Profile of Mr. Someguy

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 4928

General Information


Thread: Suggested change for call-in doctrinal units?13 Feb 2014, 01:53 AM Jump back to quoted post12 Feb 2014, 15:26 PMcoh2player I recently played VCOH again and I am once again reminded how much I miss the Sherman vs. Panzer IV/Stug IV dynamic. The vanilla Sherman was weak AT/Strong AI and a universal upgrade could turn all Shermans into Sherman 76 so it could compete with the Panzer IV. US also relied on the cheaper M18 or M10 with the 76mm gun. As a German player, you had the Stug IV and the Panzer IV, although in different (but not expensive) tiers. These were crucial main-line tanks yet in COH2 they made it completely asymmetrical to the point where one has to rely on Call-ins if they are Soviet. There were things that deserve to be asymmetrical- but making T3 amazingly asymmetrical was not one of them. The T-34/76 is kinda the same, the difference with it is having a weak gun and weak armour. The Panzer IV Ausf. F1 vs the T-34/76 does share that dynamic, oddly enough. But that's not featured in the multiplayer game aside from the Panzer IV Command Tank. They they swapped the SU-76 to T3 (preferably swap places with T-70), that'd bring back some of the Infantry Tank + Tank Destroy dynamic, and would go a long way to making Soviet late-game feel good. The Panzer IV / StuG IV dynamic hasn't changed much imo, except now it's a StuG III instead and it has longer range with more emphases on the Tank Destroyer role. I agree that Soviets rely too much on call-ins, this seems to be a side-effect of the game being shuffled around. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Small update today12 Feb 2014, 04:15 AM I think it broke my replays though, shame In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Soviet mines needs at least 2x cost for its effectiveness12 Feb 2014, 03:49 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Feb 2014, 13:07 PMnegativg Comparing Panther and Tiger's AI capability to IS2 is IMO wrong(they are both more AT, than AI). If anything, you should compare IS2 AoE to Brummbar's (same AoE range, more dmg though). I compared the IS-2 to the Tiger and Panther because that's what people like to compare it to. It's most often compared to a Tiger or a Panther by other players. While the Tiger is a health-tank, the Panther is a tank-killer, and the Sturmpanzer IV is an infantry-killer, the IS-2 is more of a combination of all 3. It has decent health but strong frontal armour, and its main gun has high damage over a large radius and high armour penetration. Jump back to quoted post11 Feb 2014, 22:36 PMKatitof And to compensate that and bring it in line with other mine build time what will give you to all other mines? 2-3 second build time? You seem to be forgetting that german mine field places 8+ minses, not a single one. You seem to be forgetting that Pioneers have to plant 4 patches or the 80 munitions goes to waste, and each patch takes ages to plant, and each mine does only half-health damage, and you can just use a vehicle to clear the mines with no harm done. Jump back to quoted post11 Feb 2014, 22:51 PMKatitof If thats true, then my jaw dropped. I still can't imagine how will they plant that in 10 secs. Same way both factions build bases so quickly they put the Amish to shame. Jump back to quoted post12 Feb 2014, 01:18 AMKronosaur0s IS2<Tiger I dont think so Imo the Tiger is a better tank than the IS-2 for tank vs tank combat. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet mines needs at least 2x cost for its effectiveness11 Feb 2014, 12:47 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Feb 2014, 11:45 AMMarcoRossolini True, but watch out for looking for realism with mines, iirc the majority of Soviet mines were made of wood, i.e. impossible to detect with a minesweeper. The Germans actually did something like they too. They even had a special mine that only their detectors could pick up, while allied detectors couldn't. After the war our engineers looked into it, turns out they were coated with radioactive paint, and German mine detectors used for finding those mines had built-in Geiger counters. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Suggested change for call-in doctrinal units?11 Feb 2014, 12:43 PM Honestly my biggest disappointment with Assault Grenadiers is that they neglected to call them Sturmgrenadiers. Oh what could have been.. That aside, a small price drop or something to help them sustain the late-game would be delightful. On the other hand, Osttruppen are okay, but they never get to shine. Light cover provides them a poor bonus and breaks too easily, while heavy cover lets them beat Penals 1v1 but is much less common, let alone a section long enough for 6 people. Trenches overcome that, but Rus has a hard-counter to trenches (and cover in general) on every infantry unit they get (molotovs, satchels, grenades). Since they nerfed the cap rate, they're more of a gimmick than anything else. They're not so much underpowered as they are incredibly niche, a niche so small it's usually not worth looking into. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Suggested change for call-in doctrinal units?11 Feb 2014, 10:39 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Feb 2014, 05:45 AMspectre645 why are all your threads centered around nerfing soviets to the ground? As if Germans even have many call-ins to nerf, if anything some of them need a slight buff (Osttruppen, Assault Grenadiers). In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Soviet mines needs at least 2x cost for its effectiveness11 Feb 2014, 05:48 AM That's only partially true. While axis squads do group up, Soviet explosives are overall better at killing soldiers than axis explosions. T-34/76 does more damage over a larger radius than the Panzer IV, TM-35 Mines do heavy damage over a large radius while a single S-mine can't kill one man, 120mm mortars have no axis equivalent but are very strong, etc. The IS-2 is particularly bad, its instant-kill radius for infantry is over twice as large as the Tiger's, and 18 times larger than the Panther's (which people often compare it to). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The high health unit problem11 Feb 2014, 05:32 AM Shock Troops are also strong because of their 56% chance to deflect a shot, they're permanantly in-cover even while charging and negating other cover. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Panzergrens11 Feb 2014, 02:46 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Feb 2014, 22:39 PMMad_Hatter If you nerf their AI then shocks get better by comparison which again wouldn't be ideal because now so inf can deal much better with pgrens whereas ost now have an even harder time vs shocks. I miss CoH1's system of armours, where you could change how X and Y fight each other without altering how X and Z fight. An example would be how Panzer Grenadiers could lose to Engineers, but not be worthless when fighting Rifles. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panzergrens10 Feb 2014, 00:22 AM Jump back to quoted post9 Feb 2014, 22:39 PMATCF Shocks and Pgrens fire more often if they move, raising their DPS False, that was the case for Assault Grenadiers in CoH1, but not here. The Panzergrenadiers lose act exactly the same moving as they do not moving. Shock Troops fire in 50% longer bursts but have 25% less accuracy. In: COH2 Balance