Not sure if I got banned because of the latest patch but I believe they said I was perma-banned cuz of all the temporary bans they already gave me. I think it was well worth getting banned. I felt my job was to regularly attack the bal team. They know I speak the truth and I was a thorn in their side and so they wanted to shut me up. Well guess what, I've done my job, and I think I've done a very good job in getting Ost an equal playing field finally. Anyways I recall, the most I've ever said about the latest patch was that I was skeptical about the panther exchanging armor for health but after testing it, I believed it was the right thing to do. I recall saying that Relic had left 1v1 Ostheer in the dust for 2 years, NOT since when the game was first released.
Thx for single-handily saving OST faction man. Aren't you the dude who has had like five accounts in the official forums? |
(BTW I don't think you can claim that this patch is "allied biased" then ask us to prove it to you; rather for such a strong claim against the current consensus, the burden of proof lies on yourself.)
Never said that the latest patch was allied biased [...]
The most recent patch is undeniably and massively allied and team biased [...]
Dude, I remember reading your posts through which you regularly called out that the latest big balance patches is allied biased in every possible thread just a while back. Just do a quick lookup on your posts, search for 'biased;
Yet the results of recent patches are clear on the current meta: USF and UKF are just burdened in team-games, and they lack power in 1on1, and OST is in a relatively goodish position. |
|
What is your definition then? It's very easy to tell others that they're wrong. |
|
Even if you just look at owler, your rough estimation doesn't make any sense. There are companies on growler which have over 1.000 employees, yet they only have had an estimated revenue of less than 50mio. I think it's just wrong to discuss companies going bankrupt because of some inapt guess. There's loads more behind companies, business and investments.
/edit: What the hell, even my company would have a deficit of a couple of millions and be bankrupt if I applied your logic with just the plain numbers of that website. |
That's so wrong on so many levels. You use assumptions, random websites, the idea that Relic isn't standing on the shoulders of Sega, that there haven't been any other investors, random other stuff, ongoing behind-the-curtains-developments, and many other factors that you just ignore or don't even know about.
This thread is just rumourous scaremongering - bar on the level of plants being sprayed with Dihydrogen Monoxide. Even the thread title is clickbait.
 |
|
I would like to know that, pretty please. What about you tell us what the stats are instead of obsessing that others are wrong? We all know how to use it, so please don't avoid the question, stats are great for a balance discussion and it's the right thread and thus more productive
Grammatically, and schematically the unit isn't doing murdering itself. He's not spreading misinformation. |
|
Shock troops have been nerfed, even if you keep on not accepting that. Really, there's absolutely no point in arguing the schematical differences between "nerf" and "adjustment" just because it is what it says in the patch notes. What matters is that they are now in a worse state than before in relationship to everything in the game, but you are the only one hitting the same dead horse over and over again to compare the shock troops in pure statistical vacuum. |
|
I've always been in the camp of 'non-turret tanks should have deflection damage' to separate them from turreted ones.. |
Oh, get your gears together mate, I reply for once in a while in the forum and you brand me instantly as not trustworthy. Typical Vipper ad hominem. Back to the topic.
Other reasonable proposals:
- increase damage output consistancy similar to the recent Brumbar changes. Better accuracy/https://www.coh2.org/post/update/post_id/690057#scatter for the main gun but the aeo damage being spread out over a larger area. This would decrease full squad wiping potential and instead deal consistant health and model damage to infantry.
in combination with:
- decrease far range penetration of AT guns and TDs now that the Panther's armor has been nerfed in the recent patch. This would increase the KT's frontal protection at long range and leave it less vulnerable/helpless against max range kiting TDs.
- add heavy tank trait to KT (and all other heavies) that snares to the front armor can not do engine criticals. Only rear armor hit snares would have a chance to do engine critical.
- keep performance the same but decrease the cost and popcap to make it more accessable.
- move Spearhead ability to vet 1
Actually, the suggestions above make a bit more sense than just adding smoke, but I generally believe that the KT is in an acceptable viable design space as it is right now but it needs some minor adjustments. This can be an accuracy improvement paired with a pop-cap reduction; that would do the trick. |
tbh i'd rather see less smoke in the game too.
Then you suggest that smoke is removed from all the allied tanks that have it.
Where the hell do I say that? I said i'd rather have less smoke in the game within the context of the thread and the discussion; I do not say "I suggest to remove the smoke from all allied tanks that have it". I wasn't even replying to you, I was adding to the general discussion. You need to read, geez, these axis lovers.. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
