Profile of coh2player

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1571

General Information


Thread: Panther13 Jul 2014, 14:21 PM Just from observation: The P4 Js don't look worth it as the commander has no other benefits. The other OKW commanders are better. Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2014, 07:17 AMsinthe I've abandoned the Panther in Favor of the OKW 2xP4 aus J. call in. Which is 2 tanks for 210 fuel. The OKW is a bit different from ostheer as its infantry's assault ability is so good, so attacks rely less on armor and more on infantry IMO. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther13 Jul 2014, 06:32 AM Oh yes, and the SU-85 could reverse with high speeds, hah. That old panther was back in the days where the T-34/76 fired duds and could not penetrate its rear armor, making it useless unless it rammed, which often didn't do anything but crew shock. The Panther also had a larger pool of HP (960), more speed than currently, and stronger blitz at vet 1. Pen was lower, @ 170 It was also cheaper than the current panther, dipping @ or below (with cheaper T4 teching) 145 fuel at one point. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther13 Jul 2014, 05:36 AM ^^ The tanks in coh have a severe penalty for firing on the move. I thought the panther from 2013 was completely terrible and OP. I think the current one is fine outside of the price but if kept at the current price it should get the P4's AI so it can function as a general tank too. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: What is it about the Luchs that makes it suck?13 Jul 2014, 02:24 AM I think the luchs is supposed to fulfill the AI armored escort for the panzer. Obersolaten can get pinned while the luchs cannot. By this time, T3 with the munition to fuel is available. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fury (2014)13 Jul 2014, 01:03 AM It's unfortunately missing the ubiquitous supporting armored halftracks and self propelled artillery (105s) of a US armored division. The US was the only army in the war with fully mechanized infantry and artillery regiments in their armored divisions. All infantry were mounted on halftracks and in fact organic transport of 'armored doughs' was generally not on top of tanks. The unsafe practice of carrying troops on top of tanks was most commonly among the independent armored battalions of the infantry divisions, which didn't have much mechanized transport. The Waffen SS pzg were very 'young' generally in 1945. We're talking 16 and 17 years olds and so forth, not middle aged, overweight reinactors with clean uniforms...:-p. They were also generally very thin boys due to poor diet. I guess these details were left out for budget reasons, and it's cheaper to have just tanks and infantry. In: Scrap Yard
Thread: US late game13 Jul 2014, 00:36 AM I usually get 2. I find their suppression abilities to be not that good and the firing arc isn't generous, either. They do good damage, though. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fury movie: Brad Pitt(Sherman M4A2 ) VS Tiger 13112 Jul 2014, 21:02 PM ^^ They also get a certificate of achievement with fancy gold calligraphy on thick paper. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: General World War 2 Discussion Thread12 Jul 2014, 20:15 PM Many Generals and divisional history compilers with the same excuses: 'We were heroic defenders of the German people' 'Overwhelming Allied material' 'Allies too cautious and slow, could have destroyed us any time if they were us' 'We were individually superior to the Asiatic, mongoloid Russians that were bound to the land and acted as with herd instincts' 'We were never beaten in a 'fair fight'' Jump back to quoted post9 Jul 2014, 00:18 AMvan Voort I also don't buy into the idea he was strategically inept, plenty of Generals survived to write self serving memoirs that basically set out to say: ...And..of course, it was 'all Hitler's fault', General Mud and General Winter beat us, not the Red Army or ourselves. In: The Library
Thread: Faction Strength12 Jul 2014, 18:27 PM While I agree that 1 v 1 is harder, there are different 'types' of skills involved in 3 v 3 and 4 v 4. Very often, these games are long as hell and it requires the management of a 70-100 popcap army which is actually quite a lot of things to keep track of. Before I play one of these, I plan out various 'fleets' that I will consider making. 1 v 1 is more about resource calculation, mind games, and individual micro of small number of units, often below 50 pop cap. This is why I think kill ratio and total kill counts are important in team games, because they show one's share of contribution to the victory or loss. The way the team games are measured are not competitive focused, and using just win/loss is wrong. In: Lobby
Thread: Faction Strength12 Jul 2014, 18:12 PM ^^ I used to play 1 v 1 only when I started with coh. But it was stressful, as mistakes are punishing. But I find the team games to be more fun and less stressful, and less punishing in terms of mistakes. I do believe that they should include another core metric with team games in order to make it more competitive. Kill ratios should make it into the rankings. I have a great team team if it goes for an hour and I have 3:1 kill ratio. In: Lobby