Login

russian armor

OKW buildings and resources upon cancellation

6 Oct 2018, 12:24 PM
#21
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



That's a good kiss-ass come back however, you said this:

Which proves that you're lying.

You may think I'm doing this because I'm an evil asshole or whatever, I'm really doing it to teach you a lesson, today you act like a tough guy on the internet without any proof to back you up, tomorrow that might just cost you your life if you're face to face with somebody. Take from it what you will.

Man, and you are speaking of passive agressivness? Come on now.

The truth is though that you can't understand your own language sadly and even your own posts... You said:


I asked SneakEye about it and he confirmed that it's possible for the trucks to retain their textures (and the flak at the back of the Flak HQ if I remember correctly) so your 2nd reason is entirely bullshit beyond all comprehension. It's also possible to keep the current system while simply allowing them to unsetup into normal sWS, it would just be a more technical complex way of doing it.


Which means that one of your propositions is copying brit system, and the other is to "keep the current system while simply allowing them to unsetup into normal sWS". The second one is what I refered to as "Simply allowing to unsetup would have to return resources." Can you understand now, or should I explain 3 more times?

Now let me end that pointless discussion as it is off topic and I don't want to feed you and your anger any more. I also have much more important things to do than explaining random guys in the internet why they are wrong.
6 Oct 2018, 12:44 PM
#22
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Oct 2018, 12:16 PMSyraw
its your mistake for trowing a satchel. small arms fire is a better solution as long as the structure is in construction, since in this case it has 0 armor. wait until it finishes before using the satchel.


against a flak HQ? id be suppressed before i could throw... no this is not my mistake rather its cheese... the OKW player played badly and failed to defend his flak HQ which i proceeded to satchel... he deserved to lose it and not get away freely...
6 Oct 2018, 12:48 PM
#23
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Oct 2018, 12:44 PMgbem


against a flak HQ? id be suppressed before i could throw... no this is not my mistake rather its cheese... the OKW player played badly and failed to defend his flak HQ which i proceeded to satchel... he deserved to lose it and not get away freely...


He means that you should use small arms for the most part and only throw satchel right before it builds, so that he doesn't have time to cancel and even if he does, he would still lose almost all resources. That is the optimal strategy with current design, although it is true that the punishment for losing the truck could be bigger.
6 Oct 2018, 13:17 PM
#24
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2


Man, and you are speaking of passive agressivness? Come on now.

The truth is though that you can't understand your own language sadly and even your own posts... You said:


Which means that one of your propositions is copying brit system, and the other is to "keep the current system while simply allowing them to unsetup into normal sWS". The second one is what I refered to as "Simply allowing to unsetup would have to return resources." Can you understand now, or should I explain 3 more times?

Now let me end that pointless discussion as it is off topic and I don't want to feed you and your anger any more. I also have much more important things to do than explaining random guys in the internet why they are wrong.


I never mentioned anything about returning resources for unsetup, that was your own assumption so I see no reason to blame me for it.

And yes like I said unlike you I can prove your passive aggressiveness, I'm just giving you your own medicine here.
6 Oct 2018, 19:50 PM
#25
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2

And yes like I said unlike you I can prove your passive aggressiveness, I'm just giving you your own medicine here.

And that kind of thing will (rightfully) get you in trouble with the mods. Im not a mod and dont want one to have to come to this thread, so just do yourself a favor and stop right now.
6 Oct 2018, 20:37 PM
#26
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2


And that kind of thing will (rightfully) get you in trouble with the mods. Im not a mod and dont want one to have to come to this thread, so just do yourself a favor and stop right now.


I stopped... about 6 hours ago I think, if not more.
6 Oct 2018, 21:14 PM
#27
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Just shoot it with rifles till it gets close to finishing then satchel. You're arguing that you lost 45 munitions when he loses over 100MP and 15F. I think you'll be fine.
6 Oct 2018, 21:26 PM
#28
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Oct 2018, 08:42 AMgbem
ive had a game where this guy simply builds an OKW T4 HQ... but fucks up his placement and gets satcheled... and simply cancels it to regain his lost resources and waste my satchel like a get out of jail free card...

i find this stupid to be honest... if you placed your HQ there and have been outplayed to the point where i satchel your HQ... you better damn lose your HQ along with your fuel and resources... not cancel it to reimburse resources like a get out of jail free card...


Just wait for it to end building... voilá! He cant escape now.
I find your complaints every time even more childish than the one before...
7 Oct 2018, 03:39 AM
#29
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979



Just wait for it to end building... voilá! He cant escape now.
I find your complaints every time even more childish than the one before...



OKW cancelling their HQ is just as cheesy as the brits cancelling an emplacement... my request is not being childish im simply asking for the enemy not being rewarded for bad play

Also its the okw t4 building.... it actually shoots and suppresses you if its finished
7 Oct 2018, 11:55 AM
#30
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

Just shoot it with rifles till it gets close to finishing then satchel. You're arguing that you lost 45 munitions when he loses over 100MP and 15F. I think you'll be fine.


He should definitely be punished harder for bad placement... defend your HQ appropriately or lose it hard...
7 Oct 2018, 12:49 PM
#31
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3



I think the solution to the OKW HQ truck problem is fairly simple, you just make it so instead of deploying forever you deploy it and then can undeploy it like the CoH British HQ trucks, meaning that it can't just vanish in thin air like some cheap magic trick.

Here is what SneakEye did:

But I guess it makes too much god damn sense for it to be implemented sadly.

As for the UKF emplacements, it's a bug. I once "decrewed" a Bofors while it was still building and then couldn't destroy it but I could capture it.


So basically the constant truck (and especially FRP-) re-deployment from brits in CoH1 didnt give you enough cancer that you want this BS in CoH2 as well? Wow what an amazing trade-off for removing the truck canceling :rofl:

Guess this is what happens when people who never played automatch during the last 5 years start making suggestions :/
7 Oct 2018, 12:52 PM
#32
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



So basically the constant truck (and especially FRP-) re-deployment from brits in CoH1 didnt give you enough cancer that you want this BS in CoH2 as well? Wow what an amazing trade-off for removing the truck canceling :rofl:

Guess this is what happens when people who never played automatch during the last 5 years start making suggestions :/

What do you mean?
Comp stompers make the best and most balanced suggestions every time they post :sibHyena:
7 Oct 2018, 17:58 PM
#35
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

holy shit what happened here??
7 Oct 2018, 18:54 PM
#39
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Says the guy that hasn't played the game in a while, do you even have my amount of hours? But yeah keep laughing funny guy, you're only fooling yourself.

That still makes me have infinitely more insight on multiplayer implications and actual balance.

Sorry, but playing with paper boats in puddle every single day will not give you any comparable experience to someone who goes to open seas even if only once a year in regards to sailing.
7 Oct 2018, 19:01 PM
#40
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

I guess A. Soldier is just a hateful guy. The more he hates individual community members and community as a whole, the more he wants to destroy the game for us. And of course he can fix it for himself then, because he plays with mods either way.

But I guess it is time for this thread to get back on track. Especially as it was never supposed to discuss bringing coh1 brits back to the game.

If people want the overextended truck placement to be punished even harder, then the price of the truck has to be increased and the price of conversion decreased. That is the only solution that touches only this aspect of the game, without breaking the design and ballance at the same time.

That said, it can be argued that even with current cost separation the best placement for the trucks is usually in base, so punishing forward placement even more may not be that smart.
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

781 users are online: 781 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM