Profile of Tiger Baron

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

General Information


Thread: OKW UP?27 Sep 2018, 19:49 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Sep 2018, 19:34 PMKnuckles2095 may i ask why you (and Others) see the raketen as an inferior atg? for me it is in line with other atgs and in many cases thanks to the invisibilty and ability to retreat it can do things you can't do with other factions. Because I've been playing with the OKW since they were first released and I experienced first hand the raketen's brilliant yet faulty design. If you go around the forums or just search for "raketen" you will find many mentions of it's bug caused by it being "too low to the ground" so to speak, as in the rocket often hits the ground instead of the intended target because of the model and where the shell spawns at. Nobody is doubting it's ability to cloak, retreat or garrison, I even suggested the same abilities (or mostly) be given to the Soviet M42 to make it more useful. So that's more or less why you will find that people simply want a proper normal AT gun like the Pak 40, or a new, Pak 38. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW UP?27 Sep 2018, 16:28 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Sep 2018, 16:03 PMgbem OKW is not UP nor OP... buffing okws main weakness would lead to its dominance over the meta AGAIN... anyone who says okw is UP is most likely just a scrub... also the JT is not crippled... and the KT is just as crippled as the IS-2... Never said anything about OKW being UP or OP, or buffing for a matter of fact. I only pointed out a major design flaw of theirs. I also don't see the point in you being an Allied fanboy, I play all Armies equally, well, except for the Soviets since I don't like communists but that's another matter... Like I said it's just my opinion so no need to hint at me being a scrub or starting to compare units which I talk about for the sake of an argument. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch27 Sep 2018, 15:38 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Sep 2018, 12:59 PMCyra I thought all bunkers and repair stations didn't cost pop at all. I would love to see Concrete Bunkers being an upgrade for the standard bunker, you just build the normal bunker, upgrade it to what you want and then you could 'reinforce' it with an upgrade to concrete. That or make it worth the 300 Manpower to use really. In 2v2 its repair upgrade is pretty helpful for an OKW ally who doesn't want to retreat their Tiger from the front all the way back to his/her Mechanized HQ; but seeing how its only available to the Defense Doctrine and nothing else; it can be easily over looked or missed by most, me thinks. Agreed. But there is still the concern left with the Bunkers just sweetening the deal with the Pak 43 while the Pak 43 itself is still ultra vulnerable, so you're basically getting only a 50% effective ability taking up a commander slot, that is shared by multiple commanders. The Pak 43's survivability should be somehow improved in my opinion not just for this commander but for all others as well because right now it's just wasting a commander slot while only being effective only around 20-30% of the time if not less. I mean even the AI is not dumb enough to leave it alone, they nuke it with everything they got once they find it. I've found a bit more success with the 17 pounder tho, largely thanks to it's emplacement. My only problem is that it's big and it takes up my population cap and is generally just useless once the fighting has moved on and is nowhere near the gun, I have no idea why they removed the simple "Delete" button, at least give it a self-destruct ability like the OKW trucks before. In: Lobby
Thread: Looking at USF27 Sep 2018, 15:33 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Sep 2018, 01:10 AMelchino7 Ez. Go ask all USF top main players why they basically drop the faction starting by Devm. Since conception, USF has been driven by the old Soviet design of polarizing teching options which was surpassed by having strong shocking value units. The LT/Cpt coming with weapons and then the light vehicles. As opposed to UKF, i think USF has all the tools it needs, the problem been how they access to them. PD: with the exception of good late game indirect fire. What do the UKF lack in your opinion, except for a snare and mobile indirect fire? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: OKW UP?27 Sep 2018, 15:31 PM The OKW just needs some proper support weapons in my opinion, simply adding them in a doctrine would fix the problem. Specifically it's the case of their AT gun, the Raketen, failing to meet it's mark that's the overall down pour of the Army in my opinion. That and all of their heavier vehicles like the KT, JT and Sturmtiger feeling crippled, again, at least to me. This is just what I personally think from my experience with them. