Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback19 Dec 2020, 09:05 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 01:03 AMMr. Someguy Yes and that is my point. If one continues to bring Soviet stock units inline with Ost/OKW stock units one will have to tone down Soviet access and power of doctrinal unit. Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 01:03 AMMr. Someguy The indication would be pick-rates and win-rates, which are lower than others. In WC2019 they did more then fine, the WC2020 only indicates that they have a hard time dealing with Osttruppen. One will have to wait and see how well Ostheer do after the nerf to Ostt and 5 men grenadiers to see how viable Ostheer actually are. And OKW did not do great either. Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 01:03 AMMr. Someguy Well that was the initial design and it has been received many changes since then. Maybe they should try to return to the original design. Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 01:03 AMMr. Someguy Conclusion: The T-34's mobility is average and penetration is poor, which doesn't make it particularly good at flanking because it doesn't really move faster than other tanks and it cannot reliably penetrate the rear armor of a heavy tank as well as any other medium tank. You are missing the point I made. T-34/76 penetration increase more than most tank with range. As of its penetration is high enough to reliably penetrate enemy rear armor. 100% vs PzIV j at range 40 100% vs PzIV at range 30 100% vs Panther at range 30 Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 01:03 AMMr. Someguy He is very clearly talking about Ram's original intent, which is at odds with what the current team believes it should be for. Those patch notes are from Relic and they clearly say that T-34's ram intention is a last resort, which is exactly what the MOD team did. I am not sure why we are even debating this since absolutely clear. The fact is that the ram/off map combo is not good for the game. I would suggest to people that do not like the change to RAM to come up with better suggestions. For instance I have suggest that RAM changes to "Ramming speed" an ability that makes the unit move faster in straight line. The ability then improve with veterancy and can be used to ram at vet 1. The effect and penetration of ram also scale with veterancy. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] General Discussion19 Dec 2020, 08:43 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 06:21 AMMr. Someguy The Paratrooper M1 Carbine is superior to the Rifleman M1 Garand at range, so giving them Garands doesn't serve your purpose of making them better at long range. M1 is inferior close thou and if one gives them M1 one can lower the cost so that Pathfinders can become a support unit instead of fighting unit. Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 06:21 AMMr. Someguy The only thing you could do is give them an M1919 That is out of the question unless one want to increase cost and pop. Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2020, 06:21 AMMr. Someguy or create another M1 Garand that is better at long range. Perhaps an M1 Garand with the close range DPS of a Vet 3 Garand (which itself closely mirror's the Panzerfusilier G43) with the long range DPS of the Panzergrenadier G43. The weapon of the unit should be good at long range and unit should be weak at close range. It does not need good DPS at close range. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW Spec Ops Doctrine (especially Radio Silence)18 Dec 2020, 22:19 PM Speaking of C.Panther the whole design is problematic. The unit is used more like a solo unit than a support unit and imo the units design should be looked at. Either design a support vehicle that operates with rest of the army or design a Panther Ace and lose the "command" aspect... Aura should start having an time active element. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] UKF Feedback18 Dec 2020, 22:12 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 19:53 PMSander93 With Royal Engineers having a capping bonus at the moment, what do people think about putting them in T0? It is one option or can move and redesign the officer. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 19:53 PMSander93 Possibly in combination with reverting the AEC build time increase, moving medics, and giving the UC a ~10 fuel cost. This problem start from making all these unit available so early. I would suggest to make 221 available to Ostheer to counter sniper and micro light vehicles and tone down the shock value of micro light vehicles. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 19:53 PMSander93 And gating the destroy cover ability behind a unit upgrade or tech. This ability is very power but it is needed to help with emplacement placing. Maybe there could be an alternative where placing would flatten the area where possible? Imo the ability need a mu cost, longer CD and becoming more user friendly let the user know here it can not be used and the exact are it effect. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 19:53 PMSander93 These changes may increase build diversity (think early capping power and doctrinal flamers), while also making the 222 less mandatory to counter the UC (as the UC would now delay tech) and in turn (with RE on the field) making the AEC less mandatory to counter a 222. Again bring back the 221 and redesign the 222, Ostheer the faction with weakest light vehicles has become the faction most depended in LV. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 19:53 PMSander93 So for example changes could be roughly: - (Royal Engineers now have 1.25 capture rate) - Royal Engineers moved to T0 - Blow up cover ability locked behind T1 - Medic Squad moved to T1. This way going for early doctrinal flamers (potentially strong) would lock you out of early healing on Infantry Sections - Possibly 5-10 fuel cost added to UC - Possibly revert AEC build time increase Ditch the medic squad add base medic if needed. If Ro.E are moved to T0 the F.A. should probably move behind T1. Another issue is the IS performance (and bolster). Maybe IS should simply be redesign to start weaker but gain bonuses with each tech they unlock. The hammer anvil choice could be expanded to become allot more meaningful. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback18 Dec 2020, 17:00 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 16:44 PMthedarkarmadillo a normal throw time would do wonders for the ability. It get normal speed as a vet bonus. