Profile of SkysTheLimit

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: I think now ptrs penals are a valid at squad15 Jun 2021, 15:42 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Jun 2021, 14:58 PMVipper It it obvious that (to me at least) that you are not interested in my suggestion about penal and you are trying to pick up a fight How am I picking a fight? That's what JohnSmith is doing, and it's why you're rightfully ignoring him I'm literally asking you one question: Don't you think completely redesigning penals might cause more problems than it solves? You haven't even provided your rework suggestion in this thread, you just said to nerf the satchel. Expecting others to remember your posts/go digging through your history to find them is honestly a bit ridiculous In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I think now ptrs penals are a valid at squad15 Jun 2021, 14:55 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Jun 2021, 14:01 PMVipper I have posted suggestion on penals plenty of times and others have also. You can look them up if you are really interested. So your dodging my entire point once again. Got it In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I think now ptrs penals are a valid at squad15 Jun 2021, 13:24 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Jun 2021, 13:14 PMVipper now pls stop pretending as if I am the only one that says Penal/t1 is badly designed. I like how you underlined half of my sentence. And ignored the relevant part. I didn't say you were the only one who thinks they're badly designed. I said you're one of the only ones advocating for a full redesign. You're certainly one of the only people who thinks that would be simple I'll ask again, what is simple about fully redesigning them? Elchino gave a suggestion in that thread but they also specifically acknowledged exactly what I'm talking about: Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 10:24 AMelchino7 Given the current state of the game and from my awesome 5 minute thought full rework redesign plan which has no flaws whatsoever or any chance of backfiring this is what i came with. /s In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PTRS Conscripts and 7 man15 Jun 2021, 13:09 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Jun 2021, 11:03 AMBakairu Okay. Now that ptrs have now been reworked only penals have benefitted from it. Cons still however opting for the ptrs upgrade their AI capability drop so low that their anti-infantry capabilities is non-existent that they would even lose to charging squads. How is this different from most AT infantry? Most AT squads will lose to charging infantry Ptrs cons come with camo which most AT squads don't have. Don't see how they need the 7th man In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I think now ptrs penals are a valid at squad15 Jun 2021, 12:55 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Jun 2021, 08:44 AMVipper How many people have to say that t1/Penal are NOT ok before redesign? You didn't answer my first question and you're deflecting from the 2nd one. Are you really incapable of understanding how a full redesign is less "simple" then just keeping them as is? You are literally one of the only people advocating for a full redesign. And you have no good argument as to why, literally none at all. You just keep repeating "simply need redesign" In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I think now ptrs penals are a valid at squad15 Jun 2021, 04:18 AM Jump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 20:06 PMVipper T1/Penal simply need a redesign. What is simple about redesigning a unit that is available for most of the match? Right now they are well balanced in the beginning as an anti-light. They trade off infantry damage for that. Late game they have the satchel to keep them useful against tanks How many people have to say the unit is fine before you admit that MAYBE a full redesign isn't a good idea? At least get smaller and more concise with your suggestion, whatever it is In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Winrates indicate horrible balance13 Jun 2021, 19:43 PM I wouldn't be surprised if the current version of Jaeger armor is causing a lot of problems in team games. Especially at lower skill levels. I suspect the AT strafe is spanking a lot of rocket arty spammers. Or USF players who don't pay attention to their repairing tanks In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Winrates indicate horrible balance13 Jun 2021, 19:38 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 19:30 PMFarlion Fair point. However, it is difficult to then make judgments on balance when a lack of game understanding plays a huge role in the making of those statistics. That's true too, and it's difficult regardless to make any judgements on overall faction balance from winrates anyway. A specific commander/meta could be inflating the numbers when the faction itself isn't actually dominant Jump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 19:30 PMFarlion For reference, I edited my previous post. Have a look at the 1v1 statistics to illustrate my concern about non-top 200 matches. I think OP was focusing on team games, given their choice of data. 1v1 is the easiest to balance so I'm not sure that means much for OPs point In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Winrates indicate horrible balance13 Jun 2021, 19:27 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Jun 2021, 19:16 PMFarlion In other words, the issue there is not always balance, but the fact that a lot of players outside the top 200 especially in 3v3 and 4v4 are just braindead and don't understand game mechanics. That doesn't explain why there's a specific pattern. Or why the gap is THAT large, which it shouldn't be You need to use both. One has players who know the game better, but it's a tiny sample in comparison. Both are useful In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?29 May 2021, 13:54 PM Jump back to quoted post29 May 2021, 03:39 AMthedarkarmadillo nothing wrong with there only being 1 commander with rangers. Before the most recent ranger commander there was only 1. Like I said they are good, but boring so I personally don't care for them (always prefer interesting mechanics than raw power) Yeah it's not about their being just 1 one ranger commander. It's about the specific commander that would still have them, which happens to already be a dominant choice over heavy cav I agree rangers are boring. I wish more people played that way and picked non-boring commanders rather than exclusively what seems to be the highest power level. I like to think that's the way I roll at least 50% of the time if not more Jump back to quoted post29 May 2021, 03:39 AMthedarkarmadillo that's good though, that there is no necessity for the Pershing I mean. It means faction design works to a degree if usf doesn't NEED a meat shield Ideally sure because this is how every commander should work. Probably too late for it but a significantly weakened stock calliope would solve many issues imo. Obvi gives you an issue for those 2 doctrines but it indirectly buffs all the others In: COH2 Balance