Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Raketens are too good25 Feb 2020, 09:17 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Feb 2020, 09:02 AMmrgame2 RW insane vet bonus. Nerf that shit. Vet3 should be 4.5 if scaling was fair At 4.0 is unfair buff to axis late game yet again Vet bonuses zis/RW: Unlocks the "Tracking" ability//Unlocks the "Camouflage" ability. +30% rotation speed. //+25% penetration. +30% reload speed. //+25% reload speed. +20% reload speed. //For first shot, fired out of camouflage:+100000 penetration +25% damage. +30% penetration. +6.25% range of the "Light Artillery Barrage" ability. vet4 // +15% maximum speed. vet5 //+10% reload speed. I personally do not see "insane" vet bonus. I personally would redesign them but that is different story. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Raketens are too good25 Feb 2020, 08:29 AM ROF M1 vet0 4.3 vet3 3.8 RW Vet0 5.0 vet3 4.0 In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke24 Feb 2020, 12:44 PM Jump back to quoted post24 Feb 2020, 12:41 PMSander93 Because the Sturmtiger, unlike Heavy Gammon Bombs, has frequently been the subject of discussion over the past year(s) and the general consensus about that unit is that it's still a bit underperforming, so the NahVW ability is being changed as a means to give it a little buff. The ability correctly is becoming better designed and relevant. The same should be done with a number of abilities including HGB which currently are simply cheesy and about to become even more cheesy with change to the UKF. And my question remain In your opinion are HGB in good spot now and in what use? In: Lobby
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke23 Feb 2020, 22:43 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 19:16 PMHannibal Heavies were broken in a sense that they were never used beside sometimes the Pershing and the Elefant in large team games. OKW was designed around the KT and also OST is supposed to regularly bring on a Tiger. The game is designed with heavies in mind, and to be honest it would be a shame if the game did not include them properly. But that is very subjective. Balance team decided to bring them back to the game again which was a very good thing. So they did a complete rework of how heavies function. Turns out that you can't foresee all consequences of a complex set of changes. No surprise here. It is a bit of a shame that it took multiple months until they might finally be fixed, but as a matter of fact the meta now is not really worse than the meta we had before gameplay wise. And demanding regular updates and fixes from people that spent their free time on it would be inappropriate, especially since they have done an exceptional job in the last two years. CoH2 has never been better and strategies more diverse, even if there are issues and current metas. Earlier every faction had three commanders at best that were somewhat viable. There was no selection. Now you at least have to pick a few from a group of viable ones. We are drifting off topic now, but my point is one could had used his limited resources in fixing other things than trying to solve a complicated issue as Super heavy tank especially with a double buff. One for instance could start with toning down TDs.... At this point and once more I would like to take the time to congratulate everyone involved that help crate the patches for the work the put. They are doing a great job. Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 19:16 PMHannibal Well, back to topic, and I think this will likely be my last post since we will start running in circles now: I don't think the HGB will become such an issue that we need to rework it before the patch. Spending so much time on reworking a minor ability will leave more glaring issues unfixed. The game is better off with other fixes. And if it really turns out to be a major issue, then a hot fix will do in a month or two. Is simply do not agree with the argument especially since the same patch deals with a much smaller issue like the "NahVW Grenade" and correctly in my opinion. In: Lobby
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke23 Feb 2020, 22:35 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 18:50 PMMazianni Have you? All anyone here is asking for is a replay of this in action. Yes I have, have you? Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 18:50 PMMazianni Okay, so you think HGB on Tommies are a problem in general. This would have been a more successful premise for a thread, I think. Read the previews post instead of jumping in the middle of debate and actually in its worse part. Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 18:50 PMMazianni I disagree though, and moreso with moving it to Sappers since they're already particularly overburdened as an engineer, AT, and assault unit. I honestly have never seen or experienced HGB on Tommies to be a problem considering its short range and high cost, and this is again even in conjunction with existing UKF smoke sources like the mortar pit and (more practically) smoke shells. How many times have you seen the ability being used? Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 18:50 PMMazianni I think I would need to see a replay or a video of this being a problem to think otherwise. Removing HGB from Tommies strikes me as an unnecessary nerf to Hammer at this time. The reason the preview exist in the first place is so that you can test things. So go ahead and test instead of asking me to create video for you to see. In: Lobby
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke23 Feb 2020, 22:29 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 19:11 PMSander93 The problem since 2017: Now check how many thread are out having "NahVW Grenade" in there title yet for some "strange" reason it has been decided to be fix in this patch while I among other have brought it up years ago. Now why are we going down this road? I have already asked you to start over. In your opinion are HGB in good spot now and in what use? In: Lobby
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke23 Feb 2020, 18:41 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 18:31 PMMazianni With all fairness, you are the one making a claim here, the burden of proof falls on you. Katitof is simply trolling as usual in forum for game he does not actually play so I find that he, asking for replays is rather hilarious. Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 18:31 PMMazianni UKF have had smoke in conjunction with anti-TW/bunker methods (including the subject of this thread) for a very, very long time now at the exact same timings where you would acquire HGB. Why is this a problem? Is there any evidence whatsoever that it even is one? If you are actually interested to see if there is an issue, I suggest you start a winter preview game and try to use this tactic. As I have pointed the problem was there from DECEMBER 19th 2017 and since recently UKF has access to AT snares and UKF have entered scope it is an opportunity to fix it. In: Lobby
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke23 Feb 2020, 17:38 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 16:58 PMHannibal Nope, you first fix the stuff that is broken and then go for optimization. After that you sort your list to stuff that has the highest gain for low effort. The current HGB is not a balance issue, just the design is not pretty. It does not harm the gameplay. Still it would take quite some time to do it. Don't take my word for it if you don't want to, take Sander's words. So you have low gain/medium-low effort, it's also part of the optimization branch, so it's quite far down on the list where it honestly should be. Heavy tanks currently harm the gameplay ("broken" in some sense). Fixing them is high gain/high effort and is therefore overall better. "Super Heavy tanks" where not broken to being with, they become broken when they tried to "fix" them. And this is quite a common pattern on the Coh 2 patches history, units become OP and then UP again and persisting problems being fixed at a very low rate. In: Lobby
Thread: Heavy Gammon bombs/ smoke23 Feb 2020, 16:54 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 16:35 PMHannibal I can agree with the general reasoning. I think there are three options: .... I'm not against rethinking the HGB. But looking at the current live game, I think balance team should invest their resources elsewhere. I have to disagree with resources investment as an argument. When one has limited resources one should focus to problems that are easier to fix. When one gives exams one should first answer all the question that are easy to answer and then move to more complicated issues. One will have secure points even if he does not have time to complete the complicated issues. In: Lobby
Thread: Panzer Tactician To CP523 Feb 2020, 16:02 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Feb 2020, 16:00 PMSuperHansFan I think you need to be careful otherwise you're just making underutilized doctrines like mobile defence worse. So a nerf to PT is unwise. It definitely should not be in doctrines with tigers though, the tiger is already the best heavy. Pixie dust smoke is just the icing on the cake. It's like giving the IS-2 mark target, sure mark target is balanced but giving it to an IS-2 just screws with heavy balance. Yes some commander abilities combination should not be available. Then these abilities will be easier to balance. In: COH2 Gameplay