Profile of donofsandiego

Avatar Area

Offline United States
Posts: 1404

General Information
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJT-oswDRyOrhrVghT-6ZRw
Steam: 76561198157193379
Nationality:

United States
Game Name: Snaek

Signature

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?..The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and... the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough...We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

― Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn , The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956

Show Latest Posts


Thread: USA scotts (M8A1)27 Oct 2021, 17:59 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Oct 2021, 15:32 PMProtos Angelus Golden Rule of RTS games: "If it's stupid and it works, it's not stupid" Conversely, "If it's not stupid and it doesn't work, it's stupid." In: COH2 Balance
Thread: For all the Wehraboos out there27 Oct 2021, 17:51 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Oct 2021, 14:48 PMPip Spoiler: Stalin and the Soviets were, in fact, evil. In: Lobby
Thread: the most balance is27 Oct 2021, 17:11 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Oct 2021, 11:35 AMDonnieChan imagine a form of hell in which you are forced to play random 4v4 without mute for the rest of time Eternal pain and suffering. In: COH3 Central
Thread: US Reverse Lend Lease commander26 Oct 2021, 22:09 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 21:36 PMKatukov yes but i do not see a gameplay reason for usf getting the t-34, makes no sense, not even the good t-34 but the bad 90 fuel one. Cheap tank you can afford to lose flanking axis heavy tanks and bullying infantry. I know I'd rather have T34s backed up by jacksons than Shermans backed up by jacksons. Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 21:36 PMKatukov conscripts get x4 ppsh (previously x3) and are 240mp, riflemen are 280mp, penal battalions 290 and they get full ppshs, but nobody used them while they were obtainable for 1cp. PPSh is good, but not that good that only 2 will suffice Alright sure. Say 4-5 but it takes up all weapon slots. Sounds alright to me. Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 21:36 PMKatukov the PTRS is still completely inferior to the bazooka that the rangers would normally get. they are elite infantry so they should receive the full power of their upgrades, like the soviet equivalents do (except ass guards who only are worth for their bazookas) Nobody's making you upgrade the PTRS. It's not like they can't just get bazookas from the weapon racks like everyone else. It was just for the option of it, costing less than bazookas, like I said. Then you can use the munitions elsewhere. The idea was a little versatility. As for the DP28 yeah they could probably do with two just fine. Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 21:36 PMKatukov the ml-20 is nothing impressive but its still static arty, that the US lack Yes EDIT: Oh and btw, for the PTRS upgrade I was thinking the rangers get the soviet AT grenade. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: US Reverse Lend Lease commander26 Oct 2021, 15:48 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 15:19 PMProtos Angelus No offense, but don't you have better things to do than make such pointless threads? Again, no offense. None taken. Don't you have better things to do that to engage pointless threads with pointless comments? It would seem we all have our vices . In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: US Reverse Lend Lease commander26 Oct 2021, 14:57 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 14:15 PMKatukov t-34/76 - completely pointless due to the existence of the sherman, historically and thematically this doesn't fit the faction either Yes. That's why I said the commander was completely ficticious. Sherman isn't that good in teamgames and I just wanted an excuse to give USF T34s . Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 14:15 PMKatukov PPSH tactics: weak, give riflemen x5 ppshs or upgrade to 6 man squad with x6 ppsh. Not even cons get an entire squad's worth of PPSH's and they are pretty strong in close range where they weren't beforehand. Meanwhile riflemen are already pretty good in close range so I think it's probably fine. Maybe an extra PPSH to lower the mid range damage a bit more but honestly unless they're getting a different version of the PPSH I think 6 would be insane. Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 14:15 PMKatukov Rangers: the PTRS would be pretty useless straight up, svt count increased to x6 or x2 dp-28 at the very least, or combining and having a x2 ptrs/x2 dp-28 guard clone with svts as secondary rifles Coming pre-equipped with PTRS sounds good but it would just give US too much momentum b/c then they don't have to spend as much munitions on their AT, therefore they can spend more on BARs for their infantry. I think they should have to upgrade for them, but it could be like a quick upgrade and cheaper compared to 2 bazookas. Jump back to quoted post26 Oct 2021, 14:15 PMKatukov and the ml-20 is pretty alright, this alone would probably be the reason this doctrine gets picked in team mode Most likely. EDIT: I bungled the formatting. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: US Reverse Lend Lease commander26 Oct 2021, 13:52 PM Complete and utterly ficticious commander idea for the lols here: 0CP: Raid Tactics - Raid tactics. 0CP: T34/76 Reserves - Uncle Sam has asked Mother Russia to give them the blueprints for T34 tanks, as a result, T34s can be built at T4. This US version of the T34 lacks ram, because reasons. 2CP: PPSH Tactics - Riflemen and Rear Echelon Squads can be upgraded with a pair of PPSH submachine guns, taking up two slots of weapon space. 2CP: Lend-Lease Rangers - These rangers, can be upgraded with either 3x PTRS rifles , 3x SVTs or 1x DP28. Any one of the upgrades take up all weapon slots. 8CP: ML-20 Howitzer - Rear echelon squads can build an ML-20 howitzer. Self explanatory. How OP would it be? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: the most balance is26 Oct 2021, 13:34 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 21:52 PMDonnieChan for the sake of your sanity, you shouldnt enter the 4v4 searchlist then Well see but I'd also want a mute feature of course. In: COH3 Central
