URALGRAZNOMOD release thread -1.7 Now available.

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Vasily Krysov » Mon 2 Jun 2014 16:05

Bryan wrote:You should experiment with 30km Buks, with 30-45 second lock on times, and also extremely limited agility to represent a bigger missile.
But, will OHK a jet even if its a near miss.


I will reply with about as much thought as you used to make your suggestion: No.
User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
 
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Seer7 » Mon 2 Jun 2014 19:48

Vasily Krysov wrote:
Bryan wrote:You should experiment with 30km Buks, with 30-45 second lock on times, and also extremely limited agility to represent a bigger missile.
But, will OHK a jet even if its a near miss.


I will reply with about as much thought as you used to make your suggestion: No.

Since I put a bit of thought into the T-62M issue, what do you say?

Also, finished Blue Dragons. They seem pretty good, only noticed a few things:
  • M67-HAN don't get an availability penalty on the Hachi-kyu Shiki. The penalty should probably be a bit higher too, considering it has 4AV and a 3AP 30mm with an ATGM (is it just me or do the launchers look like they're on backwards?).
  • K1 get 4 cards: haven't seen any other tanks with 4 card availability, at least not yet.
  • Some questionable stuff going on with the 25 point tanks: M48A5K = 0/0/14/7/0 while Nana-yon Shiki A/C = 0/18/9/0/0. Also, M48A5K2 = 12/7 which is a strange availability drop, and should the Nana-yon Shiki E get an availability drop for 2275m?
Happened to be fiddling about in my E-Bloc deck again and noticed that Mot-Shutzen get 18/14 in the BMP-2 compared to 16/12 in other BMPs, figured I better report it here, surprising that I missed that before. Went back over E-Bloc infantry in general and noticed PTRS Konkurs, Sturmpioniere and Zeniste don't get an availability penalty from taking the Mi-8T. Seems like a troublesome coalition. Tomorrow I'll do Scandis I think.

I have two other suggestions to throw out there for consideration:
1) Make HMGs a bit more accurate.
I'm talking 12-14mms, so things like M2 Brownings, NSVTs, DshKs, KPVTs etc. I don't mean miniguns or ZU-class guns, since their ROF is ridiculous and/or they have 1HE and that makes up for bad ACC in my experience. Seems to me, and this is just from what I've observed, that since the targets they're meant to kill (infantry) are 'very small' size that means with 10-20% ACC the chances of actually hitting them are friggin' tiny. I doubt they do much to infantry entrenched in urban environments either. I'm sure ShanRevan could confirm or deny this, but they're not really all that threatening imo. How much of a buff would be ideal is guesswork to me, so I suggest 10%, hopefully not too game-breaking. The idea is to increase their utility so they're not just there for the fireworks, and even to help tanks out a bit since the M2 is strapped to just about everything on Blufor, for example.
  • Similarly, some LMGs are strapped to things like Hueys and have 10% ACC yet when in squads they're 45% ACC (eg. M60). Just a bit of a discrepancy there. I'm not saying they have to be at parity, perhaps make them 10% lower. That's how it is for the MG3 at least (compare Bell 204 MG3 to the I.MG3 in Fallskjermjeger).
2) Nerf some RPG ranges down one step (175m).
Okay, so at the moment 525m is standard RPG range and with some of the more advanced stuff its 875m, or two steps up. I always thought 875m range was pretty BS, as combined with the high veterancy and training of the soldiers that use them, as well as the high ACC and AP of the weapons themselves, it makes tanks incredibly vulnerable even at max range. It's also part of the reason why HMGs are pretty useless: most have 1050m range and that's only one step above the maximum range of those RPGs. Closing even a short distance means certain death. Apart from all of that 875m is practically ATGM distance (eg. Eryx is 1050m), which is ridiculous from an authenticity standpoint. So if you knock them down to 700m they still have a clear advantage but they're no longer able to reach out quite so far and smack armour in the face with an accurate +20AP rocket.

