Profile of Myself

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 677

General Information


Thread: Jagdpanzer 4 price 21 Jun 2016, 12:20 PM Imo JP need to have the camo fixed, the Vet 5 ability fixed and a specific role. If it a counter to medium tanks it need to be cheaper and have less pop. (should be closer to Stug and SU-76) If it is meant to be a counter to heavy tanks it needs more penetrations. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Predictions for win rates after JUNE BALANCE UPDATE17 Jun 2016, 12:36 PM This is a prediction and as such might turn out to be wrong. I predict that: OKW will increase their win rates but mostly against UKF USF will increase their win rates mostly against Wer Soviet will increase their win rates mostly against Wer Wer will decrease their win rates maybe win against UKF. UKF will will decrease their win rates. In addition heavy tank like Tiger and above will be used far less (accept IS-2 maybe). In: Lobby
Thread: Panzerwerfer vs Emplacements - make it burn!22 May 2016, 13:19 PM Brumbar is a very good candidate as an Wer late counter to emplacements. Give it a vet 0 barrage with range 60-80 and bonus damage to emplacements and I can server the role fine. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [may preview] cromwell's size nerf20 May 2016, 20:57 PM Jump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 20:00 PMFiresparks ... axis medium tank was left virtually untouched. In fact, the ost tech got a cost deduction, making it easier to field stuff like the panther and panzer4. Don't forget the buff to the brummbar as well. ... IMO USF, OKW and Soviet come out stronger out of the patch leaving Wer and UKF trailing behind... Brummbar lost its stun...and generally remain a bad investment. It luck ranges (out ranged by 20) and/or armor (can be penetrated reliably even at 60)and/or mobility (one of the slowest vehicles and no turret). Currently it can only be used defensively... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [may preview] cromwell's size nerf20 May 2016, 13:00 PM IMO since in this patch Axis heavy play has become less powerful one should also rebalance medium Tank balance. That has not only to do with Cromwell but with most allied medium tanks. PZIV imo are the least cost efficient tanks... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [may preview] cromwell's size nerf20 May 2016, 09:50 AM Jump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 09:43 AMFiresparks The churchill and comet were already the best armor fielded by the brits during the war, unless relic start digging into experimental tanks. Churchill was actually a very good tank if it was designed for WWI but pretty lousy for WWII. But that has little impact in the game. I agree with most of the the other points. I simply don't see how people can complain about the PZIV when Crom is actually more cost efficient... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [may preview] cromwell's size nerf20 May 2016, 09:11 AM Jump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 06:57 AMKatitof And P4 gets insane armor with vet and ability that allows it to warp away while shrinking its size at the same time(yes, blitz makes you harder to hit as well). You can't actually use "Blitz" as an argument "war speed" is better than "Blitz". I also reduced target size in a target that is small to begin with (prepatch)... 21-22 is probably a better size for Cromwell... PZIV are probably some of the least cost efficient medium tanks currently...Cromwells are more cost efficient... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [week 3 may preview] alternative to crush removal19 May 2016, 21:01 PM Another alternative would be to have some slow or stun for vehicles hit by hand infantry AT weapons at point blank range (below 10). I really dislike crushing as a viable strategy especially against AT infantry... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [week 3 may preview] alternative to crush removal19 May 2016, 20:02 PM Valentine is also extremely good at crushing... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Royal Engineers are op19 May 2016, 11:03 AM Jump back to quoted post19 May 2016, 08:40 AMsteffenbk1 well i would call the first building a T1 it's more of a T0.5 then also call Soviet T1 as T 0.5, and Wer T 2.5 In: COH2 Balance