and it doesnt mean prove anything wrong I said. The players were just superior than to the axis players.
 |
Yea, I also played CoH1 back in 2006. I've got my old box somewhere with the 6 CDs and everything. I'm well aware of how MP worked - and if you repeatedly left (or DC'd) matches back then, you'd just get kicked from future lobbies when you joined. The same thing would happen in even older games, like Rise of Nations, Age of Mythology, etc. Joining games, only to ruin them by leaving a few minutes in (either intentionally or not) wasted everyone's time, and gave that person a bad reputation.
Yes, I will complain. Wasting 5 minutes is wasting 5 minutes. I can understand if someone crashes, or needs to leave once; but this is about OPs problem where a person is leaving 10 games in a row. Even if it's not intentional (it almost certainly is, in hopes of lowering their ELO), it's still incredibly inconsiderate.
Even comparatively, other games with skill-based match making almost always have "leaver penalties" to prevent this exact thing. It's usually no penalty for the first leave (in a period of time), and then increasingly long periods of match-making bans (10 minutes, 30 minutes, hours, etc.). That's all I'm asking for.
Remember to make a thread whenever CoH3 is announced. |
|
Your best route option is to bait them to use chat. |
Are these the only doctrines you don't have?
Cause these are not really worth paying money for. 
Yep, i don't think they will be meta anytime soon or provide anything remarkable different.
Luftwaffe was just there to boost old KT rushes. Joint Operations is basically 2013 meta and Scavenge got 2 moments, when they could 1 shot USF and when Ostwind was meta (before the buffs).
@OP if you still want any of them, i guess it's a coin toss between Scavenge and Joint OP. |
In AA its to prevent loss of company strength by suiciding unneeded units.
In MP, it would take away planning element, knowing you can fix your mistakes without offering vet to enemy.
You could always offered them to base MG bunkers and that wouldn't give any xp whatsoever.
IF this is implemented it should give nothing in return. Simple as that. It should be there to free up popcap. |
You sure?
4 min 251 with more health then T34 at vet2?
Tiger ace?
First iteration ass grens?
Whole fucking march deployment patch? 
Godlike HMG42?
Soviets had it pretty damn rough during first year.
For every thing you mentioned, there was a soviet equivalent.
If we talk about teamgames over 2v2, thats a complete different story. |
No. I see plenty of balance discussion in the forums, but discussion of the competition, the players, the matches, the strategies, and the matchups to come.... none. Tbh it's been like this for years.
I might be wrong but to me it felt like in recent years there was a lot forum discussion about a tourney going on only if 1) the balance seemed to be completely broken or 2) there was some sort of DRAMA involved for whatever reason... and god, from 2013-17 it felt like there was drama in almost every bigger tournament.
Neither of the 2 points apply to the current tourney, and the twitch + youtube viewcounts and interactions have been great so far... so I guess it's a good thing?
Aerafield is correct.
Unfortunately, the forums is like democracy.
" The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"
Unfortunately, there's something called talent bleeding. @AE you can take a look at staff members at the entrance hall section and see how many strategist we had and who they were through history.
More often than not, people who shared valuable posts had pass through the staff. The exceptions are quite few. Lot of people are far gone.
Analysing and discussing in detail the tournament requires knowledge, time and dedication (i generally don't watch them live and play the catch up game through weeks after it finished, i would check a specific game if it's brought up).
You could had a well structure post just for it to be drown by the usual biased players who wants to push their agenda.
|
Yes, why you say that?
Brumbafant sounds fair, and if we use tiger as such, i guess it works. But allies do have good AI heavy
Historically, in game sense, heavies were always the most useful in 1v1, depending on meta on 2v2 and less useful on 4v4. It's just a matter of unit volume, timing, counters available, etc.
Which is totally inverse to super heavies. Asking for any buffs or adjustments to heavies for teamgames atm, is like asking for buffs on super heavies because they are harder to use in 1v1. |
|
Answering the question:
It depends on the armor and HP on the target mostly.
For example:
320HP HT will die faster to the Su85.
400HP Puma will die faster to the FF.
In this cases pen doesn't matter. In the first case, both units require the same amount of reload cycles. In the 2nd case, the Su85 needs 2 reloads while the FF only needs one.
At 560 HP, FF is marginally better.
At 640 HP the Su85.
So on and so on. |
I forgot where to officially get it, but here's a link to my copy: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ioocf34d9sq778f/coh2dpsnewui.html?dl=0
Is this the same as this ?
https://coh2db.com/stats/
|
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
