Profile of Carlos Danger

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 362

General Information


Thread: Buff Wehrmacht30 Jun 2016, 03:12 AM Posted this in another thread quite recently: Sometimes I wonder if Grenadiers could get the -40% received accuracy bonus Conscripts get at vet 3. Or at least slightly better vet bonuses. IMO, this would improve balance with Ostheer vs. US or UK but would negatively affect the Ostheer/Soviet matchup. Anyways, imo I think Ostheer needs the following changes: - Pioneers need to be better at repairing stuff (so do Soviet Combat Engineers) or alternatively the newer factions need to be made worse at repairing stuff - LeFH (and maybe PaK43) needs to be harder to kill (same with all other static howitzers) - Ostwind just needs a buff. Don't want fuel cost reduction. - 222 needs a complete redesign - The Med Kit needs to be more useful - 251 halftrack needs something. Unsure what. Think more armour would be a start but that's not going to change much. - Pioneers back to five popculation please. And, maybe most important, I think Ostheer needs some sort of tech tree redesign so they can counter light vehicles more easily (I'd love to see the Sniper and PaK get swapped, as I see that alleviating a number of balance issues) and also get units out into the field a little faster. I also wonder if Grenadiers and maybe Panzer Grenadiers should become a little more expensive and a little more potent in combat. I feel like Ostheer is supposed to get quality units, but Grenadiers feel pretty mediocre compared to Allied WFA infantry. Feel like they should be a 280MP squad but really good at long range combat. Again, I'm aware this would skew Ostheer/Soviet balance. (Maybe Conscripts could become cheaper?) Other thing is I'm not sure what to do with the Panzer IV. This unit feels reasonably powerful and very well balanced, but I'm also aware that the Brits have a much better vehicle with the 110 fuel Cromwell and that the US Sherman has more utility. Not sure if situation is fine or if nerfs/buffs need to be handed out. Last comment is that I don't want to see five-man Grenadier squads. I feel like the four-man squads are part of the faction's aesthetic and I don't want to see all the factions get homogenized. I mean, four-man squads worked fine in CoH1 so I'm thinking that the number of models isn't actually the problem. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Faction satisfaction poll30 Jun 2016, 03:08 AM Primarily an Axis player here, so I'm only really able to speak about them: Ost is just hard to play at almost all stages of the game. I feel you basically win matches if your opponent overextends and lose if they don't. You have virtually no initiative whatsoever until quite late in the game unless you opt to cheese with 222s. Units generally feel pretty boring to use - not a lot of interesting abilities and such. OKW is badly designed but more fun to play than Ost. Feels vulnerable to specific strategies like Maxim spam. Not particularly versatile. The five veterancy levels rarely seem to actually count for much. Generally weak doctrines imo. Some units, like Pumas and the Sturmtiger, are a lot of fun to use. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Ostheer 26 Jun 2016, 10:18 AM Sometimes I wonder if Grenadiers could get the -40% received accuracy bonus Conscripts get at vet 3. Or at least slightly better vet bonuses. IMO, this would improve balance with Ostheer vs. US or UK but would negatively affect the Ostheer/Soviet matchup. Anyways, imo I think Ostheer needs the following changes: - Pioneers need to be better at repairing stuff (so do Soviet Combat Engineers) or alternatively the newer factions need to be made worse at repairing stuff - LeFH (and maybe PaK43) needs to be harder to kill (same with all other static howitzers) - Ostwind just needs a buff - 222 needs a complete redesign - The Med Kit needs to be more useful - 251 halftrack needs something. Unsure what. Think more armour would be a start but that's not going to change much. And, maybe most important, I think Ostheer needs some sort of tech tree redesign so they can counter light vehicles more easily (I'd love to see the Sniper and PaK get swapped, as I see that alleviating a number of balance issues) and also get units out into the field a little faster. I also wonder if Grenadiers and maybe Panzer Grenadiers should become a little more expensive and a little more potent in combat. I feel like Ostheer is supposed to get quality units, but Grenadiers feel pretty mediocre compared to Allied WFA infantry. Feel like they should be a 280MP squad but really good at long range combat. Again, I'm aware this would skew Ostheer/Soviet balance. (Maybe Conscripts could become cheaper?) Other thing is I'm not sure what to do with the Panzer IV. This unit feels reasonably powerful and very well balanced, but I'm also aware that the Brits have a much better vehicle with the 110 fuel Cromwell and that the US Sherman has more utility. Not sure if situation is fine or if nerfs/buffs need to be handed out. