Profile of Dullahan

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 1384

General Information
Steam: 76561197997530183
Timezone: America/Edmonton


Thread: lets talk about medium tanks vs schrecks (AGAIN) 13 Oct 2015, 16:12 PM Schreck blobs get rekt by suppression and mortars. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Balance Preview] Pack Howitzer vs Infantry Gun13 Oct 2015, 06:06 AM The suppression/pinning stuff is the thing that pisses me off. Why does it need it when it regularly kills guys? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW Flame grenades vs Molotovs [with video]13 Oct 2015, 06:01 AM 30 munitions versus 15. T2 versus global upgrade. Your testing methodology is also shit. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Ostheer Fuel Requirements are surprisingly high13 Oct 2015, 03:36 AM Ostheer also doesn't have to spend fuel on global upgrades. They get access to all their weapon upgrades and abilities based on their tech progress. Soviets have molotovs/ AT grenades. USF has weapon racks and grenades. Brits have grenades, weapon racks and squad sizes. They also have Hammer/Anvil tech to unlock churchills or comets. I think if you accounted for these, fuel would be fairly even. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Extra Squad Member13 Oct 2015, 00:14 AM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 23:38 PMvan Voort One thing it does do that's not been mentioned yet is that makes them harder to wipe, and means they can stay in a fight longer before needing to retreat How practical is this? You shouldn't be leaving your squads in a fight until 4/5 men are dead. Maybe more damage is distributed evenly across the squad but that wouldn't make a huge difference. And arguably a delayed command post means you have to wait longer to heal your squads since you can't upgrade them with medkits yet. I could see it working out if you get some extra fuel income early on, but if you're fighting for map control this seems like a bad buy before t2 imo. In: UKF Strategies
Thread: AT ANYTHING?!12 Oct 2015, 22:08 PM 6lber at gun. PIATS with attack ground micro. Mines. Sniper. In: UKF Strategies
Thread: Soviet's tech tree needs to be look at12 Oct 2015, 22:05 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 21:10 PMThe_rEd_bEar This is with out out a doubt the dumbest post I have ever seen on this forum, soviets have less tech decisons and strategies? What crack are you smoking? It's really simple. T1--> T4 doesn't exist anymore. T2--> T4 doesn't exist anymore. Elite infantry became independent of tech choice. Vehicle call ins were independent of tech choice. Less tech options. Objectively. Instead, it's all about having all your units available whenever you want. Being locked out of tech going down one path or the other meant your gameplay strategy revolved around tech decisions. Now it does not. It's also piss easy to have all four tech structures available at once, with zero sacrifices. In team games with soviets it was not uncommon to coordinate your tech. Now who cares, you both have all your tech available. All the decision making was moved to production choices rather than tech choices. (Save for very early game.) In: Lobby
Thread: October Balance Preview12 Oct 2015, 20:32 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 19:43 PM__deleted__ Relic told us that british can be played as 2 factions. Agressive or defensive But now you simply cannot play competitivly with 1-2 emplacements You totally can. In: Lobby
Thread: Soviet's tech tree needs to be look at12 Oct 2015, 20:15 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 18:50 PM__deleted__ When teching that give you away mobility or raw power instaed of fast hard hitting vehicles + good tanks means versatility , then i think something is wrong in kindoom of It used to be you chose between aggressive playstyles (T1, T3) and defensive ones (T2, T4) you could mix and match however you liked. First Relic removed elite infantry from T1 and made them call ins. Then they nerfed sniper cars because scrubs couldn't deal with it. Then they made commanders with vehicle call ins that didn't require any tech structures. Is-2, kv8, kv1, kv2, etc etc. Then they made t4 require t3 and then swapped the t-34/76 and su76. Then they made t1 and t2 dirt cheap so you can get them both early in the game without slowing down later tech much. As a result Soviet have way less tech decisions and strategies. They were best when the game came out. It has been downhill ever since release for them. In: Lobby
Thread: Firefly and the tulip12 Oct 2015, 18:21 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 15:38 PMImagelessbean OK...Your diagram and response make little sense. Basically you are saying use low health cheap tanks to absorb punishment for high health high armor tanks with limited maneuverability (the exact opposite role these tanks are supposed to have). Also not sure how an AT gun in this case does not cause you to lose your Stug 100% of the time you engage an enemy tank, probably without it even firing back. To top that all off you are showing this only for Wehr, whereas OKW has no cheap tank. All of their tanks are expensive, and I fail to see how always needing a wall, in the form of another tank, in front of my heavy tank is good game play. Your post does not address the larger issues I brought up, and is at best a niche situation in which he has no AT so you can absorb the rockets he chose to waste on your Stug (which you now lose). I'm just refuting that there's no counterplay. I can't be bothered to teach people how to play anymore. The point is to kill the firefly cost effectively. If he uses his tulip on the drug or panzer IV, he may kill it but he will die too. If he doesn't the drug or pzIV have a good chance of killing him. I'm not saying drive into a wall of AT guns with a stug. (Such a thing does not really exist in 1v1) and if he has such a thing there are ways of countering that too. What I'm saying is that the firefly is very expensive, the tulip is very expensive. Don't drive your more expensive tanks at him when your less expensive tanks can kill him, ja? In: COH2 Balance