Profile of SkysTheLimit

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: The OKW Pak 439 May 2020, 19:15 PM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 19:00 PMT.R. Stormjäger Nice to see OKW's superior veterancy design in the trash can while USF keeps vehicle crews intact. Lol yeah poor okw, they only get a free flak base with their last tier and have a heavy tank no matter what commander they pick Do you think vehicle crews need nerfing? Cause they've already removed them from the problem units (Calliope and Pershing) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Changes i feel grens need9 May 2020, 19:09 PM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 18:51 PMelchino7 The reinforce bunker is too expensive to use. Which is why i always suggested to make base bunkers 50mp and put the other 100mp of the cost on the upgrades. You would keep it equal on the MG, but you could tweak numbers for the medic and reinforce bunker. I want this too, would allow grens to use unupgraded bunkers more just for cover. So they are less punished for not having sandbags In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Isn´t maxim aoe suppression9 May 2020, 07:26 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 06:06 AMMr Carmine What needs to happen if its to remain meh at vet 0 price it accordingly, dropt it 240 mp to better reflect it preformance. Or if it remains 260 mp make sustained fire vet 0 with price increase to 30 muni and cheaper at vet1. Either the maxim is to expensive or the mg42 is to cheap. How these both cost 260 mp is beyond me. To me the former is the obvious thruth. Yeah I agree with all of this exactly. But I think you can leave the mg42 as is if the Maxim got that change The ability still forces a reload. Its not like we're just making the Maxim have that performance as standard fire Make sustained fire more expensive and could even increase it's cooldown a little if necessary, to prevent spam. There are plenty of ways to make this change work without breaking the Maxim In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The HM-38 needs a reload buff9 May 2020, 04:48 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 04:43 AMStein Grenadier Frankly, a reduction of barrage size to 4 as well as reducing the reload amount by 2 second on the barrage would give a completion time of ~20.8375 seconds, which would put it on par with other mobile indirect fire units without touching any of its other aspects, and prevent it from literally taking as long as a howitzer to complete its barrage, which was more or less the only thing I'm after. That's very well put, and seems like a good idea. Would be nice if someone could test it in a similar fashion to how Stormjaeger did but with those numbers. I'm learning the mod tools but I'm not quite there yet Would be great if we saw this change in a preview so we could test In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Changes i feel grens need9 May 2020, 04:44 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 04:37 AMApplejack I think grens are fine the way they are. They are a very cost effective DPS squad in exchange for less survivability. Adding too much RA bonus would make them even better general purpose infantry. Take pre-nerf Fallschrimjaegers for example. They shred infantry and they had a snare to keep tanks anyway. Way too good for their cost. Grens already have a snare and putting grens above all other infantry would create the issue of how do you deal with them if they have no weakness? Just my thoughts. Yeah I don't really disagree here. I don't think they are that much like falls per say but I get your point I only say RA because they lost all of it when they got the received damage modifier at vet 3. Wasnt an awful trade, but it means grens have .91 Target size at vet 3 which is pretty high, especially for a 4 man squad. Maybe they should have a little of both instead of just damage reduction In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Isn´t maxim aoe suppression9 May 2020, 04:39 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 04:29 AMthedarkarmadillo I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel here, just make sustained fire vet 0 and say 20-30 mu and cut its price in down like now with vet 1. That prevents over use early game but makes it usable if recrewed. Basic functionality shouldn't be locked behind vet. Yeah this would go a long way without buffing it through the roof. Really solid change In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Changes i feel grens need9 May 2020, 04:31 AM Jump back to quoted post8 May 2020, 22:42 PMApplejack Having an upgrade to choose between LMG or 5th man would create the issue of limiting gren squads to 1 weapon. So you can't pick up another weapon as you can right now. If I know my stuff correctly, current the 5th man upgrade for grens and cons counts as a weapon slot. Question is: Is it better to trade a permanent weapon squad for a 5th man upgrade. You already have to choose between 5 men and lmg42 upgrade though? It just requires a doctrine Stock 5 man grens cannot happen. I think they should maybe get an RA bonus with vet 2, so vet 3 isn't the only survivability buff they get Could also split the damage modifier between vet 2 and 3 if adding RA is too much In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Isn´t maxim aoe suppression9 May 2020, 03:59 AM Snip In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The HM-38 needs a reload buff9 May 2020, 01:08 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 00:19 AMelchino7 -Cost should go down to 310mp and 8 popcap. +1 Doesn't need much, just a small cost adjustment In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Isn´t maxim aoe suppression9 May 2020, 00:48 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 00:43 AMTobis Also to be fair, it's a gun from the 1880s being compared to weapons from the 1930s. Lol I don't think anybody is forgetting how arcane the Maxim is compared to mg42. That isn't supposed to have much impact on the games balance anyway In: COH2 Balance