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 16:44 PMthedarkarmadillo the fact that you are paying (or not paying, because its garbage) for an ability that it flat out worse than others in the same vein that are free is an enigma to me. VG incendiary grenade where designed to as counter to maxim spam so it not the best thing to compare them with to begin with. (And you aware how I feel about them). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] UKF Feedback18 Dec 2020, 16:54 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 16:22 PMgeneral_gawain That meta was completely fucked up. Churchills were completely op, noone wants to go back there. Just make it a tank with some decent AI damage output and cap it a 1 (maybe shared with Crocodile/Avre). It has decent AI since at vet 1 it get grenades and extra smg. If one redesigned to unit be limited to 1 one could probably buff but I doubt the moderation team would go for that. Point here is that the unit is cost efficient so any change would have to do with power level (both cost and performance either going up or down) or limiting to 1. If you check my suggestion I think that it would be better design if Comet stayed at the same price but lost its AI abilities (grenade/WP) and Churchill got these abilities and lower pop and lost some of its AT capability by reducing penetration. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] USF Feedback18 Dec 2020, 16:11 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 16:06 PMTobis ... The AA mode is good though. Probably too good from the little test I did. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW Spec Ops Doctrine (especially Radio Silence)18 Dec 2020, 15:05 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 15:01 PMFlying Dustbin What if, Radio Silence doesn't remove all the unit icons from the tacmap, but change them maybe? Like they all show up as blank or something? So you can still see and respond to threats, but you don't know what they are without looking at them? Hope someone understands what I mean. I guess you mean that mini map gives information about the position of the enemy unit but not the type of unit. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW Spec Ops Doctrine (especially Radio Silence)18 Dec 2020, 14:52 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 14:21 PMJibberJabberJobber For Radio Silence - Absolutely agree, any fourth wall breaking abilities like that shouldn't be in the game. It targets the opposing player's ability to the play the game. That might be unique, but that's because it's inherently bad design. It should just be reworked to something like Smoke Raid Operation of UKF, allowing all infantry squads to camo in cover and something else like improved capture/movement speed. Radio silence. I do not think it is necessary to removed the ability with a few changes. I would suggest the following: Ability now effect a group of unit instead o being global Unit now do attack attack until ordered to attack Once unit engage enemy units they become visible in mini map These changes will require some micro and smart use from player using the ability and allow opponent to react. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 14:21 PMJibberJabberJobber Infiltration nades - I see your point. An interesting design element about them is that they can't be cancelled unlike Assault Grenadier grenade assault (you don't get refunded), so you have to be smart about whether you throw them or not. If munition cost gets increased to 30 munitions, they should be refundable if cancelled on time. Another difference is very long CD. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 14:21 PMJibberJabberJobber Spec Ops - True, they can't be countered unlike Recon loiters. I personally had the idea of moving the flares to tanks as targetted ability, similar to the 251 in Mobile Observation Post mode for Strategic Reserves. Then you can safely decrease cost from 60 to 50 munitions as it can't be freely used anywhere on the map. 50 munition is way to high for something (251 also) Soviet mortar get from vet 0 for 30... The current ability need some change like longer CD for sure. What I do not understand is why people complain about flare being "uncounterable" and do not complain about about stock reckon planes that also "uncounterable" and soon will be available in 3 factions. Or why people to not complain about 3-4 UKF abilities that come also with flare/reckon for no particular reason. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] UKF Feedback18 Dec 2020, 14:36 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 13:25 PMgeneral_gawain 1. 1340 manpower? What do you bought? 2. AT-infantry should only be a soft counter to tanks, TDs and PaKs should be hard counters. 3. AT-infantry is available way sooner, it is somehow redundant to build a Churchill, when its counters are on the field for a long time and vetted already. 1) yes that was not correct it 1020 for 3 PGs sqauds. 2) And even 3 pgs onyl soft counter a churhcill according to you so I fail to see the issue. 3) Yes if one's opponent has invested so much in AT infatry one should not make tanks. Same goes for ATG, your point thou? Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 13:25 PMgeneral_gawain PZIV is at a different tech level. Fighting a Panther is more of a realistic case. In addition the PZIV is able to pick the fight or not, the Churchill can't choose. And the Panther is way more expensive the Churchill so again your point? Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 13:25 PMgeneral_gawain Don't understand this comment... A FF in range on enemy AT is using the unit wrongly. Claiming that Churchill need buff because Comet is better is not a solid argument since these vehicles do not fight each other. If choice A is better than choice B that design issues and not balance issue. This can fixed with add utility not with buffs. Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 13:25 PMgeneral_gawain I talked about population. 19 population is not cost efficient for such a low damage output. It is about 1/5 of your army for the damage output of a medium tank. That is one way to look at it. Another would be it more than twice the durability for about 1.5 times the pop... Chuchill is a cost efficient Tank. Should the pop be reduced? probably but then the power level of the unit should be decreased also unless you want to go back in meta where multiple Churchill where used. In: COH2 Balance