Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Reverse the M5 upgrade30 Jun 2020, 18:41 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 17:57 PMSuperHansFan Why should the AA be nerfed? Espexially in a faction with no pintle mounts Quad is superior AA by a large margin and OP has suggested to become cheaper and available earlier. Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 17:57 PMSuperHansFan Recently Bofors and ostwind were buffed because this exact gap and reason. AA Is no use if it doesn't take down a plane in first two passes Bofors AA was buffed because its AA was 0. I am not sure what buff in the ostwind AA you are referring at but is much more expensive than proposed quad. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: An Old Schooler's Rant and Observations30 Jun 2020, 15:01 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 14:41 PMelchino7 ... I will always prefer smalls nudges rather than big hammer swings. But the later makes us move faster towards a better solution. ... I seriously doubt that. Big changes are only need when one want to redesign things or sift the meta. After seven years of patches I would expect that people should have a rough idea what "values" should be close to balanced and playing around these values should be enough to balance a unit. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Should doctrinal units/upgrades be superior?30 Jun 2020, 13:56 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 13:45 PMT.R. Stormjäger The drawback for the T34/85 is the price. Ramming becomes less of a no-brainer and you don't trade as efficiently. I can only partially I agree. One pay less for what he gets. Imo T-34/85 is more cost efficient than T-34/76 so the cost is not a drawback (especially after the "accidental" buff to mg). Imo T-34/76 is in the top most cost efficient medium tanks. Only ram is less cost efficient but one can simply build a T-34/76 if one want to ram. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Should doctrinal units/upgrades be superior?30 Jun 2020, 13:22 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 10:24 AMElpern Sure its the same, since 5men is objectively better in most situations, i.e it's a braindead choice given both options. This is the same with SVTs and 7men, where SVTs is objectively better in most situations and therefor it becomes a braindead choice, when given both options. The doctrinal stuff is better. Returning to the t34/76 vs t34/85 argument, the 85 isn't always the braindead better option, therefor i think its done right. Having a doctrinal option being a "braindead" option does not mean it is done "wrong". SVT is badly designed but not because it is superior to 7 conscript. Doctrinal option can offer something more cost efficient,something superior, something not available... but they should offer something worth a commander slot. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Reverse the M5 upgrade30 Jun 2020, 10:40 AM If quad is to be touched one should start with lowering its AA capabilities. Actually one should have a look at the whole planes/AA interaction since the performance of AA is all over the place. As for OP suggestion I find the quad way to powerful for the suggested price. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15230 Jun 2020, 10:35 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 10:01 AMSuperHansFan I think PT is more suited to Ele and spotting scopes more suited to Tiger. Especially as rotation counts as movement and removed LoS buff, this is an issue on Ele and Stug. Why it is powerful in ele doc has always been 222, not upgrading ele itself. This would be a buff to Tiger VS TDs but a survivability nerf to things like infantry and button. Obviously with a turret tiger would benefit the most from scopes, and allow it to easier deal with Jackson dives etc. Really I think these two heavies and these two abilities should have been swapped a long time ago. Maybe I was not clear enough: Jaeger armor Doctrine: Riegel/Reckon/Spotting scopes/Stuka dive bomb/Elefant Fortified armor doctrine: Panzer tactician/ Reckon/Hull down/Command Panzer/Elefant. If one replaces spotting scopes with Panzer tactician 3 out 5 abilities will be identical thus the commander will have too much overlap. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15230 Jun 2020, 09:34 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 09:23 AMSuperHansFan Spotting scopes could be swapped with panzers tactician That I believe would be a fair enough trade reducing cheese but keeping Ostheer armor options strong. We already have smoke tigers so a smoke ability on ele to provide some defence vs infantry would be fine I think. And in team games it would promote the use of the Uhu spotlight to work with team play with no more scoped 222 A Elefant commander with panzer tactician already exist so the overlap would to much... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15230 Jun 2020, 09:19 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Jun 2020, 08:56 AMblvckdream I agree but I think it's spotting scopes that need to be removed from Jäger Armour and not Stuka Dive Bomb. Spotting scopes should have never been put in a doctrine with the Elefant and it's really time this lazy combination gets removed.Breakthrough has flares on Füssiliers which is a MUCH better design because it still allows you to get vision for the JT but it actually requires player input, positioning and a slight muni cost. Both ISU doctrines need to lose the IL2 bombs for the obvious reason that they make the only counter to ISUs a ticking time bomb that can be deleted by clicking two buttons. Then after this is done Jacksons need to lose some penetration so they can't just frontally take down Elefants and JTs with HVAP rounds and vet. As I repeated several times, the Jackson doesn't need 390 penetration. It's completely crazy. Stuka need to go from Elephant and maybe have a price reduction. Spotting scopes have been nerfed too much and if they removed from the Elephant they need a buff or a redesign because currently they are not inline with other similar type abilities. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: An Old Schooler's Rant and Observations30 Jun 2020, 07:40 AM Jump back to quoted post29 Jun 2020, 18:15 PMelchino7 Once upon a time (like 2 or 3 years ago) there was a plan on releasing an article mentioning the "history" of CoH2 meta/gameplay state. It never lift off because it was a lot to digest, edit and work for. .... In my opinion such a project would be far more interesting if it brought an issue and then focused on solution and its side effects. That would actually be very helpful in choosing good solution with less side affects. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: An Old Schooler's Rant and Observations29 Jun 2020, 17:36 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Jun 2020, 17:15 PMelchino7 I blame Tiger Ace/Windustry basically been the whole meta back then. ugly times. Funny how some people defended those doctrines at the time. Jump back to quoted post29 Jun 2020, 17:33 PMJames Hale Well, it's always nice to be disproven as a liar. Thanks, Vipper. You are welcomed. In: COH2 Gameplay