Profile of FaustCostBulletin

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 521

General Information


Thread: Damn this balance27 Feb 2015, 23:21 PM The thing is if 85 replaces 76, it will be distinct enough from T-70 in what it can and can't do cost effectively. Meaning such a switch won't be needed and a buffed SU-76 can complement Katyusha and SU-85 as a soft counter to both infantry and vehicles. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: COH2's IDEAL future in YOUR opinon 27 Feb 2015, 23:08 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Feb 2015, 06:04 AMPorygon Remake COH1 or do nothing. COH2 strategic depth is too shallow and too nubs friendly, it's beyond salvation. I'll tell you why you feel that way. In CoH1, Axis had the brute force and Allies had the gimmicks and tricks like Sticky Bombs and Greyhounds that could flank and deal great DPS at the rear armor; giving you a reason to flank. In CoH2 Axis has the better of everything and then some. Sturm Offiziers, Command Tanks, Artillery Field Officer, Panzerschreck, Pak43, these stuff are wholly unique for Axis (could list more) but Allies don't get much, leaving them with a bland faction design that banks on the Axis player screwing up at some point or overwhelming them through repetitive, memorized tactics executed by using doctrines used countless times. So yeah, give the stock Allied factions some ground to stand on and you'll find the game will get better. Of course, if you want the insta-pin MG's from CoH1 and you call that strategic depth, then your opinion of strategic depth is twisted and not really something I can agree with. Just being cautious here. In: Lobby
Thread: Damn this balance27 Feb 2015, 22:48 PM T-34/85 at T3 and suddenly the whole call-in meta is fixed. Nerf Tiger and other heavies too, and woah, late game suddenly becomes playable without spamming call-ins. Ostheer does it because it can, and Soviets do it because they must. The end result is the same. And if Jackson bothers you so much, give it its vet 1 pen ability at vet 0, give it 160 damage and give it a +50% damage boost at vet 1. So at least it can do its job of hitting heavies while giving Panzer IV a better chance, whose chances aren't that low to begin with. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Ostheer: What is to be done?27 Feb 2015, 22:37 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Feb 2015, 22:08 PMAlexzandvar Why are you so bloody against making the 76 better? Worried about realism or something? I am bloody against making the 76 better because it makes no sense 85 is doctrinal and more accessible. And just because it's doctrinal, you guys support that but it just lets the Soviet player be lame and skip T3 AND T4 and get 85 cheaper. Doctrines should not give straight upgrades. As Katitof said, heavies are straight upgrades. Do what? Nerf them so they are no longer direct upgrades. 85 is a straight upgrade and it is actually functionally identical to the Panzer IV and balanced with it while not being terrible like 76. Do what? Replace it! 76 has no reason to be a stock unit, just like the snubnose Panzer IV. They repurposed that model as a command tank. This should be the same. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ostheer: What is to be done?27 Feb 2015, 20:42 PM Another good reason for it to replace 76 in T3. So when can I expect your supporting posts at my thread about making that change? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ostheer: What is to be done?27 Feb 2015, 19:48 PM > Not getting tanks death sentence for OKW > Vet 5 Shrekblobs > Obers killing everything else Remind me why people take you seriously again? Or do they? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ostheer: What is to be done?27 Feb 2015, 19:30 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Feb 2015, 19:27 PMAlexzandvar It's not horrible at all, it needs better late game power (better vet bonus's or optional armor upgrade) but is not in any universe a bad tank. It's one of the best tanks for killing enemy infantry in the game. Good crush, good squad wipe potential, fast. It is at a good cost point right now for what it does. Soviet techning still needs a rework. And the Jackson is anything BUT bad, it's literally makes building anything smaller than a Panther nonviable thanks to it's great mobility, range, and damage. It's the best medium TD in the game bar none and it makes the Jadgpanzer and SU-85 look like sickley grannies the way it can run around the map punching enemy armor and moonwalking back out. There are 2 non TD tanks in the game it does poorly against: The KT, and the Panther. That's it. Reverse your T-34 into the range of your AT guns, watch has he runs up over a mine/gets at naded chasing you and then is killed by your AT guns. If your charging your T34's into his PaK wall anyway your to hopeless to give advice to anyway. His infantry won't get anywere near your PaK wall thank's to your maxims and infantry. If he tries to crawl up under suppression HE barrage his ass. T-34 is not good against infantry. It is worse at that role compared to just about everything of similar size. T-70 is also better at killing and wiping infantry. Crush? It doesn't go faster than anything or turn better. Panzer IV is a better crusher because it has blitz. You're grasping at straws here. And Jackson is pretty bad against Tiger too. Tiger, Panther and KT. Guess which 3 Axis tanks are used the most and change games the most? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ostheer: What is to be done?27 Feb 2015, 19:16 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Feb 2015, 19:09 PMAlexzandvar The 76 costs less manpower and fuel to make, so in what world do you think it should preform equal at all huh? The PIV is just a medium tank, seriously your making it out to be waaaay better than it actually is. It can be penned easily by the ZiS/SU-85. It also comes in a tier with units that will literally get you nothing against Soviets. Nobody is saying it's bad, I'm saying it simply isn't worth the teching cost at this current time. The Jackson just needs 160 damage like all he other TD's and a better ROF. It's not better or worse than the other medium TD's except for the fact it's far far more mobile. I think the 76 should be removed in the first place. But if it must stay: Are you kidding? Nobody here said that it should be just as good! It's just that it's absolutely horrible and not cheaper enough than Panzer IV to make up for it! Since it can't get cheaper, BUFF IT. MAKE IT NOT SUCK. Use the tank for 5 games and you'll see how it has nothing on the Panzer IV which can stay around the entire game unless the enemy is going for doctrinal tanks, at which point you put out your own/put out a Panther and keep the perfectly viable panzer tacticianed (or not), Blitzing, armored skirted MG equipped Panzer IVs around and deal damage just fine. Jackson is already bad and you want to kill it further. Unless it gets something like its penetrating shot ability at vet 0, it will remain useless against heavies. And just because it is USF's best option, doesn't mean it is cost effective when compared to other factions' options. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ostheer: What is to be done?27 Feb 2015, 19:02 PM So nerf Jackson, which in turn is not viable against heavy tanks with its horrible vet 0 pen. Jackson this Jackson that. Panzer IV does more against non-doctrinal Soviet anything than Jackson does to it. I'm tired of hearing "but, but Jackson!" to justify how Panzer IV is a better unit than T-34/76 in every way. And wow, 76 is fine in every way except it falters late game (you mean after the 2 minutes between Ostheer T2 and CP11) while Panzer IV isn't? If there was a time to say "biased Axis warrior", this would be it. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Damn this balance27 Feb 2015, 18:59 PM He has a point. T-34/85 at T3 is the way to go. In: COH2 Balance