Posts: 772
1. That 5 range is difference between 100% being spotted before firing vs fire in FoW.
2. I think they also nerfed vet bonus which gave ST 45 range WITH 45 sight
Posts: 195
Did you lose units to a ST firing from the FOW? thats a low level mistake lad. Decent players can hear a ST coming and firing and dodge such an attack its still an utter horror to support weapons which s the main reason to use it.
Posts: 956
Stormjager got rekt by the Sturmtiger in this match (https://youtu.be/1pD0qQ3k_8A?t=1030) and I wouldn't call his play low level. He outplayed his opponent and pulled some great moves to counter two Sturmtigers, even if it was all futile.
Posts: 919
this is a completely biased thread. u did not mention AVRE got a turret anywhere in ur comparison (please correct if i am wrong, but i didnt see any mention of the turret)...and y dont i see threads about nerf AVRE??? forum is completely ally biased.
Posts: 1
Avre was mentioned various times in this thread beeing similar in wiping quality to ST, just not by op. Even its turret was mentioned as an advantage to be more responsive and to aim faster(->MMX). So your claims hold little water, various people pointed out that the Avre should be handled the same. Just stop your "biased" call-outs, the forum is able to talk about both sides. Its just your perception.
Posts: 1153 | Subs: 1
Posts: 658
I just gotta say I played against a competent player using the Sturmtiger into KT build and holy hell is it some toxic shit.
I fundamentally believe units like Sturmtiger and AVRE shouldn't be in the game. Reserve those kind of big explosions for off map abilities.
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
Posts: 713 | Subs: 2
Posts: 197
it's fine
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
I have noticed a pattern that regardless of the balance issue being discussed at hand, in every single thread, you say that "it's fine, stop crying l2p" without ever elaborating how it is fine.
This is particulalry noticeable whenever something unbalanced on the axis side is being discussed, you don't ever provide anything constructive when you reply to a thread.
Why are you on this forum?
Posts: 713 | Subs: 2
I have noticed a pattern that regardless of the balance issue being discussed at hand, in every single thread, you say that "it's fine, stop crying l2p" without ever elaborating how it is fine.
This is particulalry noticeable whenever something unbalanced on the axis side is being discussed, you don't ever provide anything constructive when you reply to a thread.
Why are you on this forum?
Posts: 772
why should i discuss l2p issues without even a provided replay?
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
This forum is worthless. It's populated by people who don't understand basic CoH gameplay but still want to discuss balance issues. That's fine but people who actually understand the game (like him) don't take it seriously. It's kinda like people debating coaching decisions in sports when they've never been involved in the sport in any relevant way. It's fun for them but the discussions are ultimately worthless.
Posts: 713 | Subs: 2
Since when 100+ rank in 1v1 counted as "understand the game?"
I'm usually on 20~40 rank when I do play (Not playing until ST nerf hits live server),
Current ST is one of the worst unit I ever seen in balance history that affects all mode 1v1 to 4v4.
Posts: 919
This forum is worthless. It's populated by people who don't understand basic CoH gameplay but still want to discuss balance issues. That's fine but people who actually understand the game (like him) don't take it seriously. It's kinda like people debating coaching decisions in sports when they've never been involved in the sport in any relevant way. It's fun for them but the discussions are ultimately worthless.
Posts: 713 | Subs: 2
1) Worthless? Why are you here and posting stuff (atm 624 posts)? I hope you don't meant it that way.
2) A good strategy game offers fun at all skill levels of play. Everyone should have the right to discuss balance problems at his own skill level. l2p is just an arrogant and lazy excuse for not wanting to balance the game for all players, and that means leaving out over 90% of players. If a game for example is pretty good balanced in top100 but one faction falls of sharply in winrate below that ranks, than it is the fault of the game not the fault of the players that have to learn to play. The game is not overall balanced in that case. A lot of players are just casual gamers that have a family and a job and no time for practizing over and over again. Things get worse because this game is not very transparent about a lot of its game mechanics. Casual gamers payed money for this game too and have the right to have an pleasant experience if playing online at all skill levels.
Thx for taking this serious ;P
Posts: 919
2) I'm done debating this point for the millionth time. You logically can't balance the game for all players because unit and faction strength are completely dependant on the player if you assume non optimal play. There would be a million unresolvable conflicts as proven by this forum.
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
l2p is just an arrogant and lazy excuse for not wanting to balance the game for all players
 |
|
|
72 | ||
 |
|
|
39 | ||
|
|
|
|
39 | ||
|
|
|
|
27 | ||
|
|
|
|
21 | ||
 |
|
|
11 | ||
|
|
|
|
611 | ||
|
|
|
|
15 | ||
 |
|
|
13 | ||
 |
|
|
3 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