All of this is subject to those who know the mechanics better than me, of course, I'm interested to see what you guys think.
Image
Image
Seer7
Warrant Officer
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Tue 4 Jun 2013 07:26

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby xthetenth » Tue 3 Jun 2014 00:05

Seer7 wrote:K1 get 4 cards: haven't seen any other tanks with 4 card availability, at least not yet.


STRV 103C has four cards as well. The K1 is the only tank in all of blue dragons in that price range, while the other main coalitions nearly universally have more tanks in that price range. USSR and US are the ones that other factions are getting balanced towards so the K1 gets a lot of cards so blue dragons can put up a comparable number of heavies. It's a similar reason to why the M1A2 is two cards and the Eurocorps and USSR heavies are one each.
Image
xthetenth
First Sergeant
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu 21 Feb 2013 04:56

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Vasily Krysov » Tue 3 Jun 2014 03:57

Seer7 wrote:Since I put a bit of thought into the T-62M issue, what do you say?

Sure! But it's a low priority right now so remind me when we are doing some polish passes in case we forget.

Happened to be fiddling about in my E-Bloc deck again and noticed that Mot-Shutzen get 18/14 in the BMP-2 compared to 16/12 in other BMPs, figured I better report it here, surprising that I missed that before. Went back over E-Bloc infantry in general and noticed PTRS Konkurs, Sturmpioniere and Zeniste don't get an availability penalty from taking the Mi-8T. Seems like a troublesome coalition. Tomorrow I'll do Scandis I think.

Any helicopter number issues are from vanilla as we have not touched them yet. Do keep in mind that the M-8 is the "sky APC" for use in airborne decks which is why they are so big numbers.

Shan has addressed this before, the BMP-2 is lacking the ATGM so thus has a little more availability to compensate. Unless you are talking about the BMP-2/c which we will look into then

I have two other suggestions to throw out there for consideration:
1) Make HMGs a bit more accurate.
I'm talking 12-14mms, so things like M2 Brownings, NSVTs, DshKs, KPVTs etc. I don't mean miniguns or ZU-class guns, since their ROF is ridiculous and/or they have 1HE and that makes up for bad ACC in my experience. Seems to me, and this is just from what I've observed, that since the targets they're meant to kill (infantry) are 'very small' size that means with 10-20% ACC the chances of actually hitting them are friggin' tiny. I doubt they do much to infantry entrenched in urban environments either. I'm sure ShanRevan could confirm or deny this, but they're not really all that threatening imo. How much of a buff would be ideal is guesswork to me, so I suggest 10%, hopefully not too game-breaking. The idea is to increase their utility so they're not just there for the fireworks, and even to help tanks out a bit since the M2 is strapped to just about everything on Blufor, for example.
  • Similarly, some LMGs are strapped to things like Hueys and have 10% ACC yet when in squads they're 45% ACC (eg. M60). Just a bit of a discrepancy there. I'm not saying they have to be at parity, perhaps make them 10% lower. That's how it is for the MG3 at least (compare Bell 204 MG3 to the I.MG3 in Fallskjermjeger).

A mounted MG buff is something we will address later as we are focusing on the big trouble spots first, before we start working on the smaller things.

2) Nerf some RPG ranges down one step (175m).
Okay, so at the moment 525m is standard RPG range and with some of the more advanced stuff its 875m, or two steps up. I always thought 875m range was pretty BS, as combined with the high veterancy and training of the soldiers that use them, as well as the high ACC and AP of the weapons themselves, it makes tanks incredibly vulnerable even at max range. It's also part of the reason why HMGs are pretty useless: most have 1050m range and that's only one step above the maximum range of those RPGs. Closing even a short distance means certain death. Apart from all of that 875m is practically ATGM distance (eg. Eryx is 1050m), which is ridiculous from an authenticity standpoint. So if you knock them down to 700m they still have a clear advantage but they're no longer able to reach out quite so far and smack armour in the face with an accurate +20AP rocket.

