Profile of Grumpy

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1960

General Information


Thread: What I don't like in OKW18 Apr 2015, 22:06 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 17:55 PMCardboard Tank And the Panther could take out T-34s from 3km away. KVs were easily defeated by Panzer IVs and StuGs from a km. Yet that´s not ingame. 85mms defeating KTs now? Maybe from the sides, definitely not from the front. Even Panthers with almost half the armor bounced 85mm without a problem. You are maybe referring to a Russian testing, where they would shoot some hundreds of shells on a plate until it succumbs. In this game Russian armor gets off pretty well considering the disastrous losses they actually took. Losses so high that they would totally cripple the tank arm of any other nation. OMFG, how did the Soviets manage to take Berlin then? Oh wait, the German's had maybe 1500 AFV's of all types to defend Berlin. The Soviets had 4x that, and the rest of the Allies had probably 40x that many AFV's making popcorn and watching from a safe distance. So who suffered "disastrous" losses? You're cherry picking historical arguments. There were 600 Tiger II's made vers 54,000 T34's (all types). Since you like historical arguments, change the cost and pop cap of the T34 to 1/90 of a Tiger II (8 manpower and 3 fuel, 1 pop cap), make half or more of the Tiger II's break down before they come into the field of battle, and then make some of the remainder run out of gas during play. Make those changes and you'll never hear a Soviet player complain again, or simply stop with the "historical" arguments that somehow try to make the loser of both World Wars into an army of super heroes. Here is an actual (albeit atypical) engagement of 3 T34/85's vs 3 KT's. Try to duplicate this in COH2. http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/history-research-third-reich-ww2/3-king-tigers-vs-t-34-85-a-272607/ In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What I don't like in OKW18 Apr 2015, 16:04 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 09:59 AMOZtheWiZARD Hey Alexander if something doesn't have a turret it's usually a tank destroyer. Lack of turret allows for longer cannon which transfers into higher projectile speed and better ballistic properties (accuracy for example). Higher speed of a projectile means better penetrations as per laws of phisics and few other factors. The Soviet turretless vehicles in COH2 are all assault guns, intended to support infantry and should be good at both. Stug's were also assault guns, the Jagdpanzer was a true tank destroyer. The M10 and M36 have turrets but are TD's. I do get annoyed at the axis fanboys who pull out the "historical accuracy" bs. The real SU76 had a range of around 10 miles. The real Walking Stuka had a range of barely over a mile. Somehow, the axis fanboys who made up the unit stats gave the SU76 a bombardment range of 80 while the Walking Stuka is probably 400 (couldn't find value). Also, the laser-like accuracy of the Walking Stuka is pure bullshit. Rocket artillery in WWII was the least accurate of any type of artillery. It was used because it was really cheap in comparison to conventional artillery. In a similar move, the SU85's penetration should have been much higher than it is in the game. The 85mm gun was capable of dealing with even a Tiger II. The 85mm gun may not have penetrated the armor but the impact would still often spall pieces of the armor off of the inside of the tank and go through the inside like a shotgun blast. A couple of hits and the crew was likely dead. The gas tanks for the Panther and Tiger II were in the back of the tank and had very little armor covering them. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What I don't like in OKW18 Apr 2015, 00:48 AM Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 00:37 AMVuther Whoa uh, are you sure in the right place? Didn't stray from the CoH1 forums by accident? In CoH2, all vehicle call-ins also cost fuel, unlike in CoH1 where they were manpower only. Currently, Tigers and IS-2 cost 640 manpower and 230 fuel in CoH2. I think he was talking about the Tiger Ace. A lot of people complain about it not costing any fuel. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What I don't like in OKW18 Apr 2015, 00:43 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Apr 2015, 21:36 PMsome one 1) All units after upgrade may retreat to FHQ. Poor design gives advatage on big maps. I don't mind about healing. 2) Schwerer panzer building still shoting at the planes. (Get AA halftrack for that as all other factions). 3) Schwerer panzer building shoots very far and secures territory for huge amount of time (untile tanks arrive). 4) Sturmpios repair vehicals very fast 5) Volksgrens has increased vision with = poor design. 6) Jagdpanzer has rotates fast sees far moves fast = poor design ( no need support) that's it other stuff is ok for me now I usually play Soviets but not with you on this one. 1) If someone goes aggressive FHQ then it is ALWAYS hilarious to hear Ivan, the drunken 120mm mortar crew chief, brag about fukking up that squad. After you have saved enough munitions, smoke and 3 penals with satchels are also funny. Next truck will not be as aggressive. 2) Soviet plans, other than the one that comes with Tank Hunter, not that great anyway. They're the SU76's of the sky. 3) Schwerer shoots further than cons, but not as far as mortars or AT guns. When Sturmpios try to repair, there is a good chance you will hear from Ivan again and it is STILL hilarious. 4) Sturmpios repair fast, so do 2x CE which cost the same amount. 