Profile of FelixTHM

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 503 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Conscripts need to be cheaper5 Dec 2018, 16:52 PM Cons are already 20 to reinforce. The only mainline with a weird reinforce cost is the Infantry Section, and the Sturmpio if you consider it a mainline. I don't think Cons are as bad as people claim - I go for them pretty often, and since PPSH commanders are pretty meta, they tend to perform pretty well overall. I think that making them too good would make them overshadow T1 builds. Imo the main problem with Cons is the nade techs costing such a high amount of MP and fuel. Something like 150/20 for both nades combined would be far more reasonable. The fuel cost of AT Nade is positively criminal, and delays the T70 by so much. It's one of the reasons why so many people crutch on Penals/Guards. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: King Tiger - Is it worth buying?5 Dec 2018, 06:22 AM Jump back to quoted post5 Dec 2018, 06:04 AMmurky depths If they were literally right next to the KT, they could easily kite it and not get hit since the infantry could outrun the turret traverse. Which is indeed one of the problems of the KT. That turret traverse...ugh In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Weapon upgrades for elite allied units5 Dec 2018, 06:14 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Dec 2018, 06:19 AMAntemurale Upgrading Rangers with 4x M1 Thompson takes up 2 weapon slots, but Rangers have 3 slots. So, essentially they can have 4 SMGs and a BAR. Personal Preference: Give your Rangers SMGs and BARs, more DPS doesn't hurt as it buffs close range performance as well as long range performance. Don't give Commandos Brens, as they are mediocre at range even with the Brens (and close range DPS decreases). They are a powerful close range ambush unit that relies on camouflage and ambush, don't waste munitions on Brens, spend them on Gammon Bombs. Oooh, I didn't know they have triple slots. Which other units are triple slotted? And another related question, if Thompson Rangers + BAR drops a model, can the BAR drop from the first model going down? Since technically none of the other dudes remaining can hold the BAR (they are already holding thompsons). In: Strategy Desk
Thread: Weapon upgrades for elite allied units4 Dec 2018, 06:10 AM Brens are long-ranged weapons, while Commandoes are by default short range specialists. Opinion is very split on whether Brens on Commandoes are a good idea because of that. For Rangers, I assume you mean BARs? Iirc Thompsons should use up all weapon slots, so this isn't a consideration imo. Upgrading to Thompsons should be a relative no questions asked decision. In: Strategy Desk
Thread: IS2- Is it worth buying?3 Dec 2018, 15:14 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Dec 2018, 13:12 PMNaOCl Strange how more people think the IS-2 is fine, yet that KT needs buffs. Because the IS2 is cheaper, faster, has better turret traverse, and is a tech-free call-in vs KT being the most expensive tech cost in the game. Once you get more experienced with the game, you'll realise that timing is super important. The Luchs had a 90 seconds build time in the previous patch, making it a seldom-used pick because it came out at the same time as the T70, later than the AEC, and for such a unit, losing a full minute of shock value meant it had a very small window of opportunity remaining. One of the biggest appeals of Falls (apart from cloak) is that they come very, very early for an elite infantry unit. Obers come at the 10 min mark if you didn't go for a Light Vehicle, and realistically come at about 12 or 13 mins for most games. Falls come at the 6 to 7 min mark, which gives them so much time to dominate infantry engagements and affect the rest of the game's development compared to Obers. Tech-cost/timing relate to shock value - the IS2 can and often does come at the timing of Axis having just 1 medium tank and saving fuel for another. The KT comes at the time when the Allied player should have multiple mediums AND a 60 range TD. In raw stats alone, the KT isn't much different from the IS2. Timing-wise, the IS2 actually has a window of opportunity and a chance to vet up as well as impose its will on the battlefield but the KT doesn't. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: IS2- Is it worth buying?3 Dec 2018, 09:30 AM IS2 is actually very good. In 1v1 particularly, it causes a very serious timing problem for both Ost and OKW because it comes right after the 1 medium tank phase. The problem with IS2 is indirect - it's because Guards are too awesome, and IS2 Commanders don't have Guards. Vs OKW call-in Command Panther is too powerful and too bail-out in nature, so players often feel the IS2 is underwhelming when the actual problems lie elsewhere. The best IS2 commander is probably armoured assault, but I find t34-85s and IS2 in the same commander is too much role overlap. And choosing that commander puts a lot of pressure on me in the early to mid game to win the infantry and LV phase without Guards. If my Ost opponent goes flame HT into Puma (which is pretty common), not having Guards is going to make life very difficult, since AT Penals don't have button AND they have far worse AI performance compared to Guards. If armoured assault swapped the T34-85 for Guards (I know it's a bad idea), people will start to realise that the IS2 is actually a very good heavy tank. The main thrust of my point is that Guards positively influence the early-mid to early-late game state so much, so if you go for an IS2 Commander, the opponent you're fighting will basically have much more map control, resources, and army size by virtue of the Sov player no longer having access to arguably the best elite infantry call-in in the game. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: King Tiger - Is it worth buying?3 Dec 2018, 05:28 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Dec 2018, 03:30 AMShadowLinkX37 It doesn't gib models consistantly, that's the problem. If it did it should currently be used since nothing was changed in its nerf other than scatter. It isn't though since it requires all techs and is expensive. It just doesn't have the shock value for that price. Personally I'd rather give it pershing scatter and call it a day. TDs could crush it pre nerf and they crush it post nerf. People just didn't like how it insta gibbed full 5-6 man squads. They could've lowered the OHK radius and changed the AoE profile which would've been fine. They do a lot of heavy handed nerfs/buffs on the team and it isn't always neccesary. I don't really agree at all. The KT has massive shock value. If my opponent ever builds a KT, I'd be incredibly shocked. If he's losing, he basically spent all his resources on an elaborate and expensive white flag. If the game was tied, he basically threw the game away. If he was in the lead by a little, he basically threw the game away. If he was dominating so much that he could throw 760mp and 280fuel away, and was able to dominate the late game with only 74 pop cap, I'd have surrendered by that point anyway. Hence, one would argue that the KT offers massive and unrivalled shock value, especially in 1v1 games. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: King Tiger - Is it worth buying?3 Dec 2018, 05:21 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Dec 2018, 02:14 AMferwiner I don't really think that an unsupported heavy tank being countered by a tank destroyer is a problem. That is how it is supposed to be. Actually the Tiger will just chase down the SU85/Firefly and the IS2 will just chase after the JP4/Stug. The KT basically has the mobility of an engine damaged vehicle so being perma-kited is uniquely a KT problem. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Buff Ostwind3 Dec 2018, 05:11 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Dec 2018, 00:37 AMDarkshaddowsss Part of the issue is that panzer 4s are overperforming, if they got nerfed, the ostwind would be more viable because the p4 will give enough anti-infantry. With this considered I would slightly buff the range on the ostwind and lower the AI damage on the p4. By doing this it would stop Wehrmacht from becoming more OP. If you nerfed Ost P4 then Mobile Defence into T4 becomes the only viable playstyle. The Ostwind is simply terrible right now. Decent anti-infantry but low armour, high scatter on the move, and can't do anything vs even a Stuart or T70. It's horribly expensive for what it does, and it's vastly inferior to the Centaur. Centaur has vet 1 strafe, better damage profile, and higher armour for a similar cost. Centaur is also able to rip through Axis light armour. Wehrmacht is strong right now but the Ostwind is definitely not in a good spot. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: King Tiger - Is it worth buying?2 Dec 2018, 14:58 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2018, 12:53 PMNaOCl Thanks for all the replies so far. Its seems like the general consensus is that it needs something to make it worth getting. I honestly prefer the PIV for AI and the JPIV/Panther for AT. It would be nice for super-heavies to have a more impacting role. The general consensus for team games is that it's situational and for 1v1 it's not even possible to use it. If you can get the KT out in a 1v1 game, you've either already lost and will lose it further or you've already won and you're just showboating. Turret traverse and scatter are the commonly mentioned issues, but I think KT could use a pen buff as well. Given that it's not going to fire many shots, having its shot fail to pen is usually crippling in a tank vs tank engagement. Its monstrous exp value is also problematic (because the damned thing costs a bajillion resources). The moment it pokes out, allied TDs jump multiple levels of Vet almost instantly. In: COH2 Balance