The problem with small numbers. Just one 175m step up isn't a big improvement, a 350m step up is bordering on being a little too much. I don't feel that there is especially a problem though as the only LR RPG's.
-M72A4
-RPG-16D
-RPG-29
-SMAW
-PzF.3

If we look at this, the First two are pretty low AP or RoF. The RPG-29 is a special thing for only one paratrooper unit, so it's pretty rare. The SMAW is the weapon of a FIST squad, a marine one too. The only one that is sorta problematic is the PzF.3 as it's used by popular shock/SF squads but then they are expected to have good firepower. Lastly we want some area to be the home ground of infantry, so that we see the use of combined arms.


All of this is subject to those who know the mechanics better than me, of course, I'm interested to see what you guys think.
Again, thanks for the extensive and detailed feedback, stuff is hard to get! :)
User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
 
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby MoralCoral » Tue 3 Jun 2014 05:11

IMO the primary problem regarding infantry in Uralgraznomod so far is that tanks seem to dominate infantry in forests, which is hilariously counterintuitive. Not sure how you want to go about fixing that except for giving RPGs reflex, but that creates new problems.
also known as the caulktopus
MoralCoral
Master Sergeant
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon 14 May 2012 16:47

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Vasily Krysov » Tue 3 Jun 2014 05:18

MoralCoral wrote:IMO the primary problem regarding infantry in Uralgraznomod so far is that tanks seem to dominate infantry in forests, which is hilariously counterintuitive. Not sure how you want to go about fixing that except for giving RPGs reflex, but that creates new problems.


Well on REDFOR the general awfulness of the RPG-7 line is a big problem which will be getting fixed in the next version. To what I have seen, AT4/LAW80/PzF 3 armed guys are doing just fine. Might be looking at aim times later after we give it more time to pan out. Of course, boosting line infantry in this area will squeeze out Tank Hunters even more here, so we gotta be careful.
User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
 
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Seer7 » Tue 3 Jun 2014 12:55

xthetenth wrote:
Seer7 wrote:K1 get 4 cards: haven't seen any other tanks with 4 card availability, at least not yet.


STRV 103C has four cards as well. The K1 is the only tank in all of blue dragons in that price range, while the other main coalitions nearly universally have more tanks in that price range. USSR and US are the ones that other factions are getting balanced towards so the K1 gets a lot of cards so blue dragons can put up a comparable number of heavies. It's a similar reason to why the M1A2 is two cards and the Eurocorps and USSR heavies are one each.

Might be the only tank they have at that price range, but do you really need anything else? :lol: It's pretty sweet. The STRV 103C I can understand, but Scandis don't get the K1A1 or the Kyu-maru to boot. Getting 4 cards of K1s plus 3 cards of K1A1s, with one card of Kyu-marus and 2 cards of some lighter tanks, I mean damn. That's a very good armoured deck, really cost effective. I'm just unsure 4 cards is necessary.

Vasily Krysov wrote:Sure! But it's a low priority right now so remind me when we are doing some polish passes in case we forget.

If you ever announce a 'polish pass' I'll be sure to remind you then.

Any helicopter number issues are from vanilla as we have not touched them yet. Do keep in mind that the M-8 is the "sky APC" for use in airborne decks which is why they are so big numbers.

Mi-8s aren't really in big numbers tbh. I only noticed those discrepancies because they were in big numbers. If you look at Blufor, they don't get any availability penalties for taking their 'sky APC', aka blackhawks in my opinion, and that goes 300km/h. Redfor get slapped for having rockets, which is why I was grumbling to Eugen that there should be a cheaper Mi-8 with just a PKT so we lose the price and availablity hit. That's not really in the purview of your mod though.

Shan has addressed this before, the BMP-2 is lacking the ATGM so thus has a little more availability to compensate. Unless you are talking about the BMP-2/c which we will look into then

Nah you're right, I just forgot about that.

