Profile of Myself

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 677

General Information


Thread: Why imo the use of L2P is not constructive.6 Jan 2016, 15:35 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 15:29 PMDonnieChan sorry but most balance issues can easily be resolved by l2p L2P - Learn to/2 Play. Often used as an dismissive insult. Use on the forums is discouraged and may prompt moderation. For those who did not look up the link... Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 15:35 PMKozokus It is like slapping a whining child, it is bad but it feels good. Kozo. Good to know that slapping "WHINING" children make you feel good and that you consider other people posting in this forum of inferior intellectual capacity and thus as children... (added "WHINING" after protests of "deform" from Kozo) In: Lobby
Thread: Why imo the use of L2P is not constructive.6 Jan 2016, 15:33 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 15:14 PMMajorBloodnok http://www.coh2.org/guides/45391/basic-concepts-and-glossary-part-ii The Report button is there. Please use it. Good to know but I think other people should be informed... Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 10:28 AMAustralian Magic Another thread? Just L2P.... Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 10:53 AMKpen97 I agree with Australian Magic; L2P plz or your gonna get run over... Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 12:29 PMKatitof You're getting run over all the time and can't stand for it anymore? Get good. Tanks run over scrubs all the time while its more rare event at higher level play, but its there and its not going anywhere.... (katitof's extended version of l2p) Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 13:21 PMAustralian Magic Crushing is L2P becasue there are many ways to prevet it... Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 14:20 PMelchino7 L2P is just an easy way to say it's avoidable.... (quotes are not presented in full to save time so can be misleading, the point here is that they the term is used far too often, I added this note, since some people seemed to take offense and accused me of "biased" most of the quotes come from the following thread if some one want to see them in full: http://www.coh2.org/topic/47372/running-over-troops/page/2#post_id469825) In: Lobby
Thread: Why imo the use of L2P is not constructive.6 Jan 2016, 15:02 PM Some people seem to be using the "L2P" term very often is balance debates. Imo the term is rude and nonconstructive. 1)L2P comes from "learn to play" which is in "imperative", it might be considered giving commands to people, one has not met and that imo is rude. 2)It turns what should be a balance into a knowledge debate. Balance issues can imo exist regardless of the knowledge of the person that brings them up. 3)Creates a hostile antagonistic environment where instead of focusing on the issue itself the focus becomes, who has better knowledge of the game and thus who should actually "L2P". 4)It slowdown the progress of any balance debate, while creating a hostile toxic environment. Imo "L2P" as response is currently overused and should avoided. In: Lobby
Thread: Running over troops6 Jan 2016, 14:31 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 14:20 PMelchino7 L2P is just an easy way to say it's avoidable. On the same way you dodge a nade, you should know when you are forced to retreat. And L2P is usually followed by "you" should do this and that, ending up to turn what should had been a debate on a balance issue into personal vendetta...practically stopping any meaningful debate and slowing down the progress of the debate...it also creates a very hostile and toxic environment...At least that is my opinion on the matter... L2P is discouraged and may prompt moderation. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Running over troops6 Jan 2016, 14:29 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 14:17 PMAustralian Magic You are wrong. You base on something uncommon instead of common. Most of the time every player (not just top) can prevent crushing. SO you should base on more common situation. Well Relic seems to agree with me, that at least in some occasions, it is balance issue and thus removed crash from the T-70... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Running over troops6 Jan 2016, 14:24 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 14:14 PMferwiner Its true that this feature looks unrealistic. The reason why its needed is that tank machine guns are very underpowered in coh2. I mean without a crush most tanks cant do much against infantry becouse their machinguns deal less damage than lmgs. riflemen_30cal_lmg_mp 6.12 7.292 8.27 9.02 9.17 sherman_m4a3_coaxial_vehicle_turret_mp 7.57 7.57 5.52 4.17 3.45 sherman_m4a3_vehicle_hull_mp 5.79 5.79 4.92 3.81 3.12 Not very accurate...some of them are even better close range...the difference only become significant at ranges 25-35... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Running over troops6 Jan 2016, 13:58 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 13:21 PMAustralian Magic Crushing is L2P becasue there are many ways to prevet it. As I already pointed out to you if top players can not prevent is not a L2P issue. Further more just because there counters to something does not mean it is a L2P. As I also pointed out there very little consideration to how effectively units can crash humans... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Axis Supply Drop6 Jan 2016, 13:37 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 11:36 AMKatitof Actually, it kind of is as you're having much less time to react and possibly intercept, therefore mitigating counterplay. Contrary to allied supply drop that happen with no warning, player has some control over flight path and can even avoid, in some cases, flying over the enemy held map completely, supply drop zones comes with warning and last allot more time with planes following the same path allowing easier positioning of AA assets...one simply has more time react to supply zone than supply drop... Further more supply drop zone can be counter on the ground while it is virtually impossible to counter supply drop. But this a actually thread about a bug and not balance so there is little point debating balance here since there is already a another thread http://www.coh2.org/guides/47110/resource-modification-in-coh2 . And it does seem the supply drop planes can not be shot down... In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Running over troops6 Jan 2016, 13:08 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 12:29 PMKatitof Except its not an issue. Its a feature. Its not going anywhere. It is an issue, if you fail to see the significance of this issue try playing COH1 when infantry pushing and crashing made the game experience pretty bad...I did not claim that removing is the only solution there are other solutions...crashing become an issue only after the changes in infantry snares so there are other solutions... Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 12:29 PMKatitof You're getting run over all the time and can't stand for it anymore? Get good. Tanks run over scrubs all the time while its more rare event at higher level play, but its there and its not going anywhere. PLS do not address me personally or make this issue a personal issue. This thread is not about me its "crushing humans" Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 12:29 PMKatitof End of topic really, there is nothing more to it. Well when a topic comes to end is not actually your call, and if you have nothing more to say move to another post and let people who have to contribute to this post to actually be constructive. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Running over troops6 Jan 2016, 12:24 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2016, 12:20 PMKatitof It is if you're getting your troops run over every time you see med tank. It is not if it happens occasionally. Some people may have there troops run over regularly other like helpinghans don't, the crash human issue remains regardless and it is not L2P issue... In: COH2 Balance