Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Flame Halftrack19 Sep 2018, 17:11 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Sep 2018, 13:59 PMCombatWombat ... And this is bad design. If want to replace a unit with a timing tax or build it at a point in the game past its prime, then I'm being punished just because a unit could have potentially come early and created shock value - that's just silly. ... Not necessarily. Generally speaking getting the price right for units is not very easy. But there are simple solutions for this issue. For instance one could offer a discounts to lower tech vehicles once higher tech levels are achieved. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Universal Carrier vs Volks19 Sep 2018, 17:04 PM Jump back to quoted post19 Sep 2018, 11:24 AMCombatWombat .. Cruzz stats says it has a range of 30, versus the standard range of 20. ... The range of the weapon and range of the ability are 2 different things. If in doubt you can load the test map and actually test to see what range the ability has. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Flame Halftrack18 Sep 2018, 13:28 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Sep 2018, 13:22 PMCombatWombat Timing as a whole is important, most certainly, but I'm referring to its relation to the actual cost of the unit. Units should not be made prohibitively expensive or cheap just because of the time of when they hit the field. Cost should reflect their performance, not shock value. There are other ways to delay a units timing hitting the field. Early or late access to unit is reflected their cost, in game. For instance the fuel difference between the t-70 and the T-34/76 does not reflect their difference in performance. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Flame Halftrack18 Sep 2018, 13:06 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Sep 2018, 11:10 AMCombatWombat Why would it matter what time the wasp is able to hit the field? Its counters exist from the start of the game and the unit has a very hard time staying alive from the get go. .. Timing is a very important factor. It was proven when Shock troops and Guards where simply moved from CP2 to CP1 and ended up completely dominating the field. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Commander Rework approach17 Sep 2018, 21:36 PM Transferred from another thread, where it was off topic: Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 09:21 AMKirrik And why exactly it has no place in Urban doctrine? It make sense thematically and armor callins are basically must-have for a viable soviet commander pick, soviet late game tanks are a joke in comparison to Axis. Your advices are basically boil down to how make even more unviable commanders which noone would pick If armor call-ins are must have for viable Soviet commander then it the Soviet stock unit that need a buff. Adding a armor call-ins in every Soviet commander to make them viable, instead of buffing stock unit would be a bad solution. The argument that Urban defense needs KV-8 to be viable holds little water. In: Lobby
Thread: Flame Halftrack17 Sep 2018, 21:25 PM Imo all flame vehicles should have their DOT moved to an ability and their DPS better balanced on their direct fire. That force players to plan the usage of flame vehicles, instead of driving these vehicles around hoping to spread enough DOT. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 09:16 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 08:57 AMStark ... But as Kirik said - This revamp has diffrent approach and idea to balance commander system so as much as i agree with you - that's how it's gonna go sadly. ... I know and my suggestion is for future patchs, but that does not change the fact that KV-2 or any other call-in vehicle has little place in the urban defense commander. Combining the wrong abilities in commander should be stopped in this patch, even if not reverted for non revamped commanders. A powerful off map is enough to keep the commander relevant in late game and keep booby trap usage checked. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 09:12 AM Since some people seem to have trouble understanding the ramification of the changes in this patch it seem that I will have to explain more. Regardless of the performance of PTRS as AT, the weapon gets more DPS, than most other weapons, from cooldown buffs due to its mechanics. Thus the idea to providing a tough AI tank with an aura best suited for hand held AT weapons is simply in the wrong direction. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 08:44 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 08:27 AMKatitof So worst AT weapon in game will perform slightly better for couple of seconds every minute or so at best. I think we'll somehow survive that without issues. Alternatively, you could break your purity vow and playtest soviets and that specific combination you have issues with, because on paper stuff is much more potent then in actual game and since you don't play the game, you aren't aware of that. I don't see how weak weapons getting slightly stronger for a couple of seconds will break anything in late game, where the vetted KV-8 is. I suggest you calculated the difference in DPS of PTRS vs vehicles you might be surprised. Also feel free to test the unit yourself and provide feedback and replay. Unfortunately I am out of the country and can not play test. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 08:17 AM I wonder if anyone else is concern about the combination of Heavy/super heavies tanks and auras, it can easily prove to be problematic. The KV-8 being able to "inspire" PTRS penals can easily creates issues since the buff in their AI might not be big but in their AT DPS it is. Similarly a Command vehicle Croc support but Piats and heavy sappers can also prove problematic. Imo these combination need to tested thoroughly before going live. In: Lobby