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Looking at USF26 Sep 2018, 22:54 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Sep 2018, 22:21 PMLoopDloop The biggest thing would be to fix the teching somehow. Why they put all the at units (Stuart and at gun) and all the suppression units (AAHT and .50) in the same tiers is beyond me. Either making teching linear (and make one officer not free for balance reasons) or swapping the units around a bit would help a lot. On the topic of a lack of tanky tanks, maybe a global upgrade for more hp/armor on Shermans would help. If it was veterancy based then losing veteran tanks would be too big of a blow for how comparatively easy it is to lose mediums in the late game (when that kind of upgrade would matter). Making it a health increase rather than an armor increase would make it more consistent and mean the tank would spend that much more time repairing if damaged (so it’d be better for counterplay IMO). It’s worth noting that soviets are the only other faction with mediums and TD’s as their nondoctrinal armor ceiling, but t34s are significantly cheaper than Shermans. The fact that usf has to pour almost all their muni into BARs for the first 40 minutes of the game also kinda hurts them. Agreed with pretty much everything. Maybe Reserve Armor's dozer upgrade should be made a default one? That or the 76 Sherman being an upgrade that adds more HP as you said, and maybe slighty better penetration while keeping the round switching? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Rifle Company need to be rework26 Sep 2018, 22:51 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Sep 2018, 22:08 PMLoopDloop Again, LMGs don’t really fit the commander as it’s supposed to be aggressive and mobile. Maybe give them the M5 callin from tactical support? That seems to be he only unit that would actually do anything for the theme of this commander. Flares should also be looked at; they are a little expensive and aren’t that useful on an infantry focused faction that needs to put single then double BARs on all its squads in a company where infantry are even more so the main focus. Soviets can deal with the cost because they don’t need so many weapons upgrades. My suggestion for the M1919A6s is because Riflemen would benefit from it and it would be better than an MG drop in my opinion. But yeah I guess the M5 would be a nice alternative as well. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch26 Sep 2018, 21:53 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Sep 2018, 21:49 PMWiderstreit In my opinion the artillery officer is still better than the 250 with MG in German-Infantry-Commander. Also the hole 250 is in a confusing spot. I don't see the use of MG for it. Why not let it the normal transporter with passive Vet and maybe a repair ability like UC. If you really want the suppression platform, why not give them the 251 with MG and remove the MG of standard 251. The normal 251 don't really need the MGs. I agree that it's in a weird spot, I don't really see a point in a bigger Kubel that can't cap and a Halftrack that can't reinforce. In: Lobby
Thread: Bug Report: Forward Logistics Glider Medic Doesn't Heal26 Sep 2018, 20:29 PM >https://www.coh2.org/topic/82569/commander-revamp-patch-bug-list In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Rifle Company need to be rework26 Sep 2018, 20:27 PM Jump back to quoted post26 Sep 2018, 18:21 PMNorthFireZ Peeps, stop trying to remove the EZ8 from this doctrine plz. It's one of the only reasons to choose this doctrine and it's not a bad tank by a long shot. It's pretty much on par with an OKW P4 and maybe even slightly better. I would actually like to see some kind of call in with this commander or Rifleman Defenses. If combining the sprint and flare into one ability while decreasing the costs of flares, it'll become a fine ability. I suggest for rifle company to get a 50 cal airdrop after flares free up the slot. My reasoning? Rifle Companies are historically as much support weapons as riflemen spam. There's already another version of the AT gun drop from Recon company and having another 50cal airdrop will help somewhat with the weird teching of USF. Not very hard to implement and doesn't break the theme of Rifle Company. Agreed about the E8 sadly, it's the only reason why anybody would bother with the commander. As for your .50 cal idea, I don't see a reason why not just put in the M1919A6 weapon rack unlock then, Riflemen would probably benefit more from it than having the Airborne's .50 cal drop which doesn't make sense for the commander's theme. Riflemen are ground troops, the only help from the skies they should be receiving is either Close Air Support from the birds in the skies or some supply crates I believe. Maybe instead of replacing the RE flamethrowers they can be combined into one ability? In: COH2 Balance