Profile of ProBro

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 14

General Information


Thread: Remove Allied Grenade tech costs27 Oct 2015, 00:35 AM Why do Allies have to pay for sub par grenades compared to Axis? Some would say that Axis pay for them as well, but this is a nonsensical argument, because you were already going to tech, and rarely are you punished for teching up to get rifle grenades or flame grenades. USF, Soviets, and British have to pay manpower that could be used to field more men or build caches and then use fuel which delays tech all the while as Master race OKW Volksgrenadier and Ostheer Grenadier blobs grenade you at will with built in grenade tech. Solution: Just remove the tech requirement for all factions for grenades, it would help USF early game and encourage better play from Axis if they knew a conscript squad could immediately AT grenade their kubelwagon or a riflemen squad could immediately smoke and advance towards a lone, camping MG42 in the immediate early game. There really isn't a good reason to lock grenades behind tech, especially since Allied grenades aren't even significantly better. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Remove the Weapon Racks from USF, add something else27 Oct 2015, 00:32 AM Why the USF is confined to an archaic, limited system to upgrade their weapons is beyond me. Every other faction either gets their weapons stock with the unit or can upgrade it in the field . What would make more sense is to let USF upgrade in the field for 60 munitions or grab weapons back at base if you happened to retreat there for a 50 munitions cost. The 10 less munitions cost would represent the logistical effort to move the weapons out to the troops on the front. I constantly find myself playing USF sitting on munitions that I cannot spend on weapons back at base, because If I retreat my forces to reequip them, the enemy will move and take map control. Why do OKW, Soviets, and Ostheer get to avoid this opportunity cost to equip their troops. Wasn't the highlight of the USF faction versatility? This is anything but, by forcing this on USF players. The rack idea is so half-hearted in execution. The only commander specific upgrade that requires the rack is M1919 LMG, and even then, they ditch it for paratroopers that can upgrade it by themselves, and get two of them. There are also mods out there that just gives Rifles and RETs the standard upgrade options for the rack weapons. People are still introducing ideas that expand on the terrible idea that you are forced to retrieve weapons from your base or some useless supply truck instead of just upgrading them in the field, after you research the tech, like every other faction. These suggestions are unnecessary. You don't think they could let you buy one weapon at a time in the field? You could still customize your men in the field with the system the other three factions use. For example; one BAR one Bazooka 60 munitions each, upgraded separately in the field. There is a better system to customize weapon load outs among US troops and than this current one. Retreating back to base to pick up weapons is extremely detrimental to the USF play style of maintaining a field presence at all times (Major/Ambulance). British have somewhat of the same problem as well, but not as bad. If these changes were to be made, they should benefit from it as well. My feelings regarding this when people try to defend weapon racks In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Balance Preview] Pack Howitzer vs Infantry Gun27 Oct 2015, 00:11 AM This is also very ironic because the Pack Howitzer outranged the LeiG 18 by over twice as much in real life, in-game it's strange that a short barreled Infantry Gun has much better range than a Pack Howitzer. Yeah, who could have thought a long barrel HOWITZER out ranged a short barrel infantry support gun in real life. GG Lelic. Love how the ISG got the Pack Howitzer completely SCREWED with the Lelic sledgehammer of nerfdom. All the Pack Howitzer needed was supression/pin reduction or removal and a buff to long range fire and removal of its large deadzone preventing short range fire. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet Defensive Tactics Redesign27 Oct 2015, 00:05 AM I bolded the changed options for you. But Soviets really need a revamp, as do Ostheer and Americans. CP 1: Combat Engineers can build bunkers, which can be upgraded with a DShK for 60 muni. Bunker is the same one that is in the base territories. CP 1: Forward HQ is now build able in friendly territory Would be more defensive oriented CP 2: TM-44 Anti-tank mine. 60 muni, a mine that only explodes by vehicles. Does heavy damage to vehicles and can cause destroyed engines; Tank Traps are build able. Think like the Soviet version of Riflemen field defenses. CP 5: Conscripts can upgrade to 2 DP-28s for 75 munitions. CP 9: KV-1 Can Now be called in. Buff KV1 to Churchill cost and stat wise and allow it to hold the line for the Soviets against Axis assaults, and spearhead counterattacks. CP 12: Not One Step Back; all enemy units in friendly territory are bombarded with ML20 saturation barrage. Infantry fight with increased tenacity. Friendly units may not retreat while this ability active. 300 munitions. Interesting ability with cool twist; could be balanced by Artillery effectiveness and cost In: COH2 Balance