Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Spring update from design point of view. 23 Apr 2018, 17:01 PM Command Panzer 4 We are reducing the bonuses of the Command Panzer IV’s aura to decrease its potency around units such as the Stug G and Panther that are either incredibly cost effective with increased durability or have high durability to begin with. • Damage reduction lowered from 20% to 10% The unit will simply not be worth it. Being more expensive than the PzIV (at 360/125 vs 350/120) while performing worse than the PzIV. Suggestion: Standardize the mechanics of all aura units. Imo they should provide a small buff passively They should also have an ability increasing the bonuses or adding more Finally both auras should benefit from veterancy For the PzIV replace the gun profile with one similar to the one Stug-E (historically thematically and in game it fit the role. (custom design vet bonuses for the specific unit) Give an ability (maybe vet 1) to change to direct fire mode with AT ammunition with low penetration but some deflection damage. Maybe make the commander animation provide some extra vision? (+5?) In: Lobby
Thread: Spring update from design point of view. 23 Apr 2018, 15:13 PM Brummbar The Brummbar is having its scatter increased to reduce its squad wiping potential and allow it to better push back multiple squads grouped together. • Scatter from 2.5/6 to 4.8/7.5 • Bunker buster (vet1 ability) scatter from 2.5/6 to 6.4/7.5 This change will have very limited impact unless you add scatter to attack ground. The unit will become more frustrating for people not using attack ground and not noticed for people using attack ground. Reducing the Kill radius will keeping scatter low will make unit allot more player friendly, while increasing the modifier vs garrison entrenchment to better define the tole of the unit. Bunker buster ability could be improved by: Making the ability scale with veterancy Give the ability bonus damage vs emplacements Other vet bonuses: Vet bonus could include faster projectile speed One could also trade lethality for more utility by adding a small stun (1-2 sec) or abit of suppression to make the unit less lethal bad better anti blob unit. Alternative: From a design point of view having 2 indirect fire unis in T4 is bad. One could move Brumbar or PW to T3 and Ostwind to T4 and adjust cost and performance. In: Lobby
Thread: (SBP) Bren Guns23 Apr 2018, 13:21 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:56 PMKatitof Or turning PACK howi into regular, super slow, non retreating mortar which still has massive cost and requires 3 men to crew. 1) You were saying exactly the same Thing about USF vehicle crews and armor Transfers, yet no one ever does that and if someone does, its not a problem at all. 2) Cons got their own buffs tailored for their own playstyle, especially durability vet which does not go well with Long range weaponry. But your idea of that is dumbing down, mirroring and erasing unique Features of the Units all together. USF M3 medkits and muni HT being prime examples of you trying to oush that agenda. It does not help the game, it makes it even more plain and bland. ... There is literally ONE player who puts brens on commandos and he does not even play meta. Do not use extremely rare situational quirks as foundation for something prevelant. LMG REs are also a thing of the past. Tommies are supposed to be weaker at close range, that would lead to Situation equally bad as 2 M1919 for rifles in the past, just with reverse profile. Try to stay on the topic of bren and not what I do. Your continues efforts to prove me wrong simply derail threads. Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:56 PMKatitof Weren't you against having 100 different types of the same weapon when multiple PTRS variants were introduced and discussed? This essentially is the exact same thing, just changed on squad level instead of weapon level. It would also be helpful if you actually read and understood what other post before responding. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: (SBP) Bren Guns23 Apr 2018, 12:39 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:15 PMMr.Smith You already have lesser LMGs (e.g., DP-28) that are balanced even when used in pairs. I don't see something wrong in pursuing a low-effort and low-risk solution that doesn't remove game features simply for the sake of removing game features. Game features like the 2 man sniper team? The mechanics of giving weapon across factions with the m5 will be problematic. Relic already reduced the weapon slots of conscripts because of it. It would be really helpful for the game if similar solution where applied to similar issues, the number of unique features is quite big and its seem to be growing patch after patch. The solution of bonuses and penalties addresses most problem with drop-able weapons universally in single solution that is easy to understand. The solution of the bren is not bad (and actually it was one of my suggestions for rack weapons)(although if it is not touched it will be op in commandos hands) but Vickers K is still a problem specifically since Ro.E. can get 2-3 LMG. Imo turning bren into "assault rifle" profile would be a better from design point of view. