Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch25 Sep 2018, 09:40 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Sep 2018, 09:23 AMLago M10 spam doesn't need the Bulldozer. It usually didn't even call in the Bulldozer. M-10 being a viable strategy or not has to with unit balance (and in the particular case with M-10 being one of the best crusher, when it spammed). Allowing players not to tech and still have access to both AI and AT vehicles/tanks has to do with commander design. It simply should not be an option. In: Lobby
Thread: Panzer Tactician too strong, prove me wrong.25 Sep 2018, 09:36 AM Although the title of this thread has some rhyme, it is pretty bad. I would suggest that if you want make a claim support it with arguments and do not taunt others prove the opposite. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch25 Sep 2018, 07:02 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Sep 2018, 14:00 PMTiger Baron ... And your problem of both commanders having both AI and AT persists. 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. In: Lobby
Thread: Stormtrooper changes25 Sep 2018, 06:41 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Sep 2018, 17:44 PMruzara it was fine with MP40 but can we please add passive sprint at vet 3 just like lieutenant or actived sprint ability for vet 1 or 2 that will do.. to balance this remove smoke grenade (because it no longer neccesary or if it become passive still can work) ... Passive sprint should be removed from all units. It is a very powerful ability and it should be timed Jump back to quoted post23 Sep 2018, 22:03 PMjagd wölfe Completely missed Miragefla post https://www.coh2.org/topic/82365/small-arm-changes-in-autumn-patch In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Flame Halftrack25 Sep 2018, 06:27 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Sep 2018, 08:03 AMEsxile Depending how your read his sentence, he isn't wrong at all. To have Gren, you need T1 which also unlock faust. Now you can also lose your faust ability while still having Grens. ... Actually you can have Grenadier without T1 since you can call them with 250. Is their any point on this debate thou? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch23 Sep 2018, 13:24 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Sep 2018, 10:37 AMTiger Baron And what are you going to replace the M10 in Armor Company then? I can quote you saying several times here that the commander shouldn't have both an AI and AT call in units. ... 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. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch23 Sep 2018, 09:58 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Sep 2018, 02:00 AMCobaltX105 I had an idea for the M10 in another thread, but I never did post it here in the feedback one. Maybe they could take away the HVAP shells, but give it the same penetration values as the Easy Eight, move 'Flanking Speed' to Vet 1, and add a penetration bonus of 30% at Vet 3. Current M10 weapon pen (140/160/180) Current EZ8 weapon pen (155/165/200) Then it could more consistently engage mediums from the get go without needing to spend muni, but without the HVAP would require greater numbers to take on heavies (which is/should be the Jackson's role), though if you've got one to vet 3 it'll be worth keeping alive as well with the increased penetration (202/215/260) That cloak ability from CoH mentioned above would also be very useful in helping the M10 stay relevant for ambushes too. The unit is a Flanker and should be used similarly to Puma to engage enemy vehicles from the side or the rear. I has enough penetration to do that. Actually the unit was very cost efficient until 2 changes too place: 1) it required tech 2) M-36 was buffed and now it has to compete with the M-36. So my suggestions would be to simply make it a call-in and build-able from major for a discount. Since the unit is specialized it should not create many issues as a call-in as long as it in an commander that does not have AI call-in vehicles available to him so that he can completely skip major with not drawbacks. In other word simply mode the unit to mechanized, it suit the commander thematically and enhance the commanders specialization of using lighter vehicles for a strong early mid game. In: Lobby
Thread: Rifle Company need to be rework23 Sep 2018, 09:39 AM Flamers on RE is strong ability. Ez8 is a very cost efficient tank. WP is a good off map. Buff the other 2 command abilities and the Commander will simply be OP. The idea that all of the abilities of commander should be great is wrong. Commander should have a mix abilities with different potency so that total strength of commander should be about equal. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch22 Sep 2018, 16:03 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Sep 2018, 08:59 AMjagd wölfe I like this idea as long as the HVAP is toned down a bit and doesn't get to counter Heavy tanks like Tiger 1 or 2 (it pens reliably Tiger 1 atm). ... Imo if 76mm Sherman costed 110 fuel it should not be able to deal with Tigers, the HVAP should simply help it against the armor of PzIV, especially since PzIV cost more. Jump back to quoted post22 Sep 2018, 15:18 PMLoopDloop Yes, and I'm not saying that the 76mm in its current revamp state is not overpowered lol. I'm saying that your suggested changes would make it not very effective and I personally would find no reason to build it if it's just a shitty compromise between sherman and jackson that can't do either job as well as its counterparts. ... I dont know about you, but I don't really find combining a 75mm Sherman with the scott or Dozer very effective since the Sherman already has good AI. On the other hand a I would find a Sherman with better AT to work better in those combos. Even a 76mm and 75mm would work better together since one of them could switch munition to better deal with the threat that they would face. (I will not go into Heavy/medium TDs in this thread) In: Lobby
Thread: Stormtrooper changes22 Sep 2018, 08:44 AM Unit could simply become cheaper if its role is harassment and re balanced. 2 G43 + 2 k98 make sense as starting weapons. Weapon upgrades if they need any could include a number of combos. In: COH2 Balance