Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Should KV1 get 'Inspire' ability?16 Apr 2019, 14:16 PM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 13:29 PMKatitof And what fact was proven by shocks? Rangers? Ass grens? M-42? Calliope? Somehow wide choice of alternatives didn't prevented these units from being labeled as "fine but too many commanders" and they got much needed love. I guess no one but you can just use them correctly. That, or you're completely wrong about generalizing your "fact"ual opinion. KV-1 is more fine then not, it is cost efficient to a point, but its a heavy tank with a gun balanced for flanking and flanking it can't do. Again, giving it some role supporting vet instead of generic soviet tank one would go a long way. Can you please stop the personal comments? Now I am not sure what you are questioning. That the Dshk used to be OP? or that is was not used? The case of DShk is clear proof that a unit not be used does not automatically mean it not cost efficient. I might be or it not might be. And since according to your opinion "KV-1 is more fine then not," you agree with me so I am not even sure what this attack is about. I am simply responding to an argument that the KV-1 "garbage compared to T34 85 and KV8" and thus KV1 is a not good tank. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Suggestion - Small Soviet Defensive Tactics buff16 Apr 2019, 13:33 PM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 13:23 PMCrecer13 ... - M-42, I still do not see the point if ZIS-3 is better. It can be done by IPTAP ZIS-3 anti-tank stance with sub-caliber projectiles. ... check the replay: https://www.coh2.org/replay/88258/m-42-gun-cancer In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Should KV1 get 'Inspire' ability?16 Apr 2019, 13:27 PM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 13:09 PMblvckdream Completly disagree with everything written here. T34/85 and KV8 are balanced units. OKW P4 is miles ahead of KV1 in firepower and usefullness. It´s a bit weird to even discuss about this considering no one builds KV1s at the moment. Just as a hint: It´s not because KV1 is a good tank. You are entitled to your opinion. The PzIV H might have more firepower (more line better penetration) but its not miles away and KV-1 will probably bit it 1vs1. The Kv-1 is also "miles ahead" in durability. Do you actually have stat that you can provide about how many KV-1 are being built or are you just guessing? The fact that doctrinal unit is not being built does not really mean much about how cost effective it is, especially if there are +15 commanders to choose from. That was proven from Dshk which was broken for a couple of year before people started to abuse it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Discuss - PLEASE REMOVE THE CAMO16 Apr 2019, 12:47 PM Can we just change to color of tiger ACE's camo? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Should KV1 get 'Inspire' ability?16 Apr 2019, 12:10 PM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 10:14 AMblvckdream KV1 needs something to make it viable that's for sure. Right now it's just garbage compared to T34 85 and KV8. I don't even get KV1 over simple T34/76s either. It's just not worth 145 fuel. Comparing the KV-1 with other doctrinal units for balance reason is simply flawed. The unit can be compared to new PzIV H and it is cost efficient compared to it. One should probably nerf both T-34/85 that got a HMG buff by accident and lower the power level of KV-8 than buff the KV-1 from balance point of view. That could actually help with diversity also, but when it comes to commanders one should probably balance the commander better and not a single unit. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Raketen Cloaking and its justification.16 Apr 2019, 10:03 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 07:38 AMSeductiveCardbordBox The stealth is frustrating to play against. Racketens are frustrating to use. Can we just give then M42 stats already so everyone can have a better time. Put them behind buying a truck if you must. Lighter firepower, longer range, no retreat, can camo but moves at glacial speeds doing so. You probably have not faced multiple M-42 and their canister shots, OKW with such a cost efficient weapon would probably be OP. One could simply try a vet overhaul, cloak only when static faster reaction times for the gun and damage reduction for crew. Or a redesign with lower penetration but deflection damage more like a handheld rocket weapon than an ATG. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Should KV1 get 'Inspire' ability?16 Apr 2019, 09:29 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 04:18 AMStahpdis KV-1 can beat an OKW PzIV 1vs1 and is cost efficient. It needs a veterancy overhaul giving bonuses that would make it better in role as heavy tank. Other than that its rear armor (165) should be lowered and become inline with other units and damage reduction should become the vet 1 ability and turned into a timed one. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: why Rangers dont have any utility skill?16 Apr 2019, 09:20 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2019, 04:43 AMKingfisher I dont think that rangers pure stats make up for their lack of skill after removal of damage reduction. If adding smokes is unacceptable what about adding an offensive skill like tactical assault. It fits the characterastics as a close combat unit and a high risk-high return mechanism. The damage reduction was not simply removed, it was substituted by a target size reduction. Ranger should nearly as tough as they where vs small arms fire. They remain one of the units that is harder to hit with small arms fire having access to 4 of the best weapons in game plus an extra weapon slot, while they have become cheaper to buy and reinforce. In: Lobby
Thread: Raketen Cloaking and its justification.15 Apr 2019, 20:23 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2019, 19:01 PMLago It's got all the shift-queue incompatibilities of Raketenwefer stealth and it's even slower. It makes them really irritating to reposition when you're microing a load of other units at the same time. The zis also gets great bonuses first strike bonuses. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Raketen Cloaking and its justification.15 Apr 2019, 17:06 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2019, 16:59 PMElSlayer You are correct - the problem not just in one feature, but in combination of three: - cloak (no way to spot other than proximity or recon plane AFAIK) - ability to move while cloaked - ability to retreat if spotted or caught with pants down When you play OKW you hate Rak because of how susceptible it is to AoE (tight crew formation) and to small arms fire (short range). When you play against OKW you hate Rak because reasons stated above. In my personal opinion there is no reason for Rak to be able to move when cloaked. OKW mains will come here ask for a buff "to compensate" for removal of this ability. I bet there will be talk about how Rak unlike other AT guns doesn't provide green cover, but that cover bonus is buggy as hell and works only from certain angles to AT gun. IIRC this behavior was researched by Elchino. So in fact Rak's low survivability to small arms comes only from exposure to them because of short range. Actually Rak's dies to easily to both small arm and explosions since the crew is to close together. About the ATG shields: The cover might only work occasionally but I have seen tank shots colliding with the shield and thus protecting the crew. In: COH2 Gameplay