Login

russian armor

Bofors

14 May 2018, 13:17 PM
#21
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Besides SC2 and Warcraft 3, which other are these "multiple" RTS games that do both?

Every single C&C title with exception of first.
Halo Wars(yeah, I know, a stretch, but still).
Whole homeworld series(Desserts of Kharak included).
AoE:Online when it was still alive(no gear stats mode).
Supreme Commander 2(don't know much about 1).
CoH1 to an extend(plenty of cheeze, but there are ways to counter it all).
Now, try not to lose your shit here:
DoW3 last balance patch.
14 May 2018, 13:24 PM
#22
avatar of cheese tonkatsu

Posts: 105



you cant read/ understand what you read. I asked you what you get with other faction for the price from a bofors...one thing you could buy: a 222. You was the guy which tried to make a comparison

hmmm... in that topic. werent we talking about units aa work? in that topic, it looks like >^< is the fact. bofors can't do aa work so 222 wins the aa part.
14 May 2018, 13:38 PM
#23
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243


hmmm... in that topic. werent we talking about units aa work? in that topic, it looks like >^< is the fact. bofors can't do aa work so 222 wins the aa part.


not really..when you would please read the first post in this tread....

WHat do you mean was my tread where i said that german AA units are weak. And yes..bofors was the worst from all.
But its much more effectiv against land units...you will need so much mirco and manpower to deal with it against a good player....even more in teamgaes...who one def and and push your attacks away and make it impossible to stay 1min and bomb with mortars..
14 May 2018, 14:25 PM
#24
avatar of cheese tonkatsu

Posts: 105



not really..when you would please read the first post in this tread....

WHat do you mean was my tread where i said that german AA units are weak. And yes..bofors was the worst from all.
But its much more effectiv against land units...you will need so much mirco and manpower to deal with it against a good player....even more in teamgaes...who one def and and push your attacks away and make it impossible to stay 1min and bomb with mortars..

i can understand you wants to beat me. but topic is the topic. bofors<222 in aa part. try to use incendry or ats too with mortars to break bofors. or flame through the walls or smoke n use flame. it will help you. n i wont say about this. axis unit can be bad at some points. each unit has its own trait. like 222 has bad dmg than bofors but he can still move n give you a great sight. just take it. there is no reason for axis units to be always cheaper n greater than allies units.

+ if he is a better player than you, he should prevent you from destroying bofors. if he can't do like that in rts. then that rts game is unbalanced and shitty game.
14 May 2018, 15:32 PM
#25
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

For most people balance doesn´t matter anyways because of how matchmaking works.

/thread?
14 May 2018, 16:57 PM
#26
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post14 May 2018, 13:17 PMKatitof

Every single C&C title with exception of first.
Halo Wars(yeah, I know, a stretch, but still).
Whole homeworld series(Desserts of Kharak included).
AoE:Online when it was still alive(no gear stats mode).
Supreme Commander 2(don't know much about 1).
CoH1 to an extend(plenty of cheeze, but there are ways to counter it all).
Now, try not to lose your shit here:
DoW3 last balance patch.


For one reason or another I am not too familiar with C&C apart from my limited experience with Generals and hearing a lot of good things about Red Alert 2, and a lot of hate for Red Alert 3. But none of the praises for those games were related to the question at point here.

Halo Wars is arguably a big ass stretch.

Never played Homeworld but again, never heard anything related to the question at point here.

No idea about AoE:Online but since it's no longer working...

I am surprised hearing that about Sup Com 2 because many people prefer the original, including me, so I'll take it as your own opinion which I am not bashing or anything but once again I've never heard anything about it that concerns the question at hand here.

CoH to an extent has that and I will agree with you here however, the British are really pushing that extent if you ask me.

Yeah, DoW3 caught me off guard, I'll look into it.
14 May 2018, 17:34 PM
#27
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post14 May 2018, 13:17 PMKatitof

Every single C&C title with exception of first.
Halo Wars(yeah, I know, a stretch, but still).
Whole homeworld series(Desserts of Kharak included).
AoE:Online when it was still alive(no gear stats mode).
Supreme Commander 2(don't know much about 1).
CoH1 to an extend(plenty of cheeze, but there are ways to counter it all).
Now, try not to lose your shit here:
DoW3 last balance patch.


