Profile of Hannibal

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3118 | Subs: 2

General Information


Thread: The HM-38 needs a reload buff9 May 2020, 22:20 PM Damage was intentionally lowered to standardize and not make mortar OHK large parts of squads anymore with a lucky shot. I have not used the 120mm very often for the last patch. Is the autofire slow as well? That would make it a very bad mortar overall. Bad versus structures due to slow fire rate, bad on autofire due to low fire rate and even the additional +20 range for the barrage are less useful because you might just park your mortar outside of the auto fire range so it does not participate in battles in the worst case. I think a good rework would be to buff it's ROF and adjust the AoE and scatter profile a bit. Make it more consistant than it is now. Maybe even give it a small OHK radius. Something that makes it an improved version of the standard one in case you want a louder boom, even if this means being uninspired. The current one is quite useless unfortunately. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Congratulations balance team9 May 2020, 22:00 PM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 16:50 PMT.R. Stormjäger After playing UKF these past couple weeks ... Well as Jay4Jett said, you cannot expect trashing other people's opinion/work/... and then expect them to be completely fine with it once you decided otherwise. Still kudos for openly adressing your mistake instead of doing nothing and hoping nobody would remember it two months from now. Maybe it will be a reminder for some other people that tend to trash other people's opinions on the forums with sometimes unbeliavable self-assurance and complacency that they actually might not be that right and they should really take a step back. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: A laudatio on the T70, the Puma, 251 and 2229 May 2020, 21:24 PM Jump back to quoted post8 May 2020, 16:25 PMVipper Run the number on Puma vs mediums you will find them pretty low unless at medium range and bellow. The unit better used as flanker attacking side/rear armor. The AEC ability is very powerful once vetted, the 7 second stun is very powerful and I am also under impression that both shot do full damage. I know the numbers. AEC is very unreliable and horrible at worst even against OST P4 and even at range 0. And then there is OKW P4. You are forced to flank with it because your only chance are rear armor shots(which by itself is not bad). But from my games I got the impression that the AEC is not really worth much in the late game. Yes, the stun is nice but nothing that really urges me to build an AEC potentially even after the LV phase or make it so valuable that the AEC becomes a great tool in my army composition. The sight range is nice but can be achieved by pyro sections as well, also many vehicles can be upgraded with the commander for more sight. The damage is okay but relies on (I'll call them that) bad penetration values for the mid-late game And for flanking you must be willing to potentially dive and throw your AEC, because anytime the AEC can shoot at the enemy, the enemy has enough range to shoot back. In the UKF army composition, the AEC does not bring much to the table that would be unique or at least very synergetic in that special combination. Compare that to the Puma: Against mediums you have two options: Take shots from a safe range that will be relatively unreliable, or get very close, risk your Puma and pen every time. Risk-reward works perfectly. Additionally you have better sight range, something that OKW lacks for it's units unless you vet your Volks (and even then it is a conditional bonus). Plus stun shot plus smoke for itself or other units. Plus the vet 160 damage that can really put fear into a medium if the first max range shot penned. It's overall scaling and utility brings so much more to the table both for the game overall as well as for OKW. Yes, the Puma is 10 fuel more expensive and it should be reflected in the performance, but I just want to highlight why I personally think the Puma is well designed and the AEC is not. Jump back to quoted post8 May 2020, 19:30 PMKatitof I would also add AEC to the well balanced lights, specifically its firepower, I do like how its main gun is pretty much AT only, but its AI is still decent thanks to strong coax, this is how I would try to balance tanks too, with gun being oriented at fighting other vehicles and all the MGs beefed up to be a real threat to infantry, but no one shot squad wipe potential, unless specialist vehicle is involved. I have to really disagree with that approach of balancing. All units and especially generalist ones must have a trade off between shooting