A mounted MG buff is something we will address later as we are focusing on the big trouble spots first, before we start working on the smaller things.

Another thing to push to the front when you do a polish pass I guess.

The problem with small numbers. Just one 175m step up isn't a big improvement, a 350m step up is bordering on being a little too much. I don't feel that there is especially a problem though as the only LR RPG's.
-M72A4
-RPG-16D
-RPG-29
-SMAW
-PzF.3

If we look at this, the First two are pretty low AP or RoF. The RPG-29 is a special thing for only one paratrooper unit, so it's pretty rare. The SMAW is the weapon of a FIST squad, a marine one too. The only one that is sorta problematic is the PzF.3 as it's used by popular shock/SF squads but then they are expected to have good firepower. Lastly we want some area to be the home ground of infantry, so that we see the use of combined arms.

175m isn't much, but it is an improvement. I think the first two should keep their distance advantage, and the SMAW because its a FIST squad, but the RPG-29 and PzF.3 should be nerfed back a step. They're both high accuracy, high AP rockets in highly trained squads, so they already have a big advantage when tackling tanks.
Image
Image
Seer7
Warrant Officer
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Tue 4 Jun 2013 07:26

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Vasily Krysov » Tue 3 Jun 2014 15:48

Image

DOWNLOAD
edit: Now is link to 1.5a version.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nivini0l1s3p9 ... od1.5a.rar

Uralgaznomod V1.5

GENERIC wrote:-Fully switched over to new patching system, so we can now fully keep up with any new version that Eugen releases.
-With the Above in mind, we are now running off from the V345 of the main game. So no more .exe swapping is needed.
-Minor tank price tweaks to a few models.
-Small infantry bug fixes (like the TOPAS)
-Buffed the RPG-7 line accuracy

Moved to Vehicles wrote:M163 Vulcan
VAB VDAA
KVK fm/43
M42 AAG
KM163
Ural ZU-23-2
Hibneryt zu-23-2
Hibneryt zu-23-2s
Praga M53/59


Long Range SAM wrote:
REDFOR - List is by system, assume that all factions with weapon are the same as stated.
Buk-M1 now has 7km Anti Air range, 130 price.
Buk now has 7km Anti Air range, 110 price.
Kub-M now has 6km Anti Air range, 90 price
Pon-Gae-2 now has 5.5km Anti Air range, 80 price, 8HE


BLUFOR - List is by system, assume that all factions with weapon are the same as stated.
MIM-23B I-Hawk PIP III now has 7km Anti Air range, 130 price.
MIM-23B I-Hawk PIP II now has 7km Anti Air range, 120 price.
MIM-23B I-Hawk now has 7km Anti Air range, 110 price.
MIM-23B I-Hawk (NOAH) now has 7km Anti Air range, 110 price.
MIM-23A Hawk now has 6km Anti Air range, 90 price.


Medium Range SAM wrote:
REDFOR - List is by system, assume that all factions with weapon are the same as stated.
TOR now has 4.5km Anti Air range, 80 price.
Osa-AKM now has 4.5km Anti Air range, 70 price.
Osa-AK now has 4.5km Anti Air range, 55 price.
Osa now has 4km Anti Air range, 40%CTH, 45 price.
HQ-61 now has 5km Anti Air range, 50 price.
HQ-7 is now Semi-Active.


BLUFOR - List is by system, assume that all factions with weapon are the same as stated.
ADATS now has 3.5km Anti Air range, 6HE, 80 price.
Roland 3 now has 3.75km Anti Air range, 80 price.
Roland 2 now has 2625m Anti Helicopter range.
Rapier FSA now has 2800m Anti Helicopter range, reduced HE splash to 20m
Crotale is now Semi-Active.

