Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Armor value and Deflection damage5 Apr 2018, 12:52 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Apr 2018, 12:47 PMEsxile Wut? do you really think massing T70 would counter a KT? Massing T34-76 yes since it is the purpose of that change but I don't expect T70 or Stuart doing more than today. But to cut short this discussion, it is not about thinking what an actual T70 would do but how to modify any damage/armor relationship for any vehicle. If armor only reduces damage then mass T-70 would work the same way mass PTRS works. T-34/76 can still be very effective is they attack rear/side armor. Another change is that is units should have cool-down after their being destroyed. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Armor value and Deflection damage5 Apr 2018, 12:18 PM A solution where all tank still damage higher tech vehicle will only lead to spamming of low tier vehicles since their will be little reason to tech higher. If a t70 can damage a KT or a luch a IS-2 with every shot frontally there would little reason to built anything else. One should probably lower the lethality of super heavy tanks but keep damage consisted while making TDs less effective especially vs lower tier units. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: AT gun accuracy5 Apr 2018, 09:42 AM probably has more to do with missed shot not colliding and less with accuracy, although it less accurate since max range is 50 and mid range is 25. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: What to do with the KT?4 Apr 2018, 19:27 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Apr 2018, 19:24 PMKatitof I do not see why it should have armor buffed. IS-2 never had its armor increased, because Panther penetrated it reliably, I completely fail to see why should it be any different with KT. What is the actual argument for it? Krupp steel? Muh history? Its a super heavy tank and only a singular unit of each opposing faction reliably stands up to it. You want a unit to not be vulnerable to its own hard counter and I completely fail to see why as it walks over every singular unit in the game that attempts to engage it. Even IS-2 will lose to a Panther in a slugfest with a bit of luck, but there is absolutely nothing that is able to contest KT. This is why TDs were buffed and this is why KT should not be. If you want allied TDs to have lower penetration, KTs armor should go down as well. It walks over tanks, it walks over AT infantry, it walks over ATGs, TDs are the only reliable things in game. Alternatively, if you want TDs to be less reliable against KT, KT should receive further nerfs in firepower department to damage at the very least. You have to argue that with people suggesting that KT needs more armor not me. I would suggest to you to try to read what other are talking about before posting. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Why there are no night maps in matchmaking?4 Apr 2018, 19:11 PM In addition Coh's blizzards are rather demanding on the hardware. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What to do with the KT?4 Apr 2018, 19:08 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Apr 2018, 18:42 PMKatitof Maybe the point of that armor is to not try to use it against the very thing that is supposed to hardcounter that high armor? Maybe tanks are not supposed to stand up to and slug it out against something that literally has tank destroyer in the name? You don't expect infantry to frontally win against MG, why do you expect tanks to be able to engage tank destroyers without a flank? Just a thought. Do you agree that KT armor should be increased or are you just trying to get to 10.000+6.300 posts? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: What to do with the KT?4 Apr 2018, 18:28 PM What is the point in paying more for axis armor and gaining armor bonus if allied TDs have so much penetration? FF Penetration near 260 Penetration mid 240 Penetration far 210 Tullip Penetration near 1.000 Penetration mid 1.000 Penetration far 1.000 Deflection damage 39.99 (Deflection damage on what) ? SU-85 Penetration near 240 Penetration mid 230 Penetration far 220 Vet2 Penetration near 312 Penetration mid 299 Penetration far 286 M36 Penetration near 260 Penetration mid 240 Penetration far 220 vet3 Penetration near 338 Penetration mid 312 Penetration far 286 AP vet 3 Penetration near 390 Penetration mid 364 Penetration far 325 Allied TD penetration was buffed to fight the KT and now the suggestion to buff the KT armor more? In that case lower all other vehicles armor make them cheaper and replace the armor bonus with something useful. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Why there are no night maps in matchmaking?4 Apr 2018, 11:08 AM Relic probably intended to develop night fighting and that is way they have OKW weapon with Infrared, but then they saw what happened with blizzard and changed their minds. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What to do with the KT?4 Apr 2018, 09:03 AM Buffing the penetration of allied TDs and then the armor of the KT makes little sense. Maybe reduce the penetration instead. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: re-evaluting the panther's range and HP4 Apr 2018, 08:12 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Apr 2018, 03:22 AMFiresparks ... you do realize the purpose of this thread is to make the panther more attractive? to say that panther is not good enough so it's not worth buffing is entirely self-defeating. Maybe I was not clear enough. If the researching and building T4 is no worth it even if one balances the Panther it will have very little impact in anything bellow 3vs3. If Panther has a higher tech cost and cost more than allied TDs that can defeat from max range, people will still use the Tiger. The problem of Ostheer Panther are interlinked with problems of T4. In: COH2 Balance