwise for example as US side, it would be really sad to have 2 rocket launchers that are both a lot worse than only one other rocket launcher. Everyone would like something useful. Plus they could already be defeated (about penetration) by German Grenade launcher. So balance is needed. (Bazooka and Panzerschreck were in-line together for a long time and that was pretty cool.) I'm already talking about new other AT-weapons so let's talk about them: The Recoiless rifle may have more damage, penetration and range than PTRD and Panzerbusche 39 but they should be similar. PTRS is a really interesting weapon and may lack penetration too. But that will be a One hit kill 5 shots weapon against infantry.
  2. Mrdamien03

    Prototype test 15/1/19 feedback

    I really like the 3 new anti-tank guns. - The Panzerbusche 39 is one hit kill against infantry like PTRD and may be used like that more than against vehicles. With the best ammunition it needs like around a dozen of ammos to kill an APC. So I expect this weapon to be really useful against infantry, airplanes and low armor vehicles. - The ampulomet looks awesome. I didn't knew anything about this weapon and it looks funny. It may lack penetration but ont prototype its penetration looks like M9A1 Bazooka. - M9A1 Bazooka M9A1 seems really awesome too. As long as it is like (or better) than Panzerschreck I'm okay with that. Because having 2 rocket launchers and both being worst than only one, that would not be cool. Looking at actual M1A1 and M9A1 Bazookas, M1941 Ampulomet and Panzerschreck. Panzerschreck has not been changed yet but should be like M9A1 Bazooka and M1941 Ampulomet when changed. M1A1 is the worst rocket launcher then comes the Panzerschreck then come the M1941 Ampulomet and M9A1 Bazooka. Ampulomet got in fact more maximum penetration but less reliability than M9A1 Bazooka. Aka 100% chances of penetration are lower than M9A1 Bazooka.
  3. Hey guys, this is my first topic of the year. And today I will talk about the most needed reworks of game mechanics in my opinion. This is subjective, and may be imperfect. But I played since the Beta of this game. I still like it, and want to help it in my way. To me the oldest game mechanic that needs a rework is... the Real Time Strategy (Generals) part of the game. RTS rework This game being "Heroes and Generals" we have to talk about the Generals side of the game. Because each update usually Heroes have something new on the table. Generals side of the game was forgotten for a long time. Plus, the most important game mode of this game being war. Not changing anything on the RTS for so long directly affects war negatively. More assault teams, and assault team customization would be good. For the last years the last assault teams are recon planes, heavy fighter planes, and heavy tank destroyers assault teams. But in that much time we could expect a lot more. The game needed some more re-coding, assets, technologies for that. Okay but now the game may have the possibility to grow and create a lot more assault teams. About customization, an idea (that was given in some old devstreams) could be giving the possibility to make your personnal army and choosing anything inside. An example: if you have a max tier infantry unit, you have at the moment 100 soldiers and 10 APC's. In the future you may choose between around 100 infantry and the different kind of vehicle you unlocked, so around 4 APC's 10 Jeeps and 10 Motorbikes. More capital cities. And eventually extend the map! Without extending the map, you could create some more capital cities. Each capital city may give some new strategy. Strategy is the main theme of RTS obviously and so it deserves a bit more strategy. We can go further beyond and eventually extend the map. We can think about giving a new dimension to it (2D map -> 3D map). The Earth is not flat after all. And we could have a globe-like earth in the game too. Because having X factions (with X>2) on a 2D map will make corners strategically better than middle. More strategy overall: Some RTS-specific events/battles could exist. Like bombers in an interdiction battle could partially destroy an assault team. Some minor/major events could exist. Like production boost, accidents... Warfunds earning rework, more warfunds for everyone! Each game would like to grow. This is logical. And in this idea, I will talk about how warfunds are hard to get and easy to loose. A new player has few warfunds at first. And at the moment have to fight a lot (in war only) for buying its first assault team. Plus after that he needs some warfunds to refill it. And if his unit was not profitable. He has to earn some more warfunds because he may have not enough warfunds to use it again. The system is finite to avoid some players having too many warfunds. But because this system was changed a long ago. Players with a lot of warfunds before still have a lot. They are in fact "frozen" for years. If you have a lot you can't really loose everything neither. Except if you choose to sink your warfunds economy of course. A new player that would like to play as general doesn't have any choice than paying real money for his army. That's good that helps the game. But still there is a problem here. Every player should be able to earn enough warfunds to contribute to war. And war shouldn't sink that much ressources. It is not grateful and don't even have consequences. (The consequence is having an upgraded war victory ribbon by around 100-200 points...) Plus if some RTS game mechanics destroy even more warfunds, we overall need more warfund earnings. I talked about generals, let's talk about Heroes. In my opinion the second most needed rework is about game modes themselves. Gamemodes rework First let's talk a little about war. In my opinion, every game mode should affect war in different aspects. For example it could change some AT's stats, and production stats (more or less speed, a moral boost, a production boost, some of them could die just before an assault before for example an Interdiction battle). It could change the weather condition of a battle, and the time a city is attacked for example. -> "We wanted to attack at night. But we failed some encounter-skirmishes scoutings. So at the end we will attack at day or wait for the next night. Enemies may have more defenders units then..." I agree Heroes and Generals needs a less serious game mode than war. And here should be encounters-like game modes (soon tank vs tank gamemode, maybe one day recon vs recon...) and skirmishes. And it needs a game mode for new players too. About it, it should take longer than 10 games for them to play with max rank players for example. A simple idea would be giving them the possibility to play directly with players if they want to. But they should be able to play with bots until level 12 for example if they want to. It may be "Coop VS IA" kind of game mode. The problem is that at the moment they have no choice whatever they want to play against players or against bots. About war it could stay the same. But be more attractive. Not with rewards (especially XP that don't attract the wanted players aka high level players but the opposite aka low level players that want to level up) but with gameplay. Make it fun. A clan vs clan game mode could be a first idea. So that could more fair for everyone. And solo players are not forgotten too, because now they will not play 1 vs clan. Thing that happens at the moment and that is really dumb of course. Any other game mode could be merged with war and its actual war battles (so instead of 2 queues, only one) and if there are not any. Some "general-bots" could send some assault teams. (Or in this idea just spawn some battles). Some players especially with a lot of assault teams may not be happy about that. But they have to remember they can earn the warfunds of these AI-assault teams too. So it could be a working idea. The general-bots could help the faction(s) that has the less capitals. That could be a bonus for the loosing side(s). About assault gamemode. Especially actual staged assault with 2 lines. I think it could need a simple rework too. Because for too long the defender often win, and the attacker often loose. The problem is that the defender have often all of its units, and the attacker the half. Because a line may have been captured before everyone could join the game and that's stupid. A simple idea could buffing the numbers of units of attackers. So in case one line is closed, attacker has not already lost. Or an other idea is just putting the unit of the closed line on the not-closed-yet line. That's simple, but just needed. Of course there are a lot of other good ideas, some tweaks may be needed. But that's all for now. Thanks for reading and see you next time.
  4. Mrdamien03

    Credit problem.

    It is possible to earn credits even as low level. The key to win credits is knowing about prices of everything. Here's a fan spreadsheet. It's not perfect, a bit forgotten in some aspects, and trolled by stupid people sometimes. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TO3th5nfLrhqx-HQDA8cGxD4zoarQT7nHozZUhgSTYA/edit#gid=0 An other thing is to correctly mod a weapon and never fully mod any weapon. You have to buy mods, and then repair them. Mods will surely make a weapon better, but it will increase the price of each bullet fired. If you don't know about a weapon yet: Don't mod it! A base weapon is better than a stupidely-modded weapon. Especially for credits! When you know more about the game, you may have a lot more credits anyways so you will be able to mod it. Eventually making it a lot better, but eventually credits-negative too. A last thing is knowing that each action will change your earnings. And the best action for it is capping points. Instead, the worst action is camping. Camping will give less money. This system is not bad but sometimes can affect battles badly. Like people going to cap useless lines in war. Well before that, that's a money problem in fact. Plus, about starting rifles. Their prices are not "high". They are high if and only if you modded them. Best mods being scope + barrel making them the best weapons of the game. Without any mod a standard rifle cost is like like 0.05 credit per bullet fired... And a better free weapon, is just taking panzerfaust. And then taking any better weapon from players. So to resume, you have to find a weapon you like. Don't overmod it. Play for capping points not for kills. If you are trying to get MG 42, maybe you already have MG 34. Machine Guns are pretty cheap to use. They are in fact the type of weapons with the lowest cost. Just never use sniper ammo with it (as a low level when you get higher level it is possible but it costs a lot). Just buy one or two rate of fires mods and you are good to go. If you really want MG 42 and have MG 34, you can buy a ribbon booster. It's cheap and really efficient but you will have to play some hours in a row with it to make it useful.
  5. Mrdamien03

    King Tigers armor values wrong

    This game being a WW2 experience is a mix between reality and choices for balancing purpose. So it doesn't care about this kind of thing sorry! There may be more realistic game if you really want realism.
  6. Mrdamien03

    Tanks...and their health pool

    Tanks have a lot more health, and any damage AT weapon (and even tanks gun!) were not changed. So my honest proposal may be: - add more damage to every AT weapons except H3 H3 got already the best damage, as much damage as the best heavy tanks: 1200. For example a panzerfaust deals between 500 and 700 damages, and panzershreck/bazooka rocket deals between 600 and 900 damages. Before update it was enough and a rocket launcher could kill a tank in 3 or 4 rockets. H3 was dealing probably too much damage and this is why H3 was 2 shotting anything. (1 Shooting up to medium tanks with correct combat badges). Tanks health pool is now 2 to 3 or 4 or 5 times bigger and AT weapons and tank guns were not changed. Of course you need more weapons to kill them, but they got more efficient weakpoints that annoy them instead. So it's a lot harder to kill them but you can now disable them. - add more damage to tanks guns. H3 is still better than Tigers, Pershing, IS-2, Jadpanther, M36 Jackson and SU-100... That's just strange. They should deal at least X 1.5 more damage. (So at least 50% more damage). To conclude, if everything (except H3!) deals more damage, tanks will still be a lot more powerful than before but will not stay in this really hard to kill state. Plus tank vs tank interactions will not stay in the actual state: shooting the enemy more than 10 or 20 times in a row until either one die or one get his main gun or breech destroyed.
  7. Mrdamien03

    Matchmaking fairness

    Yes sometimes light tanks are put into light-td-medium battles and that's not fair for them. It is like putting planes together like light planes against better planes that's not fair.
  8. Mrdamien03

    Gimmie a break

    Yes closing a line may be one possibility. An other may be about servers. Because at the moment servers got a lot of problems too. If a server crash and get restarted while some battles are being played. The ressources inside will stay for the next similar battle... Even if unbalanced. It happens a lot in the prototype server, because well it is for test purposes and sometimes it will crash.
  9. Mrdamien03

    King Tigers armor values wrong

    First of all in this game APCR is just better than AP (more damage, more penetration, often but not always more velocity). Heroes and Generals may have a penetration decrease over distance one day but that may be far away from now (and I think there are things more important to do!). So if you are talking about AP rounds that's normal try APCR rounds. And about APCR penetration I would say in-game that's at most 110mm - 160mm. Like IS-2 and Pershing (being the best SU and US guns). If this heavy tank destroyer was decided to be better than its opponents. It may have the "Deutsche Qualität" bonus of Tiger 2. So its penetration could be "115mm - 170mm" like Tiger 2. Sources: https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/IS-2_Model_1944 https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/M26_Pershing https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/Panzer_VI_Tiger_II_Ausf._B
  10. Mrdamien03

    Modular damage needs fine tuning

    The fact is that tanks now have modular damage AND MORE HEALTH POOL. So in fact they are tanking even more. ( Before light tanks had like 1500 hp, medium 1750 and heavy 2000. Now heavy have like 5000 so that's more than the double.) During this time offensive stats of any tank didn't changed. They got the same damage, the same penetration, the same velocity... To balance it we may see more damage for any tank (especially bigger ones). As an example this isn't normal that light tanks needs like 10+ shots from an heavy tank.
  11. Mrdamien03

