Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Cruzz's The More You Know10 Mar 2021, 22:28 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 22:09 PMHannibal At the moment I can say for sure that the formula is wrong. However it will still be a decent indication for the time being. But if you want to compare units that are only a couple % apart, then bear in mind that you can't draw any conclusions. grenadier K98 Weapon profile has at range 0 at 5.76 DPS Cereal has it at 5.988 at range 30 2.6 vs 2.6 so they seem pretty close. But all these is theoretical. One could test in game timing the TTK of modified model of lets say 1600 HP. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: flank vehicles10 Mar 2021, 21:30 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 18:39 PMSander93 The Tiger II gets +40 penetration from far to close range too. Is that a flanking tank too then? There nothing magical about the number 40 that makes a unit a "flanking" unit. You should also be aware by now that absolute values mean little. That is why weapon profile curves are used. The T-34/76 get a x150% penetration increase while the Tiger gets x120% and thus the T-34/76 has more reason to close in to its target. This is an intentional decision. It even explained in Patch notes about the PzIV buff: "Panzer IV The Panzer IV is having its ranged penetration increased to better combat medium tanks at a distance where it has the advantage of stronger frontal armour and faster rate of fire. Penetration from 120/110/100 to 125/115/110" The PzIV has it penetration increased by 10 far but only half that to mid and close so that it benefits less from closing. The player is encouraged to keep the distance when using the PzIV. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 18:39 PMSander93 How is this an assumption? You can check the values yourself. The vast majority of vehicles get a steady +/-10, +/-15 or +/-20 penetration per subsequent distance. You are looking for pattern that is simply not there, specially since the penetration values have changed with paches: Panzer IV: +5+10 Cromwell: +15+15 Sherman: +20+20 T-34/76: +20+20 Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 18:39 PMSander93 There clearly is no formula for these values, they are simple fixed increases. The Panzer IV is the exception here (+5 and +10), not the T-34/76. There is no formula but there is design. There tanks that want to close the distance and there tanks that want to keep their distance. Since it seem you do not want to take my word for here it from Relic in black and white from the patch notes: "The role of the T34 is that of a flanker meant to exploit enemy weak points with hit and run tactics. " In: Lobby
Thread: Sandbags nerfed enough? Nope10 Mar 2021, 20:22 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Mar 2021, 23:17 PMWhiteFlash ... Cheers Since the wire sandbags has been brought up in connection with map I would like to bring up the ability "destroy cover" and hear your opinion in connection to maps. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Smartie's commander reworks: OKW10 Mar 2021, 17:55 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 17:48 PMPip Fusies have a snare, flare, and regular grenade, though. I'm not entirely certain, but I'm pretty sure Fusies outfight Penals (At least in an efficiency sense) in the lategame, too... though this likely has changed somewhat with the patch. They're not really the same unit, I don't know why you want to compare them specifically. Clearly said combat performance. And they do have lots of similarities. Similar mid far DPS, similar EHP, similar vet bonuses, but PF cost more and are available later. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 17:48 PMPip EDIT: Penals would be better compared with Pgrens, they ostensibly fill a similar role of a "shock" infantry to support the mainline (Grens/Conscripts), but Pgrens do the job far better. And Pg have higher cost by 50 and higher tech cost and thus you should be comparing their cost efficiency and not just performance. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 17:48 PMPip If you want to rebalance Penals I'd suggest seeing about making them come at a similar timing to Pgrens, and having a similar level of power/utility. I have pointed that from day one. Unfortunately we had the opposite and Pg become available earlier. But I am going to stop here because this thread is about suggestions to OKW commander and not Penals. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Intel/Recon - key to victrory10 Mar 2021, 17:42 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:39 PMpvtgooner I mean look at this retort from you. You demand all this evidence with your non sensical gip gallosh style of debating while you have gems like "oh its not a good idea since the sole role is vision"??????? What law of COH says vision extending abilities cant cost munis since its vision? There are TONS of muni activated vision abilities in this game, saying other wise is just bad faith and bordering on lying. There no law, on the other hand it would make IRHT obsolete. