Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: What is up with M8A1(Scott) change?3 Sep 2021, 09:35 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Sep 2021, 09:17 AMtheekvn if you say Scott is an assault gun then it has a right to have smoke. - they had to stay as long as posible to make bleed damage overtime. Without smoke, 2 shot from anti tank unit kill them. If you want to take it smoke ? fine. Give it back old power with 55-60 range auto-fire. Axis AT can touch it while it can do the job: " Blob control ". This is a game even 3-5 M8 scott cant do their job problaly as Blob/Crow control unit. And yet They need smoke to stay aways from 2 shot kills. assault guns generally do not come with stock defencive smoke. assault guns job is not blob control it is indirect/direct fire support Finally I do not want to "take away smoke", I pointed that the unit is hard to counter and reducing its tenacity would open the way to improve its offencive capabilities without becoming op. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I don't trust the official balance team.3 Sep 2021, 09:21 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 18:44 PMHannibal My misread on that part, I thought it was about the G43 itself. Why do you only point out the far DPS difference? Their close moving DPS is 44% higher than Penals', I'd say this is pretty special, while retaining a vastly better DPS after model drops. But I'll move away from the Penal point since I don't see a reason to use Penals as a reference. To the highlighted point: Normal squads in that function lose between 40-50% (sometimes even more) of their DPS across all ranges on the move. PFs lose 25-30% of their static DPS. Only Shocks achieve this, but even then only on the close range with heavier losses mid and far (not that these ranges really mattered, but still). But if we need a completely different class of units that is meant to do heavy damage close range which to justify PFs moving DPS, this should be a clear sign that PFs need changes, also regarding their DPS. Phrase the issue as you want: Too high DPS concentration so that model drops are not punished, too high standard moving DPS: PFs do too much damage on the move for various reasons. The claim was that balance team did not care enough if issues exist outside of high level games with taking PFs as an example (no one has seriously complained about Penals for quite a while now). While I agree that PFs have multiple issues, the comparison to Penals still does not make sense. Those squads, especially Penals, fight in completely different army compositions and even face different enemies. Off topic from our discussion: PFs need a REAL weakness. They literally are a complete squad. Acceptable static DPS at all ranges, good to very good moving DPS, very good DPS retention, grenade, snare, even a utility flare. Decent RA and reinforcement cost. The only "bad" thing about them is a relatively mediocre mid range DPS, but that is not an issue due to their mobility. This squad needs more punishment for losing models. Afaik they have their own G43 version: Make it shittier but give them 4-5 of them. Or just nerf their RA, even if reinforcement costs have to get a bit cheaper. There must a some decision making for leaving cover and pushing in, but currently there is none. That's what makes them so blobbable. My point is that "fixing" PF is not as simple as it presented and I dought that reducing the moving dps would fix them. (as I pointed out the issue has more to do with the desing and less with performance) Generally speaking Coh2 is complicated system and in complicated system the effects of even small changes can be amplified. I find most of the critism to mod team injust since balacing such a system is not easy. Imo the main problem with balacing approach has to with what it seems as a lack of a balance desing ( strategy), the balance seem to focus more on band aids ( tactictal) then actual long term desing solution. For instance snipers got an hp increase so that they do not get one shoted by mortars and then mortar damage was reduced so that can no longer one shoot while snipers retain their extra hp. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: What is up with M8A1(Scott) change?3 Sep 2021, 09:02 AM I am not sure why people compare the scott with rocket artillery. The unit is an assault gun and not rocket artillery. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: What is up with M8A1(Scott) change?3 Sep 2021, 08:59 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Sep 2021, 12:10 PMvgfgff What about panther? This have long range / speed , good mobility too. I think Its survivability is not enough point to nerf its fire power. Point here is that the tenacity of scott amplifies its perfomance. Even if one manages to get the offencive properties correct the unit might still be op due to the fact that is hard to counter. Imo it would be easier to balance if one remove the defencive smoke. Why does an indirect fire unit needs defencive smoke to begin with? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Allied inf should also have dmg reduction to AT Satchel3 Sep 2021, 08:48 AM Jump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 12:57 PMleithianz Kinda tired of you manipulating own words. I'll just walk away. But just one last thing, I have not touched the title. One of the site manager did. So don't blame me for that. That is unfortunate since apart from the unjustified hostility I found the debate interesting. I know I learned some things and I guess you learned some things also. Apart from the unfortunate title and OP I would go as far as to say that there might even be some merit in the thread. For instance if someone suggested tha the kill radius vs friendly units should be reduced I would agreed. My suggestion would include: Create a new weapon so that satchel and AT sachel can be balanced separately Remove engine damage from normal satchel possibly remove engine from AT satchel also and reduce AI damage from AT satchel since it would be lower reword In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Allied inf should also have dmg reduction to AT Satchel31 Aug 2021, 12:53 PM Satchel are mess mostly due to bandaid solution that where used during creation. On the other hand there is logic in their design. Since AT satchels are an AT weapon they should not easily wipe enemy infantry thus the reduced damage. On the other hand since the combine heavy damage and one shot engine damage they are considered "high risk high reward weapons" and thus can be punishing for the unit using it. The weapon fit the Penal role. This is design decision and so No, friendly and enemy units should not take the same damage. I personally do not like the design and I have suggested change but that is different story. On the personal staff you keep bring up In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Allied inf should also have dmg reduction to AT Satchel31 Aug 2021, 12:21 PM Jump back to quoted post31 Aug 2021, 06:37 AMMMX interesting find! i remember this came up quite a while ago in the grenade AoE comparison thread, but i always thought the damage multiplier would apply to all units, not just axis. this should by all means get standardized to either dealing full damage or the reduced amount to all squads, regardless of faction. btw, according to the stats tab you posted it it should be 20% of the original damage, not just 20% less. that at least would explain why it seemingly does almost zero damage to the axis units in your test. This solution is result of the weird story behind AT satchel. If I remember correctly there is not AT satchel weapon and the weapon used is the normal satchel. For some obscure reason the MOD team choose to use the same weapon instead of creating a new one. But the difference is damage seem to be intentional they simply had to target tables instead of friendly fire modifiers because that would also effect the vanilla satchel. The solution is not elegant and imo they should simply create a new weapon. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I don't trust the official balance team.31 Aug 2021, 12:15 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Aug 2021, 17:10 PMHannibal Calling it a myth is wrong. If I calculated correctly, in the late game the G43 retains about 84% DPS at short range and 90% long range. Although the close DPS is more important, still the G43 retains a crazy ratio when moving. We are simply talking about different things. You are taking about the g43 weapons and I am talking about the whole PF squad. The myth is that 6 men g43 PF squad lose only 10% DPS on the move. And it exactly that myth that is false. Jump back to quoted post30 Aug 2021, 17:10 PMHannibal Again, if my calcs are correct, late game Fusies perform between 44% short and 6% long range better on the move than Penals, with way better damage retention. This is secondary myth. That G43 PF somehow have significantly superior DPS on the move than other units. As your state the difference far is only 6% so their far DPS on the move is not really that special. You are correct to point DPS retention and that is why I pointed it out also in my previous posts. Jump back to quoted post30 Aug 2021, 17:10 PMHannibal But I don't know why you mention Penals in the first place. They have nothing to do with the topic. and also work very differently in their faction. PF are not the topic either. What has been argued is that the MOD team should have for foreseen the issues with PF and they should be nerfed: "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see 90% DPS on the move units is pretty stupid and when they're picked every game maybe there's an issue." What I have pointed out is that is not the on the move performance the issue (since it similar to Penals) but the design so fixing PF might not be a simple as it looks at first glance. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Allied inf should also have dmg reduction to AT Satchel30 Aug 2021, 13:58 PM Now according to https://coh2.serealia.ca/#158 it seem that satchel do 85 damage to infantry but there is a modifier vs west_german_infantry "Target Table Target type vehicle Accuracy multi 1 Damage multi 0.7058824 ----- ----- Extra damage 340, Requires types: building Target type west_german_infantry Accuracy multi 1 Damage multi 0.2 ----- ----- Extra damage 340, Requires types: building Target type german_infantry Accuracy multi 1 Damage multi 0.2 ----- ----- Extra damage 340, Requires types: building " Now this indication that killing friendly infantry is intended and that issue vs okw infantry comes from the weapon and not from "secret axis modifier" as has been claimed in this thread. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Allied inf should also have dmg reduction to AT Satchel30 Aug 2021, 13:15 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Aug 2021, 13:03 PMleithianz I'm quite assertive to myself because I do have test that backs me up that all Axis infantry does not get killed while Allied inf units does. And what do you had when you said "Axis infantry do not have damage reduction. There is simply separate modifier for friendly fire." after seeing test result? Unless you have opened the editor and found a modifier that makes axis infantry have damage modifier specifically vs AT satchel you have nothing more than bug. Yet you claim that such a damage modifier exist for axis infantry and you even claim that his balance issue. I no intention to continue on this path of personal comments. In: COH2 Balance