Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Redesigning Emplacement13 Sep 2019, 18:11 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 18:05 PMSupport Sapper Yes, back on topic, i get your ideas. For mortar pit, let said 250mp for the pit with 1 mortar operational, then another 100mp for the second mortar. I brought up this idea a while ago in the other forum. But, for bofor and 17 pdr, i think it will be tricky. Brace should be removed if possible and may be replace with something else. May be an upgrade to unlock stand fast as toggle ability. As long as things come with tech: One could add other abilities for the mortar like different munition and longer range (they are already in the game actually.) Stand fast imo could easily be reintroduced but with a cost in MU or UP so that there is some cost attached to it. So can be brace. In addition the HP and armor of this emplacements could also have upgrades so that player can have more control of how much he want to invest on them. In: Lobby
Thread: Redesigning Emplacement13 Sep 2019, 17:53 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 00:35 AMSupport Sapper We can have two versions of the valentine. Or, replace the valentine in royal arty by "designated arty command vehicle". Making the the "command" Valentine an upgrade should be implemented anyway. They the limit to 1 can be removed and they unit can balanced accordingly. If there is a need to the upgrade could lower the combat efficiency of the vehicle. But we are drifting off topic. The idea here is that with current design emplacements will either be too strong and the whole UKF play will focus around them or useless. By adjusting their power level via tech balancing them could become allot easier. In: Lobby
Thread: Infiltration nades vs molotov 13 Sep 2019, 17:25 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 17:07 PMMazianni ... the idea that abilities have to be overpowered in order to merit their own slot is a fantasy; ... Thank you for verifying the point have been bringing up for years now. Yet the point I made in this thread still stands. "Infiltration grenades" is not the selling ability of either commander that they are available to. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Super heavy tanks changes.13 Sep 2019, 17:19 PM Heavy Tank Call-In Changes for all Factions From my experience so far and in 2vs2 game MOD IS-2/Tiger/Persing/Croc have become even more popular due to earlier arrival. Even KT seem more popular, while I see less of JT/ELe/ISu-152. In: Lobby
Thread: Inaccurate Efficiency Stats?13 Sep 2019, 15:29 PM The calculation is inaccurate since it takes into account also damage to the surroundings. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Infiltration nades vs molotov 13 Sep 2019, 14:49 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 13:44 PMMazianni "If you don't pick the doctrine for the ability, the ability must be fucking garbage." Thank for trying to derail yet another thread. I suggest you open a dictionary and check the difference between "not that great" and "the ability must be fucking garbage". But we already aware that you use the term "garbage" rather loosely from your claim about the USF mortar. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Infiltration nades vs molotov 13 Sep 2019, 14:46 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 14:07 PMKatitof Your reading comprehension seems to be as bad as your ability to grasp context when someone uses the same word to describe 2 completely different situations. I'm claiming it was one of the most overused abilities of the whole faction, across all doctrines and stock abilities of the faction. It wasn't really hard to understand point, but I've got to applaud to you as you managed to let it fly over your head. Actually it is you have poor understanding of what quoting and replaying means. I wrote: "As an ability "infiltration grenades" is not that great and non one would be pick either doctrine because of them." to which you quoted and responded: Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 13:06 PMKatitof That's pretty interesting description for probably most overused doctrinal ability for the faction if not for the game. Spamming it as much as possible was as meta as CP5. So either you agree or you disagree and arbitrary claimed that "infiltration grenades" is "most overused doctrinal ability for the faction if not for the game" as argument that people choose the special OP commander because of "infiltration grenades", which inaccurate or You wanted to say something completely different and you should had not quote me in the first place. In any case, I would suggest on focus on fixing your own problems understanding posts and quoting before giving advice to others. On topic the ability saw extended use because it was available to number 1 picked commander and because it very cost efficient. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Infiltration nades vs molotov 13 Sep 2019, 13:32 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 13:23 PMddd It was because of cpanther, infiltration nades and flares. From strongest to weakest. Doctrines have 5 abilities. Infiltration nades were used more than cpanther, you really think that it is hard to use them 2 times per game (usually people call cpanther only once)? They should be both nerfed, you are right. Thank you for verifying my points. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Infiltration nades vs molotov 13 Sep 2019, 13:13 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 13:06 PMKatitof That's pretty interesting description for probably most overused doctrinal ability for the faction if not for the game. Spamming it as much as possible was as meta as CP5. Are you claiming that special op was chosen because it give access to "infiltration grenades"? I bet most people will tell you it was because of the C.Panther. So "infiltration grenades" where used more times than "Command Panther", I suggest you inform the Moders so that they can nerf them instead of the "Command Panther". In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the Kingtiger13 Sep 2019, 13:08 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 12:27 PMKatitof ... Says the guy who was against any con buffs "because doctrines and doctrinal infantries". You simply failed to understand what post so pls stop putting words in my mouth. Jump back to quoted post13 Sep 2019, 12:27 PMKatitof Also, doctrines are reason why cons have 1 weapon slot, even further invalidating your argument. You can't ignore doctrines in balancing a unit, because that's how you end up with OP units as well. Read understand respond once more you have completely missed the point. KT should be balanced on its own. If "heat rounds" KT proves OP then the ability should be balanced separately for KT. It is as simply as that. In: COH2 Balance