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Intel/Recon - key to victrory10 Mar 2021, 17:40 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:36 PMpvtgooner Yeah 35 sounds good to me, its just as arbitary a point like anything else you pick (63?????) Care to provide an argument why IRHT should have less sight than other reckon vehicles? Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:36 PMpvtgooner But the point vipper, that you always seem to miss, is that wasn't the discussion of what OP put forward. Have you ever wondered why you start so many threads that begin with a quote from another thread with you saying "it was off topic"? Because you derail almost every thread you jump in, specifically if it has anything to do with a slight axis change. Like he just said spotting scopes should be a muni activated ability, stated his case with the evidence you demanded from me, and you just drone on about IRHT. Its very hard to actually discuss what OP wanted to discuss in that environment. Yes you derailed this threat by making about me and not reckon vehicles. Funny thing is that I said all reckon abilities should not cost munition including T-70 and Valentine yet you ignored that and try to present it as if I said that only for IRHT because it suits your biased narrative. Me and OP where debating just fine and he even thank me for my additions. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Smartie's commander reworks: OKW10 Mar 2021, 17:37 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 17:14 PMPip I don't think Fusiliers are "Underwhelming". They're really good in the lategame, it's just that they're a weird design. They're basically just Volksgrenadiers that start out worse and end up better.. there's not really anything all that "unique" about them (Except the Shreck upgrade, but I'm assuming we're talking about their stats as a G43 squad. Their Shreck upgrade is clearly fantastic) The 295/80 mu PF's performance in combat is not that much better than cheaper 290 Penals although there become available later... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: flank vehicles10 Mar 2021, 17:34 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:43 PMpvtgooner Oh ok, so useless thread no one asked for, including the guy you quoted to start this thread, got it. Since in your opinion it useless feel free to stay away from it, and the guy I quoted just posted it in it. In: Lobby
Thread: flank vehicles10 Mar 2021, 17:31 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:56 PMSander93 Why would you calculate it like this? Relic clearly didn't use a percental increase formula for establishing penetration values, but a simple -/+10 to -/+20 per distance for most units. That is an assumption in your part. Even so PzIV get +15 and T-34 +40. There is clearly a difference. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:56 PMSander93 Otherwise we would have different sets of penetration values (like 80/96/115 with a 1.2 increase, etc). I did not claim there was a formula I simply point that T-34 weapon profile penetration has different curve than other medium tanks the same way M10 has different curve than other TDs. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:56 PMSander93 The T-34/76 just happens to have a high percental increase because it has the lowest base value that gets disproportionally multiplied by the standard +20/+20 pen increase compared to other vehicles, but there is nothing to conclude from this and it makes no sense to compare vehicles like this. Yes there is. Relic create a role which is "flanker vehicles" and part of that role included better DPS at close distance. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:56 PMSander93 How does high near penetration prove the vehicle has a flanking role anyway? It does not on its own. Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:56 PMSander93 If a vehicle is supposed to flank, it should be able to get to the rear armor of enemies relatively easily, and then they do not need high penetration. 110 would be enough for quaranteed pens against the rear armor of nearly every unit. There is no logical correlation that high near penetration values indicate a flanking purpose. Penetration decrease over distance is just a natural phenomenon. Tank had much higher rear armor values that 110 at the time. In: Lobby
Thread: Intel/Recon - key to victrory10 Mar 2021, 16:32 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 16:25 PMpvtgooner If you ever make a thread to discuss things to tone down and they happen to be axis, vipper will spam your thread with nonsensical gip gallosh like bringing up units that should have 63(???????) sight range. If you say "hey I think spotting scopes should atleast be a muni activated ability to add some micro burden to a crazy good ability" he'll just reply the IRHT should actually have more vision than it does now lmao. Dude just derails every thread someone posts in good faith. My suggestions to you is to focus on the arguments and not the people. Do you believe that reckon vehicles like IRHT should have a sight of 35? If so do you have any argument to back up that belief? In: COH2 Balance