Profile of FaustCostBulletin

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 521

General Information


Thread: Riflemen don't show STG-44 IR26 Mar 2015, 09:17 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Mar 2015, 06:25 AMTheChosenOne Would you be so kind as to explain how you resolved the problem? What exactly is your problem? Refer to this: http://community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/company-of-heroes-2-general-discussion/modding/159253-riflemen-won-t-show-stg44-ir In: Modding and Tools
Thread: How to prevent blobs25 Mar 2015, 22:23 PM How do conscripts have cheap upkeep? Full squad reinforcement cost for Cons: 100 MP For Grenadiers: 90 MP In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Real Talk: Panther25 Mar 2015, 21:16 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 21:00 PMKovuTalli I see you are adding the Ost Tech costs, but It seems you aren't adding the OKW truck manpower/fuel costs, why not? It's still needed to unlock, unless we are talking about Command Panther but that is a doctrinal unit and cannot be compared 1:1 with an Ost Panther. I believe I did add them to the OP, OKW is incomparably cheap though. Also, teching for OKW is not a resource sink and actually has benefits other than accessing later units. In: Lobby
Thread: Pershing in demand25 Mar 2015, 19:49 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 19:47 PMCorkscrewblow I'm not sure why the Pershing is the superior tank, it's comparable to the Tiger on paper but there's nothing to definitely make it "better" other than things like ease of maintenance, availability of spare parts and fuel, etc. that are intangible as far as COH goes. At the end of the day the Pershing was much lighter than the Tiger, 45 tons vs. 54 tons, and had better all around armor though less armor in some places. Again game balance matters far more than historical trivia like this especially since this is not a simulation game. My feeling is the Pershing should be faster and less armored than the Tiger, a strong AT tank that is less effective against infantry. It can still counter infantry with a munitions-required skill shot ability (HE phosphorus round) and targeted smoke. But first and foremost it is a heavy tank deterrent and heavy tank finisher, strong enough to risk charging through the fog of war to get that last hit against German heavies that would get M10s, Jacksons, Shermans, etc. vaporized by shrecks and Paks. Also I'd like to think that a player who picks Pershing still has plenty of good reasons to build a Sherman first, to fight infantry and because Pershing is a late call-in. So a non-paper Jackson? Like Easy Eight? In: Lobby
Thread: Pershing in demand25 Mar 2015, 19:30 PM I don't see why a Pershing should be cheaper and (presumably) worse than a Tiger when it's the superior tank. In: Lobby
Thread: Real Talk: Panther25 Mar 2015, 19:08 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 19:06 PMTea Maker Machine Stop giving this frustrated kid your attention. He des not deserve it. Frustrated? You're the one who's been trolling this thread constantly since you joined. Do you see the irony here? In: Lobby
Thread: Real Talk: Panther25 Mar 2015, 18:52 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 18:30 PMJoeH Sure, lets nerf the panther. The thing I am missing here is the compensation. Maybe there is a reason why Axis needs strong tanks. Mabye Allied early game is too strong. Maybe we should look at that too. If you nerf Axis tanks you have to restrict Rifle and Conscript dominance. Well, OKW has no excuse on that front. As for Ostheer; I'm not an expert on the 1v1 dynamics, but in 2v2 and above the problem is not as apparent. I'm not denying it, but it's not blatantly obvious as Panther and its impact on 2v2 and above. Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 18:34 PMTea Maker Machine That's a good point, JoeH. But some kids want to have the cake and eat it too. That's your imagination. I said it earlier myself that Ostheer may have problems but that does not justify an OP Panther. Conversely, an OP Panther does not justify a large selection of non-viable units. In: Lobby
Thread: Real Talk: Panther25 Mar 2015, 17:02 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 16:48 PMPorygon Wut? In your mod or what? Or you smoked somthin good? Give me some dude. Derp I meant 4 not 3 In: Lobby
Thread: Real Talk: Panther25 Mar 2015, 10:42 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 10:24 AMJohnnyB A buff to other things? The ones allied fanboys tried so hard to accomplish on these forums? Ah c'mon you can't ruin their work. Get real man. Most of forum people are admitting ostheer is currently shit, and OFC it would need some buffs but it will never get them. So let the competent units ostheer still has out of your nurfing fury. I chose not to believe that. I mean your love for ostheer is outstanding and so obvious. I don't love ostheer that much. My favourite factions are the "abusive" factions of WFA, meaning USF and OKW, but I am realy astonished about the amount of pudding you are writing. I didn't want to bring it up but if you have seen my minimod, you'd know how many buffs I gave Ostheer; unlike Soviets, Ostheer got a direct buff in pacing. Believe what you will, but just because I point out what is overperforming in a faction doesn't mean I hate them. I think I can rightly say I did far more of an effort than you did to shape Ostheer into an even more viable and interesting faction; all you do is to counterwhine Allied complaining. Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 10:33 AMTea Maker Machine JohnnyB is right. About time you change your avatar. "Look I have a natsi in my avatar so my arguments are not biased" And I didn't attack you, I just said if you want to gain a more realistic view on the current balance, you need to play more 1VS1 games aside from your own mini mod. No further explanation needed. This units is the most expensive vehicle in game, it doesn't need any change, aside from lowering it's fuel cost. Yeah that's Captain Kirk. It already feels like I'm breaking the prime directive by talking to you. I'm not denying that Panther may not be a realistic goal in 1v1. But I already explained myself by saying that that is only caused by the call-in meta and how Tiger is a good enough substitute, and that Ostheer MP teching costs are out of this world. Both of which I addressed, and both problems which should be fixed, ideally at the same time with a Panther nerf. Panther is hard to reach in 1v1, that's not the case in 2v2 and above. And once you get it, it's too cost effective. And if you seriously want its fuel cost reduced, you're the biased one here. In: Lobby
Thread: Real Talk: Panther25 Mar 2015, 10:29 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2015, 10:24 AMAchtAchter Because it comes at a premium cost? Those rules of more expensive units being able to beat cheaper units still apply. P4 gets absolutely dominated by the Easy8 for only 20 fuel more, do you see anyone complain? For every Panther you need two tank destroyers. The problem with that statement is that tank destroyers are not Panther. They can't soak damage, they can't conveniently get away from trouble using cheap abilities and they can't crush infantry without facing panzerschreck. They can't resist snare with supreme armor, they can't kill one tank when in a 2v1 and then run from the other and they don't have the luxury of not facing Panzerschrecks. Panther is an advantageous position, two tank destroyers are far more expensive than the Panther, less reliable, less powerful without vet boosting their poor penetration chances, and less versatile. Panther-first is a thing for OKW, but you will never see SU-85 first. In: Lobby