Profile of negativg

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 24

General Information


Thread: Penals weaker than conscripts??9 Nov 2015, 19:09 PM From a design point of view I'd love to see them get PTRS+light AT mine upgrade (I'd remove the PTRS from guards, so they'd be solely AI, but elite at that, I never liked the idea of elite infantry running around with obsolete AT rifles in 1944). Having light AT in T1 wouldn't hurt, I believe. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF cakewalks OKW and Ostheer6 Nov 2015, 19:42 PM I disagree on this, maybe the buff was too big, though. As I said, in order to avoid possible overnerf again, I advocate fixing Rifle Company first, all I'm saying. Cheers, ng In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF cakewalks OKW and Ostheer6 Nov 2015, 19:30 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Nov 2015, 19:25 PMausterlitz Rifle vet is extreme atm.As is tommy vet. An that may as well be the case. What I say, is to fix the most important issue first, and then see whether the rifles are still problematic. The problems are interconnected, so it's safer to fix them one by one. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF cakewalks OKW and Ostheer6 Nov 2015, 19:18 PM Riflemen need to be good and scale into lategame, as USF has no non-doc elite inf, and can't build anything else before tech. Before any adjustments are made to riflemen themselves, Rifle Company needs to be adressed, otherwise USF may get overnerfed, classic Relic way. As many already pointed out, flamers on main line inf are quite retarded. Just replace it with M1919 and push back vet-rifle call-in in CPs so it can be used only for replacing losses. Buffing OST/OKW in response to flamer rifle problem may in turn screw SOV. One fix at a time, I say. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: M36- badly underpowered?4 Feb 2015, 11:04 AM M36 should have "user experience may vary" disclaimer in the tooltip. As many pointed out it's very inconsistent. When positioned correctly and with some favors from RNGod it's beastly. When map or situation forces it out of favored range and you get miss/deflect on 2 consecutive shots AND THEN you get stuck on something when reversing AND that blitzing Panther just hit you twice it feels like complete POS. Basically that's why opinions are so far apart here I think. It's similar to 120mm mortar and M8 Scott in that respect, because sometimes it feels like overperforming, and sometimes like utter garbage. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Where is USF air superiority?22 Jan 2015, 14:56 PM For the history curious, here's some analysis on tank losses (Normandy): http://lmharchive.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/18-Chapter-Ten1.pdf Tl;DR: Initially most German losses were due to AP rounds (17pdr, 57mm) penetration, later almost half of German tanks were destroyed by their crews. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: About the B-412 Nov 2014, 15:15 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2014, 13:41 PMsomenbjorn How is the B-4 even in the same leauge as those units? all do huge amounts of damage, 1 can be wiped by two clicks and 160 muni. They are not in the same league, but IMO they fall into same category in terms of ability to deal huge damage that is hard to avoid and do that with really low micro-tax. And this I consider rather bad design. Potential to do a lot of damage: 1) should be tied to resource cost (all of those are expensive, so its good in those terms) 2) dealing the actual damage should be reasonably "micro-taxed", and in case of ISU-152, JT and B4 it is not I consider this as poor gameplay If you deal damage by clicking precison shots, or leaving JT/ISU in the middle of the map and letting them autosnipe their targets. I'd love if Relic would do an esports mod taking such stuff into consideration. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: About the B-411 Nov 2014, 13:06 PM This game would be some much better without ISU-152, JT and B4 ps. and w/o Elefant as well for that matter (it would not be needed anymore + a doctrine having both recon AND bombing strike was stupid from the start). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jakson and M1011 Nov 2014, 12:55 PM I think acceleration increase for M36 so its more responsive (what Cruzz already did for his mod I think), and MAYBE a very SLIGHT RoF or reload speed increase. Alternatively HP increase would be welcomed, but then it could easily become OP, as its not intended to slug it out with heavies. But now if you want to go in aggresively you may lose 1-2 then Axis heavy lolblitzes to safety with sliver of health and you are f#$%ked. And you are kind of forced into P-47s, at least in team games. Just my opinion, maybe I am wrong In: COH2 Balance
Thread: My thoughts & ideas on Conscripts28 Aug 2014, 16:04 PM What I'd love to see, but it'll never happen: 1)Cons get PTRS upgrade (after building T1 or T2), but lose AT nades. Button is moved to PTRS. 2)Penals get AT nades by default, SVT weapon profile is adjusted to emphasize close range role - or just give them PPSHs. 3)Guards lose PTRS, but get DPs by default (this way some doctrines get elite short range infantry, some long range). 4)All above comes with price adjustments if neccessary. Effects: 1)playing T1 now allows for light-undoctrinal AT. Penals and cons now synergize (also as long and close range units). 2)balance would probably get all screwed at first 3)a lot of doctrines would need to be redesigned, so it won't ever happen But hell, it would be cool In: COH2 Balance