Profile of ZombiFrancis

I always thought Hit the Dirt would've worked pretty well if it simply made the squad immune to being pinned. Not suppression, but being pinned. Especially with the reduced grenade range while suppressed.

The ability to crawl a squad around a building or even towards an MG without being completely disabled I think would've been an interesting mechanic in the early days of EFA.

Sorry bad I have to disagree. The nerf to Penal are too little to have an significant impact while the patch creates a whole new set of issues with nerf to Axis TDs and buffs to allied TDs...

People respond to the novelty of it all. The game would be different, therefore 'new', and therefore there'd be a period of time where players could figure out the next broken meta strategy.

And that's what people really want: to be the first to devise the next cheese to the top 10.

It's never been about balance.

Hi Hector,

no problem. I would never consider myself to be a very good soviet player... definitively not. I watch my replays very often and there is soo much that needs to be done: Micro, Map-Awareness, etc. And I'm not saying, this needs to be fixed. I started this thread to hear what kind of arguments there are to justify that discrepancy. So actually, I'm looking - with you guys - for valid categories and indicators that can be used to underline that. And so far, I have read a few: Multi-useability of the T-70 (Scout, Recon, Cap), that translates better into the late-game. The need for a fast and powerful counter to the penal-meta.
I totaly see these points. I would love to hear your reply to my other post, about the indicators or factors that can be used, to analyse such an issue as here at hand. Maybe these can make your point more obvious to me and other (and maybe even some trolls, who knows? )

The main thing to keep in mind is that soviets and ostheer were designed without usf, okw, or brits on mind.

Okw was overhauled just prior to release, resdesigned afterwards, and then given to a couple community members that chose to implement a gambit of changes that did not account for overall faction design.

Trying to understand the reasoning behind just about anything to do with OKW is a fools errand, imo.

Soviets made sense against ostheer for the longest time. But ostheer had to get changed because of USF, which created a need to change soviets... and so on.

Where we are at today is midway through a more or less aborted attempt to overhaul the game.

Relic has announced the official 2v2 Map Contest Cup on their blog!

Relic 2v2 Map Contest Cup

This should be a fun tournament, we will get to see the new maps in action, and it will be a nice warm up for the 2v2 Mixed Factions Tournament coming up in December.

Cool. Looking at that splash image it appears the winners of the visual categories have been chosen too.

This is something I've thought about off and on and tried to implement various ideas in mod tools. I could never get things to function how I'd wanted due to the restrictions of mod tools/my own time and knowledge of modding this game.

I honestly believe that while there are obviously some broken commanders on either side of the viability spectrum, I don't think that individual designs of commanders are the root of the problem.

I think the most distilled version of what might function for CoH2, not necessarily a hypothetical CoH3, would be the return to how vCoH utilized CPs.

You didn't choose a doctrine that automatically unlocked abilities as you acquired CPs. You acquired CPs, and then you used them to progressively unlock abilities from one of the three doctrines.

For CoH2, since commanders don't have branching/multiple paths of unlocks, it would actually be feasible if ALL THREE commanders in the loadout could be unlocked in one game. You would have three pathways to spend CPs on. You could have your Soviet Shock Army where you spend 2 CPs to unlock Shocks, but then you could have the community commander with tank traps that you could spend 2 other CPs on. And then hell, you could have Guard Motor to unlock Guards.

6 CPs in you could have Shocks, Guards, and Tank traps, but at the same time you'd be a long way off from any ML-20s, T34/85s, etc. This setup would allow for players to spread their CPs out for a wide array of useful passives, like say, Riflemen mines, RE flamethrowers, and M1919 unlocks. But the endgame abilities and call-ins would be likewise delayed. That M10 might just come too late.

Do you put everything into one commander to get out that Elefant? Do you get your Panzerfusiliers out then switch gears to try and get that Sturmtiger or Command Panther unlocked? Spreading CPs too thin could be crippling.

I always thought this would've been far more dynamic and interesting for CoH2. This is how I felt in 2013.

My OTHER notion about commander loadouts would be that all commanders could be categorized in a mutually exclusive way. For example's sake, all commanders could be categorized as "Offensive", "Defensive" or "Support". All loadouts would consist of one "Offensive" commander, one "Defensive" and one "Support".

All in all, I kinda miss triple NKVD commander loadout scare tactics. Kappa.