at infantry or shooting at tanks. Moving the AI DPS to the MG only would cause issues in balance and game design. Every vehicle should instantly be set to prioritize vehicles only, because the MG will already pick the right target anyway and the cannon shot would be a waste. The player should make a trade to shoot at infantry and then not being able to target a tank until the gun is reloaded. It would take so many decisions away from the player and honestly just dumb down the gameplay. Yes, there are/were issues with one shot wipes, but most have been adressed by AoE reworks. In that regard I really like the approach of the Sherman with switchable rounds. This forces real decisions to be made prior to an offensive. If you miscalculated the strength composition and what type of damage you needed your attack might fall flat because your Sherman can't support that well for a full reload. On the other hand you are rewarded very well if you make the right calls. And as a cherry it also simulates the crew having to chose between HE and AP rounds and checks that bit of authenticity that CoH aims for and makes it quite appealing. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Medic heal on Grens9 May 2020, 20:34 PM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 17:48 PMShadowLinkX37 I think aura heals are pretty dumb outside base sector. Especially Brit ones which are super spammable. I’d rather see a cost reduction on the gren kits. You don’t ever use them unless you have 4+ models anyways. From what I thought this ability is meant to keep support weapons on the field which can also function with three models. Basically to compensate that Soviets got 6 men back when there eere only two factions. But I agree, Grenadier medkots could use some tweaking on the price, cast time or both. I think they are really fine for their price, I just find them very bad to use since two of your swuads are blocked for quite some time. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Leaderboards Rank rebalance9 May 2020, 11:30 AM I don't see a reason what this should bring to the table In: Lobby
Thread: The HM-38 needs a reload buff9 May 2020, 07:59 AM Jump back to quoted post9 May 2020, 06:00 AMdistrofio I understand your point OP but I don't see the issue the same way. The price tag is always a hard discussion, because unit performance involves utility, a single 120mm shell will effectively force a retreat on most axis units. Increasing the firing rate reducing the reload time gives less time to react to the enemy. Having longer barrages times means more land denial. Unlike the pak Howie, 120mm is very durable but also has better range than conventional mortars. It is more rng dependent but again, comparing it with pak Howie somehow the price is meant to disencourage its use or make it a costly decision. It's not a linear upgrade of mortars, i think it's a different kind of indirect fire. Vs buildings it's a monster I don't think SU needs any indirect fire buffs, the faction itself is doing pretty well. Vs buildings, the SOV standard mortar is better due to higher DPS. I am not sure how well the garrisons do because I only tested vs OST bunkers. The big plus of the 120mm before the general mprtar rework was it's high wipe potential. Now that this has gone away there is not much left. The higher AoE is offset by the high scatter, top damage is the same. The +20 range on barrage is nice but then you have a high price tag and very slow ROF. The whole damage profile screams that it is either an upgraded version of the standard mortar or at least boosted AI performance. Judging the AoE profile this still is true. If the shell hits, then it does a lot of health damage. But the time for the second shell is so long you cannot really use it. It hits even less versus moving infantry, softening the defensis before an assault does not really work either because only 2 shots max will hit before your opponent micros his units away and it takes ages to get the second barrage. And as already pointed out against buildings it is worse than the standard.For area denial it is honestly a quite weird unit. And the utility is (arguably) lower than with the standard mortar because you need to vet before getting the flare. The only scenario where the 120mm really shines is if you shell the BG HQ of OKW as a FRP. There all the strengths come together, you'll wipe retreated infantry in the best case or hit the building worst case. And at all times, you make this building unusable because of the long barrage time. But that case is so specific that it just shows how niche the 120mm has become. Two years ago I really loved the unit. Build even two in team games. But every time I used it now I had the feeling that a normal mortar or another conscript would have been better. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: A laudatio on the T70, the Puma, 251 and 2228 May 2020, 16:20 PM Jump back to quoted post8 May 2020, 15:54 PMVipper Although I do not really disagree I feel the need to correct some facts: Puma does not have have high penetration: Penetration near 160 Penetration mid 120 Penetration far 80 nor does is have good accuracy and it becomes good vs mediums only at mid range. Puma has rather low armor and it can be damage by HMGs. Imo Puma does not have a shock value but "counter shock" value since getting a Puma when you opponent has no vehicles will have little effect but it can counter many enemy vehicles. AEC does not have bad penetration but rather inline with cost and ability with 1.000 penetration. Penetration near 120 Penetration mid 100enetration far 80 Stuart can reckon since it get bonus sight as vet with a sight of 58.5 Luch also get bonus sight with sight of 45.5 Finally I would like to point that there is difference between having a good design and being balanced. A unit can have great design but be UP or OP and units can have poor design but be balanced. I'd like to do some corrections on that as well, or better to say provide better context. I agree on the Luchs and Stuart sight range. While the Stuarts sight range is quite large, the Stuart remains pretty shitty against mediums and does also not burst against infantry because it was never intended to. The Luchs sight range is nice but barely enough to really provide a huge benefit. I disagree on Puma and AEC though. Puma has enough penetration to push Allied mediums and can stay in a safe zone to kite while the AEC is very unreliable even at close range. And the 1000 penetration shot is misleading in this context. The ability foes even lower damage 80 IIRC) and not even help the AEC against mediums from a shots to kill perspective. Yes, it is a good support shot for the Firefly or a ATG to do the job, but the AECs overall power and utility have declined rapidly at this point of the game. At least this is the impression that I got from my games, althpugh I am (very) far from top level CoH2. Jump back to quoted post8 May 2020, 15:54 PMSander93 I do think the Luchs has a vastly superior damage profile compared to the T-70 in terms of balance. The Luchs has enough firepower to force off any squad, it has the ability to chase down and wipe badly mispositioned squads, and it can deal devastating damage point-blank creating an interesting risk-reward mechanic, but it does not have enough DPM to wipe units left and right like the T-70 regularly does and it's worse against retreating squads because it uses accuracy over AOE. So although the T-70 has better scalability, I do consider the Luchs to be a much more balanced vehicle regarding combat power. Fighting against the Luchs always feels fair, while fighting against the T-70 usually doesn't. I agree on this, but my main post focused on the scalability. Sometimes even a late T70 is a decent choice although mediums are already around. I never had the feeling to get a late game Luchs though, it just would be a burden to the army. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Scatter This! - Your trusty scatter calculator8 May 2020, 15:37 PM Jump back to quoted post6 May 2020, 08:25 AMMMX hmm, no idea what's going on there... at least the naural hit tally should work just fine. anyway, thanks a lot for the troubleshooting, that's very much appreciated!. anyone else that had a shot at it yet experienced the same problem? Tested the sheet yesterday (release version): Natural hits and OHKs do not work and are not counted, at least not for me.This is a minor issue though since it seems to work for others. The natural hits are not that important, especially not for AoE calculations. Since you you said you fixed the OHK counter, all the important information is visible. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: A laudatio on the T70, the Puma, 251 and 2228 May 2020, 15:18 PM Besides the more topic specific discussions that are going on at the moment, I wanted to take a different approach and open a discussion about a phrase that is often thrown around the forum (me included) without the broader community having an actual reference or agreement of some sort: Good unit design. For the sake of focus I'd like to narrow it down to vehicle design more specifically, and that's where I want to start: A laudatio on the T70, the Puma, the 251 and the 222, because I think they belong to the best designed light vehicles and vehicles in general in the game. And yes, I include the T70 despite all the controversy that sparks in every thread about it. Now why are these units in general very well