Profile of Tiger Baron

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

General Information


Thread: GCS2 qualifying tournaments faction win rate25 Sep 2018, 15:31 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Sep 2018, 12:06 PMKharn You have to understand that most of these studios are now run by people 2-3x the age of the average gamer and are so out of touch with what makes a good game that they simply bark at them to make more money. A lot of studio's are under so much pressure to deliver increasing bottoms lines for stockholders and it inevitable will make them crumble. Studio's being bought up by larger entities is just how it's always been and as you've seen it often results in shitting out increasingly worse games until the studio is closed. I mean look at Battlefront 1? It was a terrible game because Disney and EA forced DICE to release it in under a year to be timed for the movie. Nobody gave two shits about the quality of the game, they just wanted to get that sweet sweet movie game hype money. Hype money that fans had been waiting for over 10 years for a new battlefront game only to be laughed at. Dawn of War 3 was the same thing, the fanbase for Warhammer is insanely passionate and often loyal and that's why the moment they shat out a terrible game it was practically dead in the first week or so of launch as fans dropped it. We have to scream louder, it's the only way companies are willing to listen. But also involves witholding your cash and stowing your wallet! Look at Total War Warhammer, SEGA must be fucking reeling at LISTENING to fans because it's their top earning title and it started off with a massive backlash on how Chaos was going to be DLC.... years later.. look at them now. You do have a point, but I for one wouldn't mind for the old guys to keep their positions as long as creative freedom is given to the developing team. And believe me I tried screaming, yelling, crying, chasing... I'm done with that, now I deal in action. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch25 Sep 2018, 15:28 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Sep 2018, 11:05 AMStark adding pershing with off map barrage, call-in infantry, and m10 or sherman buildozer isn't the good idea. By making it you would simply overshine first pershing commander, It's all becouse USF lack of another late game tech structure If we're going by that logic then a lot of these reworked commanders are going to overshadow other commanders. People say that Defensive is going to overshadow Osttruppen... because of the Osttruppen. German Infantry will probably overshadow German Mechanized doctrine because of the Stormtroopers, 250 HT and 5th man upgrade. NKVD tactics might as well overshadow Soviet Industry because of the KV2, and commissar. Urban Defense will certainly overshadow Defensive Tactics. Mechanized and Armor will probably overshadow a lot of the other Companies like Recon and Rifle for example. Tac Support Regiment will probably also overshadow Special Weapons now because of the Sapper HEAT grenades and IS mines, making the Tank Hunter Section pretty much obsolete besides for their Boys AT rifles and vehicle detection. As for the OKW... I don't think Overwatch and Armor is gonna overshadow any other commander, if anything really I still think Luftwaffe and Fortifications will still be my top picks, and Armor will still probably be situational compared to Breakthrough because of the Panzerfusiliers and JT, which might not be worth it right now but it's better than the waste that's the Sturmtiger. I could also give a lot more example which aren't even reworked but I will probably need an hour or more to write it so I'll just stop here. But I don't see a problem with artificially "locking" a unit to be implemented somewhere else just because it's a unique vehicle for somebody, such as the KV2 and KV1 in the Soviets' case which were given to other commanders for the sake of improving them. So again, just because the M8 and Pershing are in a certain commander I think is not enough reason to never include them in any other commanders, it just simply doesn't make sense, at least to me. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch25 Sep 2018, 10:39 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Sep 2018, 09:54 AMVipper Giving access to 2 vehicles in one ability would make that ability better than most similar since most doctrinal vehicles abilities provide access to only one. So it would rather depend on the strength of the rest of the abilities in the commander if the total power of the abilities is balances it should not be a problem. Like I said, one ability already gives access to the WC51 and M3 HT, plus Reserve Armor isn't really 2 vehicles but still, it's a 2 in 1 ability. With that in mind considering that Elite Crews is still... an underwhelming ability for Armor Company, Ass Engies are fine right now I suppose and then there's the 240mm Artillery ability. I think a trade between Mech and Armor Companies of their Tank call ins wouldn't be so noticable, but right now I'd honestly always go for Mech Company since it just provides a lot more than Armor Company, unless Elite Crews are really fixed as a passive and something more is added to overall buff the commander, like a Pershing or an M8 Greyhound, of course this is just entirely my personal opinion and I can be completely wrong about it. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch25 Sep 2018, 09:42 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Sep 2018, 07:02 AMVipper The problem exist only if a commander can have vehicles that provide both AI and AT with no tech. Armor used to be a problem because one could call in both M10 and Dozer with no major, T-34/85 or Sherman 76mm (lend lease) where an issue because they main battle tanks with no tech, partially mobile defense was an issue because of the Puma/C.PzIV combination. If ones makes specialized units like M10, Ostwind, hezters, KV-8,...call in unit I am guessing that they should not prove too problematic as long as they are not combined with other call-ins that can cover the handicap or can not be used as transition to super heavies. So even if combined in one ability the fact that they would both be in the Battalion building unlocked by the Major would not make it a problem in theory, right? In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch24 Sep 2018, 12:31 PM Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 11:43 AMLago I was thinking they're like Assault Engineers without their aura, but they buff up to Rangers when close to a vehicle. They're priced somewhere in between. Fair enough. I just love Riflemen with Thompsons, that's all. Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 11:48 AMSmartie Some thoughts about the current mod version: Tactical support commander: Air Resupply Operation should be more expensive. The price is probably okish for 1vs1, but in team games it could be problematic. A soviet player could go his 3 penals +1 guard build and still get (via teammate) a great AT gun and a mortar for a discount price. German infantry I really like the new design of the stromtroopers and the SdKfz 250 with MG, although it needs some smaller adjustments (DerbyHat has some good suggestions in his post). All in all the commander is much better than before but i would like to see "Sprint" gone. Its too weak (at least in this doctrine) to justify a whole commander slot. Idea: Replace "Sprint" with "Valiant assault". There is no commander where valiant assault fits better. Replace "incendiary bombs" with "Infiltration Tactics". Now you would have a true infantry doctrine: Veteran squad leader SdKfz 250 Stormtroopers Infiltration Tactics Valiant assault Thoughts? My only thought is that the 250 should be able to reinforce when dug in as it's description states. It would also be nice for it to have some sort of sandbags or something on/around it when dug in to have a more visual indicator besides the shield on top of it which is also given by the Command Panzer IV I believe. Think of it like Hull Down, but for light vehicles. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch24 Sep 2018, 11:41 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 11:05 AMLago That'd just make Armor a better version of Heavy Cavalry. The M10 is also somewhat redundant in Mechanized: the Bazooka Bus already fills the anti-medium fast AT role. I agree with this. Make them kinda meh on their own but give them an Ostruppen/Infantry Section style cover bonus that triggers when near a vehicle. If you're gonna make em an initially handicapped unit like the Osttruppen you might as well at least arm them with some proper weapons like the Thompsons right from the get go. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch24 Sep 2018, 10:04 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 09:49 AMKatitof I don't even want to start going on how 2 different mechanized doctrinal units on 1 slot would be beyond overpowered. Isn't that like, the point of Mechanized now? You have the Mechanized Combat group with the WC51 and M3 HT, which also included the M21 Mortar HT before mind you, and Reserve Armor, which is again basically a 2 in 1 ability. The only thing that will be different is that the 105 Sherman will be like the M10, in the Battalion HQ with the Major unlocking it and that it will take only one slot. That or making Combined Arms a passive for the Cav Rifles would also probably work to free up a slot. But it'd be nice to see the Pershing in Armor Company, which is in my opinion it's proper home. Heavy Cav just feels all over the place with Riflemen field Defenses, elite infantry like the Rangers and lastly a heavy tank. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch24 Sep 2018, 09:45 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 08:32 AMLago Is scrapping Elite Crews entirely an option? Then you could stick Mark Target in its place. Speaking of Armor, maybe combine the M10 and 105 Sherman and put them in Mechanized, then Reserve Armor and a Pershing can be added to Armor Company? Even if the 76 Sherman remains broken it can be remedied by the normal Dozer Shermans and Pershing. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch24 Sep 2018, 08:06 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 07:55 AMWiderstreit I think it is time to remove the silk-trench for Germans. I don't get the need for it, unless for UK. ### Also, please give Ostheer dragon-tooth tank traps. Not Czech-hedgehog. It fits better with concrete bunker. Commander-ability: -bunker + dragontooth for Pios -sandbags + wire for all units ### UK should get a mortar-squad with range-handycap if not garrisoned. In british silk-trench the squad gets a range boost and reload multibler. Current mortar-emplacement should become a an commander unit, pop-cap and price benefit. Trenches were used by all sides altho not as much as in World War 1 obviously, I just don't know know why everybody can't build them. If you're talking about the model specifically I agree, a Trench should just be a wider hole in the ground with maybe a stack of sandbags at the top at most, like the CoH trenches. As for your second point, the Ostheer is meant to represent the early to mid war (1941-1943) German Army stationed on the Eastern Front so it makes no sense for them to have any sort of concrete structures because they had no time to erect anything like that, there was a planned line, something like the Hinderburg line, but it was never made again, due to the lack of time. It makes more sense for OKW to have the Dragon teeth, Belgian gates and concrete bunkers. Also, we only have the Entrenching/Defensive tools to work with as far as defenses are concerned, I don't think the Pak 43 changes will stick due to the problems of the bunker. And finally, I agree with you about the UKF Mortar pit. I also noticed that many people want Hull Down back for the Defensive Doctrine, so maybe it can be bundled up with the Pak 43 instead. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch23 Sep 2018, 14:00 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Sep 2018, 13:24 PMVipper There many solution for armor company. For instance since Dozer is now so powerful (OP in my opinion especially thru reserved armor) one could make Dozer also require Major instead of being a call-in. Then M-10 could stay at armor. Or one could move the 76mm Sherman to armor. 76mm Sherman would then need to be redesigned, for instance one could model it after Ez8 but trade some of the AT of the Ez8 (penetration) for AI or clone the 75mm and replace HE round ability with AP rounds ability. One could even completely remove the idea of call-in and simply add an ability that would allow Sherman to upgrade for increased HP. (for instance sandbag...) Thematically the commander should have something that promotes the use of armor and/or that makes its armor better than stock. The only way I see that working is by Combined Arms becoming a passive for Cav Rifles to free up a slot, then Reserve Armor and Armor Company's call ins being swapped, but then again Armor Company has 1 slot left open again, I would suggest the M8 but people probably won't like that again. And your problem of both commanders having both AI and AT persists. In: Lobby