Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 08:00 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 07:57 AMOutsider_Sidaroth You can't equip double bars with a flamer. Never claimed they could, they can actually equipe a flamer and a bar which is simply OP. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 07:59 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 07:52 AMKirrik Yes, thats why underperforming abilities or vehicles are being selected. Reworking these will buff other non-meta commanders. You're missing the point again, its not about about nerfing or re-desinging whats working, its about buffing whats not. This is not the place to debate what point I am missing or not, this is thread about providing feedback. I have provided mine. If you want to debate revamp from design point of view pls start a new thread or even use the one I have created: https://www.coh2.org/topic/81270/commander-rework-approach In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 07:51 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 07:45 AMKirrik Here is a common sense information: Commander revamp patch scope is limited to the commanders who are getting reworked. Thats it. Nobody is going to randomly rework half of the doctrines in this game on a whim, there would be no telling how factions would even perform if something like was done and it would require a long amount of testing to pull something like that off. It seems that we can not avoid provocation so here is some common sense information for you: Since many abilities are shared especially in EFA commanders many commander are effected by the changes and not only the ones reworked. It almost seem that units abilities are added to the revamped commanders, with sole purpose to broaden the scope. Finally meta commanders do not have to be touched in this patch but they should touches at some point. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 07:46 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2018, 19:26 PMAntemurale ...Personally, I would opt for 5-man Assault Engineers over Cavalry Riflemen in almost every situation. ... That is a problem of Assault engineers and not of Calvary riflemen. 5 men flamer unit available from minute 1, than can also equipe bars should simply not be in the game. If Assault engineer need more punch (when they should be more about utility than DPS) one should start them as 4 men with the option to upgrade to a flamer or 2 Thompson +1 entity locked behind an officer. Imo all USF infantry call-in should also be move to CP1. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 07:40 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 07:34 AMKirrik Your explanation is unneeded, meta commanders are not going anywhere and they wont get nerfed either. These reworks are about buffing unused commanders not trying to fix doctrine system as a whole, its way too late for that. Well meta commander should be nerfed/redesing (and have been nerfed in all of previous patches), buffing all commander to meta level is not feasible and is quite pointless since one then would have to nerf stock options. Unless you have some inside information, pls do not present your opinion/prediction as a fact. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 07:35 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2018, 20:36 PMOlekman I know that Withdraw and Refit doesn't have many - if any at all - fans, but it's very unique ability and I'm sad to see it go again. Anybody still up for some brainstorming? ... I have suggested a change that imo would make "refuel and refit" a a very good ability. Currently the commander has a phytophthora of call-in to choose from when one would be able to use only 1 or 2 of them. By redesigning the ability to actually "swamp" vehicles instead of "selling" them one can greatly increase the versatility of build and usage of light vehicles. For instance if WC51 come with a button to swap it to an M3 one would have more reason to invest to WC51 even if it had little to offer in late since one would have to option to "swap" it for something better. If the m3 could then be swap for M21 and/or for AAHT the player could keep his light vehicles relevant in all stages of the game. Even new builts/options could be explored like Stuart and "Refited" AAHT or AAHT and "refited" m20 to Greyhound. Imo Refuel and refit can become a very useful ability if it promotes investing in light vehicles. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch16 Sep 2018, 07:16 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Sep 2018, 14:54 PMKirrik You are almost comically missing the point here, the reason armor was added to Urban defence precisely because commanders becoming useless late game is bad design, you have no reason to pick such commander over meta commanders who are mostly good at every stage of the game. Actually you are missing the point of commanders (can we pls avoid provocation at least in this thread?). A commander should not be there to make the a faction stronger is all stages and aspect of the game but the add strength and options at a particular stage or aspect of the game. Else the faction becomes commander dependent. In addition revamped commanders should be buffed to meta commander level since many of the meta commander are simply op: For instance a commander that combines g43/stuka loiter and Tiger, a powerful infantry buff, a powerful off map and superheavy call-in, is op and instead of nerfing these abilities one should simply not combine them. As I explained adding a powerful off map to the commander instead of call-in tank would keep him relevant in late game without making him OP. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch15 Sep 2018, 14:17 PM From a design Point of View Call in tanks have very little place in the Urban defense commander. The commander strong point is early and mid phase of game when by investing fuel one can add pressure with forward healing, reinforcing and aura buffs. The commander is designed to become weaker in late game. By adding a non tech calling the commander will become powerful in all stages of the game since he will be able to skip t4 fuel cost and call-in the heavy armor. Their should be no call-in armor for the commander. Simply replace the the rather weak incendiary artillery with IL-2 bombing run or AT bombing run and the commander will be in a good place. In: Lobby
Thread: Feedback for Commander Revamppatch11 Sep 2018, 22:32 PM After reading the patch notes (and not testing) I have to ask: Does Relic likes to fix one commander while breaking another in processes. KV-2 simply has no place in Urban defense commander and the changes will also break Soviet industry. Why? For the simply reason Soviet industry in the mod has 2 unit with damage reduction and repair stations allowing them to be repair faster than the enemy can damage them with costing no pop. Total EFP for KV-2 at vet 3? 1300HP with 300/180 armor. And the cherry in the cake? Inspired Penal PTRS blobs with *80% cooldown support by KV-8s. What could possibly go wrong? In: Lobby
Thread: Churchill tank is the most OP unit ingame11 Sep 2018, 13:47 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2018, 13:34 PMKatitof ... The original post: Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2018, 21:13 PMKatitof DPS against what also matters. Churchill struggles against OKW P4 and vet2 ost P4. It can't go up against anything bigger frontally and I don't need to say that won't be flanking anything with it. Nothing about long "time to kill" or anything else. The claim simple clear and wrong. Churchill does NOT struggles against OKW P4 it can win easily. Again simply move. In: COH2 Balance