Profile of JohnSmith

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1273

General Information


Thread: Why not add more rng to this game18 Dec 2020, 09:50 AM ...what about matches that might suddenly enforce an armistice mid-game because the war ended? /Edit: Not sure if the thread is meant to be serious or casual forum fun. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback18 Dec 2020, 09:43 AM Jump back to quoted post18 Dec 2020, 09:15 AMVipper Ram is an extra ability that T-34/76. T-34 has a vet 1 ability like most units. If one does does not like ram one can simply not use it. I disagree. What is that for an unfriendly solution? A lot of people are already annoyed that the most fun abilities in the game are removed patch after patch because the mod team loves to nerf everything. Your idea is really over the top, you're wrong about this. I don't want to end up with a perfect symmetrical game that is utterly boring to play, there's already too many out there. Just delay that airstrike bit that is all that is needed. Don't remove fun abilities, or tell people not to use abilities as a solution to balancing (???) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] OST Feedback15 Dec 2020, 15:53 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Dec 2020, 15:46 PMVipper Are asking for Elefant to get a HE rounds with range 60? I really don't think the Elefant should get a buff with HE shells, it is already strong enough as it is. Keep it as hard AT, please. No need to make everything the same for every faction. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Osttruppen Discussion and Feedback15 Dec 2020, 11:58 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Dec 2020, 11:57 AMAlphrum voted for t1 too but this is a 1v1 only issue, ostruppen are terrible in team games. But has the mod team realised that ppl are crutching on ostruppen? and that grens are underperforming It is Grens that are underperforming, as simple as that. They should make them more attractive instead of nerfing everything; i would like to see Ostroops require more time before they hit the field, which isn't much of a nerf, just a timing change. It wouldn't solve problems like light LV rush, but at least open different doors for strategies. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Osttruppen Discussion and Feedback15 Dec 2020, 11:53 AM I voted requires T1, so that things keep unique to the faction, just with a small delay. Alternatively, increasing cooldown would work too (without increasing cost), as it does not interrupt special builds around the commander. I'm a heavy OST player and I like the unique flair from the faction that things are timed differently, yet balanced around that. I rather not have these changed just because people don't like the uniqueness of OST or they don't seem to understand the faction. These ideas of changes to make everything perfectly balanced and symmetrical kills the game slowly and shows bad game design knowledge. Don't make OST the new OKW or OKW the new OST. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Infantry, mortars and MGs: relationship and scaling. 10 Dec 2020, 11:05 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Dec 2020, 11:02 AMHannibal (quick requote since you added some more parts) I was talking about the FOW targeting in general. CoH2 should keep it since it has been part of the game forever. I hope that the hypothetical CoH3 will remove it, although I doubt it will happen. Ah, OK. The way I read and responded to Vipper's suggestion is that I understood that they want ATGs to deal less damage when players are microing their units to target the enemy through the FOW. They do make a big point about targeting in FOW in several of their examples, leaving the reading open to different interpretations of the suggestion. (edited for clarity) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Infantry, mortars and MGs: relationship and scaling. 10 Dec 2020, 10:42 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Dec 2020, 10:34 AMHannibal But Vipper suggested to reduce damage vs structures, not to disable ground targeting in FOW? Regarding what Vipper said, I technically agree with him, although I doubt it would be good to indirectly buff defensive structures again at this point. As a side note to the FOW shooting: I'd rather had it gone too. Yes, it allows good players to get some extra performance out of a unit, but even with all suspension of disbelief possible I always find it weird that units are able to do a pin point shot at something they have absolutely no line of sight on. It also really diminishes the value of smoke. Removing that mechanic would take away from micro focus, but put more emphasis on positioning and defense in depth. I said that I disagree with the change proposed (with reference to the change that Vipper suggested), I did not say anything about disabling it. I am not sure where you got disabling from. Because if suddenly there's damage reduction for shooting in the FOW for one unit, every other unit should have something similar too. Otherwise, there's a weird rule that only applies to one unit. And as you said, it'd be a buff to defensive buildings; the change would be similar to a straight HP buff ... Smoke could disable any targeting reticle, but that's like changing major parts of the play mechanic. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Infantry, mortars and MGs: relationship and scaling. 10 Dec 2020, 09:22 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Dec 2020, 03:09 AMVipper Microing units are an essential part of the game; the suggestion to change shooting in the FoW for ATGs doesn't make sense. Your suggestion adds another gameplay complexity and mechanic inconsistency and you'd have to apply that new rule to everything that related to FoW/Shooting (otherwise there's an inconsistency). You can shoot in the FoW with a mortar (and other units) too ... If your building gets shot at by an ATG, find the source and counter it. Buildings have enough HP to provide enough time for players to react. No need to change the game for that based solely on you not liking it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: mainline infantry8 Dec 2020, 11:41 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 11:39 AMAlphrum Grens, maybe can do more damage to suppressed units That's a good idea, I would welcome that. It'll add some unique flair to Grens and make early game pretty cool. In: Lobby
Thread: mainline infantry8 Dec 2020, 11:16 AM I think you accidentally clicked New Thread instead of New Reply from your Penals thread. Or is there a need to split up the very same discussion in two threads? edit: my bad if i misunderstood the aim of the thread. In: Lobby