Thread: USA scotts (M8A1)25 Oct 2021, 16:04 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 14:35 PMKlement Pikhtura I would say that the only thing is T34/76 best at, is dying. otherwise m4 is better and more efficient unit. It's not more efficient. It costs more and its armor isn't even that much better. If you want to talk 1v1 I will agree with you all day that the Sherman is better, but in teamgames you're not keeping mediums like that just because there's only so long Allied medium tanks get to stay effective in long teamgames. When the panthers hit the field, Shermans get bullied off while T34s can still be used for flanking & utility because they're cheaper. Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 14:35 PMKlement Pikhtura But...my initial point was, that USF have a top tier AI stock medium that is not used, because why would you, if you can barrage your opponent to death? No reason to build an AI medium tank and invest all that micro and attention in it, if you have much more efficient and less micro intensive option like Scott? And I agree with you. Why would you waste your time on a squishy medium tank that gets bullied by panthers when you could make a cheaper scott? Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 14:43 PMSander93 It's the opposite actually. The HE Sherman deals AI damage more quickly because of main gun alpha damage which makes it better at hit and run tactics, which makes it better in teamgames because the compact nature of teamgames means sustained fights are dangerous for generalist mediums I never said that this wasn't the case. Using T34s in teamgames, I use them to harass and bait the enemy into my defenses. Medium tanks don't last long in teamgames, which is exactly why being cheaper is better. I can happily lose a T34 after having used it to bait a Panzer 4 into a conscript AT grenade and finish it off. A Sherman doesn't have that. All you gained was a 10 fuel advantage and you lost 60 munition plus the cost of snare. Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 14:43 PMSander93 It's also better against blobs because of its huge AOE profile. I'd always go for a Sherman unless I'd go heavy with elite infantry, while I'd usually pass on a 76 for something bigger or a Katy. Look, maybe this is a learn to play issue, and I'm a huge idiot or something, but T34 always has a place in my army composition. I'm naked without at least one. If the enemy is going hard for panthers and heavy tanks, I'm going to be getting one T34 at least, for a snare. And plus on top of that I can use it to bully infantry. The only thing the Sherman has going for it in that situation is bullying infantry. But it can't control blobs, because the panthers and heavy tanks will eat its ass for dinner. Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 14:43 PMSander93 A much bigger investment being 20 more fuel and some munitions, that comes with the added utility of self repairs, smoke grenades as well as AA on top of better performance in both AI and AT. Easily worth it. Easily worth losing? It's just barely worth losing to a panzer 4, meanwhile for the same price point a soviet player gets 2 mines and 20 fuel off their next tank, all the while USF's tank destroyer costs 15 fuel more than the Soviet one. To me it's an easy comparison to make. Comparatively it's just not worth it. Like Klement said, the Scott is doing the job better. And yes, all that utility is great, but its meh in teamgames. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USA scotts (M8A1)25 Oct 2021, 14:12 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 13:05 PMSander93 That's not really true. Main gun scatter/AOE damage mostly ignores cover and standard/vet TS/RA bonuses, while these heavily affect MG dps. Moving also doesn't affect main gun DPS as much as it does the MGs'. And there's also the fact that the T-34 needs to be facing its hull towards the enemy to deal a large portion of its AI DPS, which is often not practical. The T-34/76 is a great cost efficient medium, with very good AI for its price, but ultimately the HE Sherman is undeniably better at anti-infantry. Of course. That's why I said the Sherman is definitely better VS blobs. I've already admitted that the sherman is better at AI, and I also rephrased my statement. My point is that T34 does the job better in a teamgame setting. You're not going to be attacking blobs with the T34, and neither can you really do it with the Sherman, because axis armor is hard-hitting and easily will scare it off. What you use T34 for boils down to bullying infantry and every once in a while using them to brute force a heavy tank or flank other tanks. You can do it with the T34 but not the Sherman, just because its a much bigger investment compared to it. Jump back to quoted post25 Oct 2021, 13:09 PMKlement Pikhtura If you give t34 30 sec of shooting without moving, it might be better if M4A3 has no pitle. But everytime you move your tank, for example reversing to avoid a snare, your armor has to move and if it moves, MG DPS drops significantly, while cannon does not care, because it is almost always missing vs infantry. Also cannon gives no F about target size, while MGs definitely do, while having 5 more range. Sure. I agree. I've already agreed with you that the Sherman is better at AI. The point is that the T34 does roughly the same at less cost. Which is huge for teamgames. Its jack-of-all-trades design hampers it in teamgames. Which is what I meant when I said that T34 was "better" at AI. It's not strictly "better", but the T34 as a whole is in my opinion better in the same role in totality. In: COH2 Balance