Profile of RedT3rror

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2

General Information
Steam: 76561198034870222

Signature

Playercard of RedT3rror

3v3: P	streak: + 4	with -.-, & SoE-Sturmpanther
3v3: P	streak: + 9	with -.-, & SoE-Sturmpanther
4v4: P	streak: + 1	with -.-, -Overlord-, & SoE-Sturmpanther
4v4: P	streak: + 1	with -.-, -Overlord-, & SoE-Sturmpanther

Show Latest Posts

Explain to me how any of my statements are false.

For example Panther vs Comet
P C
Manpower cost 490 500
Fuel cost 200 185
Speed (max) 6.6 6.9
Armor 320 290
Rear armor 110 180
Target size 24 22
Reload time 7.38 6.28
Penetration 240 190
Accuracy .04/.06 .03/.06
scattermaxdist 8 4.2
Area distance 0.25 / 0.15 1.50 / 0.25
Area damage x 0.05 / 1.00 0.20 / 1.00
Moving accuracy 0.65 0.75

P4(okw) vs Cromwell

Cromwell has better penetration, AOE, moving accuarcy, 20mp cheaper, 40 fuel cheaper, faster, faster rotation, and a smaller target size.

P4 only really beats it in armour.

A King Tiger is target size 26. How is it that the target size of a p4 is only 4 below that and cromwell is 4 below the p4? or that a Comet is the same size as the P4?

About Comet vs. Panther:
I like how you compare a dedicated Anti-tank unit with an allround unit. You are also doing a good job by ignoring: veterancy bonuses, tech cost, cost difference between factions, unit synergy, units and weaponry which they are up against, secondary guns, counters etc.

The Cromwell has better penetration that's right, by 9%, but the OKW P4 has better armor by 46%. You also haven't taken a proper look at the AoE, have you? P4 cannon does full damage at distance 0.75, Cromwell at 0.25. The deadly distance for the P4 is 1.125, and I don't know about the Cromwell, but I'm sure you can backup your claim.
Just like with the Panther vs. Comet you are ignoring veterancy, secondary guns and fought units.
Mind showing me your playercard?