designed? the simple answer is: They have a place in every army at every phase of the game. The 251 and 222 are Ostheers light vehicles. The 251 is a pure utility vehicle. At the time of arrival (~5 min mark) it can act as a decent replacement for Ostheers early medic bunker, establish a forward soft retreat point to help an othrrwise highly static and defensive army get more field power. A well microed 251 micro allows Ostheer to adapt a quite different play style. And if you manage to vet it, it can even lay mines for you and take a bit of pressure of your pioneers from the mid game onwards. Alternatively, you can trade all this in for a flame vehicle with very high shock value at a time were no mobile counter is available. However, this also means that your 251 needs to push to the front line and therefore will become obsolete by the mid game. But however your choice is - you will get your money back, but only with good micro. Similarly, the 222: designed as Ostheers counter for super lights with okay AI capabilities, it can even fight against a T70 if it needs to. It does not win, but makes it not worthwhile for the Soviet player to shoot at it. and all this for small money! through veterancy or via doctrinal spotting scopes, it scales into the late game as a scouting vehicle for all your tanks and can take some flank defense duty to punish lone infantry squads. Although it rarely makes sense to build a 222 in the late game a vetted one from the early game will be useful at any stage. Slightly different by design and timing are the Puma and T70. Both units offer high shock value but also come at high price and a shorter window until mediums arrive. What protects them during the early mid-game is their armor. This is subsequently replaced by mobility from the mid game onwards and emphasized by their veterancy bonusses. also the general power level even at vet0 is high enough to make them a decent choice for later game stages. Additionally, both units have abilities that let them scale very well: Recon abilities (toggle for the T70 or standard higher sight range for the Puma), or the Pumas smoke that compensates for lower health and the aimed shot to support actual damage dealers. The Puma especially has an interesting veterancy: Increased damage to 160, which makes it a fearsome opponent for medium tanks in combination with its ROF, penetration and high range. And this is also where other vehicles fall short despite being similar: The Luchs is very good AI value for its timing, but the ability to camo is questionable and it has not much to scale to the late game: No recon, no other ability. The AEC is, like the Puma, an AT vehicle with increased sight and even a stun shot. Yet it does not scale as well due to the lacking penetration that make it hard to fight against mediums and the lacking range that force it to always get shot back at. The Stuart is an even worse offender: Despite two abilities, its scaling fails. Its armor makes it almost untouchable for light vehicles, but again lack of penetration, damage and range do not allow it to fight against mediums. On top of that, it will always need support due to not being a scout unit. OKWs and USFs flak half tracks fulfill an important role on the battlefield especially in team games: shoot down skill planes. The low HP and lack of veterancy and utility do not allow them to play a big role in the late game though, even when vetted up. They are just expensive anti air with no other purpose than being parked in the back. The M5 halftrack has a general design problem of coming late and not really being useful for Soviets, the SU76, while being a decent LV in the late game, suffers from better options and not being needed at any point of the game Alright, this was my long summary of what bugs me with the light vehicles and their design in the game. Hannibal In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Changes i feel grens need7 May 2020, 17:32 PM Jump back to quoted post7 May 2020, 14:54 PMEsxile I'm pretty sure Ostheer is dominant in the majority of those milestones. 4x mainline + 1 HMGs, they're first. (how couln't they be) 4x mainline + 1 support + 1 elite: first 4x mainline + 1 support + at snare + ai grenade: probably second behind OKW 4x mainline + 1 support + 1 elite + at snare + ai grenade: first again 4x mainline + 1 support + 1 elite + at snare + ai grenade + light vehicle (222): first again 4x mainline + 1 support + 1 elite + at snare + ai grenade + light vehicle + medic: probably 2nd depending on how you count OKW healing crate. In fact, maybe except Brit, if you top all upgrades for USF and Soviet before teching medium tanks, Pz4 is cheaper to reach than Sherman and probably equal to T34. BUT we all know Soviet need badly the T70 to stay on the game, so if we count a T70 before going T34, the Pz4 is hitting the field before even if the Ostheer player went 251 AND 222. Well it really depends what and against whom you are comparing and how much this makes sense. 