Profile of Finndeed

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 612 | Subs: 1

General Information
Broadcast: https://www.twitch.tv/Finndeed


Thread: Fall Balance Replays3 Aug 2017, 19:05 PM 2 VS Finndeed Hector OKW forward base vs Arty. by: Finndeed map: Arnhem Checkpoint 1 - In: Lobby
Thread: OKW forward base vs Arty. 3 Aug 2017, 19:02 PM Hector's thoughts: 1.) New t34 with canisters is so sex 2.) New Howie with 400mp and 50fuel allows Soviets so explore more "non-meta" commanders. Manpower is at premium in the lategame and 50 fuel isn´t all that much after all Mine: Forward HQ: I made the mistake of putting the Med truck slightly into the wrong sector and thus had to maintain control of that advanced (and not too easy to defend) sector to the left of the VP. Good change i think to make it linked to province control, though maybe too punishing on large/team game maps where there is an easy cut off. I don't see a work around however, so I am happy with the change. The much slower reinforce rate is also a nice change, means I cant continuously reinforce very high power units like the Sturm pioneers to effectively push off any early attack. LEIG: The units range is simply too short to be effective on larger maps. The trade off I thought was its inability to retreat, making it vulnerable to direct attack. The unit is still vulnerable however, it now has short range making it doubly so. I wouldn't get this unit unless I had a forward defensive position to defend it. Arty: What worries me about the arty is that Hector was able to get two of them. I also don't know if they had enough range to reach my HQ. Considering that many maps are much smaller, defensive play with a lot of arty could make a big and horrible come back. Good if it punishes forward bases, not good if it makes turtle-ing with arty OP. In: Replays
Thread: What's your idea for conscripts in terms of design26 Jul 2017, 13:17 PM My personal idea, if i had all the time in the world and Relic let me do whatever i wanted would be as follows: I would swap penals and conscripts roles almost entirely, Penals would be available from HQ and would have Mosin rifles. They would have no weapon upgrades (however i would allow them to upgrade to the doctrinal PPSH). Penals would retain the satchel. They would be cheap to make and to reinforce but they would lack combat effectiveness. Vet would bring them up to a pretty good cheap defensive infantry unit. Cons would go into Tier one, they would retain the AT nade and Molotov. They would also get the Mosin rifles but would have much better combat ability. Vet would make that better and with each level of Vet the unit would gain access to upgrade to two SVT rifles. So at vet one they can get two SVT with 4 stock Mosin's, vet two they get four SVT and vet three they can upgrade to six SVT. At vet three conscripts would effectively become what Penals are currently (probably toned down). Each SVT package would cost 30 muni, so for all SVT would cost 90 muni vs grens 60 for the MG42. I would leave the molotov as a slowly thrown ability and the AT nade would be unchanged. I would predict Penals be used to grab map and destroy buildings, cons would be 'okay-ish' at the start but become quite potent towards the end. Ideally they would still lose to Pgrens in close range with medium depending on RNG. I might also increase reinforcement cost of Con's when once they get to vet three. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Fall Balance Preview: Scope Additions25 Jul 2017, 11:51 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Jul 2017, 10:47 AMMr.Smith I suppose we can both argue about ideal or non-ideal situations. However I hold to my position that a better solution to the mortar pit would be high range and lower lethality, meaning it could fulfill its role as a garrison and overly defensive play style counter but not force one player or the other to lose based on its survival or destruction. That way we don't have to worry so much about brace or sim-city, as players can build it farther back and not have to go bofors/rep's to protect their investment in a mortar pit. In: Lobby
Thread: Fall Balance Preview: Scope Additions25 Jul 2017, 10:00 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Jul 2017, 13:22 PMMr.Smith I'm always willing to change my mind. However, imo, the point of emplacements is to force the other guy to attack at somepoint (since emplacements can't move), or to focus on a different area of the map (since emplacements have a smaller range). What emplacements shouldn't do is force players to attack with particular, slow-moving/situational units (e.g., panzerschrecks, AT guns, tanks), or reinforce an indirect-fire arms-race that will always end in a shitshow. Low-lethality, short-range pits would be useless vs MGs. Low lethality, long-range pits would be just as annoying as before when you go sim-city mode. About the revamp-mod mortar pit? Any sort of evidence that proves that it is no better than live-version/FBP mortar pit mechanics in terms of gameplay/player frustration/faction synergy. For both live-version and FBP mortar pits, you cannot build mortar pits in open ground. That's because the massive target size means that the mortar pit will get wrecked by Stugs/AT guns etc. This means you need to find a suitable shotblocker to place them behind. For live-version mortar pits, this restriction doesn't matter, due to 120-range autoattack. For FBP mortar pits, the restriction will matter a lot more; the mortar pit will only be able to control an area of 85 range around it; for anything beyond that, you require a 40-60 second barrage which can easily be dodged. This