Profile of ZombiFrancis

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 2742

General Information


Thread: Was the panzerwerfer in t3?5 Nov 2016, 14:47 PM Swapping the P4 and the Panzerwerfer would be the only feasible option honestly. But even then, the implications are pretty significant. Ostheer T4 would be in such a sorry state. Everyone would just use call-in tigers or command tanks instead of bothering with T4. Any time I look at Ostheer's tiers and teching I just can't help but feel that CoH1 Wehrmacht unit composition was superior in every way, design-wise. Panzerwerfer being an upgrade for halftracks @ t4 was an excellent notion, and the nebelwerfer in T3 filled its role spectacularly. Between Ostheer and OKW there's the tools for two well designed factions, they've just been mixed up between each other. (Hell I made a mod that essentially merged the two and it actually worked pretty well. You just have to break from the current system of design to make the factions work. It really takes more than a few unit swaps. Redesign is more appropriate than rebalance.) In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Was the panzerwerfer in t3?5 Nov 2016, 02:46 AM Yes it used to be T3. The audio for building T3 (or maybe it's the Battle Phase) still reflects that. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Learn to adapt4 Nov 2016, 19:45 PM Well holy crap you're right. That's an issue then. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Learn to adapt4 Nov 2016, 18:40 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2016, 18:23 PMDanyek So am I brave or stupid for not using panic puma doc? I'm using Mech Assault for the cheeky beeky close(r) ranged maps and Tiger / Elite Troops for mid ranged maps to get G43 + infiltration units + almost everything except Tiger Ace lol / Blitzkrieg for command P4, recon, inf sprint and AT stuka circle Having it in your loadout and using it are two different things. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Learn to adapt4 Nov 2016, 18:01 PM Hey at least you can use supply and get it instead of spending $$$ or relying on the RNG War Spoils of old. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Learn to adapt4 Nov 2016, 17:47 PM Every faction is map dependent, every map requires it's own specific strategies. Build orders for a faction are most influenced by map and opponents factions, followed by commander choices for both you and your opponent. For Ostheer I believe always having panic puma commander in your loadout is key, as well as a Tiger commander. Since your opponent can see your loadout, if there's any options they know you don't have available (like, tigers or puma) they can adjust their build order and rush a stuart because they know you're going to be crippled at 0:00. Things like that can actually have a huge impact on how the game plays out. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Send Your Feedback Directly to Relic4 Nov 2016, 17:26 PM I just submitted for NKVD and then wrote in the final section my opinions. In: Lobby
Thread: Market ruins4 Nov 2016, 17:23 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2016, 05:45 AMedibleshrapnel The play style is definitely different, as you intended. It just forces different strats against certain factions. I understand that you cant please all 5 factions with all their respective units and commanders, but I feel simply putting more usable buildings in between those lanes would be amazing(allows for moving between lanes and flanking). I don't like plain maps either, however I do find the hybrid maps most enjoyable, such as Langreskaya and crossing in the woods, incorporating buildings with areas of open map, short combat areas, and perhaps some buildings that overlook integral points. I'd be happy to chat more if you're serious. Good maps take into account multiple playstyles and the designs of every faction. There is very little wiggle room in map design with how CoH2 territory and resources are set up. As it currently stands map design will typically cripple one or two factions that play on it by how cramped options are for mapmakers. In: Lobby
Thread: Close Quarter Combat sections of maps4 Nov 2016, 17:16 PM D is a good choice for one corner of a map surrounding something like a munitions point. It's a good design for a CQC section of a map, but not for the whole map. There should be a city park, an empty field, or a series of entirely passable rubble adjacent. But there's something to keep in mind, sight blockers, shot blockers, and finally buildings are HUGELY different. Many sight blockers can be destroyed and crushed, many shot blockers can't until at least the endgame, and buildings, even destroyed ones, are permanent impasse. Not to mention garrisoned buildings offer intense bonuses to sight, range, and mobility that other blockers down. For instance, if in D, that isolated square in the bottom center was a strong building, there'd be an obvious imbalance in the buildings that would be intensely unpopular. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Meta review4 Nov 2016, 17:08 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2016, 02:04 AMTric My tourney was so meta, we had to scour the ends of the earth for the cocojambo game. As the tourney progressed as well, the meta become more and more... just like the regular meta that you would typically see. Alluding even more to that certain commanders and play styles are simply just stronger. I was only able to catch a few games of the tourney, so I was basing most of my assumptions on what I'd seen of people playing the maps outside the tourney. It's kind of interesting that the metagame was so stagnant through the tournament though. I feel like when the playing field changes people stick to the first thing that works and abuse it until it doesn't. But hey, I'm the one whose been calling for more WorldBuilder tools (more territory points, etc) for years which has fallen entirely on deaf ears from both the community and Relic. Three resource points is entirely too few to design maps that scale for team games or accommodate the playstyles and designs of 5 factions. In: Lobby