4 mainlines or similars make sense on all factions since this is a viable build. Additional AT gun also makes sense for basically all factions, additional MG not so much since OKW and USF were not designed to use MGs as an integral part and UKF and SOV don't necessarily need one either, especially not in the early game and even more especially not in the early game against Ostheer. Also we may should not forget to compare the strengths of the composition afterwards (and the amount of unit options each faction gets). This is obviously quite tricky and situation dependent, but at least some points can be considered. E.g. Riflemen cost more than Grenadiere. Does USF therefor draw the short end of the stick? Nope, because Riflemen are very good infantry that usually beat Grenadiere unless you go for a long range shoot out. Similarly you can argue that OST get's it's 251 or 222 faster than SOV get their T70, but that's scewed as well. Now obviously there are more factors to that like for example OST's faction design in the early game revolving around using the MG42 and Grenadiere in conjunction, but we should not leave the power level out of sight. Also OST's tech is quite "in between" other factions, but you know this already. Now a bit more numbers to the point with SOV T2 build, correct me if I am wrong (MP gain OST/SOV): 4x mainlines + pio: 620/570 + 1 MG: 880/990 4x mainlines + pio + medic + AT grenade: 770(+60 mun)/945 4x main line infantry, pio, tech up to medium tank building, inclusive medic, both grenades and weapon upgrades: 1410/1460 -> For comparison at this stage USF/OKW/UKF(with bolster): 1730/1360/1870 Combined with the need for OST of building T1 first before fielding their main line, I think from the numbers we can assume that OST should have a slight disadvantage at the beginning of the game that turns into an advantage once the SOV player needs to build medics, T2 and AT grenades. Now it does not make much sense getting AT grenades at this point unless you see an OST LV, so the SOV player might postpone this until later in the game unless OST invests into a LV which would even out the costs at least MP wise. All (three) factions need approximately the same amount of MP to gain their medium tech and the standard set of utility. Now for fuel I doubt it makes much sense to compare OST and SOV before medium tech because their teching and the units are so different. OST gets the PaK comparatively late but their vehicles early. For SOV it is completely the opposite (apart from the Clown Car). When OST gets early light vehicles, SOV can easily afford to get AT grenades and a ZiS at this point. Similarly, SOV can buy a strong T70 at which point OST surely can afford its PaK-40. So every faction should be able to field the counters at the point of game. So, fuel gain to medium tech (medic inclusive, OKW T2 build with upgrade) OST/SOV/USF/OKW/UKF: 155/170/165/185/125 +AT grenades and weapon upgrades OST/SOV/USF/OKW/UKF(with bolster and AEC tech): 155/195/195/200/200 + medium tank: 275/285/305/340/310 without medium tank, but +last feasible tech level (SOV does not back-tech to T1, USF only backteching for officer but not upgrade): 190/195/230/255/250 Fuel wise, the Eastern factions are comparatively cheap. Especially OST has an advantage as long as they don't need to tech up to BP3. SOV T34 and OST P4 come around the same time cost wise (bear in mind SOV always got Molotows in this case, something that is usually not needed although SOV then runs without non-doc "grenade" and T34 is generally weaker in almost all regards). I am not sure how the newer factions can keep up with the pressure, but I assume it mostly is because of skipping of unneeded side techs that allows for earlier vehicles. We can see though that for a fully viable unlock, Eastern factions pay similar prices and newer factions pay similar prices within their group. For eastern factions, SOV gets a bit of a head start against OST until they need to build T3. Then OST takes lead being able to get their LV our early. This in turn is almost evened out once OST has to tech up to T3 and finally fully evened out at T4. OST does also not profit too much from this relatively long advantage after SOV get T3. Their pay gap between a usable light vehicle like the 222 and a built P4 is 225 fuel and they have nothing to build in between. For SOV the gap between T3 and a built T34 is 180 fuel. Fuel tech costs are very similar for these factions, especially if SOV does not get Molotows. In: COH2 Balance