5) Having penals meet Volksgrens is a great way to get the CP's you need for call-ins. 6) Isolate the Jagdpanzer from it's support (using Ivan and his twin brother) and the Jagd goes down to a cheap, POS, T34/76. Obers with free LMG's used to bother me. KT that bounced everything used to bother me (including lack of side armor, which caused me to lose a lot of tanks just trying to flank). JagdTiger still difficult in team games. It's awfully expensive and seems to be used less often since patch so not as big of a deal. Non-doctrinal heavy (KT) bothers me a little. Soviets should get non-doc IS2 and USF get a non-doc Pershing if OK2 gets non-doc KT (which would also add greatly to the variety of Soviet commanders used). In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What I don't like in OKW18 Apr 2015, 00:22 AM Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2015, 00:06 AMMack674 Game is super unrealistic in almost every way outside of graphics and sound effects so Im not going to bother arguing semantics anymore, it hurts my head. I still love the game, i just find it immensely frustrating. I can't speak to anything bigger than 2v2 games though. The game isn't intended to be realistic. If you want that, there's Men Of War Assault Squad 1 or 2 that are much more realistic, and much less fun to play. This game is intended to be a fun game with 15-60 minute matches ala StarCraft or WarCraft and barely historically more accurate than those. Would you really want a match that took multiple days? Where tanks routinely 1-shot each other from distances further than infantry can see without binoculars? Where a 57mm AT gun can 1 shot a Tiger from the side (were Relic to include side armor). You'd get maybe 1 tank per 100 infantry, so the game would largely be infantry based. You would order your troops to charge across an open field and some might charge while the others ask if you are nukking futs. You would have to add vodka as an resource (in addition to fuel and munitions) if you want troops to do stupid shit. I've played both MoW 1&2 and both of them quickly reach boring and tedious. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: PTRS now OP?17 Apr 2015, 13:48 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Apr 2015, 12:20 PMofield Tbh the amount of ptrs blobber seems to decrease. I encountered less in the passed couple of days. PTRS's still attached to a very fragile con squad. The doctrine as a whole still not as good as other options so people were probably just trying it because others were complaining. Also, it takes a lot of micro, even compared to other Soviet gameplay and if you can't keep up, you get rekt. My micro isn't good enough so I play it only once-in-awhile for some variety, just like I did before the last patch. PS - The bombing run on that doctrine is great - pretty much a anti-everything to anything caught in its path. The 5 mp mines are pretty good also. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PTRS now OP?16 Apr 2015, 01:30 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 19:12 PMelchino7 I still wonder why i've still to see someone use con spam with PTRS yet. Is not like i would had been defeated by regular con spam if that would be the case. Tank Hunter means no IS2, T34/85, 120's, shocks, etc. The pinnacle of your armored force is a SU85. Anyone who gets beat by it was most likely trolled and would have been beaten worse had their opponent went Shock Rifle or Guard Motor. Looking at your player card, you're a top 100 as Axis so how many automatches would you expect to have with someone good enough to troll you? (assuming that there is enough of a skill difference for anyone to troll anyone else at your level) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PTRS now OP?16 Apr 2015, 01:13 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 14:07 PMKatitof He isn't complaining, he points out how retarded argument about PTRS destroying weapon is in reality. Yes, on so many levels. But it was amusing to see someone fail at reading comprehension and then LOL at me. OKW having the salvage ability just seems a kluge by the developers to let a good player overcome the bad part of the weird design of OKW. The only time that it really bothers me is when I'm playing OKW or Ost, have a weapon get decrewed, and a teammate rushes to salvage it before I can recrew it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PTRS now OP?15 Apr 2015, 13:15 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 07:46 AMStonethecrow01 What your describing assumes there is no counter system. MGs should counter Cons. 4 cons with the PTRS upgrade can walk up and snipe an mg now. That shouldn't be the case. Just to be clear, are you saying that there is no problem balance wise with mass PTRS upgrades on conscripts?? It's a little broken, but not any worse than dozens of other inane things in this game, like: IR halftracks being able to see through buildings PAK 43 being able to shoot through buildings Soviets suffering casualties during the winter, but cold immunity to western front Germans Luftwaffe pummeling US ground troops, instead of vice-versa OKW being able to salvage Soviet weapons, but not vice versa The disparity in being able to destroy crew weapons by using attack ground (a volks blob of the same size would kill the mg also, then either salvage the weapon, take it, or destroy it with attack ground, two more options than the cons get) M10 crush (an open top TD would normally stay away from infantry) lazer guided AT nades from Soviets and shreks from OKS or Ost hand-held AT having nearly the same range as the main guns of battle tanks etc, etc In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PTRS now OP?15 Apr 2015, 05:51 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Apr 2015, 01:30 AMStonethecrow01 PTRS on conscripts is too powerful. I imagine on Guards the issue isn't as big but with tank hunters and 4-5 conscripts all with 2 PTRS they are sniping germans and wrecking support weapons left right and centre. On different steam accounts, I tested this. If you think that one mg (240? mp) should be able to suppress 4 con squads (960 mp) and win the battle, then keep calling it OP. The four con squads did destroy the mg which killed the crew also. However, 4 con squads against 2 lmg grens and 2 mg's (roughly equal mp and munis) also wasn't close. The mg's and grens wiped or suppressed all the cons easily, even without using rifle nades. In: COH2 Balance