Profile of thedarkarmadillo

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 5279

General Information


Thread: KV112 Mar 2021, 16:20 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Mar 2021, 15:06 PMVipper Units should not be balanced against other unit of the same faction but what they are facing (else could end up with endless circle of power creep). Diversity is should be addressed via role/utility/play style/map usefulness/... in sort with what its unit bring to the table. T-34/76 is very cost efficient due to its timing. T-34/85 is the one of the most cost efficient main battle tanks. KV-1 has been buffed too much exactly because it was being balanced around the T-34/85 and that is a mistake. I disagree entirely. Baseline performance should be balanced by stock units, doctrinal units should balanced off of the stock units that have established the balance as long as the balance has been established between the factions core units, which I believe that tanks, frankly are, then as long as doctrinal tanks are balanced relative to their stock counterpart all is well. Even at that, look at Ostheer. Doctrinal they can get the okw p4. It costs 145 fuel iirc, which is 25 fuel more than the standard p4. It gets ~55 more armour. The KV1 costs about double that more than the t34 and gasp gets nearly double the armour. It gets other things too (more health and currently a damage modifier) but considering that the cost difference between the t34 and the KV1 is roughly the difference between a P4 and a Panther. And I don't think we need to delve into all the things the Panther gets over the p4 eh? The KV1s performance is balanced in the faction for its price. The t34 and the p4 are balanced against each other, then slap an extra 50% to the cost of the t34 and its going to be a hell of a lot better... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: KV112 Mar 2021, 14:56 PM Compare the 85 and kv-1 to the t34/76 because it's the tank they are competing against for cost efficiency. Not panzer 4s. There is other factors at work for p4s (faction design and balance offsets) but the truest comparison is the t34/76 and if we can agree that the 76 is roughly balanced against the p4s (which I'd say it is) then it's replacements, when balanced against the 76 are performing as they should for their price point in that faction. The kv is like 50% more fuel than a t34/76. One would expect it to perform accordingly. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: flank vehicles11 Mar 2021, 11:42 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Mar 2021, 10:59 AMKatitof Not a single axis unit in game lost any relevant amount of armor that would even remotely impact result vs T34 main gun at any range, be it frontal or rear armor. Maybe some fringe cases with 5-10% bounce chance. That's not true, heavy tanks list a dramatic amount of ass armour, but regardless, flanking has no role as it isn't rewarding enough for a role. It can be used of course, and by any tank at that, but a role it is not. In: Lobby
Thread: flank vehicles11 Mar 2021, 04:12 AM There used to be a formula but it has been altered by tweaks. P4 used to be 100/110/120 iirc, the t34 has been as listed for ages The formula used to be simply consistency. A close value and a far value with a middle value... In the middle as a result, an even split. "flanker" units don't really exist because the risk of flanking is rarely worth the reward, certainly it enough to warrant a class of its own. This is why the t34 is regarded as hot garbage when it comes to AT. No, if you want a "flanker" unit it needs to have low pen and high damage so that it's actually advantaged to be up in the enemy's guts, not disadvantaged-because the enemy is getting a pen increase as well after all, so it's not only making the flanker easier to snare, but more reliable to do finish off at the same time. The role that's being called "flanker" exists and is really just called "shitty" In: Lobby
Thread: Random OKW in team games – blood, guts and glory10 Mar 2021, 15:16 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Dec 2020, 12:30 PMHannibal That design is long gone and while I am not a friend of caches and their current design, it would add consistency though. okw still has a number of highly efficient abilities and a non doc heavy tank. Infiltration nades cost the same as molitovs, spec ups sneak'n' sprint costs the same as where tactical movementfor example, they also still have salvage, while it's not a 1 to 1 being able to remove wrecks as cover and destroy team weapons for profit is a nice bonus. All of their vehicles beyond lights also have over 230 armour, being able to speed up acquisition of those themselves would certainly lead to issues... Randoms can't choose who they play with, and 3v3+ is what they mostly play. And caches in larger modes are dirt cheap for what they bring. Playing with mostly OKW because of pure luck puts you at a disadvantage by default. You can't pick anything when it's random, that's what random means. You might get hellen Keller playing from Ethiopia as a team mate and no amount of caches will fix that. This is the struggle of Randoms. The best advice I ever got for not being able to pick your team mates is to pick your team mates. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Sandbags nerfed enough? Nope10 Mar 2021, 10:56 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 07:17 AMEsxile GrenLMG > Rifle+1BAR, available around 4-5 minutes PZgren > Rifle+1BAR, hit the field at 4-5 minute Obers > Rifle+1BAR, hit the field a 8-9 minute That's a terrible idea to say the less. This is exactly the point. That way rifles can't just brute force down every single axis squad. They will have to maneuver. They have the flexibility for this, and if you reread, officers will retain 2 slots, meaning as the enemy can't have thier high efficiency squads in every engagement, neither can usf. USF tech has also been redesigned to allow for 50 cal support so rifles themselves no longer need to carry the entire game. @Mrcarmine I agree with all you've said In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Sandbags nerfed enough? Nope10 Mar 2021, 00:07 AM Jump back to quoted post9 Mar 2021, 21:14 PMMr Carmine We also need to remember ukf and usf dont have other strong inf wich come a little later down the line stock. In that regard volks and grens should be a bit weaker because sections and rifles plus all their upgrades need to be able to fight stronger inf then volks and grens, I do agree however that they need toning down but we must just look at grens volks vs rifles and sections, both axis factions imo have a stronger range of viable supporting units in the early game. usf has officers. at the moment they are nothing more than rifles with a thompson, but they could be more. also, rifles scale great with weapon upgrades, ideally, imo, they would only have 1 slot until vet 3 but allow officers and elite infantry to keep their multiple slots. that fixes the massive jump in power and allows grens and volks some time to get vet that isnt just from farming casualties. this makes officers the pgrens and sturm/obers of the faction. the teeth, the "elite" infantry, it also makes em unique. atm they are so unexciting and unneeded they just added a feature to throw them away.... rifles will be stronger than the axis infantry, as they are currently, just not jumping tin power as dramatically. they retain their mobility and flexibility afforded to them via the garand, but not the massive jump of double BARs. tommies are their own mess and the bane of the UKF. until they come round that you cant make a unit be cost effective at a price point and then have a global upgrade that improves them flat out by at least 25% there can be no balance for the faction. as they get rid of more of the balancing factors in place to offset tommies power things will only get worse. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Sandbags nerfed enough? Nope10 Mar 2021, 00:01 AM Jump back to quoted post9 Mar 2021, 20:26 PMGachiGasm Easily said then done. Tonning down mid to late game is easy, but how you gonna tone down early game, where most of the problems are? USF one especially who dont have anything but rifles. UKF at least have engis\MG\LV to play with and really strong late game tanks, so potentially there are units to relocate power to. USF have jack shit on the other hand all its power comes from snowballing. Simply make it so volks can actually win at range. There is really. Zero reason for rifles to be so formidable at range, and grens suffer from this as well. Combine that with giving them a standard target size of 1 might be edge enough for volks to fight them a bit more effectively. Combine with the needed volks vet rework and it may be sufficient. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Sandbags nerfed enough? Nope9 Mar 2021, 20:19 PM Jump back to quoted post9 Mar 2021, 18:14 PMGachiGasm Speaking of buffing volks, I think balance team stated that they are afraid of buffing volks, because of OKW vs Sov match up, which is indeed more or less balanced. which is why vipper is right in that WFA allies need toned down. dominating from the word go with raw stats and then having the ability to double arm weapons that reduce the damage attrition from losing models and funneling more dps into enemy singular models is a recipe for disaster, regardless of cost. volks also need a vet reworks as they haven't been spared the lash since they got gutted as a result of the equally ill thought out shrek. perhaps on the whole, taking inspiration from vcoh where sandbags costed manpower might be a route... then at least having bags on every conceivable point may not be economic.. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: New penal ptrs feels a bit much9 Mar 2021, 20:03 PM Jump back to quoted post9 Mar 2021, 17:55 PMKurobane Thematically it doesn't make sense to have Penals as mainline. That's why conscripts are In: COH2 Balance