Don't bother, ddd is on a campaign of trolling and got banned two times in a row for it already.
I guess he's looking for the third straight away.
Ahh whoops, should've looked at the poster
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Don't bother, ddd is on a campaign of trolling and got banned two times in a row for it already.
I guess he's looking for the third straight away.
Posts: 129
Posts: 692
Historicaly german air forces in 1944 were far superior to usa or british so it makes sense.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Lol @ the guy gas light me and telling me what I saw didn't happen
Replay link below:
https://www.coh2.org/replay/95255/sector-assault-being-dumb
Posts: 129
Posts: 818
So, I watched the replay, and as I posted above, clearly what you "saw" (and reported) is not what actually happened.
Your first IS-2 died mostly from a Goliath and multiple penetrations from the Jagdpanzer IV. The Sector Assault planes barely did any damage as they missed most shots.
Your second IS-2 ran into two Rakettens and a Jagdpanzer IV who penetrated multiple shots before the planes even arrived, and the planes merely finished off the IS-2, dealing only about (I estimate) 30-40% damage.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
People obviously have different ideas of balance when someone can "estimate 30-40%" damage by an evidently self spotting point and click ability on the sturdiest of allied tanks that reversed immediately, and not detect the ridiculousness.
Posts: 4474
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
It's also a 250 munitions ability, so it's perfectly fair that it can deal 30-40% damage to the sturdiest of Allied tanks. That is its purpose. There are multiple similar abilities, for the Allies too, that deal just as much or even more damage to even more sturdy vehicles for a lower munitions cost.
Posts: 284 | Subs: 1
Posts: 97
Posts: 3053
Fair, yes since everyone gets them. Is it fun? Personally i don't think so. I'd rather all of the loiters be gone in coh3 (besides recon). Or at least make them less impactful
Could be just me though. I understand the rage behind these abilities, but when people pick one to rant on and ignore the others there's clearly something else going on
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
They can get rid of loiters as soon as they can create a strafe that targets units in the strike area instead of ground (that's empty by the time it gets there).
Replacing "never-miss" skill planes with "never-hit" no-skill planes is just a dumb idea - bad for the game AND historically inaccurate.
Posts: 97
If your strafe missed that's your fault.
But historically innacurate? What are you talking about? In ww2 it was intensely difficult for planes to reliably hit moving ground targets. Far more difficult than this game suggests
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
There's plenty of gun-camera footage from WW2 that says otherwise. Gun-camera footage was reviewed after every mission and any pilot whose gun-camera footage showed him shooting empty ground while enemy units could be seen elsewhere would be grounded. If your CO saw footage of you continually shooting at nothing, you'd be stuck scrubbing toilets while all your buddies were off getting the glory.
My point is that, as long as strafes target a spot on the ground instead of enemy units, they are an unrealistic waste of munitions. No human behaves the way the stupid AI does when it comes to strafes. The difficulty of hitting the target should be addressed through the amount of damage done, not by making it nearly impossible to hit anything that can move.
What I'd like to see is the targeting from loiters applied to single pass strafes, that's all. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Posts: 207
There's plenty of gun-camera footage from WW2 that says otherwise. Gun-camera footage was reviewed after every mission and any pilot whose gun-camera footage showed him shooting empty ground while enemy units could be seen elsewhere would be grounded. If your CO saw footage of you continually shooting at nothing, you'd be stuck scrubbing toilets while all your buddies were off getting the glory.
My point is that, as long as strafes target a spot on the ground instead of enemy units, they are an unrealistic waste of munitions. No human behaves the way the stupid AI does when it comes to strafes. The difficulty of hitting the target should be addressed through the amount of damage done, not by making it nearly impossible to hit anything that can move.
Posts: 97
Posts: 97
... Long discourse about historical accuracy ...
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
If your strafe missed that's your fault.
But historically innacurate? What are you talking about? In ww2 it was intensely difficult for planes to reliably hit moving ground targets. Far more difficult than this game suggests
Posts: 232
Actually, that depends purely on the plane, its weapons and if the moving target was infantry or vehicle(latter weren't hard to hit at all).
28 |