Profile of Grumpy

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1954

General Information


Thread: WBP V1.3 Stuka14 Nov 2017, 16:21 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Nov 2017, 15:31 PMSturmpanther You know that you can use the stuka on maxrange and still this unit is great or? I always use it around max range. Weren't the other nerfs enough? The units in this game have gone from overnerf to overbuff so many times. Shouldn't they slow down? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: WBP V1.3 Stuka14 Nov 2017, 15:24 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Nov 2017, 15:05 PMscratchedpaintjob IMO it is the artillery piece that is most dependent on your fog of war, because of the low amount of rockets and its precision. You cannot just click an area and be sure to hit something! Additionally it allows the enemy to move their weapon and not get hit entirely, something that is impossible with every other rocket artillery in the game. Combine that with the high price and the mediocre results against emplacements, i would say that halfing its HP is too steep! I don't like the 160 hp either. It will make it highly susceptible to tanks diving, random arty shots, etc. If they're going to do that, then it seems like the fuel cost should come down. I think it would have been better if they just made it scatter like all the other rocket artillery, instead of the laser-guided rockets that it has. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: WBP V1.3 Stuka14 Nov 2017, 14:36 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Nov 2017, 13:22 PMSturmpanther mrsmith + You get a Walking Stuka ca. min 9 on the fiel already and NON-Doctrial! If the map is half half Sometimes that isn't a bad thing. I mostly like to play 2v2 OKW in the current patch (because of the extra cool uniforms). One of the most annoying things is when someone starts building multiple mortar pits about 6 minutes into the game. Then I want my 9 minute walking stuka. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: I am done with this broken mess of a game.13 Nov 2017, 19:54 PM So long PanzerKampf, we hardly knew ye. Someone clearly thinks that Swiftsaber needs more thread-locking practice. In: Lobby
Thread: 2V2 Random loss as OKW replay review12 Nov 2017, 15:19 PM Thanks for taking the time to review. A lot of the squad wipes came from sticking around too long trying to decap or thinking that I'd get my grenade off first, then retreating without getting the grenade off and still losing the squad. It's interesting how you could see the indecisiveness. There were multiple times where I was thinking WTF do I do now? I will try Obers in long matches next time. I took a long break from playing and when I started again, it seemed like Volks were so efficient that there wasn't much of a reason to use anything else. I've tried Obers in 3's and 4's where they didn't seem to be worthwhile due to the stupid amount of indirect (particularly mortar pits) and the long reinforce time. Thanks again In: Replay Reviews
Thread: Why is there no IS2 buff being discussed? 12 Nov 2017, 15:09 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Nov 2017, 14:16 PMOsinyagov Imo IS-2 much better, than ISU-152. It is one of the best tanks for allies. On the other hand i find weird that fact, that 122-mm D-25T(IS-2 main gun) deals 160 damage, and 8.8-cm L/71 (Tiger II main gun) deals 240 damage. In the same way 152-mm guns (ML-20 on ISU-152 and M-10T on KV-2) deals only 240 damage, and 12.8-cm gun/8.8-cm guns (Jagdtiger and Elefant) deals 320 (in WBP 300) damage. In some regards, you're talking apples and oranges. The KWK 43 had a lot higher muzzle velocity than the D-25T and could penetrate thicker armor. In real life, either of these would have one-shot any medium tank that they hit, but that wouldn't make for a fun video game. A good compromise might have been to give the D-25T a passive stun ability, so that anything hit but not penetrated couldn't respond for 1-2 seconds, including an increased reload time for the tank that was hit. At the end of the day, it is a video game, not a simulation. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: 2V2 Random loss as OKW replay review11 Nov 2017, 06:54 AM If any higher level OKW random players have time to look at this, please review it. I lost an hour long 2v2 on Crossing against a USF/UKF team where I made a lot of mistakes early yet it still felt winnable until about 40-50 minutes in. Here are the questions that I have: 1) Unit composition - on that map and matchup, was Scavenge the right doctrine to pick? JLI's didn't seem to be any better than volks on that map and that type of fighting 2) After losing my schwerer, should I have rebuilt it or just stuck with calling in a KT? 3) Was getting a KT the right choice? It seemed to not be effective with the Jacksons and Firefly's on the other side. 4) A lot of times, the game felt like two 1v1's, except when the other team hammered one of us. Did it look that bad, and do you have any suggestions on how to avoid the situation. I mostly tried to stay center but remember being far away a couple of times while my teammate was getting rekt. 5) Any other strategic mistakes? 0 VS Troyd Wilkessy ipanda Grumpy 2V2 Random loss as OKW replay review by: Grumpy map: Crossing in the Woods 1 - In: Replay Reviews
