Profile of Alexzandvar

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

General Information
Steam: 76561198026003886


Thread: su-7631 Jul 2015, 12:49 PM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 12:37 PMElSlayer It is quite pointless just to compare flat penetration values of two units from different factions because average armor values those units got to face is different for those factions. A StuG III is less likely to pen an IS2 than an SU-76 a King Tiger. A tad interesting that. Though 140 armor still isn't really that thin for 80 long range pen of allied meds. Since when does anyone sit in front of a StuG III to shoot at it's frontal armor unless they are using an AT gun or TD with superior range? Yes the StuG III can technically bounce frontal shots from the weakest cheapest mediums in the game but that's not a very ringing endorsement. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: SU-76 issues31 Jul 2015, 12:44 PM The Puma for Ostheer is 75 fuel not 80. And it's stats are actually different to the OKW one. The Ostheer puma has insanely higher turret rotation speed (something stupid like 300%) and it uses the old TWP instead of the new one or aimed shot. 1-Su85 can spot for itself, turret has some rotation, 160 damage and 240more hp. Vet2 or vet3 is way better than the Su76. Going for either is a matter of wether you could tech T4 or not. I still think that Su85 needs a better vet1 ability and that could mean all the difference between both units. 2-No one was building Stugs before for it's AI, they died easily and weren't reliable against armor Except the SU-85 is still much more expensive. Yeah going T4 makes sense in larger game modes like 3v3 and 4v4 but in 1v1 and 2v2 lately Iv noticed that T3 tends to have everything you need for a large part of the game because the M5 gives you all your AI and the SU-76 can punch way above it's weight. Reducing the SU-76's range to 50 would make it so it has a bigger disadvantage over the SU-85 while still keeping it spammable and able to get shit done when it comes onto the field. Yes nobody made StuG's for AI but I find it inconsistent the StuG III had it's AI potential removed while the SU-76 got to keep it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: su-7631 Jul 2015, 12:34 PM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 12:23 PMKatitof Menpower cost also got a hefty increase. It got double penetration, because it was a TD that couldn't fight tanks. Now it can. StuG got more buffs with survivability and armor. They didn't touch it's armor; only it's health. It's still pretty thin. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW in the New Patch: Roman go the house!31 Jul 2015, 12:33 PM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 11:10 AMBanillo question the ammo income rate was nerfed cuz of the shrek blobs combined with obers, cuz of the scavenger doc arty that was able to wipe the american base if you accumulate around 700 muni right? now since the mgs are buffed, shreks were nerfed, that off map arty was nerfed, obers are overpriced and need to pay for they lmg, do you think its ok for okw to get its 100% muni income back? i know that most pepole are going to say: "but its a resource starved faction; is should be like that" i don't see much benefit of giving up fuel and ammo income: yes you can reach vet5 with all of your units in theory but in practice i can only see volks reach vet 5 due to the shrek upgrade, others take forever to vet up. you pay for all your ammo abilities more even tho they perform the same if not worse then the allied counterpart (valiant assalut vs FMR as an example), okw off maps are shit, like proper shit and some of the most expensive ones (zeroing arty) The munitions income is currently set at 80% for OKW. I don't think it would to THAT bad if it was bumped up to 100% considering shreks have a lot more counters than they used to (and everyones fears of 100% income revolve around shrek income anyway) In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Fuel rationing as an approach to balancing31 Jul 2015, 02:21 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 02:09 AMOmega_Warrior you could say the same thing about 1v1s. The whole point is that you will no longer be facing 4 opponents backed by a map full of caches because only one player made a investment. You wouldn't need to rely on your wher allies putting down caches any longer in order to stay in the game. 4v4 balance and pacing is absolutely wacky due to communitive caches. Okay hear me out. The issue with balance in 3's and 4's is that Axis late game is to powerful yes? Why is this? Because Allies numbers can't be properly utilized if everyones just sitting around slugging it out over 1 point. What is the advantage of having 1 Jadgtigers worth of SU-76s? The obvious answer is that multiple tanks means more coverage, but 3v3 and 4v4 maps are so tiny that the SU-76s have to clump up so their advantage over the JT is lost. Mess around with the fuel incomes all you want but your not going to fix the problems of Allied units lacking room to utilize their strengths by making the JT come a couple of minutes later. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Why do YOU prefer Axis over Allies?31 Jul 2015, 02:15 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 02:13 AMTobis The factions need something more significant to differentiate themselves. I miss how in vCoH each faction had very different ways veterancy worked. It's very disappointing how UKF will have the same veterancy system as the normal three armies. It doesn't actually, UKF units only have 3 vet levels but they have insanely powerful vet bonus's. Like effectively 5 levels of vet squished into 3 (which is what they should have done with OKW). And OKW player different enough to Ostheer anyway even if it didn't have vet 5. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: SU-76 issues31 Jul 2015, 02:14 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 02:01 AMhubewa It's balanced early and mid game, its OP in late game IMO. The penetration is too strong. And in most cases, the game is balanced around 1vs1 and 2 vs 2, not 3vs3 and 4vs4+. "Game is harder for axis" - well that's what balance is for - fine tuning units of the game so that they're working as intended. I don't care if axis or allies are harder, but I'm looking for what's reasonable and what isn't Well I think the issue lay mostly in that it's hard to cost effectively counter the SU-76 because it represents such a small investment while not being particularly hard to keep alive. Sure you might wipe out a few here or there but when your suffering more bleed than he is then there's a problem. Bringing the range down to 50 would solve a lot of problems. Alternatively bring the range of the StuG III up to 60 so StuG's can slug it out with them easier. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: M5 Quadrush31 Jul 2015, 02:04 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 02:01 AM__deleted__ Ok best disregard everything, I have drunk way too much. Relic the Quadmount had driven this man to drink, do you need anymore sign of it's destructive potential!? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OH has too much in the openiing31 Jul 2015, 01:59 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 01:15 AMTatatala Does not effect the math. Ost is still more or less 1 unit ahead, after both factions make their first tech building, due to manpower increase. This is a particularly bad scenario in 1v1 and small map 2v2 (crossing/kharkov). The (almost)1 unit ahead mechanic is make up for the fact Ostheer as to spend extra time making a building before they can head of their base and start capping and the fact Ostheer early game is very very MP intensive due to reinforcement costs. OKW has the least starting MP of any faction (due to having the most expensive starting unit) which limits OKW's map control early game because they don't have to spend time making buildings since their trucks self assemble. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fuel rationing as an approach to balancing31 Jul 2015, 01:53 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Jul 2015, 01:26 AMTatatala Stackable caches would be great. If all 4 players put 1000mp into a cache and it gets caught... nice reward! As for OKW struggling in team games, that's how they were designed Alex. They are supposed to struggle, not get the benefits of a team mates caches. I feel like a faction designed to be intentionally bad is a badly designed faction. Remember how people kept trying to justify OKW not having a medium tank with "they are supposed to have no mid game!" which obviously is a view Relic doesn't share. The argument your using is silly, "oh well USF late game should be trash because they were designed to only win at the start of the game" see how insane that sounds? When I'm playing with an Ostheer mate why should our cooperation options be limited? Making caches to make up for falling behind in map control is a thing in 2v2 you know. And OKW get's properly reduced income from them. It's not like fuel drops. In: COH2 Balance