Profile of Junaid

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 509

General Information
Register Time: 4 Mar 2014, 04:14 AM
Last Visit Time: 3 May 2017, 19:33 PM


Thread: Balance Preview Update 09/08/201510 Sep 2015, 08:02 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2015, 00:38 AM$nuffy I never pretended I wasn't. It's just that the Allied bias is flooding these boards it's insane. There's plenty of bias from both sides on these forums. Too much if you ask me In: Lobby
Thread: Ostheer Sniper overperforming10 Sep 2015, 07:32 AM Everyone who says brits need more sniper counters: +1 absolutely correct. Brits need more/better sniper counters. Design-wise they're supposed to countersnipe so I propose that the cloak time on brit sniper and ost sniper be mirrored. I will also point out that ost sniper does over-perform vs 5 and 4 man squads. He's balanced vs 6 man squads. I don't remember where but there was a thread comparing total time to kill of sov and ost snipers vs differently sized squads, and both snipers are balanced around opposing 4/6 model squads. Sov sniper needs a RoF buff vs volks (cause theyre 5 man). I propose this be done using target tables to adjust RoF. [Ty for your post elchino]. (Squad size standardization would be even better imo). To those complaining about durability: I propose adding a received accuracy modifier of 1.1 - 1.2 (test the values) to all snipers but keep the HP as it is. So they will be more vulnerable to small arms but retain durability against explosives. Also propose increasing the spacing on sov sniper cause he is VERY vulnerable to AoE in cover, and snipers (as a general rule) are always in cover. There, I believe that covers everything! In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Scoped Lee Enfields bug9 Sep 2015, 19:32 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Sep 2015, 22:14 PMKatitof Its just visual, not another weapon. It should just be normal lee enfield with shorter cooldown and scoped graphic. I believe it is a separate weapon. Have read that in multiple threads now. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Scoped Lee Enfields bug9 Sep 2015, 19:31 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Sep 2015, 23:19 PMAlexzandvar The only stat that is different to the regular Lee Enfield is that Scoped ones have a longer reload (meaning less DPS). Either way, its most probably not meant to be a downgrade. Completely goes against game design. So must be a bug. Probably leftover weapon data from their in-house value tuning crept in. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: So an MG42 gets inside a 251 Half-Track.....9 Sep 2015, 19:28 PM I believe that its working as designed. Since it has been like this since release. Not 100% sure ofcourse, a dev would have to say. Jump back to quoted post5 Sep 2015, 05:21 AMWhat Doth Life?! You can also put the sniper into it. I am gobsmacked why the Soviet sniper can't load into vehicles anymore. They could have just removed it's ability to fire from it. I suspect they kept it that way because ost infantry can't fire out of the 251 HT whereas sov infantry can fire out of m3 and m5. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Vickers K causing MG42 to stop supressing. Permanently.9 Sep 2015, 19:25 PM Hi all, So, the issue is as follows: Patch: 3.0.0.19545 Vickers K UC used its suppressive fire ability to suppress my mg42. My mg crew died while still pinned. Afterwards i recrewed that mg twice (one with pios, once with grens) and it completely stopped suppressing at all. I've attached a replay below. I'm not sure whether its the mg42 crew dying while in pinned state or the vickers UC, but I suspect its the UC. 0 VS Beardedragon !8=89 4820= Shaunuthun StormTrooperSkillz Junaid [AJSA]MeloDeath rekso83 clever_Ely MG42 bug: No suppression after vickers K UC suppressed it by: Junaid map: Steppes 1 - In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: MG42 bug: No suppression after vickers K UC suppressed it9 Sep 2015, 19:21 PM As title says: my MG42 got suppressed with the vickers K UC, and afterwards stopped suppressing completely. Observe my mg42. I was playing ostheer on the bottom side. In: Replays
Thread: Balance Preview Update 09/08/20159 Sep 2015, 19:14 PM Jump back to quoted post9 Sep 2015, 00:27 AMbC_ add some things Tiger and Tiger Ace Vet 2 sight bonus reduced from 10 to 5 Added more of a stagger of time between the planes of Stuka Close Air Support Fixed rifleman sandbag requirement so u can build it right off the bat Ty for the quick updates devs. I have a balance request: Can hand-held infantry AT weapons i.e. shrecks, zooks and PIATS be modified to not deal damage to infantry, particularly no splash damage? With the new cover spacing its just a horrible exploit to quickly clear enemy infantry in cover by rushing in close (AoE does the trick and they don't miss infantry at short range). If I may suggest: The PTRS uses a bonus dmg mechanic to reduce its anti infantry dmg to 27 while retaining its anti-vehicle dmg at 40? Could something similar be implemented here? In: Lobby
Thread: Balance Preview Update 09/08/20159 Sep 2015, 18:54 PM Jump back to quoted post9 Sep 2015, 16:23 PMContrivance I believe the answer is in the middle of these two sides. Tank development involves a lot of trade-offs, and one of the major trade-offs the T-34 designers made in order to have a good combination of sloped armour and excellent mobility was a cramped interior with fewer vision ports. The standard for German medium and heavy tanks was a 5-man crew, but the T-34 only fit 4 crew members (the later T-34/85 with the larger turret fixed this, though it was still cramped), so the commander was also the gunner. Even if the Soviet crew was as experienced as a German crew, they were still at a bit of a tactical disadvantage if their commander was busy aiming and firing the gun rather than observing the big picture. And with fewer vision ports (and the lack of a commander's cupola in early models) the crew didn't have great situational awareness to begin with. ( Lack of radios was another issue that contributed to low success rates in combat, though more to do with a shortage of dry cells than to do with the T-34 design itself. ) No surprise that when the Germans made two proposals for T-34-inspired vehicles, both were a bit larger than the actual T-34 so that they could fit 5 crew in. The winning proposal led to the Panther, which as we know is quite a bit bigger Informative and excellent post there. Just to add to the trivia: The Heer (army) wanted a 35 ton tank. Hitler insisted on adding more armor so it ended up being as big as it was (45 ton IIRC) In: Lobby
Thread: Balance Preview Update 09/08/20159 Sep 2015, 18:53 PM Jump back to quoted post9 Sep 2015, 17:04 PMRobbie_Rotten I know you are being sarcastic but I have had people do that... and then say "axis armor is such a joke" It is actually pretty common. Yeah it is, sadly. In: Lobby