Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Stormtrooper g4329 Jun 2019, 09:26 AM Jump back to quoted post29 Jun 2019, 02:52 AMIncendiaryRounds I heard somewhere G43's moving acc is 75% not 90+. 75 is already very good but there's no way it would be 90+ Depends on range: Range 0 11.6/13.2 = 87% Range 35 3.1/3.2 = 97% One has to keep in mind thou that K-98 is alloy worse on the move while it contributes allot more at rang 35. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fusilers28 Jun 2019, 19:20 PM Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2019, 18:58 PMLoopDloop 4 PFs is definitely doable as an opening, and it'll be a little weaker at the beginning but once they all get g43s they'll win almost every engagement. Note the 6 men PF claim, that is not doable you need a truck set up and and 360 MU. Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2019, 18:58 PMLoopDloop Penals and g43 PGs are both more to reinforce than pfusies are and both cost more to make in the first place (although they are a lot better vanilla). With g43s, pfusies are at least equal if not straight up better with high vet than both penals and PGs. Penals can reinforce for 27 and they can use merge vs 25...6 men Pg cost 305 MP/90MP vs 300 for Penals. Note also the timing of Penal and timing of 6 men PF. Penal battalion vet 3 have DPS at 10/20/36 41.3/33.6/20.6 PF vet 3 have 66.69/25.8/17.2 So they are not straight up better than Penals. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Stormtrooper g4328 Jun 2019, 19:00 PM Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2019, 18:48 PMSkysTheLimit Tactical assault/advance has also restricted to automatic weapons if im not mistaken. I think its only been on squads with mp40s, thompsons, stgs, etc. Not saying its not possible, but I think it only on those types of weapons because they are cqc. Would be too strong on g43s which are completely different Thompson is hardly CQC weapon. It is effective even at range 20. The ability was also available to ST44... (I would rather see this ability redesigned for all unit.) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fusilers28 Jun 2019, 18:55 PM Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2019, 18:25 PMRocket Anyone find that Fusilers maybe come too early in the new commander? I am finding this commander pretty super cancer to play against as they just spam 4 6 man fusilers at the beginning of the game seems a bit overwhelming because they are by no means shit at any point in the game. They are somewhat weak at the start of the game but just seem to turn into monsters every minute the game goes on. They can replace okw main line infantry at the start of the game I cannot think of any other call in infantry that can really do that because of cp requirement delays that and most call in infantry are small squads or do not have as much utility to allow them to completely replace mainline infantry. I think there early game weakness is nulled by their field presence and squad size. Seems to me most other quick call in infantry lacks late game for a reason or have some sort of a downfall with stronger call in infantry coming in later in the game. Just think maybe they come too early kind of a blob promoting delay to tiger commander only its a bit harder to make them pay with fusiler blob because of their survivability/squad size. Other than that i think the commander is ok nice for okw to have a choice of a tiger 1 to mix it up a bit. Try playing with the commander and you will find out that you can spam 4 6men PF at the beginning of the game. In addition try comparing cost efficiency of Penal and G43 PFs. PF are probably the best designed alternative infatry since they timing is similar to the mainline infatry (implementation might need changes) and other early infatry should follow the same design. The Tiger timing is a real issue. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Improved portraits for Eastern factions28 Jun 2019, 11:59 AM Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2019, 11:03 AMOsinyagov Royal officers are here to provide to support! Next step will be ostheer commanders, mentioned by SneakEye. The look great. Personally I would like to see their hats a bit more so maybe zoom out a bit? Especially for the new commander. In: Lobby
Thread: CoH3 campaign 28 Jun 2019, 07:35 AM Should Relic ignore USF/British empire/Soviet war crimes? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Wishlist for 201927 Jun 2019, 23:20 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2019, 22:00 PMBalanced_Gamer Define units roles better. Like Sturmpio AT package for 70 ammo. It should do better. Buildings cover should be nerfed! It should not feel like a stronghold as it currently does. In some maps, getting into a "building" near a strategic point, determines control in early gameplay. It is pretty biased! I suggest *nerfing* the building cover and make it similar to any regular cover. Just slightly stronger but not too much. Building do not offer stronger cover, they simply are not affected by the point blank mechanism, thus they provide cover even in fire fight that take place closer to 10 units. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Shrecks In T227 Jun 2019, 22:21 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2019, 18:27 PMDoomlord52 I don't disagree at all with this; but PFs are doctrine units, not mainline. However, my point was, that PGrens were unused before this patch because they came too late to be good. Forcing an AI upgrade would mean that when they arrived, they would be (performance wise) worse than before, and require additional resources to become as good as they are now. This would entirely offset the resource/time saved by the current BP1/T0 setup. While I see your point, PGs AI doesn't scale nearly as well as other mainline infantry units like double-bar rifles or double-bren IS. If this is a concern, then basically all mainline infantry needs to be re-worked. Penal and PG would see a cost reduction if they started with inferior weapon and had to upgrade. Some of their cost would simply move from MP to MU. If these change take place one could start lowering the effectiveness of double weapon upgrades. For istance one could lower the weapon price to 45 and the performance. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Shrecks In T227 Jun 2019, 18:24 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2019, 18:09 PMDoomlord52 ... Both of these kind of defeat the purpose of moving PGrens to BP1/T0; it was entirely to offer stronger AI squads earlier on. Forcing an AI upgrade would likely make them even worse than they were before. Moving the AT to another squad also defeats the purpose, since that squad would likely be in T2, which means teching is again required, which means the move of AI-PGrens to T0 only 'rushes' them by 200mp/20f, which (iirc) works out to 30-45sec in most games. Not really. PF are far better designed the Penal or current Pg (although they do not seem to be cost efficient). Not really. making unit very good and able to adapt as the game progress means that there is little reason to built anything else. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Rethinking Sandbags, Tank Traps and Barbed Wire27 Jun 2019, 18:12 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2019, 17:54 PMLago Trenches and bunkers can stay, they're buildings with costs. ? trenches have no cost In: COH2 Gameplay