I saw the section being on retreat yes. But ukf forcing okw off the field in a first/second engagement i fail to see stil how that is the sole reason that okw loses complete map control.
Okw does about the same to soviets and even ukf with no help yet no one bats an eye. Both dont have snares as well at that time.
Your 3 points are valid but looking at the big picture there is nothing game breaking about it in the slightest.
I have not described this issue as game breaking in any of my posts so I am not sure why people keep repeating that.
It still allows UKF to bring more troops than other factions in the early engagements giving them numeric superiority. That allows them to gain early control while the faction can defend effectively.
The first two foto's have the minimap and taskbar visible. I am assuming those are of the same game. So the second shows axis having more territory dispite being forced to retreat the first time.
They are from the same game.
The okw on that side control only normal 2 sector and a VP for 2 minutes, then they completely lose map control.
Actually in that game UKF player was originally out played and had IS forced to retreat by SP as you can see from the pic, yet he still manages to win the first engagement without any help form USF.
You are entitled to your opinion.
But think it safe to say that:
1) tactic is being used
2) there is no snare available at the time frame
3) combat drop works
And here is another example
UKF player finds first OKW does an infatry and forces a retreat on his volk and at this point the second okw player send all hit troops to help: https://www.coh2.org/file/20188/ror6.jpg
at thing point does another infatry drop on first player's SP forcing another retreat and almost a wipe at which point his also retreats while he teammates has gain control uncontested. https://www.coh2.org/file/20189/ror7.jpg
Vipper. I can't help you. Clearly google translate or whatever you're using is mangling what I'm saying beyond recognition or you just can't comprehend what I'm saying to you.
It's one thing to explain to me why what I said can't be implemented, it's another thing entirely to continue to misunderstand but insist that I'm the mistaken one.
Vipper, maybe another English speaker here can help you understand what I'm trying to say. Otherwise I'm not going to reiterate it for the third time, because you're likely not going to try any harder to understand than you did the first two times.
EDIT: You know what. I'm stubborn. Why not try again anyways.
Vipper, as you have agreed multiple times, weapons have values hardcoded as to what damage and accuracy they have against certain cover types.
I am saying that for the accuracy value, perhaps it could be replaced with an equation. If you are interested in what my idea for that equation would be, please reread my statement above.
If that is not possible to implement, because CoH2 cannot take an equation as a value to a variable, that is one thing.
but I am NOT talking about giving a PROP ARMOR. I am talking about making multiple cover types, and putting this "armor" into an equation related to them.
If you want me to explain something to you about COH mechanics pls use PM.
If you have a suggestion to make share it with community and not me specifically.
There is simply not reason to address me in thread Hannibal has make for his own suggestion about cover mechanics.
The tactics which are not working i was talking about in #34 is UC drop troop using RRo.e, which you are taking out of context.
On the other hand, the "early game edge" i mention in #104 come from UC and RRo.e being used in other ways, namely UC provide fire while RRo.e provide repair/close protection. The ability to contest early fuel by bringing UC+RRo.e to the point earlier (again, no drop troop, it doesnot work), described by you as "reduce the effect of the CD for CP 0 call in infatry" in #103 is both tested by Hanibal and admited as not game braking yourself.
I stand on my point that uc drop RRo.e is risky.
Simply no, in one post you claim that to transport and drop RoRE for the initial contact
does not work and in the other it gives an edge. I have no taken anything out of context, so I suggest that you stop blaming me for your contradictions.
I have little interest in these word game thou so if we can agree to disagree.
What I am proposing is not to give a squad a bonus based on the cover that it's in. I am proposing an approximation of that, represented by an equation which takes into account the penetration of a weapon and the "armor" of a piece of cover.
For example, and please correct me if I'm wrong, within the flamethrower's code is contained how much damage or accuracy it will do against a specific type of cover. This is what I understood from the modding tools.
Nope. A weapon will fire at entity and apply modifiers according to number of variables. One of the being cover. The "armor" value of the cover itself has no bearing.
Green cover can be separated into a few different kinds, depending on the material.
For example,
whereas there is one variable for green cover as it is now, perhaps there could be "green_cover_stone" and "green_cover_steel" etc.
And the RA modifiers against these cover types could (possibly) be represented by an equation which takes into account the specific weapon's penetration.
For example:
green_cover_stone RA modifier = ".5*(pen\1.1)
green_cover_steel RA modifier = ".5*(pen\1.3)
Where "pen" is a variable that calls upon the current weapon's penetration value at that range.
It isn't "armor" per se, but I think it might approximate it.
I have not checked if target tables include "armor" in the first place. Even if they did the exact same effect can be achieved without armor only with received accuracy.
In any case if you need further help understanding how these things work I suggest you sent a PM since this is not what this thread is about.
And i and various others had already reply to the "doesnt have enough muni" from the page 1 of this thread like #4 of mine and #6 of Kurobane, but you doesnt reply to those.
Again, having to change your play style due to enemy picking doc and commit to a strat is not game breaking.
pls stop imagining things, I never described this strategy as "game breaking".
What I have pointed is that allows UKF player to reduce the effect of the CD for CP 0 call in infatry.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