SHORAD wrote:
REDFOR - List is by system, assume that all factions with weapon are the same as stated.
Tunguska-M now has 2800m Anti Air range, 80 cost.
Tunguska now has 2800m Anti Air range.
Strela-10M now has 2450m Anti Air range,
Strela-1M now has 2625m Anti Helicopter range, 2450m Anti Air range, 5HE, 50%CTH.
Strela-1 now has 2625m Anti Helicopter range, 2450m Anti Air range, 5HE, 45%CTH, 25 price.
Strela-2M now has 2275m Anti Helicopter range, 1820 Anti Air range, 35%CTH.
Strela-2M (FJB40) now has 2275m Anti Helicopter range, 1820 Anti Air range, 40%CTH.


BLUFOR
M48A3 now has 2800m Anti Air range.
M48A1 now has 2450m Anti Air range.
M48 now has 2275m Anti Air range.
Rapier now has 2450m Anti Air range, reduced HE splash to 20m
Roland 1 now has 2625m Anti Helicopter range, 2450m Anti Air range.
Stinger-C now 60%CTH
Type-91 now 60%CTH

AAA wrote:
REDFOR
Name/Price/Availability
Shilka 20 0/16/12/0/0
Biryusa 35 0/12/8/0/0
Tunguska 65 0/8/6/0/0
Tunguska-M 90 0/6/4/0/0
Praga 15 0/16/12/0/0
Strop-1 25 0/16/12/0/0
Strop-2 40 0/8/6/0/0
PGZ-80 20 0/16/12/0/0
PGZ-88 40 0/12/8/0/0
PGZ-95 60 0/8/6/0/0
Nork Shilka 20 0/16/12/0/0 (Now like the other Shilkas again)
Type-80 20 0/16/12/0/0


BLUFOR
Name/Price/Availability
M163 20 0/16/12/0/0
PIVADS 30 0/12/8/0/0
Falcon 25 0/12/8/0/0
Cent Marks 45 0/8/6/0/0
Cheif Marks 50 0/6/4/0/0
Chal Marks 60 0/4/3/0/0
Amx-13 AA 25 0/16/12/0/0
VAB AA 15 0/16/12/0/0
Gepard 40 0/12/8/0/0
Gepard A1 50 0/8/6/0/0
Gepard A2 60 0/6/4/0/0
LKVK fm/43 10 0/16/12/0/0
VEAK 35 0/12/8/0/0
M42 AAG 15 16/12/0/0/0
GUNTANK 55 0/8/6/0/0
KM163 20 0/16/12/0/0
K263 30 0/12/8/0/0
K30 BIHO 50 0/8/6/0/0

Last edited by Vasily Krysov on Wed 4 Jun 2014 16:51, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
 
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby Seer7 » Tue 3 Jun 2014 22:26

Vasily seems to enjoy increasing my checklist. Not that I'm complaining, I'm just having difficulty keeping up with the pace of change. That's a good thing; shows dedication. I'm still waiting on feedback from my suggestions above, but in light of this release I can see why they haven't been addressed yet.

Anyway, I put the Scandis on the backburner in light of the new release. Found some things I should have brought up before release, but simply didn't notice until it was in the armoury staring me in the face. Plus I was floating other ideas. So without anymore bulldust...

Two overarching problems-
Suppression:
You guys have adjusted HE but in various places you haven't always adjusted suppression. This could have been avoided if you logged suppression with your proposed HE changes imo. I'll document where things don't add up. First up is...

Strela-1/1Ms:
Strela-1M has the same missile stats as Strela-10M, except for suppression. This change is in the document so I'm annoyed with myself that I didn't notice it before, I was focusing on RAD hardware. The Strela-1M is not a budget Strela-10M on wheels. There's a noticeable difference between their missiles in range and accuracy (1 channel vs 2 channel IR seeking). The difference between the Strela-1M vs Strela-1 is range (both 1 channel IR). Warhead weight difference between the Strela-1s and the 10M is 400 grams, so no need for a HE nerf: they should be balanced like M48 Chaps.
  • Strela-1M should be 5 HE, 2450m helo range, 2275m plane range, and 40% ACC. Buff availability up bit, its the same as the baseline OSA, which doesn't seem right.
  • Strela-1 (E-Bloc & N-Korea) should be 5 HE, 40% ACC, and with a range of 2275m and 2100m for helo and planes respectively. Increase availability to same as Strela-1M (whatever you decide for that).
  • Suppression for both should be Strela-10M levels.
So in the end, they can all 2-hit a plane, but you're paying for an ACC and range increase like with the M48s.