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Spring update from design point of view. 23 Apr 2018, 11:23 AM Panzergrenadiers Panzergrenadiers are being given increased versatility; cheaper and more accurate panzerschreck will allow an alternative to the Pak40 that can support assaults with smoke grenades. • Now have access to the Model 24 Smoke Grenade • Panzerschreck upgrade munitions cost reduced from 120 to 100 • Panzerschreck far accuracy increased from 0.028 to 0.032 Imo the medic kits should be changed as a vet 1 ability. A new ability could be one that give a small passive bonus when near tank/vehicles with bigger bonuses when those vehicles use their own vet 1 abilities. Thematically that would fit both the unit and the faction. I would also suggest that unit cost is reduce to 280-300 and 2 stg 44 replace by k98. Then offer an upgrade for 2 ST44 or 2 Shrecks replacing the ST44. That would prevent blobbing the unit. In: Lobby
Thread: (SBP) Bren Guns23 Apr 2018, 10:59 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 10:54 AMMr.Smith It's not possible to limit picked-up weapons to 1 (Vickers-K), without making them trash (e.g,. 1 gun takes 2 slots). We have to find a solution for double-wielding Vickers-K anyway to keep them good but not OP. If a solution works for Vickers-K, then an identical solution will also work for Bren guns. Tweaking accuracy values is the just the best way to tweak DPS curves without shooting yourself in the foot. Removing the drop weapon mechanics from the m5 would solve most of you problems and Conscripts coul d get their second slot back. Or you could have penalties and bonuses to squad so that drop-able weapon perform at the level of the unit that wield them. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson nerf22 Apr 2018, 16:34 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Apr 2018, 16:01 PMKatitof No, existence of these alternatives does not make FF and SU specialized. Their much higher penetration and lower rate of fire, designed to combat slower or highly armored vehicles is. Accuracy does not play as big of a role, because target size affects all incoming shots, that includes ATGs, which need to combat both, med and heavy armor without 100% accuracy on both and same goes for handheld AT. And making units which are end of tier and capable of fighting reliably exclusively 3 axis units(taking into account your accuracy thing, which would make them unreliable against meds), which can engage a wide range of targets is utterly retarded idea to even think of. Su-85 does not have slow fire rate. A firefly can make medium tank disappear in 8 secs if both Tulips land and that is probably one of the fastest kills. Accuracy plays a very big role. FF/SU-85/M36 can reliably hit and penetrate PzIVs from max range. These Tds perform very good vs mediums. In this patch a Su-85 vet 2 will have 100% change to hit and penetrate a vet 3 Panther from range 60. The performance of allied TDs need to looked if the only tank with enough armor to take Tds shots is the KT. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson nerf22 Apr 2018, 15:57 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Apr 2018, 15:18 PMKatitof There still are 2 lighter, cheaper options that are capable of engaging med armor, especially in soviet case. And that does not make the FF/SU-85 specialized. In order for this units to be specialized vs super heavies they would need high penetration low accuracy (they already have high penetration). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson nerf22 Apr 2018, 15:12 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Apr 2018, 15:06 PMLago The Jackson's problem is it's got to be everything USF needs from a tank destroyer. The other factions have two or more specialist AT vehicles filling different roles. The result is a tank which has no vehicular counter. If it did whichever tank countered it would counter USF's entire armour lineup. In my opinion what USF needs is a cheaper non-doctrinal vehicular AT option that fills a similar role to the SU-76, AEC, Puma or StuG. That'd let the Jackson fall back into a more specialist Firefly/SU-85 role. There is nothing specialized about FF/SU-85 as tds, their high a accuracy make them very good vs all vehicles In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson nerf22 Apr 2018, 14:33 PM M1 chance to penetrate Ostheer PzIV range 60/30/0 frontally. 72%/78%/83% In: COH2 Balance