Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments12 May 2023, 16:42 PM Jump back to quoted post12 May 2023, 14:27 PMDIRTY_FINISHER “RTS games should have "strategies" in them and not just "micro". Player should be reward/penalized for their decision making and not just for their reflex. “ You said this. Which I followed by saying. Sacrificing map control in exchange for ideal positioning to wipe units is a strategy. Not “cheesy” like you said. Micro is involved by so is the decision to take that approach during the game? I don’t have the patience to argue with you LOLOL. Yes SMG squads and CQB units should trade efficiently close quarters. But at the same time if that unit ends up on your retreat path and your retreating a very low health squad with 1-2 models. There should be a good chance that the CQB unit wipes that squad. You are being punished for having your retreat path not protected. Know your surroundings. That’s why I said TTK is too high in my opinion. Low health squads with 1-2 models retreat through double BAR rifles sometimes 2 squads of double BAR rifles and live. Like Hannibal said. It creates boring gameplay. Yes we agree that low health/entity squad that retreat thru enemy units should have a high probability of being wiped. I still stand by what I have already posted: "The idea that High TTK is bad and low TTK is good, is an oversimplification." In: COH3 Central
Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments12 May 2023, 13:24 PM Jump back to quoted post12 May 2023, 13:00 PMHannibal Look, no one argued for an extreme stance. Squads should neither evaporate within a second like they do in MoW nor should a normal shoot out last half the game... (to me it seem that dirtyfinisher is suggesting that SMG unit should be wipe machines) And that has been my point all along. "High TTK bad low TTK good" logic does not really work. As for spectacle, an RTS game should watched in two levels. One tactical on how good a player is using units and a strategical one, like chess, where a player is using strategy and has to adapt (his build order, his teching, his commander choices in the situation at hand, including his map control, the map, opponent strategy and so on...). Else you get a stale meta that at leas to me is also boring. Is COH3 on a good spot? certainly not but imo COH2 is not either since most choices have been watered downed/removed from players and most tech/option are available to them and the same commander are used over and over again. For me having COH3 take the same direction that COH2 did would be a mistake. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments12 May 2023, 12:10 PM Jump back to quoted post12 May 2023, 11:40 AMDIRTY_FINISHER In the future if you want to debate/argue. You can’t just say something then ignore my rebuttal lol. In the future if you want to debate/argue, you can’t just presen something as "quote" when I have never said anything remotely relevant. "If you don’t like that strategy. It doesn’t mean it should be nerfed. For instance I never posted that I don't like the tactic of "Anticipating their retreat, along with forcing a retreat" or that is should be nerfed. Jump back to quoted post12 May 2023, 11:40 AMDIRTY_FINISHER High TTK is bad. There is obviously a sweet spot and there shouldn’t be super Low TTK. But it depends on the situation. A 6 model Thompson squad should have pretty low TTK on any squad it gets close to. It makes sense. Low TTK is also bad. (See commandos example above). A squad with SMG should be able to be cost efficient at close range fights but that necessarily translates to it is should be a "wipe machine". Else faction with long range unit that did not have such "wipe machines" would be in a constant disadvantage and certain map would favor specific faction. So no it does not make sense. As for Thompson I am not familiar with their DPS curve in COH3 but in COH2 they should not have pretty low TTK compared to other SMG since they are already much better at mid ranges. The idea that High TTK is bad and low TTK is good is an oversimplification. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments12 May 2023, 11:56 AM Jump back to quoted post12 May 2023, 10:35 AMHannibal CoH2 has design issues no doubt about that. Doesn't change the fact that the whole series is very micro intensive. The whole point of the cover system is that the player has to order the squad behind to take cover behind the tractor and not 3 meters next to it. That you need to place that grenade yourself down to the centimeter instead of just clicking the 'throw a grenade' button and it is resolved automatically. That doesn't mean it becomes LOL or any other game, but that's just the way any CoH has been designed from the get go. Therefore, this grenade should also matter. It should not decide about the game, but about the battle between those two squads. As you said, a good strategy game is about decision making. If this grenade doesn't have an impact on the battle, there is no point in the ability, especially no point in having the player control it to the finest position of the throw. If that's not the case, just automate it and let the player focus on the grander scheme of things. There's a lot of grey areas to the exact outcome obviously, which cannot be properly discussed without having an example. I personally also had the feeling - at least by watching the tournaments - that Coh3 is not punishing enough, that the decision to flanking and other movements doesn't matter enough. CoH2 hasn't hit the sweet spot either, but CoH3 probably doesn't as well. The context is this "People like higher TTK because people don’t like being punished. Higher TTK makes it easier for everyone to be “good” or have a better chance at winning games. Because it removes catastrophes. People not paying attention and losing squads. People think higher TTK some how makes the game more tactical. Even though I don’t know how you can argue that at all? Because it removes a key element form an RTS. Timing, and positioning power. I’m not saying you don’t understand because you seem to like lower TTK. But for everyone else. If you ambush a squad with a CQB unit you should reap the rewards of forcing that unit to retreat/wipe. Not they casually soft retreat to another squad and win the engagement. That is the problem with high TTK. There’s no more OH FUCK moments. When a shock troop shows up out of nowhere. Or a PGREN is on your retreat path. On top of they dramatically reduced squad wipes on retreat. With the whole retreating buffs rework. It may not be intentional. But it seems it’s geared to make things “easier” for everyone. Which is fine. But shortens the ceiling of gameplay. " As an example is will bring up COH2 commandos on release. They where a CQB that could ambush other units and their TTK has extremely low . They offered lots of "OH F... moments". Where they good for the game? I think we can agree that they where not. A game like COH should be played at two levels a tactical one (like using cover and grenades) and a strategical where a player has strategical options and has to make decision that effect the game long term. Coh1 had such decision, in Coh2 two most of those decision where watered down and in Coh3 I an attempt to go back to such decisions and that imo is a good thing. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments12 May 2023, 09:21 AM Jump back to quoted post12 May 2023, 07:49 AMHannibal Just a quick note on this one: As far as strategy games go, coh has been on the very micro heavy side. There is no real economy to manage as in most and especially classic RTS games, base building is non-existant either, and additionally it portrays smaller battles. You're not managing hundreds of units, you're having about 10 squads/units before you're pop capped. If there is any game loop to be had, it is about the exact positioning of units, movement and timing of abilities. The only non-micro elements are army composition decisions and if you focus on munitions or fuel. That's the way it has worked since coh1. Well yes and no. Coh always had micro but there is difference between COH1 and COH2. Coh1 give player more decision making than COH2. The tree like commander abilities and tech structure/cost forced player into making decision that had an impact on the game. In coh2 and especially after the "community" patches decision making become less important. In COH3 there attempt to return closer to COH1 model (even if not successful implemented) and that imo is a good thing. Turning the game into a LOL type of game where one controls 10 units instead of one would be bad direction imo. My original point is that game should not be only about micro with high TTK where, for instance, how well one dodges a grenade wins or lose the game. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments12 May 2023, 07:17 AM Jump back to quoted post11 May 2023, 16:50 PMDIRTY_FINISHER You do realize that maneuvering onto your opponents retreat path. Anticipating their retreat, along with forcing a retreat. To then wipe a weak unit. To weaken your opponents overall army power. Is a strategy?. Making it easier for you to do literally everything. Cap VPs/points win engagements. Because they are fighting with a smaller army than you after you wipe a unit. You do realize that is a strategy? If you don’t like that strategy. It doesn’t mean it should be nerfed. Because people don’t like it. Yea bro I hate when I get outplayed by my opponent because he wiped my entire army because I over extended. It’s extremely difficult to wipe units on retreat in COH3. Way too much forgiveness. It’s basically turned into forget everything just press T. You’ll be okay. COH is a very forgiving game when it comes to micro. There are a lot of top level players with low APM. But it also allows micro to have an impact. Your comment about invisible grenades. You lack discipline in playing then. It’s that simple. There are numerous units that reveal cloaked units. Your inability to employ them does not make cloaked units “cheesy”. Build a 222. They nerfed forward reinforcement pretty hard. For the better. But TTK is still trash. Like exsile said. There is no dramatic distinction between weapon profiles. I don’t know why assault grens take ages to win an engagement close range. Or why double BAR riflemen take ages to win an engagement medium to close range. Nothing makes sense. It seems that we are drifting away from my point. In your original post you seem to support that low TTK is good and High TTK is bad which is a oversimplification. For instance in COH2 IS had (relatively) high TTK could kill a enemy model at first contact with the first volley. That was actually pretty bad and thus changed. I mentioned before TTK might be off in COH3 but that it a more complicated issue than just TTK. One should create weapon profiles that encourage relative positioning and avoid certain weapon combination. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Discussion - Current state of Tournaments11 May 2023, 15:49 PM Jump back to quoted post11 May 2023, 14:45 PMDIRTY_FINISHER I’m not quoting you because I’m on my phone and the page would be too long. @gia But agree to disagree. There is definitely “clicks” in the COH scene. Let’s just say I find the most arrogant players almost unanimously 1s mains. I’m not saying there’s arrogant team game people. But it’s funny when people try to shine a bad light on players based off game mode and not their performance. People like higher TTK because people don’t like being punished. Higher TTK makes it easier for everyone to be “good” or have a better chance at winning games. Because it removes catastrophes. People not paying attention and losing squads. People think higher TTK some how makes the game more tactical. Even though I don’t know how you can argue that at all? Because it removes a key element form an RTS. Timing, and positioning power. I’m not saying you don’t understand because you seem to like lower TTK. But for everyone else. If you ambush a squad with a CQB unit you should reap the rewards of forcing that unit to retreat/wipe. Not they casually soft retreat to another squad and win the engagement. That is the problem with high TTK. There’s no more OH FUCK moments. When a shock troop shows up out of nowhere. Or a PGREN is on your retreat path. On top of they dramatically reduced squad wipes on retreat. With the whole retreating buffs rework. It may not be intentional. But it seems it’s geared to make things “easier” for everyone. Which is fine. But shortens the ceiling of gameplay. Kimbo is best known for the playstyle in COH2 and I try to implement it as well when possible. But in COH2 you could straight up win games by sacrificing some map control to get a juicy envelopment and wipe half your opponents army. It was a hidden win condition in COH2 that you ignore VPs and map control. To out position your opponent. Cripple him substantially. He then can no longer contest you. Doesn’t seem possible in COH3. COH3 TTK might be off but I have to disagree with your reasoning and if there an issue it has do with more that just TTK. Getting wipes and having big explosions might be "spectacular" but this type of play style where "micro" makes all difference belongs to games like LOL not RTS. RTS games should have "strategies" in them and not just "micro". Player should be reward/penalized for their decision making and not just for their reflex. This becomes more obvious when cheese tactic are involved like grenades wipes from invisible units. Imo the problem has more to do with combination of TTK and forward reinforcement/healing/re-crewing availability that leads to stale play style. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Time for a Coh 2 remaster5 May 2023, 15:53 PM Jump back to quoted post5 May 2023, 15:41 PMVermillion_Hawk ...You're arguing with a strawman. It seem so and that straw man is you. Jump back to quoted post5 May 2023, 15:41 PMVermillion_Hawk Again, if you want to go down this road, I'm fine with it, I can be a ridiculous pedant too, it's pretty much what I do for a living. Not only a straw man but also a forum warrior it seems. I stand by what I said the claim that "Russia is so far the only one (with the possible exception of Japan) that still officially insists on a glorified and sanitized narrative that conveniently glosses over things..." is simply inaccurate since a many countries do the same including US and UK. They still do it now only the have a new name for it, they call the victims of war crimes "collateral damage". And NO I am not going to follow down the forum warrior path you have chosen to follow with your ad hominem arguments. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Time for a Coh 2 remaster5 May 2023, 15:28 PM Jump back to quoted post5 May 2023, 15:23 PMVermillion_Hawk You're trying to quibble over definitions I never once brought up. Let me just stop you right here Vipper, and spare you the indignity - you aren't capable of having this discussion with me. You've posted here enough that I have something of a measure of what kind of person you are, and you do not have the critical reasoning or straight-up intelligence to have an honest conversation with me. Stick to Company of Heroes, which you have devoted an inordinate amount of your life to. Is there a reason why you resorting to ad hominen arguments? Is it simply because you know that what you wrote is inaccurate? In: COH3 Central
Thread: Time for a Coh 2 remaster5 May 2023, 15:02 PM Jump back to quoted post5 May 2023, 14:57 PMVermillion_Hawk I didn't say they didn't defend their actions, I said they don't suppress the accounts and push an "official" sanitized history. Ask the US government or 99% of US citizens about the fire bomb attack in Tokyo and the nuclear attacks in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and you you will get "sanitized history" response. They will simply not accept that those where "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity". Russia is simply not the only one as you have claimed. In: COH3 Central