Thread: 2V2 Random loss as OKW replay review11 Nov 2017, 06:50 AM If any higher level OKW random players have time to look at this, please review it. I lost an hour long 2v2 on Crossing against a USF/UKF team where I made a lot of mistakes early yet it still felt winnable until about 40-50 minutes in. Here are the questions that I have: 1) Unit composition - on that map and matchup, was Scavenge the right doctrine to pick? JLI's didn't seem to be any better than volks on that map and that type of fighting 2) After losing my schwerer, should I have rebuilt it or just stuck with calling in a KT? 3) Was getting a KT the right choice? It seemed to not be effective with the Jacksons and Firefly's on the other side. 4) A lot of times, the game felt like two 1v1's, except when the other team hammered one of us. Did it look that bad, and do you have any suggestions on how to avoid the situation. I mostly tried to stay center but remember being far away a couple of times while my teammate was getting rekt. 5) Any other strategic mistakes? In: Replays
Thread: DBP USF thread11 Nov 2017, 02:14 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2017, 00:00 AMClassyDavid snip I use the Jackson well and effectively but it makes me wonder if only I and a few other top USF players can use it then is it under powered? The reason I'm so opposed to the Jackson changes as if they go through then the Jackson will be incredible overpowered in my hands which I disdain the idea of. Take away that vulnerability of being three shotted then one of it's two weaknesses is patched. Yes, it'll have no armor but to take another AT shot is huge when said tank has a turret, 60 range, and great AT statistics. snip I don't think any amount of skill will help Jacksons on maps like Red Ball with a couple of the super TD's being used by roughly equally skilled players. Three Jacksons have roughly the same pop cop as two Ele's or JT's. They outrange you so one of the three Jacksons goes up in smoke immediately. The other two Jacksons might scratch the paint on one of the other two but will have to retreat as soon as they are hit. Those matchups end up being a shitfest of bazooka blobs, Calliopes, Fireflys versus JT, Ele's, KT's, walking stuka's etc. However, USF has nearly disappeared from 4v4's so it's usually just Brits and the occasional Soviet against mostly OKW. USF would be in a lot better position in those games if all commanders could build a Pershing after getting all of the officers, the same way that OKW can build a KT with any commander. Non-doctrinal mines would help a lot also. I do get your point about the 640 HP Jackson being too much in a 1v1. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: DBP USF thread10 Nov 2017, 21:14 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Nov 2017, 02:26 AMClassyDavid I'd argue to just keep the Jackson as is then for these changes to go through. Do note I'm advocating for one v ones not team games as that's not my interest (aside from twos every once in awhile). The Jackson should only be slightly increased in price and hp to prevent one shots and two shots but still be three shotted by enemy AT guns. The Jackson is USF answer to Axis heavy armor and it does that job well. It has good penetration, long range, and it has a turret which people seem to underestimate the significance of. USF has other tools to deal with Axis medium tanks and below with the 57mm, bazooka's, Shermans, etc. Tell me what weaknesses of the Jackson would remain aside from having no armor? It has 60 range, is mobile, and hard to flank without taking return fire as other Tank destroyers are unable to which is huge. If I allow my Jackson to get chased and destroyed it's because I misplayed from either lack of supporting it, not scouting, or some other reason where I did something wrong. Why I reached ranked 1 with USF is because I used the Jackson to it's strength as a mobile, long range but fragile turreted tank destroyer. I don't get why people are complaining about the Jackson when they play like a slugger when it's not! If the Jackson gets that HP buff even with the cost increase it will be overpowered in one v ones. I mean this is coming from a player who loves USF to death. The problem with the Jackson isn't the Jackson itself - it's the Elefant and JT combo in larger games that make the Jackson worthless after a point. Lack of mines for USF makes it worse. Also, having the pop cap of the super TD's be only slightly larger than a Jackson further complicates matters. Just out of curiosity, do you use the Stuart in the current patch and if so, when? It only seems to soft counter the flamer halftrack when I use it and is otherwise a waste of pop cap, but it could be user error. In: COH2 Gameplay