that is exactly his point; he was being sarcastic.
Thanks. Didn't think I needed to put /sarc at end but I guess I should have.
Thread: Luchs and 22211 Nov 2014, 06:43 AM
that is exactly his point; he was being sarcastic. Thanks. Didn't think I needed to put /sarc at end but I guess I should have. In: COH2 Balance |
Thread: SU mortars, mg, zis OP in 2v2 or more, replay11 Nov 2014, 06:38 AM
go bp3 as soon as possible. if you need to buy a vehicle or callin before, it's ok, but as soon as you're done spending get bp3. then decide if you're going t3 or t4. if t3, then build t3. if t4 then bp4 and t4. Will try to remember next time I see this. Feels like such an uphill battle because I know the SU losses are so cheap compared to mine. Good realism on that sense though In: COH2 Balance |
Thread: Shreks need long range accuracy nerf11 Nov 2014, 06:33 AM
PG seems too lackluster, I think they need a recived accuracy reduction and more love, or single shreck upgrade, making it elite troop for wehr, if necessary increase its tier. Agreed they cost 40 MP per model and are small squad size and their only grenade is easy to dodge and so expensive. Plus they have to get close to deal damage which is what USF and SU shock/penal/con with PPSH excel at. They should be like assault PGs of PE on vCOH, very expensive to replace but melt non elite infantry and weapons teams if yet get close. Then you can leave their received accuracy and health the same as now. Would still be a risky unit and very vulnerable to MP drain from snipers and explosives but it would give the Wehr a close quarters combat infantry unit that actually does the job somewhat well. In: COH2 Balance |
Thread: Shreks need long range accuracy nerf11 Nov 2014, 05:14 AM
i suggested it once, brought it up many times and was constantly shafted to the side, but yes. this this and this, it promotes blobby play, no brainer upgrades and insane vet opportunities. if mediums had a chance to wreck stuff at range, it would be a much more balanced game, rather than every single game is all about, blob schrecks, blob obers into schrecks,stuka for support teams, rape everything until JT/KT and end game. Thankfully Katyusha can be gotten quickly and fire multiple volleys in one barrage to make blobs an endangered species (as it should be just wish Wehr could get Panzerwerfer to be better so it could actually counter shock and rifle blobs also). Back to topic, yes PG schreck should be toned down but keep in mind they are also risky because one Sherman or 34/76 round can easily wipe most or all the squad and then schrecks are lying around. Squad wipe means 340 MP for new squad plus 120 muni of you can't recover schreck and if 3 models are wiped then need 120 MP to reinforce. Buff their AI at short range and a little bit on mid range so they have more relevance as close range assault troops while making their Schrecks less potent until they get close to tanks. In: COH2 Balance |
Thread: Heavies vs mediums - unfair and stagnating the meta10 Nov 2014, 23:36 PM
I think that is a really good idea. Certainly a step up from the current situation, the only trick would be to make sure it doesn't mess up SU/Wehr late game. In: COH2 Gameplay |
Thread: Heavies vs mediums - unfair and stagnating the meta10 Nov 2014, 23:31 PM
your fake stat is wrong, even Jesulin loses. This community is not that big where 1% is a large amount of people. There are more than 1% here than can and likely have beaten him. It wasn't meant to be a stat, obviously. It was a thought experiment nothing more. I'm using him as an example as he is top 5 all factions last I checked. My point is simply that micro matters even when heavy tanks roll out and to say otherwise is wrong. I agree it gets greatly diminished by the heavies but your reward for good micro is that you will have a couple medium tanks to at least threaten your opponent so he can't blindly rush you and push you back. In: COH2 Gameplay |
Thread: Heavies vs mediums - unfair and stagnating the meta10 Nov 2014, 22:05 PM
And it was just as much bullshit in that game as it is in here. Just because it was in Vcoh doesn't mean it was a good way to balance things. And yet the balance between US and Wehr was quite good. I am not saying we need to be like vcoh, just making an illustration/comparison. I agree we need to make USA stronger late game, the thing is that if we are good to huff their late game then we need to lower their early game because they are advantage there. In: COH2 Gameplay |
Thread: Heavies vs mediums - unfair and stagnating the meta10 Nov 2014, 21:58 PM
While the heavy call ins need work I don't think they ruin hard work of micro and preservation. Jesulin could choose a doc with no tank call ins and best 99% of the players on this forum no matter what heavy tank doctrine we chose. That may be extreme but my point is heavy tanks aren't insta-win I had a game last night where I held 60% of map vs usa player all the way to mid game then I got a tiger to go with my P4. I injured his Sherman and rushed to chase it down as well as blitz past his AT gun as I had routed his indantry and my greens were right behind. Then 2 Jackson's can from nowhere and surprised me. Their 1st salvo took 40% my health. I popped smoke and reversed but he easily chased me down. While doing so I was ale to Faust his Jackson's but they still had enough speed to get one Jackson away before my P4 could take him down. Suddenly I had lost 1 heavy and all I gained was destroying 1 Jackson. In: COH2 Gameplay |
Thread: Company of Call-Ins 2 - An Argument for Change10 Nov 2014, 19:53 PM
Allow me to further illustrate using COH1 then COH2 examples. COH1: All 3 Wehr and USA commanders had at least 2 of my top 4 abilities but none had all 4 Defensive- Numbers 3&4 you had 2 great off map arty, 88 emplacements and the rest were all passive buffs or tactical abilities you could activate. Despite only having 2 of top 4 this was a strong commander because of all the early game availability of passive buffs and commander abilities. However a complete lack of call ins meant you had to leverage your early game into real advantages to make up for that hole. Blitz- Numbers 1&2 are present with storms, Stuh, and tiger. This commander had best call in array of all forces and doctrines but to compensate for that they had no arty/strafing or on map emplacements. This commander lacked any passive buffs or ability buffs other than blitzkrieg but that came so late it barely mattered as everyone wanted the tiger. To recap, great call ins but little else to speak of. Terror- Numbers 1&4 with King Tiger, fire storm and V1. This commander was a nice fit between defensive and blitz. It had just as good off map arty support (maybe better), some decent tactical abilities like zeal, propaganda. and Of course it had a great call in tank. So to recap, you had a little less wary game strength than defensive but more than Blitz but late game was definitely better than defensive doctrine and about the same as blitz late game. All these commanders had to give up something in certain areas which led to pretty good overall commander balance I.e. While terror equally seems to be the consensus 1v1 favorite in final patch, none of these commanders were a joke like so many COH2 ones are. In: COH2 Gameplay |
Thread: Company of Call-Ins 2 - An Argument for Change10 Nov 2014, 19:34 PM
Every commander should have at least 2 of first 4 items in the following list of all different types of abilities but certainly no more than that to provide for flavor and balance but have trade offs: 1) call in vehicles/tanks 2) call in infantry/support teams 3)emplacements and on map artillery 4) off map artillery and strafing 4) economic boosts fuel drops, medical, muni and fuel conversion, etc. 5) tactical boosts like recon, fast capping/de-capping, smoke drops 6) tactical abilities (crew repair, smoke discharges, camouflage, sprint) 7) unit upgrades (spotting scope, PPSH, G43, Wehr camo, etc) Probably missing a category but you get my drift. The top 4 are strongest and most likely to result in imbalance if 3 or 4 are present In: COH2 Gameplay |