    Thoughts on Soviet Tanks

    SU tanks were not that good I can agree. Having unlocked everything on the game and finishing my US and GE tankers (Pershing and Tiger 2). I really wanted IS-2 and don't really like the other SU tanks. So I grind its ribbon from level 1 to level 12 with the little T-38 (worst tank in-game in my opinion lol, but ... it can swim at least). My opinion is that light SU tanks are the worst (and I don't like playing light tanks so I don't care). SU Medium tanks are good money maker but looks different to play than US and GE counterparts. SU Medium TD and Heavy Tanks are either a joke (SU 76M and KV 85) or really decent (SU 85 and IS 2). But the thing that changed my opinion on it is the Heavy Tank Destroyers. And after playing a lot HTD (I already got my HE shells). I find the SU one being the best overall. Followed by Jagdpanther (similar tank) then Jackson (this tank got a turret but may be the worst overall). So if you like SU tanks, you can focus on SU 100 and IS-2. It is far but worthy. And in the meantime you can grind credits with T 34 that are really decent tanks.
  12. Mrdamien03

    Heavy Tank Destroyers US TIER 2

    First of all we can all agree that US have enough sherman tanks. Plus one day it may be changeable anyways (like planes and their equipment). So you may go with your sherman and changing your main gun if you unlocked it and wants it, and have credits for it. And your version is not even a tank destroyer... The upgraded version of Jackson was a given idea but is not balanced at all with jagdtiger and SU 152. The other idea given was the Super-Hellcat, so that is basicly an Hellcat with a 90mm main gun (from most recent pershings, so that's the upgraded 90mm gun). It may be the best idea, but looking how some players fear the normal Hellcat I'm not sure about it. But if we consider each new tank deserves to be unique we can just forgot these ones. So we have to look for a new Heavy Tank Destroyer that could be T2. The last idea given is the T28 (that was a super heavy tank destroyer). And well it may be fun but it may be scary too. Plus it could be the design of a "special tier" with the panzer VIII Maus too and eventually Sturmtiger ( ❤️ ), but the problem here is now for russians. What supertank they get? Looking at the old video that showed a lot of tanks (see the sources after 13 min 50s) and according to some friends of my clan that know more about tanks. From tanks they showed the special russian tank could be the T 35-A... So US got a Super Heavy Tank Destroyer, GE got a Super Heavy Tank, and a beautiful self-propelled gun, and SU got... a T-28 on steroids? So that's a land battleship. I mean T 35 A played by a clan may be really powerful but that looks not as good as the other two factions. Even if they would have a big bonus being KV-1 and KV-2! Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-35
  13. Mrdamien03

    Stats of Jagdpanther, SU-100, and M36 Jackson

    They give as much XP as Heavy Tanks. They costs a bit less than Heavy Tanks. Around 700-900 I would say.
  14. I'm interested in the stats of the new tanks so I'm creating a new topic about it for everyone that is interested and wants to contribute to it. I know Armor 2.0 changed a lot of old tanks stats anyways but it is interesting to know more about these new tanks. About defensives stats I think about regular armor values (something similar at least). I have no clue about them so I will not give any stat here. Feel free to give some stats if you know about them. About offensives stats: We can suppose M 36 Jackson got the same damage, projectile velocity, and penetration than Pershing. It used to be 90-140mm with AP (velocity: 854 m/s), and 110-160mm with APCR (v: 1021 m/s). We can suppose Jagdpanther got the same damage, projectile velocity and penetration than Tiger 2. It used to be 95-150mm with AP (v: 1000 m/s), and 115-170mm with APCR (v: 1130 m/s). I don't know about SU 100. It may have the same damage than the 2 HTD. And its penetration something in-between SU 85 and IS 2, probably the same than IS-2. SU 85 penetration used to be 65-110mm with AP (v: 792 m/s), and 75-120mm with APCR (v: 1200 m/s). IS-2 penetration used to be 90-140mm with AP (v: 800 m/s), and 110-160mm with APCR (v: 550 m/s). The SU-100 projectile velocity may be a lot faster than IS-2, especially with APCR ammo. So it may be a lot more than 550 m/s. Because Armor update changed a lot of things some time ago. I'm not sure the damage value of these tanks is the same now, or if it will stay the same. Every tank got a lot more health. So it makes sense to upgrade a bit the damage too. The penetration and projectile velocity will probably not change. Plus if we could have some official stats it would be awesome too! Sources (H&G Wiki, this poor wiki needs an update ) https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/M26_Pershing https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/Panzer_VI_Tiger_II_Ausf._B https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/SU-85 https://heroesandgenerals.gamepedia.com/IS-2_Model_1944
  15. Mrdamien03

    Its me? or...

    I played one assault staged battle with Heavy Tank Destroyers. They are just rare (and may have a really bad ping, like 200+ ).