means the shotblocker requirement even more harsh than before. We can't buff mortar pit target-size/hitbox, obviously, without nerfing brace, because absolutely nothing would ever be able to kill them, ever. However, without fixing target-size/hitbox we have mortar pits (and the entire Brit indirect-fire department) that is completely map-dependent. Nevertheless, in both cases (FBP and live), if the map does have a shotblocker at the right distance, the mortar pit will remain immortal. Especially when sim city commanders are involved. Emplacements shouldn't be immortal; they should be kinda-replaceable. The ideal solution for the pit is one that: - Doesn't require sim city for the pit to be useful - Punishes players heavily for going sim city Indirect fire is meant to punish overly defensive players and as support for a push. What indirect fire shouldn't do is win you any infantry fight that it is in range of. The mortar pit acquires targets quickly, fires accurately and hits hard. So much so that if you have a squad in cover fighting another squad (even for 20 seconds) the mortar will hit that squad and you lose the fight almost all the time. If not because the mortar hit you but, because you had to move the squad. The mortar pit currently counters all infantry, not just team weapons or camping. As the mortar pit means the brits (for the most part) win every fight, your single objective is forced to become its destruction. The Brit player knows this so prepares accordingly. Knowing what your opponent will do, MUST do is an advantage that shouldn't be underestimated. So how does a good Brit player prepare? Set up MG's in trenches or heavy cover and AT guns protecting the approaches to the mortar pit. Worse is a Bofors. Not only does the bofors ward of infantry, it also wards off any light vehicles. Add into the mix the repairing forward base for never ending fast repairs. For an Ost player they still have some limited options. However, OKW is now fucked. With the shitty range and survivability of the Raketten an OKW player cant use them. The Stuka, as an alpha strike unit is useless vs emplacements; cant use that. The Puma gets killed by Bofors and AT guns, as with the luchs. The LEIG gets outranged and killed by the mortar pit. The only option for OKW becomes an all in push with medium and upwards tanks, however by this time the Brit will have at least one AT gun, and probably a tank of their own (given how the mortar pit is likely to win them most engagements in at least half the map). By nerffing the only actual counter OKW had to mid-late game emplacement spam, you have forced OKW into a do-or-die gamble for an early game win using the luchs/mech in general. Vs a Brit, no OKW player will ever go for Med HQ. Even that gamble is unlikely to work vs a good Brit player who uses AEC and/or AT sections. In: Lobby
Thread: Fall Balance Preview: Scope Additions24 Jul 2017, 12:35 PM Jump back to quoted post24 Jul 2017, 11:13 AMMr.Smith All TWP abilities have been turned into timed abilities to prevent the issue of doubletap shooting, but to also allow them to make easier to aim. That's not possible to do with Stug-E, due to its curved projectile. The pintle MG is there to act as a placeholder of sorts. So are you unwilling to change your mind about the mortar pit? What evidence do you need to possibly change your mind? In: Lobby
Thread: Soviet Vs OKW Patch game. 23 Jul 2017, 18:53 PM A pretty good game, I'm not sure what relevance this has to the patch but it shows that maxims in stone houses are still pretty fearsome and luch is still very strong. Otherwise i very close game, maybe worth a cast. GG WP In: Replays
Thread: Soviet Vs OKW Patch game. 23 Jul 2017, 18:49 PM A pretty good game, I'm not sure what relevance this has to the patch but it shows that maxims in stone houses are still pretty fearsome and luch is still very strong. Otherwise i very close game, maybe worth a cast. GG WP In: Replays
Thread: Fall Balance Preview: Scope Additions23 Jul 2017, 13:48 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Jul 2017, 09:56 AMMr.Smith I am referring to the precise changes in revamp mod: - Brace effectively removed - Durability vs indirect fire increased - Durability vs small arms fire radically decreased Okay thats fine, but that still doesn't remove the situation where the player facing the mortar pit MUST kill it to enjoy a reasonable chance of winning. The player that build the mortar pit knows that once he builds it, the opposing plays primary target will be that mortar pit thus giving the Brit player a strategic advantage as well as the best low tier indirect fire unit in the game (that doesn't bleed). The problem is that you cannot play around the mortar pit in 1v1, you cannot ignore it, you have to kill it, that is that needs to change. While we are at it, may I ask why the StugE needs TWP removed? In: Lobby
Thread: Fall Balance Preview: Scope Additions23 Jul 2017, 09:31 AM Jump back to quoted post22 Jul 2017, 13:48 PMMr.Smith Lowering lethality won't solve anything If you lower lethality, the pit is just going to get wrecked by mortars/ISGs. The moment you hit brace, the pit is dead. Unless you have a 2nd mortar pit. Hello sim city. Unless you transfer the mortar pit to the USF faction, tommies won't cut it to attack enemy indirect fires. If you need to increase its raw health to lower its lethality then do it. In 1v1 where you cant get 3/4 players to target the same pit, its damn near impossible to kill vs a good player. In they go sim-city then its even harder! I cant tell you what they are like in team games, but in 1v1 i can tell you that they are far too powerful. In: Lobby