This is one of the features that community is asking for since release. Or actually, many asked about this even before the release. It has not been implemented since and right now, there is even less possibility of this happening than ever. Of course I would love to see that feature in, but lets be realistic, it is not going to happen.
The "other options" include it, and it was made exactly to avoid katitofs 2.0 to hit the button without writing anything.
If you think it shouldn't get caches just write it down.
Sorry, but this is the definition of bias if you explicitly say that you want people to have harder time if they are against your idea. And bias results in statistical insignificance.
I would prefer to see how okw works in new patch first. I would also prefer the poll not to be biased. Even if you are sure nobody will vote for "let it be as is", you should put that option in just to make sure you are not wrong. Otherwise the results are meaningless as this is a choice of lesser evil.
As for my ideal idea I would prefer at least 2 factions, one for each side to lack caches. This creates synergy between factions in team games and works against faction mirroring.
Well, if COH2 is your only concern, I would strongly suggest putting as much of your money into the best Intel CPU you can afford. I'd be hesitant to game on a Pentium though. See if you can get a Core i3 at the least.
This is the second time I've seen someone mention AA performance issues, but I'm not sure what people are basing that on. The only thing I can think of is they don't have enough VRAM since the in-game options are good old brute-force MSAA. 4GB is a reasonable amount for this game though, and I can't see any reason for it to get worse as the match goes on. That's just a CPU/bad game code thing, as far as I'm aware. You can also just force newer AA methods from Nvidia control panel instead of in-game AA. That would free up a lot of GPU power.
As for AA I think the is problem with the fact that people finally can play this game on max settings with current hardware but they cant set AA to max becouse of MSAA usage. Using forced AA from GPU drivers is a good choice but as this has to be full scale it sadly also blurs fonts.
My game is capped at 60 FPS. I have a 6600k and it never goes over 50% load while GPU peaks out at 100% during explosions/smoke. So yes GPU is going to bottleneck your FPS unless you have a very very old/bad CPU.
How exactly do you expect a game that uses up to 2 threads (usually the second one is barely used) to go over 50% on 4 core cpu?
I had no knowledge of this but I as refering to the number of squads not models. Also, if you get cought up in hmg fire is that good play?
I think its not possible to define for squads becouse squads have no postition, only models do.
What I mean by good play is defencive placement in green cover. If opponents attacks position using hmg, he should not be able to supress squad in green cover quickly, just becouse there are other squads in other green cover nearby.
If the player decides to use his resources just to get cp and some more base rape defence then I think its a fair trade, no need to stop him from doing that.
Finally lets talk about blobs. I believe blobs are a valid tactic but the only way to counter a blob is by blobing yourself because hmg's (the logic counter to a blob) just die before doing something. My suggestion would be to use a mechanic simillar to the shared veterancy but instead it would share suppression. Lets say that a hmg does suppression to a squad at a rate 1x. Now imagine a blob of 5 units, with the shared suppression the hmg would do 5x the suppression to each squad in the blob because each squad would share suppression with the others and thus hmg's would finally do what they are supposed to do, counter infantry.
As far as I know this has already been implemented. The supression kicks in faster if there are more models close to each other. This is why it is so easy to supress con squad. The problem with this is that the range of this effect is rather small. This can't be improved though as for example squads in defencive cover positions are usually just as close to each other as squads in a blob. By punishing blobs with increasing range of that effect you would also punish good play.
I wanted to do that; limit AT guns to attack buildings (to bust emplacements/bunkers) and vehicles only, and to remove the ugly overhead yellow icon. However, Miragefla vetoed it and the proposal never got through
I also wanted to do the same for dedicated TDs (which would also save players from having to click the prioiritise vehicle button every damn time they re-enter the Jackson). Same result.
For generalist tank etc prioiritise vehicle, I also wanted to change the overhead ugly and intrusive yellow icon with the squad-shield padlock from brace. That way it takes up less space, and you can also keep track of unit status from the unit shields in the top-right, or also from the tactical minimap. Same story
Pak 43's have a crew and Prioritize Vehicles only applies to the main gun.
Blah that sucks! I'm sure he has his reasons, but having to click "prioritize vehicles" on every AT gun I build or recrew, and every tank destroyer I build or crew, is one of the most annoying parts of the game for me. As far as unit mechanics go, it just feels like unnecessary micro.
What would he think about prioritize vehicles as the default, and free-fire (shoot anything) as the toggle?
Maybe it would at least be possible to enable this ability on default when build/recrewed? That way we can still disable it to keep miragefla happy but we don't have to click that button so many times.
And they are a great defensive suplement to cloaked rakketen. First you hit tank with rakketen, then you faust it with cloaked Falls and then you finish it off. Your opponent wont even notice what has happened before its too late
In this case I think I would prefer to have double raketen
Poland
0
ferwiner
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
