Profile of Mittens

CnC 4 was just a dumb flop as the devs mis-read their fans and took the game in a moba/free 2 play direction while including things like limiting units behind time spent playing the game making it hard for new comers. The lack of real base building, poor story, music, and unit designs contributes to the reasons behind it, not to mention its DRM, and expensive price tag.

Generals 2 (idk if you guys got into the closed beta) was a hot mess that felt more like starcraft rather than Generals 1 or even basic CnC.




Relic should leave dow behind and I respect their decision to do so. They are in no way going under especially now that they are getting a new studio and Sega has pledge 50 more jobs in the area. DoW as a game was okay but failed to satisfy both parties (MOBA/RTS fans) b/c of the lack of depth it provided.

The one good thing about DoW3 is its engine improvements which even with its cartoon art style still proved to be a step up for foreground map elements which is cool.

We should give it to the maxim too

I am a caster and event organiser, I am not a game studio....

Please align your expectations with the person/ people you're getting the announcement from.

A_E Studios does have a nice ring to it I might add.

What is CoH without Quinn Duffy while he works on AOE4???

Like the Panther you mean? which is not cost efficient compared to the Stug.


Using the same criteria one can compare the Ostwind and the T-34/76. One will find the Ostwind lucking.


Kitting Comet is easy?
Comet has an edge over the Panther is most things needed to for kiting.
Comet has more vision, more speed and better chance of hitting the Panther. Panther has over Comet 5 range which without vision is useless.


Better AI to deal with what? It can already kite AT SP, At ST and AT PG and is one of the MBT that can deal with ATG easily.

Do you actually want to turn it into a Croc or Pershing?

Do you ever tire of over-exaggerating everyone's argument and using oversimplification and unfair comparisons? Its almost like you work at Buzzfeed at this point.

First your sturmpio argument is dumb as they are a support AT are -supposed- to be a defensive AT along with others such as PIATs -with bazookas being the exception-. AT guns are not an easy target without WP and the only AT that might be an issue is reketen but that gets cloak, good ROF, and retreat. Pak is also decent as long as you spot for it with 60 range.

Implying that AT guns should spot for themselves and a lack of trying to argue for a combined arms or a rock paper scissors balance outcome is depressing and only dilutes what makes coh 'good'. All of your "panther without vision is useless" is dumb as closing in with the comet means that 45 range is still firing at max range vs the panthers 50. Therefore the panther already has an edge on accuracy and pen as the fall off for pen and range calc for hit isn't as high due to closer distance for engagement.

Another dumb thing you are are undermining the armor value of the panther STILL after I pointed it our as the comet might get more rounds off, only a half of the fired shells might pen vs the panthers connected 75%.


My suggestion called for the comet to be better at one thing rather than being mediocre at both since we should have to choose between Churchill or Comet. Both should bring something to the field. Maybe we make the comet better V tanks with better pen but we could keep its range. Make Churchill good Vs inf. with better ROF or AOE?