Decks-
USSR:
  • Looking at the OSA-AK vs OSA-AKM, I think you need buff the AKM's air range to 5000m to give it a clear advantage over the AK.
  • The Tunguska has the same HE as the Tung-M but its suppression is lower: they should be the same.
E-Bloc:
  • Fasta-4 has +10% ACC on ordinary Strela-3 MANPADs and a slower reload time (probably a vanilla thing?). Like Strela-1 has the same availability as OSA, when it should be a bit higher imo.
R-Dragons:
  • The NEVA (Pon'gae 2) should get a price buff, it only has 500m, 1HE and 5% ACC on the HQ-61 yet its 30 points more expensive. Either that or the HQ-61 needs a price nerf. You forgot to adjust suppression here, NEVA still has 400 which looks 10HE level to me.
  • If possible, you should switch the model for the N-Korean Shilka now it's been turned into a real one; take the Polish model as its unmarked.
US:
  • The M48A1 and A3 Chaps need higher availability, so you can get 4 hardened A3s and 5 hardened A1s per card. You're not going to take baseline M48s outside of ERA decks after all. Plus, other decks get much better hardware with greater availabilities. Eg. Tung and Tung-Ms in USSR deck.
B-Dragons:
  • Guntank is 30 points. Quite the deal there when the K30 BIHO is 50.
  • Kin-sam gets a price nerf of 10 points for one step up in range vs the Avenger, seems a bit harsh.
  • The Tan-sam. See below.
Hokay, this is a bit of a problem like the Crotale. First problem: it shouldn't be F&F. It operates with a separate fire control system which uses radar to designate targets. Once the targets are designated, the missile fires and uses that initial information until a pre-programmed point where it switches to IR seeking to finish the kill. Without the radar unit, it's guided optically, probably until that same pre-programmed point. Basically, it should probably be SA like the Crotale, since you're having problems making them GUID.
Image
Second problem: 8 missiles. It did not carry 8 missiles. There is no room for 8 missiles. I don't even know why Eugen gave it 8 missiles: probably because people complained that it was useless next to the Kin-sam, and well, they didn't give the M48 Chaps another 4 launchable missiles because of the Avenger now did they?* So I think it should be undone. In all honesty, if you made the Tan-sam like the Crotale: SA, 45% ACC, 4 missiles and with 2800m air range and a 5 point price buff, it'd be where it should be. It is meant to be the mid-way point between the Type 91 and the Hawks of the Japanese arsenal, so for gameplay purposes its a Crotale, and it operates similarly to one IRL to boot.

I've checked out RPGs, but didn't notice anything glaring. I'll go back over them tomorrow just in case. I'll also do Scandis comprehensively.

*(Chaps are lucky to get another 8 so they could reload, as they did IRL).
Image
Image
Seer7
Warrant Officer
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Tue 4 Jun 2013 07:26

Re: URALGRAZNOMOD release thread

Postby MoralCoral » Tue 3 Jun 2014 22:52

Also, chinese tanks did not get the appropriate pricing. The ZTZ-88 should be 40 points instead of 60; in any case, the ZTZ-88 and ZTZ-85-II both feel a little overpriced at 40 and 50 compared to other tanks around that price.
also known as the caulktopus
MoralCoral
Master Sergeant
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon 14 May 2012 16:47

PreviousNext

Return to Modding

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jeremy2K12, Vulcan 607 and 3 guests