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: panthers reload speed25 Jun 2016, 09:33 AM I've long maintained that if this unit gets a rate-of-fire buff (which I'm not opposed to seeing) it needs to get a penetration nerf. Just giving it a better rate-of-fire will make it way too strong against heavy tanks. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer 4 price 25 Jun 2016, 09:25 AM Personally I think it should be 12 population and I've requested a penetration buff as well a couple of times - just to match the Panther. For its part, the cloak ability is clearly broken and needs to be gimped. In my experience, this unit is extremely durable but rarely actually kills anything. It's almost impossible to use offensively by itself and you can't really make a blob of them like you can StuGs or SU-76s (both of which are stronger against infantry). So yeah, decent as a defensive or stopgap unit (basically its historical role) but not the sort of unit that wins games or has much of an impact on the battlefield. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF didn't need a mortar.25 Jun 2016, 01:17 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Jun 2016, 01:00 AMArclyte USF only being able to make Riflemen for the first 5 minutes was boring As indicated in my previous post, US flexibility is in upgrades and teching choices, not opening units. Jump back to quoted post25 Jun 2016, 01:00 AMArclyte and made dealing with MGs in team games a pain in the ass It's, uh, supposed to be a pain in the ass - for every faction. Last I checked the game is supposed to be challenging. Jump back to quoted post25 Jun 2016, 00:11 AMskemshead Usf core design is simply f*#@ed. It is really strange how they arrived at the decision to omit certain units and abilities when they had coh1 formula to reference. CoH1's US faction was more-or-less succeeded by the Soviets. CoH2 USF is basically its own thing. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF didn't need a mortar.24 Jun 2016, 22:10 PM Thing was US design was based around having the most versatile and most powerful core infantry with the most flexible upgrades. Smoke and grenades were meant to deal with MGs in buildings. I honestly don't think they were ever meant to use support weapons all that much. If you think US openings are boring because you have to go Riflemen every time ... You're half right. US players are meant to go Riflemen all the time. The flexibility was supposed to be in deciding whether or not to weapon racks, ambulance, or grenades first, or alternatively rushing an officer. If you dislike being forced to go Riflemen all the time, maybe play a different faction? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW armors cost should be reverted23 Jun 2016, 10:46 AM Eh, Panzer IV is fine-ish I think. Jagdpanzer IV and Panther are good units in a bubble but don't really have much of an impact on the battlefield. I mean, yeah, a Panther beats a Pershing, but I think the arrival of a Pershing has a more significant impact on the dynamics of a match. The Jagdpanzer, for instance, is basically useless in any offensive context. Also, I think Katitof is right about OKW being intended to have a smaller armour presence than other factions, although that's 2014 logic and I don't know if it holds true any longer. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: June 21st Balance update23 Jun 2016, 08:53 AM You want to know what's happening here? Relic's original OKW design was absolutely terrible and so a few months ago they were persuaded to change it. Unfortunately, Relic has no actual idea how to fix the faction and lacks the money required to do a full overhaul, and so we've been left with a lackadaisical band-aid solution that makes no sense from an actual design perspective. Long story shirt, OKW is a broken faction and, unless Relic/Sega invests serious cash into creating new art assets (uh, don't count on it), will always be. Meanwhile Relic's patch team is either badly underfunded or completely incompetent or a combination of the two. I mean, I'm glad we're getting patches and at least some support when there could be nothing at all, but Relic's track record for releasing buggy patches is frankly embarrassing. Other gripe is that the Soviets and Ostheer have basically been forgotten and are now suffering from dated faction designs. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Using the OKW Puma19 Jun 2016, 08:09 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Jun 2016, 06:55 AMZyllen Its shit. and suicidal to use it It's micro-intensive but it has a lot of potential if you use it correctly imo. More potential than StuG or SU-76 I'd say. I mean, there's not a lot you can do with a StuG other than sit there and shoot at stuff while tanking damage. Conversely, Pumas can actually flank and chase stuff down. StuG can't really do that. In: Lobby