Where are we on Balance?
The state of balance in CoH2 has always been, and appears to forever be: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Profile of ZombiFrancis
Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1
Post History of ZombiFrancis
Thread: So where are we on Balance?28 Sep 2019, 19:06 PM
Thread: Shrecks. Blobbing in 2v2s and above11 Sep 2019, 01:43 AM
Usually around patch time old players make a return to try things out.
Many players also revert to tired old tactics while a new metagame starts to develop.
I wouldn't read too much into it.
Thread: An alternative for Kubelwagen!11 Sep 2019, 01:41 AM
For as flimsy as the kubelwagen is, it will never cease to make me laugh watching one eat a tank round and drive away.
I've always kinda wished that the armor and penetration for light vehicles and small arms could've been developed a bit more than it is in CoH2.
In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: How to edit multiplayer maps and location of ammo crates.24 Aug 2019, 15:08 PM
Mod Tools > Archive Viewer
MPScenarios (I think any archive labelled with 'scenarios' has maps.)
Extract the maps from there, and you can open them in Worldbuilder.
Brown ammo boxes I think are just crates. I think they're located under 'market' in the worldbuilder objects.
I'd have to reinstall CoH2 to verify.
Thread: Jackson needs some more buffs31 Jul 2019, 16:08 PM
Vehicles on roads are always going to be way faster than vehicles in the dirt. The Jackson in that clip is on a road at first, and the P4 is not. The P4 almost gets up to speed though, as you can see in that clip.
TBH, that p4 was not in a position to dive even at the start of the clip. Not against a Jackson, not with that little health.
Thread: Are bushes directional or omnidirectional cover?26 Jul 2019, 03:34 AM
It has always been my understanding that only terrain cover is omnidirectional. Object based cover is directional because entities and projectiles are interacting with the object. However I believe bushes to be effectively omnidirectional because infantry can walk inside of their hitboxes.
However, if infantry are standing up against a bushrow and not inside of it, I think they are vulnerable to a flank.
Thread: USF Base Reorganization mod20 Jul 2019, 01:14 AM
19 Jul 2019, 23:26 PMdistrofio
I absolutly love it. Much tidier.
Could give the truck in the base an upgrade to act as an ambulance.
Thread: What Role Should Heavy Tanks Serve?19 Jul 2019, 22:49 PM
Heavy Tanks, which I would include to be Tigers, King Tigers, KVs, IS-2s, and Churchills, should be units with poor mobility that can serve primarily defensive roles overwatching chokepoints or critical resources. They also should be able to serve (with support) as a spearhead unit.
Other Heavy Units, such as the ISU, Elefant, Jagdtiger, and Sturmtiger, I would categorize similarly. Although for these casemate units I would say they are primarly defensive overwatch type units, as the lack of a turret makes offensive pushes a little more challenging. Still possible though.
They should be able to withstand standard, non-specialized weapons from the front in a consistent fashion. Standard frontal fire from an unvetted medium tank of any faction should not reliably penetrate any heavy tank except when at close range. Anything like a Jackson, Panther, Firefly, or SU-85 should be somewhat reliable in penetrating heavies at max range, but should always penetrate from medium range. The Jackson and SU-85, given the limitations of the faction and unit respectively, should probably be able to be consistent at max range versus the Axis heavies. I think all heavy tanks should have a decent shot at clearing/destroying an (meaning ONE) anti-tank gun from the front without taking a critical amount of damage. Unless, of course, it a USF ATG using its AP rounds.
Heavies should be vulnerable to artillery fire and any rear armor shot. Even light tanks should penetrate their rear armor at close range. I would even go so far as to say heavies should take bonus damage on rear armor hits, even if it is just the heavy casemate units.
The Pershing, incidentally, I would not consider a heavy tank because one of its key features is its mobility. Although I should say I personally don't think the Pershing should be limited to 1 nor do I think it should lack a vehicle crew, but that's a different topic and rife with its own caveats.
Furthermore, as an afterthought, though the Churchill and KV series do not have powerful anti-tank weapons they are less generally suited to serve in a spearhead role, except the performance against infantry may be appropriate depending on the Axis army makeup. Especially given OKW's puppchen is easy to clear with either tank.
Thread: Automatch Map Making Check List19 Jul 2019, 18:19 PM
On "Points/Territory" you say normal maps have: "5 territory points, a munition, a fuel, and three VPs." I think you mean 10 standard points, 2 fuels, 2 munitions, and 3 VPs. The VPs aside, many maps tend to allocate each player/team 'half' the resources of a map, which more or less aligns with what you said.
Also, to elaborate on the points on Map Size: See Points/Territory
The number of points don't scale with game size, so a map meant for eight players means the same number of points as one meant for two. The larger the map becomes, the harder it is to create strategically meaningful territories.
For context, a munitions point and a fuel point together bring in 11m and 7f. Two standard points bring in 10m and 6f. This is a relatively minor difference in resources, though many players (and maps) tend to place great importance on the fuel or munitions points like they were the high fuel or muni points from CoH1. Some larger maps have attempted to sidestep this by using 5 VPs. However, VPs don't scale either. Contesting 5 VPs instead of 3 means VPs can bleed very fast. (I always felt a 5VP map needed 750 VPs, but that's just my opinion, man.)
A safe standard territory point, especially on larger maps, can easily provide a player or team with more (or at least more reliable) resources than a fuel point because of the Observation Post upgrade.
Also, I would say that buildings themselves are not necessarily problematic on 'main points', as it is the orientation, health/stability, and the number of windows that govern the utility and power of a garrison.
Thread: Tric maps and peoples response18 Jul 2019, 18:00 PM
13 Jul 2019, 18:09 PMSturmpanther
Like I said, I don't exactly have the time to devote to making these changes. If I miraculously have time to work on CoH2 maps in that window of time, sure I'll give it a shot.
I don't have any of the original files for the map, though maybe I can locate the zip files I sent to Relic back during the map contest...
Though with that in mind, to clarify, you mean upload the raw files and give you the link and not upload to the steam workshop? It'll be a longshot if I am able to do anything.
If I was able to (at the very least) generate a less god-awful tac map, do you think that would stand a chance of being implemented? I ask this not knowing exactly how you are actually involved with Relic these days.
Ladders Top 10