In: COH2 Balance


Thread: I don't get why Brits are still receiving buffs28 May 2016, 22:38 PM Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 21:25 PMsinthe What you seem to be discounting is the fact the panther have a considerably longer reload/cool down. The comet on the other hand he much better rear armour, speed and accuracy on the move. Once the panther is forced to move any advantage it had was gone. Missing a shot for a panther is not a good situation. As for the veterancy, comets get much faster and gets better turret rotation. Generally speed/mobility/consistency > amour/health. Here´s something to read for you In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I don't get why Brits are still receiving buffs28 May 2016, 19:36 PM Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 17:53 PMsinthe I'm comparing the panther and comet because the comet is a much better tank than the panther even considering that the panther is supposed to be a TD. The comet can easily best a panther 1v1. What does it matter if the cromwell has less armour when you can have 2 of them before I have 1 p4? and they are better in their anti inf role. Explain to me why a cromwell is sized the same as a puma? Then instead of listing the potential contextual differences, can you explain why they matter? I am making a very broad statement that the stuff the british has is better than what everyone else has based on a cost benefit metric. Ie. It costs less and performs better. What's the point of have a tank that vets better if you can just tulip 60% of a panthers full health? Why does my player card matter? Are you one of these playercard bullies that I keep hearing about? No, the Comet can not easily 1v1 a Panther. The Panther wins most of the time (there´s a nice video of multiple Panthers fighting 1v1 with Comets, we had this discussion about the Comet multiple times). Regarding the Cromwell and P4, both tanks have completely different roles. The Cromwell sucks in AI while the P4 does very well in that. The Cromwell is for swarming axis armor. Each faction has different strengths and weaknesses. The Brits have the most cost efficient medium tank and very good AT options. However, they lack in the AI department and have problems acting offensively with their infantry. The "high" price of OKW vehicles is justified by their superiour veterancy. You clearly fail to see the point of faction diversity and complain why unit x outperforms unit y in a vacuum. Well, yes I'd consider myself as a "playercard bully". And why does your playercard matter? Because it's the easiest way to dismiss fanboys and people with L2P problems instead of proving them they are wrong in a long and exhausting discussion while they eventually won't step down from their biased view. It's a good filter. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I don't get why Brits are still receiving buffs28 May 2016, 17:31 PM Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 16:39 PMsinthe
Thread: I don't get why Brits are still receiving buffs28 May 2016, 11:32 AM Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 10:53 AMButcher Please provide arguments instead of throwing out a meaningless phrase. You are on a forum to discuss after all. That is some great elementary school level of bringing your point across you´re showing there. That won´t bring you far in life though. I made points and you lack arguments it seems. Sure, usually I don't deal with such extremely biased posts since it's mostly fruitless to discuss with such people, but if you insist... Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 09:52 AMButcher I´ll join. Brits changed Coh2 to the worst. The blatant OP-ness of OKW from the very start and their 1.5 year dominance in everything above 1v1 can just be ignored right? Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 09:52 AMButcher It´s just an accumulation of abusive non fun features (emplacements, tulips, a sniper that counters light vehicles) the best tanks in the game hands down (Croc + Comet) and strong infantry (Bren or Piat blob + 5 man upgrade). It is Ostheer on steroids. Thus Ostheer can´t participate in the game effectively. This can´t be balanced in any possible scenario. Emplacements are ok on their own, only certain commanders gave unbalanced advantages. Tulips are not hard to evade and avoid. The best tanks are still Axis sided. The Panther outperforms the Comet in veterancy bonuses, cost and unit synergy. The crocodile is like an overpriced KV-8 to feed the enemy tanks vet. The best medium tank destroyer is still the JP4 with superior veterancy and survivability. The OKW P4 becomes the best Anti-Infantry medium with vet. The Stug is the most cost efficient tank destroyer. The KT is non-doctrinal and one of the deadliest foes for tanks and infantry alike. JT and Elefant are just blatantly OP on many maps and negate any kind of armor play. And then there are doctrinal aura tanks with +50% dmg abilities or 20% damage reduction. Obersoldaten are still the best anti-infantry when gaining veterancy. OKW Schrecks are cancerous since day 1. Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 09:52 AMButcher The really retarded point is that Coh2 was about mobility. Now there is a faction that can sit around and break the concept of Coh2 with superior defensive tools. It would be fine if the Brit player was punished for sitting around. But he gets rewarded with superior lategame. Thus being a dick and sitting around on your lazy ass is rewarded with a likely win. The British faction encourages bad gameplay. --> see Australian Magic's post In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I don't get why Brits are still receiving buffs28 May 2016, 10:26 AM Jump back to quoted post28 May 2016, 09:52 AMButcher I´ll join. Brits changed Coh2 to the worst. It´s just an accumulation of abusive non fun features (emplacements, tulips, a sniper that counters light vehicles) the best tanks in the game hands down (Croc + Comet) and strong infantry (Bren or Piat blob + 5 man upgrade). It is Ostheer on steroids. Thus Ostheer can´t participate in the game effectively. This can´t be balanced in any possible scenario. The really retarded point is that Coh2 was about mobility. Now there is a faction that can sit around and break the concept of Coh2 with superior defensive tools. It would be fine if the Brit player was punished for sitting around. But he gets rewarded with superior lategame. Thus being a dick and sitting around on your lazy ass is rewarded with a likely win. The British faction encourages bad gameplay. The Axis fanboyism is strong with this one. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Perfect example of balance24 May 2016, 11:47 AM Speaking as someone who has not much experience 1v1 OKW... here are my thoughts (or more how I would generally play). Doctrines: Even though going non-meta is fun, Luftwaffe is the only viable doctrine you could choose, but there are other good doctrines such as SpecOps, Defensive, Breakthrough and Scavenger. SpecOps and Defensive are especially good against Pershing doctrine (Command Panther extra damage/Pak43) No Kübelwagen: Just a minor thing but I like to get a Kübelwagen to get early capping power and allow my few troops to focus on fighting, though I must admit the Kübel wouldn't have survived for long against all those mines. Only 3 Volks: I think atleast 4 Volks are mandatory for OKW, instead you got yourself a way too early Püppchen. Falls or Obers? Decide which you want. Getting Obersoldaten requires expensive tech. So why not spent that fuel on light vehicles (which could have helped you out greatly) isntead and get Falls? Luchs, Puma, Stuka all those vehicles could have helped you against his playstyle. Everything could have been worse: If the enemy had chosen Calliope which is THE killer-doc against infantry heavy OKW play. In: Replays
Thread: Week 3 Update to the Balance Mod19 May 2016, 07:39 AM Jump back to quoted post19 May 2016, 00:36 AMPanzerGeneralForever My favorite mechanic to use in the game has been removed . RIP cromwells... Although now that i think about it, they also are removing shrecks from volks so it seems way more balanced that way... Considering that Sturmpios now use Panzerschrecks.. I think not. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Week 3 Update to the Balance Mod18 May 2016, 21:39 PM Jump back to quoted post18 May 2016, 21:35 PMdrChengele Why the slit trench quote, exactly? Proving that running over troops actually has a right to exist. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Week 3 Update to the Balance Mod18 May 2016, 21:31 PM Jump back to quoted post18 May 2016, 21:26 PMdrChengele Actually my great grandpa was in WW2 and he said it was mostly fought between dozens of allied light tank destroyers trying to run over hordes of rocket wielding volksgrenadiers. That was the main problem with the Normandy landings - they had to go uphill and Germans were in the bunkers which made running them over much more difficult. Ha - ... - ha - ... - ha - ... how funny "During the fighting in North Africa, U.S. forces employed the slit trench. This was a very shallow excavation allowing one man to lie horizontally while shielding his body from nearby shell bursts and small arms fire. The slit trench soon proved inadequate in this role, as the few inches of dirt above the soldier's body could often be penetrated by bullets or shell fragments. It also exposed the user to assault by enemy tanks, which could crush the man inside a shallow slit trench by driving into it, then making a simple half-turn." Wikipedia In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Cheating in Company of Heroes 2 (news from Relic)18 May 2016, 17:34 PM Jump back to quoted post18 May 2016, 17:11 PMNapalm I didn't think map hacking was possible but I was very very wrong. I wonder what makes you think so. If a game has multiplayer, there are hacks. There was a video some time ago of someone showing a maphack. In: Lobby