Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Machine Guns3 Jul 2019, 17:39 PM half of the issues with maxim have to do with VGs incendiary grenade. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Ostheer Mobile Defense Puma rework3 Jul 2019, 12:13 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Jul 2019, 11:32 AMSander93 Which is exactly why rather than the raw AOE stats I presented Cruzz' quantified AOE rating, which includes the difference in damage. Yet the "AOE rating" of the PzIV is around 23% better while the kill radius is x 151% better making the PzIV AI performance superior with high alpha damage. In addition the C. PzIV vets allot slower than normal PzIV. In sort C.Panzer IV is more expensive, does not get a pintle mg, it vet slow, its AI is not that impressive, s and it AT is simply UP even compared to KV-8 45mm gun. The only it has going for it the aura and no tech. I suspect that if it was not available in this commander that was meta for a while people would not even mention the unit. In many cases having 2 PzIV is better than having 1 PzIV and 1 C. PzIV even if one is facing soft targets, while being cheaper. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Ostheer Mobile Defense Puma rework3 Jul 2019, 11:19 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Jul 2019, 10:41 AMSander93 Its anti-infantry performance is actually easily on par or even better than a normal Ostheer Panzer IV's. It compensates slightly weaker AOE with significantly less scatter and a faster reload. It's actually surprisingly good considering its anti-infantry is mostly a secondary role (the damage reduction aura being its primary role). The normal P4 needs the top mounted MG to achieve roughly similar TTK, but that is under ideal circumstances (at medium distance and in neutral cover, giving the MGs maximum DPS). Comparing AOE with out taking account damage is simply misleading. C. PzIV does half the damage PzIV does. The kill radius for C. PzIV is 0.75 va PzIV 1.13. C. PzIV is more expensive the normal PzIV with extremely low AT. Even its AI is not superior since PzIV can get an extra LMG and now where near ostwind's performance. It up as fighting unit and the only thing that save it is the no tech cost. The combination of no tech cost call-in vehicles both AI and AT in the commander on the other hand is problematic. Imo all aura units should be redesigned providing a low passive bonus and more meaningful active one and the aura should scale with veterancy. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: ISU-152 needs some love.2 Jul 2019, 21:14 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 16:41 PMPanzerFutz In real life, the penetrative ability of a shell is (mostly) determined by the weight of the shell multiplied by the velocity at which it's travelling. The weight of the shell is (mostly) determined by the caliber of the gun, while the velocity at impact is slightly less than the velocity as the shell leaves the muzzle. The reason the 88 on the King Tiger and the Elephant could outshoot the ISU-152 is because the Kwk43 gun had a muzzle velocity of 3,340 fps, while the M40 gun of the ISU-152 had a muzzle velocity of 1,900 fps. The 75 mm gun on the Panther fired at 3,068 fps which is why that particular "pea-shooter" was so deadly. The JS-2 was on roughly level terms with the Tiger I, having a slightly lower muzzle velocity but a heavier projectile. In the context of the game, the ISU-152 should only be as powerful an AT platform as the Axis heavies if it's AI ability gets severely nerfed. Tank does not have to be penetrated to be destroyed. The effectiveness of AT weapons has to do with energy. AP rounds use kinetic energy to destroy tank while HE explosives use chemical energy. Real life fact have secondary role in the units performance, else the Brumbar should have a similar penetration and damage of ISU-152 since it was 15 cm Caliber gun. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: For the Love Of God M1 Pack Howitzer 2 Jul 2019, 20:58 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 14:38 PMSander93 I do ask them. Unlike some of us who just keep coming up with one unrealistic suggestion after the other. If you are referring to my suggestions I can give you a list of my suggestion that actually make it in the game but don't think that it would be helpful and I am not sure why you would like to turn this into a personal issue. This is forum for providing feedback and that is simply what I am doing. My point here is simply either ask Relic and quote they response here as it was done about the Tigers and do not bring them up at all. Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 19:40 PMSander93 That's pretty much how I'd envision it personally, maybe with its HEAT barrage turned into a wanabee rocket arty strike (good AOE and fast ROF), perhaps still with a mediocre auto attack (similar to ISG). But I doubt Relic would allow such an extensive overhaul. Comments like this make little sense when you are in position to ask instead of guessing, unlike the rest of us. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: For the Love Of God M1 Pack Howitzer 2 Jul 2019, 12:59 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 12:07 PMSander93 For someone so keen on pointing out the smallest of details, you might want to read the part where I said they don't have that many, which doesn't mean they don't have any. Yet you claimed: "Stripping the Pack Howitzer of its good AOE damage risks making the USF really bad against turtling and forcing them to pick Calliope/Priests doctrines all the time, when most other factions (OST, OKW, SOV) have stock options to deal with it." I simply proven to you that USF have plenty of other stock and doctrinal options to deal with turtleing. I also pointed out to you that USF are very good at turtleing also. Now you can choose to argue details as much as like but the bottom line is that the picture you painted about the necessity of an OP pack howitzer is far from the truth. Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 12:07 PMSander93 And again I literally gave you the reason why I think the way I think, which is that Relic will not allow major redesigns at this point. So what you are suggesting is pointless. We have to work with what we've got and that requires some units to perform as crutch units because the USF lacks stock options and we can't "simply" go around nerfing all of them without risking to ruin the faction. A) You do not have to guess what Relic will allow or not, you can simply ask them. B) You might have your ideas how the game should be designed but it comes down to Relic. C) Imo you should either: Convince Relic that your design is better and move forward with it or You should accept that Relic design is not changing is not changing and stop trying to squeeze your design into Relic's design. The current half/half implementation is simply problematic. Pack howitzer is simply an over performing unit especially for its time frame and it should be fixed. The argument that it need to be OP because USF do not have access to thing like the weffer holds no water and imo it is bad mentality. It seem like a "grass is greener on the other side of the fence" approach that does not take into account many parameters. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: For the Love Of God M1 Pack Howitzer 2 Jul 2019, 11:26 AM Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 10:27 AMSander93 There are multiple subcatagories of indirect fire because of the multiple strategic roles these catagories fulfill. The only thing that's misleading here is you pretending that Major arty is classified as indirect fire or even bringing infantry and tanks into an indirect fire comparison. Mortars and Scotts do not instantly force off an enemy blob or turtle position like rocket artillery does. Offmaps are a completely different catagory to begin with because they are abilities that cost munitions and even then the USF doesn't have that many impressive ones. The Pak Howitzer with its devastating AOE is the only thing that comes close to a stock option for heavy indirect fire that's comparable to other factions' stock rocket artillery. USF do no have impressive off map? seriously? The IR pathfinders is almost certain hit to any unit that can not retreat, The time on target does significant damage to OKW trucks, M83 cluster mines wipes out ATGs, White phosphorus force retreats and leave unit healing for a very long time. The " heavy indirect support weapon" is a nice theory but if in your opinion Pak howitzer is such a weapon its timing and lack of fuel cost is way way off. If you want to make it a "stock rocket artillery equivalent" move it to major re-balance/redesign it and make Scott doctrinal. Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 10:27 AMSander93 And again you are missing the point. For the record I think Relic made some bad design decisions with the Western Front Armies by depriving them of several stock unit roles and personally I think all factions should have had access to stock tools like flamethrowers and rocket artillery to make them strategically versatile and viable. I don't disagree that the Pack Howitzer is very strong or even overpowered in certain aspects. But we're stuck with what we got now and we will have to work around that, and that means we can't simply strip a unit of its strategic role without thinking really hard about the consequences and risk leaving a faction vulnerable to a basic strategy. And we can't make any big changes to the faction design either. Actually you are missing the point, Relic give WFA OP unit because they where lacking basic tools. With the current homogenization certain faction retained those tools while many of the limits to "several stock units roles" where removed. Those OP units simply need to brought inline. USF where given access to a great mortar at T0 so they do not need an OP pak howitzer in the early game. Currently is I have already pointed out they can turtle up as good as Ostheer. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: For the Love Of God M1 Pack Howitzer 2 Jul 2019, 10:11 AM Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 09:47 AMSander93 The mechanisms of rocket artillery and the Pak howie are completely different? Jeez I never noticed that, thanks for the info!! If only I wasn't talking purely about their strategic role! Yep but that is simply misleading. USF have stock options one of best best mortars in T0, the best auto attack howitzer, one of the most cost efficient direct fire vehicle in Scott and the arty from major. Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 09:47 AMSander93 Note how I specifically mentioned heavy indirect fire, as in something that can instantly kill or force off enemy team weapons or blobs (like rocket arty does) of which USF has only one doctrinal unit (Calliope) of which one is in a pretty bad commander, and only one stock unit (Pak howie) that even comes close to fulfilling that role. The Priest is a decent option too, but it has more of an area denial / hope for lucky wipes role. Scotts are annoying and a bit overpowered but they still need time and numbers to work. Again misleading. The USF have plenty of option for squad wipes like flanking with high DPS infatry and HE Sherman. Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 09:47 AMSander93 Stripping the Pack Howitzer of its good AOE damage risks making the USF really bad against turtling and forcing them to pick Calliope/Priests doctrines all the time, when most other factions (OST, OKW, SOV) have stock options to deal with it. Not really, they as mentioned one of best best mortars in T0, one of the most cost efficient direct fire vehicle in Scott,the arty from major and a number of stock option like the MHT, the Priest, the Calliope and number of devastating off maps. Actually the Pack howitzer give the edge to USF that can now actually turtle up at least as good as Ostheer. Again pack howizter is simply to powerful for its time frame. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: For the Love Of God M1 Pack Howitzer 2 Jul 2019, 09:29 AM Jump back to quoted post2 Jul 2019, 09:11 AMSander93 Why should a 340 manpower unit be on par with a 270 manpower unit? Especially when that 340MP unit is the only stock heavy indirect fire option (as in being the equivalent of rocket arty) the faction has? Rocket artillery equivalent argument does not hold any water at all. The mechanism of rocket artillery and Pak howitzer are completely different, so is timing and fuel cost. If we are talking about roles (providing indirect fire support) USF have enough strong stock options and many very strong doctrinal options. That does not mean that the power of Pak howitzer should be the same as Leig if they do not cost the same. But pak howitzer is simply too strong for its timing. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Machine Guns2 Jul 2019, 08:59 AM Funny thing is what was posted when HMG-34 was about to get nerfed. https://www.coh2.org/topic/65093/hmg-34-in-dpp/page/2 In: COH2 Balance