Profile of Madok

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 101

General Information


Thread: WEHRMACHT=RUBBISH7 Mar 2015, 23:09 PM My 2 cents: Whermacht (at its core) is probably the best designed faction. Despite some overlapping unit roles Wher has probably the most well-rounded core (non commander) unit selection. BUT The current call-in meta invalidates quite a lot of the core units mentioned above. Additionally a lot of core units are hidden behind crippling tech costs (encouraging the call-in meta in the first place) - this is especially obvious if compared to the two newish factions. Squadwipes are a problem as well, but the clumping behavior of units (needs a fix pretty badly) is kind of an equalizer as far as I am concerned. EDIT: We can bicker and rant about this units or that's unit performance or lack thereof all day but this is the bigger picture as far as I am concerned. In: Scrap Yard
Thread: COH2's IDEAL future in YOUR opinon 27 Feb 2015, 12:29 PM For me it would be 'just' 2 things: Solution for call-in meta - might require some redesign of factions (looking at you SU) + would hopefully result in a more complex and diverse game actually involving strategy/macro decisions .. based upon that: More than one Balance patch + including map overhauls Regarding F2P: This isn't necessarily a bad idea. However given the past implementation of DLC commanders (they were blatantly P2W at release) and CoHO's design it's quite understandable why a lot of player would be apprehensive. It's an uphill battle for relic - please relic, win us over. I am ready and willing to be hyped. Silence isn't helping In: Lobby
Thread: If you could ask Relic one question...29 Jan 2015, 21:43 PM For me it would be pretty much RMMLz's question: Jump back to quoted post29 Jan 2015, 20:36 PMRMMLz When will you give us something to look forward to (Big patch, next DLC, even your next project) and what is it? (Yea I know that's technically two questions.) .. you know .. those things we hear you are excited about ... still excited about. In: Lobby
Thread: Ostheer vs usf matchup 17 Jan 2015, 12:40 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Jan 2015, 12:27 PMAustralian Magic Yea, but still 7W/1L in last 8 games (better than as USF or OKW) Which is weird... Matchmaking I'd guess. I've had a terrible USF player rant and rave in a 1v1 that .."relic finally needs to buff USF." ... less than 10 minutes into the game against my mediocre OST play Jump back to quoted post17 Jan 2015, 12:27 PMAustralian Magic I lost only vs massive cons spam - idk how to deal with that I guess conspam vs. Ost is the main reason why some people are reluctant to consider lmg upgrades for cons. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Remove USF Major and OKW Med truck retreat2 Jan 2015, 19:08 PM I completely agree with the OP. My main gripe is that these retreat points pretty much invalidate MGs, as retreats are by no means as punishing as they are for the vanilla factions. Sadly I also think relic won't change this in the near future ... BUT ... if we want this game to evolve these kind of threads are invaluable. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Wehrmacht Ostheer26 Dec 2014, 13:19 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Dec 2014, 02:44 AMMr. Someguy Also in response to "Grenadiers will beat Riflemen at long range" I've decided to test it. Squad vs Squad controlled test, long range, no cover, no vet, no outside factors, no retreating, 20 attempts. Grenadiers won 9 times and Riflemen won 11 times. The number of survivors per-lane is as follows: Surviving Grenadiers: 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 Surviving Riflemen: 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 In other words, with both sides on equal footing, victory is mostly RNG. You may take one casualty or lose the squad and anything in between. Riflemen seem to have a very slight statistical advantage, but they have a completely advantage in any sort of actual fight unless Grenadiers are caught in heavy cover and force Rifles to charge. But of course Grens in heavy cover aren't out capping, and heavy cover isn't always available nor can they create it. Thanks for the testing - I had always assumed grens would loose at long range as well as short range (think that was stated in the patchnotes sometime ). So it does seem a bit like a reminiscence of the old vCoH earlygame "volks vs. rifle" matchup: Volks would win (barely) at long range but get decimated at short range. This lead to a surprisingly intersting and dynamic earlygame. Of course we now have: vastly different unit/upkeep costs/systems true sight -> more short range engagements vCoH wher had grens in T2 -> a heck of a lot better then volks against rifles. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Axis heavy armor needs nerf or Allied AT needs buffs25 Dec 2014, 18:16 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Dec 2014, 17:46 PMAustralian Magic OKW Panher with blitz has 13 speed You know how glass cannon works in games - no matter if it's diablo or coh - ? Huge damage, very fragile. Jackon is very fragile - chec Jackon can do huge damage - check Jackon can penetrate almost everything - uncheck . Thanks for the reply. While I understand the point you are trying to make I fear your proposed Jackson changes (pen and speed buff - no cost adjustments or nerfs) would render all OST tanks (with the possible exception of a less effective tiger) kinda obsolete. EDIT: Admittedly the Panther would also still be an option in 3v3s and 4v4s. How is OST (mind you: OST not 'Axis') supposed to respond to this change? I believe it was Sib (or possibly VonIvan) who commented in one of his recent streams that he could not go T3 now, after spotting a major (in a 1v1, playing OST). He stated the Jackson as the reason for this decision. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Axis heavy armor needs nerf or Allied AT needs buffs25 Dec 2014, 17:12 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Dec 2014, 16:40 PMAustralian Magic Leave KT alone. Buff Jackson penetration and speed. You would like the Jackson to be faster and reliably penetrate the heaviest vehicles - right? Any other adjustments? Perhaps armor, HP, damage or pricing? I'd like to know your take on the changes of this 'new' Jackson will bring for the OST 1v1 (and possibly 2v2) metagame. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Luvnest's state of the game report9 Dec 2014, 19:07 PM +1 Really hard to disagree with any of that ('xept the side armor ofc ) In: Lobby
Thread: Where Company of Heroes went wrong.8 Dec 2014, 18:03 PM Yes, absolutely correct. Then again there are 2 kinds of DLC. Content that is behind a pay wall and may only ever be accessed by paying real money. Shortcuts to unlock able content within the game. EXP boosters are a prime example. An ingame currency was obviously planned and that made me (and some others) believe that there would be some sort of progression system. So adding new content (like commanders) would have encouraged people to play more thus increasing the community and the longevity of the game. Believing COH2 to be a title with a AAA budget this would have made a lot of (business) sense. If the devolopers were thinking of the first (admittedly narrow) DLC definition then this might not have been at odds with the developer comments at that time. Then again maybe I am just nitpicking here and it was evil Sega after all. In: COH2 Gameplay