Profile of achpawel

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1351

General Information


Thread: New Commander Update Patch June 14th15 Jun 2019, 14:47 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Jun 2019, 13:07 PMBalanced_Gamer That would make up for its lackluster AT and cost of 70 ammo. That is a good idea! Who needs cold immunity anyway! I mean, it think its better for OKW sake to have a proficient infantry AT role like any other faction. To have 2 Pzshreks wouuld make it proficient have finally an AT mobile infantry unit. Generally I struggle against OKW as US because their infantry is really potent. They have some hard time vs vehicles but to me it is supposed to be like that. They have often map domination advantage early. But why not give those 2 shrecks and see what happens. Still puma-raketen combo plus snares is not bad. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Bug Report for Commander patch15 Jun 2019, 13:03 PM Strange colours covered the whole map each time I used covering smoke with the new US commander. In: Lobby
Thread: Pershing Underpowered?15 Jun 2019, 12:57 PM I am a pershing fanboy In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: New Commander Update Patch June 14th15 Jun 2019, 12:45 PM How about make them holster panzershrecks just like they do with sweepers? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: StuG and JPIV Penetration14 Jun 2019, 15:39 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Jun 2019, 14:03 PMFelinewolfie http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/soviet/soviet_SU-76.php the ZiS-3 had the best maximum elevation angle of any other comparable SPGs and could operate to a 17 km (10.5 mi) range. Short Barelled tanks did not have shorter range. Most howitzers had short barrels and excellent ranges. Long barrels gives horizontal hypervelocity FLAT trajectories. Not better ranges. Well, that is the sort of situation when you have to look at the gamplay more than at historic figures. But still you are a bit wrong about barrel lengths. 1. Tank battles would happen at ranges often much higher than entire maps in coh2 and all vehicles would have to have ranges longer than the map 2. The range you mention is a typical range of an artillery piece. No very useful in tank to tank combat. Basicaly, simplifying it a lot, tank destroyers had long barrels to have high muzzle velocity. High muzzle velocity helped in a) aiming since the trajectory of the projectile was more flat and aiming was much easier b) higher velocity of a projectile meant higher chance to pentrate armour. So, long barrels were used for a reason and I believe long barreled tanks/TD in COH2 should have longer effective ranges. They were simply more effective in effectively egaging armour at longer distances, especially when the target was moving. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: StuG and JPIV Penetration14 Jun 2019, 12:29 PM Genrally I'd say that the game is nicely balanced. There are still some details that require polishing up. Range in tank combat war is a very important element and should be a bit adjusted towards being a bit more natural. I feel a lot of old and new players would welcome the idea of say 4 range categories. We could put all TD into one category with longest range. The rest of tanks should be put into 3 remaining categories based on the gun they had. Long barrel tanks should have shorter range than TD but longer than short barrel gunned tanks. Small calibre guns should have the shortest range. It would have a natural 'feel' to it and would make the gameplay more intuitive. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Lets talk shrims as a commando unit14 Jun 2019, 08:05 AM Jump back to quoted post14 Jun 2019, 08:01 AMKatitof Agreed, remove obers Now, on a serious note, falls are what? 3CP? What if they dropped to 2? Timing is also very important factor in relevance of a unit, earlier arrival would allow them to get the scaling needed for late game, while retaining initial punch. Sounds like a good idea to try it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: What is people obsession with panthers?14 Jun 2019, 07:28 AM Jump back to quoted post14 Jun 2019, 06:40 AMMr Carmine The current allied td preformance stems purely from the fact that the kt is non doc and not limited to one per game. The fact the panthers just bounced off td round after td round at that time did not help either. Now because of the td buff panther and kt feel up. Because they cant own like they used to. It's all true. I completely agree. Still a lot of players seem to think there's something wrong with a tank that requires so much tech and is expensive. I'd try a better mg option still In: Lobby
Thread: Panther armor rebalance.14 Jun 2019, 07:25 AM Jump back to quoted post14 Jun 2019, 06:23 AMthedarkarmadillo I'm inclined to disagree about fast repairs. I'm probably an hold out here but I remember a time when taking damage meant something. When retreating a tank with 1 hit of health meant that tank was out of commission for some time. When actions had meaning. When losing models left a squad weakened. When you as a commander had to decide if it was worth taking the damage knowing that the unit would be down for a bit. I would rather see all repairs normalized DOWNWARD to EFA levels so dealing damage means something again. Its horseshit grinding a unit down to the brink of death only to have it back in full operating order in 45 seconds. It devalues dealing damage and makes wipes too defining. It changes the game and not in a good way. Agreed - either one way or another - but should be more unified for sure at the current stage of the game. If churchill gets auto crit repairs, ost should have sth similar (not identical). I always felt this power creep with repairs is crazy (even if people want crit repairs it should be way more expensive - should make you decide - do I want to spent say 60 munitions on a crit or get some offmap sooner). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Lets talk shrims as a commando unit14 Jun 2019, 07:21 AM Jump back to quoted post14 Jun 2019, 06:18 AMthedarkarmadillo As a vet bonus for sure. As a native ability.... Well we already have JLI designed to ignore retreating durability bonuses and cover so let maybe move away from "ignore the game mechanics to make the unit attractive" style bonuses. Falls already have tremendous DPS so a native ambush bonus would require nerfing them to keep them from being nuts. That said, in coh 3 I would like things like camo to provide a standard bonus that every camo unit can count on. None of this "maybe that one will have it, maybe not" bull shit. True. Maybe its again a 4 member squad issue that some playrs feel there's somethingbwrong with them. In: COH2 Balance