3 factions is significantly easier to make asymmetric and balance than it is 5 factions. You'll run into serious overlap the more factions you have.
14 May 2018, 21:15 PM
#28
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

It's funny because he's true. Almost every british emplacement will be forced to brace from 1 fire nade and finished off with a mortar.

It's laughably easy to do, and even if you go for commandos to snipe the mortars, they'll just safe retreat and do it again. Except you're still under pressure to get the mid VP back

i would recommend making emplacments PART of your army instead of expecting them to hold up the entire enemy while you 5 man bren tommy ball across the map like they used to. if the enemy can get up to your bofors and flame nade it you let them or were out played. they are cancer and should require something from the brit to make them work well and if a single nade and mortar can kill it so easily you deserve to be out the resources
14 May 2018, 23:52 PM
#29
avatar of Cyanara

Posts: 769 | Subs: 1

I'll admit I don't see bofors often, but all my memories are of them wiping my infantry, even if I instantly retreated.

I just tried cheatmod though, and it definitely struggled to stop a single squad from approaching, let alone 2. It could perhaps stand to have flak halftrack levels of suppression.

That said, I detest British emplacement design so much I'm fairly happy to pretend that faction was never released.

Also, as a side note, the difference between balancing asymmetric factions in COH2 compared to other RTS games is RNG. COH2 is designed around it (to a very complex degree) to provide a rich micro strategy, while in most RTS games you can easily tell with a high level of certainty which unit will defeat which.
16 May 2018, 06:25 AM
#30
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post14 May 2018, 23:52 PMCyanara
I'll admit I don't see bofors often, but all my memories are of them wiping my infantry, even if I instantly retreated.

I just tried cheatmod though, and it definitely struggled to stop a single squad from approaching, let alone 2. It could perhaps stand to have flak halftrack levels of suppression.

That said, I detest British emplacement design so much I'm fairly happy to pretend that faction was never released.

Also, as a side note, the difference between balancing asymmetric factions in COH2 compared to other RTS games is RNG. COH2 is designed around it (to a very complex degree) to provide a rich micro strategy, while in most RTS games you can easily tell with a high level of certainty which unit will defeat which.


Just because you don't like a certain Army doesn't mean that it shouldn't be fun and brought to other Armies' levels.

And the "emplacement design" should be an option, like with Anvil and Hammer, instead of forcing you to rely on the mortar pit for indirect fire support for example, which I agree with you on.

As a side note to your side note, CoH has more RNG involved, CoH2 has less of it due to the competitive community's complaints. That's why I consider CoH a more gameplay realistic game than CoH2, which arguably is a bit more historically accurate in the way units and mechanics work compared to CoH.

But still I'd rather take somewhat of a realistic and fun game than a competitive tryhard, pseudo "historically accurate" game which is trying to be more like StarCraft 2 with every other patch.
16 May 2018, 07:29 AM
#31
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Well emplacement by design are not supposed to be fun to play against. Where is the fun in the enemy being able to hold without a micro tax. Where's the fun in "ahah I've got you now... Oh wait you clicked a button and now I need literally 4x the damage" where's the fun in Sim city? By design its not fun because it dilutes all the important parts of the game that make it fun- there's no dynamic engagements, no risky trades to gain ground....
16 May 2018, 08:04 AM
#32
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

Well emplacement by design are not supposed to be fun to play against. Where is the fun in the enemy being able to hold without a micro tax. Where's the fun in "ahah I've got you now... Oh wait you clicked a button and now I need literally 4x the damage" where's the fun in Sim city? By design its not fun because it dilutes all the important parts of the game that make it fun- there's no dynamic engagements, no risky trades to gain ground....



on top of this point: the emplacements are the units which need the most micro for the enemy to destroy it when you look at the cost.. no other units with the same costs lvl, would need that much micro for the enemy to destroy it.

thats the bullshit. show me other 400mp or 30 fuel units which need nearly that micro do destroy it

in hands of a good player...they are harder to destroy than mostly every tanks like p4, panther or other tanks.

16 May 2018, 08:11 AM
#34
avatar of Cyanara

Posts: 769 | Subs: 1

Just because you don't like a certain Army doesn't mean that it shouldn't be fun and brought to other Armies' levels.


Sure. I just don't have any expectation of that ever happening. Emplacements seem to be fundamentally broken, e.g. target tables can't be applied to bracing, and the whole emphasis of the rest of the game is on moving your units constantly. So removing them is probably the only option. But Relic can be amazingly stubborn about the most obviously broken mechanics sometimes.

As a side note to your side note, CoH has more RNG involved, CoH2 has less of it due to the competitive community's complaints.


I was referring to the much finer RNG that defines every unit, rather than obvious things like vehicle abandons. Accuracy, received accuracy, ROF, cooldown, scatter etc. There's a substantial amount of probability in the most basic stuff that makes it extremely hard to definitively tell if a unit is balanced or not, compared to many games where it's a straight forward DPS value.
16 May 2018, 08:25 AM
#35
avatar of cheese tonkatsu

Posts: 105




on top of this point: the emplacements are the units which need the most micro for the enemy to destroy it when you look at the cost.. no other units with the same costs lvl, would need that much micro for the enemy to destroy it.

thats the bullshit. show me other 400mp or 30 fuel units which need nearly that micro do destroy it

in hands of a good player...they are harder to destroy than mostly every tanks like p4, panther or other tanks.


B U L L E T FOR S N I P E R
16 May 2018, 09:37 AM
#37
avatar of Darth

Posts: 44




try it...the counter barrage will bleed your mortar/ ISG heavy. and dont forget..which noob brit sit back and look how you shot on it? and which teammate will sit back and do nothing?

on a 2v2 there is somebody who push the front..while you as brit can sit back and def the frontline with ease and so less micro...


Looks like your highest rank is 1000+ in 2v2 which quite frankly is potato territory. It is easy to see why you would become frustrated by something that is very easy to counter if you know what you are doing.

Besides, my first suggestion (the one I prefer) wouldn't even change how difficult it is to kill/how much damage it does. Brits are the only faction in the game that must pay 100 fuel to counter air units. It doesn't make sense to build a centaur late game and a bofors should serve as a viable alternative.
16 May 2018, 10:05 AM
#38
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2018, 09:37 AMDarth


Looks like your highest rank is 1000+ in 2v2 which quite frankly is potato territory. It is easy to see why you would become frustrated by something that is very easy to counter if you know what you are doing.

Besides, my first suggestion (the one I prefer) wouldn't even change how difficult it is to kill/how much damage it does. Brits are the only faction in the game that must pay 100 fuel to counter air units. It doesn't make sense to build a centaur late game and a bofors should serve as a viable alternative.



it only looks like this because i didnt play 2v2 the last time.

in reality i play 2v2 in a rank around 300. (when i play)

and you try to say us centaur is bad at mid/late game...which is completly wrong..it snipes infntery like no other tank at this price...didn u look the 2v2 tournements? there was often fights where the centaur attack frontaly a pak40 and kill all models while the pak could only shot one times.


it is not bad like the ostwind,..which visuall make splash dmg...but...only hurt the healts..not kill models.
16 May 2018, 10:19 AM
#39
avatar of Darth

Posts: 44




it only looks like this because i didnt play 2v2 the last time.

in reality i play 2v2 in a rank around 300. (when i play)

and you try to say us centaur is bad at mid/late game...which is completly wrong..it snipes infntery like no other tank at this price...didn u look the 2v2 tournements? there was often fights where the centaur attack frontaly a pak40 and kill all models while the pak could only shot one times.


it is not bad like the ostwind,..which visuall make splash dmg...but...only hurt the healts..not kill models.


Lol, I never said it was bad at mid/late game. It still does an excellent job vs infantry at all stages. I will even admit that the centaur is too good right now, but it's a crutch. All other british tanks have been overnerfed and the only one possibly in a good spot right now is the churchhill. Against a late game composition of vet stug/panther/jp4 the centaur is often more of a liability than its worth.

The ostwind underperforming has nothing to do with the centaur or the bofors so I don't see how its relevant.

16 May 2018, 12:31 PM
#40
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

jump backJump back to quoted post16 May 2018, 10:19 AMDarth


Lol, I never said it was bad at mid/late game. It still does an excellent job vs infantry at all stages. I will even admit that the centaur is too good right now, but it's a crutch. All other british tanks have been overnerfed and the only one possibly in a good spot right now is the churchhill. Against a late game composition of vet stug/panther/jp4 the centaur is often more of a liability than its worth.

The ostwind underperforming has nothing to do with the centaur or the bofors so I don't see how its relevant.



you said: " It doesn't make sense to build a centaur late game and a bofors should serve as a viable alternative." ...
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

352 users are online: 352 guests
1 post in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49973
Welcome our newest member, iasexam
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM