Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Maxims are useless in Team Games8 Apr 2019, 13:57 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 13:55 PMRedTerra I remember the early days of CoH2 where players stupidly spammed Maxims because of the fast deployment time. But now, the Maxims are just utterly useless in team games. It can barely suppress anything whereas the Vickers, MG34 and 42 can almost always suppress in the first burst. The crewmen health is so poor that I find maxims dying faster before they can even suppress or even retreat (because of the unique game logic for the crew to pick up the Maxim) The Suppressing Ability is far far less useful than the Incendiary rounds. You also have to reload, which by that time the Maxim crew is being targeted by overwhelming firepower. And oddly Maxims are now 260, apparently Relic thinks a Maxim = Vickers or MG42. The only use of Maxims seems to be last desperate defense lines or being in buildings The crew of the maxim has the same health and target size as other Mgs. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Why does ost puma require battle phase 2?8 Apr 2019, 12:41 PM The problem was with the commander not with puma. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of Tank Balance8 Apr 2019, 08:25 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 01:41 AMSpades68 ... Formula: Penetration/Armor * 100 = % chance to deal damage ... That is simply incorrect. You are assuming that the unit has scored a hit. Chance to score a natural hit: accuracy* target size 100 Chance to score a collision hit estimated via test... Chance to penetrate: Penetration/Armor 100 Chance to deal damage static: (Chance to score a natural hit + Chance to score a collision hit) * Chance to penetrate Chance to deal damage on the move: (Chance to score a natural hit + Chance to score a collision hit) * Chance to penetrate Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 01:41 AMSpades68 SU-85 dies in 4 hits (with a 157% chance to deal damage if hit by panther) Panther dies in 6 hits (with an 84% chance to deal damage if hit by SU-85) Now do the same and include accuracy. Then do the same at vet 2 and vet 3 In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I hear the new patches have made western allies op?8 Apr 2019, 08:18 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2019, 08:02 AMSeductiveCardbordBox I told you that they do more damage then, I'll tell you the exact same now, your bizzare personal fixation on being wrong is admirable but you can quit any time. Do I need to dig up the posts where you insisted they didn't and you were demonstrably incorrect? Back to the point, yes. You can't just buff Ost to be better in 1v1 via gren boosts or the like without making a mess of team games, 2v2 and up. Their vehicle play and team weapons already make them incredibly viable, adding mainline infantry strength on top of that will mark a return to the misery days when team games were a 90% axis searching at any given time. Compare USF and Ostheer you will find that their support weapons are about equal and their infatry is better. So is their light vehicles. Should they grenadier get a big buff? probably not but there is large number units that need to nerfed. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I hear the new patches have made western allies op?7 Apr 2019, 22:12 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 21:30 PMmiragefla The main issue I see with is a number of their units aren’t that viable/need tuning to help diversify what the faction can do. WFA only needs slight nerfs with USF only really needing some tuning on the Jackson and M8 Scott in terms of the core. Things like the Pack Howie are stronger than mortars due to price, tech and having to fulfill the role of pseudo heavy artillery aka medium artillery. From what I play as USF, double bars might be strong but it’s also counteracted by cost and it’s best range is to fight at mid-short which is harder to achieve. Boosting Ostwinds, PGs and a simple target size on the stug G would give them more options to fight. A combination of small nerf and small buffs is probably the way to go. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I hear the new patches have made western allies op?7 Apr 2019, 21:27 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 21:20 PMSeductiveCardbordBox None of the NDAs put out for CoH2 ran any further than the alphas/betas they pertained to. The game's nearly a decade old. I singed a NDA in 2014 but the agreement includes the information of the agreement itself so I can not say any more. And this is quite off topic and nonconstructive. Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 21:25 PMmurky depths Considering how many bloody balance patches and overhauls and reworks this game has gone through, I think it's silly to quote conceptual balance thoughts from 2015 as being pertinent in 2019. Oh well. The details are in fact pointless, the principals are as relevant as ever. Simply try answering the question, how do you know if a unit is balanced if you do not have a "benchmark" to compare it with? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I hear the new patches have made western allies op?7 Apr 2019, 21:18 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 21:17 PMPuppetmaster Would you mind quoting where relic said riflemen were designed to be overpowered? I can not say much more I have singed an NDA. I am sure you find information about the original desinge of the USF faction from the twitch videos during release. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I hear the new patches have made western allies op?7 Apr 2019, 21:09 PM If there is a new philosophy I would love to hear about. Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 21:09 PMSeductiveCardbordBox Even if it wasn't, there's nothing in PQ's theory that states "And also the balancing benchmark is the unit of OST Grenadiers, forever, eternally, because only it is pure and good." I'd rather use riflemen, personally. Great Idea only riflemen come after Grenadiers... In addition riflemen where designed to be OP since the faction was designed to be "incomplete". Finally changing benchmark means that one to redesign the whole game. In the end of the day I does not really matter which units is the "benchmark" as long as that unit is used as the benchmark consistently. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: I hear the new patches have made western allies op?7 Apr 2019, 21:03 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 19:33 PMTiger Baron Say what you may, my arguments are based upon facts proven as time has gone on, *however your "benchmark" is now entirely your own opinion and one could even say that it's biased since I haven't noticed your explanation on it*, why not have the Conscripts as a benchmark, why the Grenadiers? Why can't we have the WFA Armies' 5 man squads as a benchmark instead since they seem to be a bit easier to balance? The Ostheer's 4 man Grenadier squads have low survivability and only lead to balance and design headaches where you're giving them 25% of their firepower in the form of the MG42 upgrade to mimic the 5 rifles shooting at them on the other side and giving them slightly more HP for each model to again mimic the survivability of the other guy's mainline unit, why? Why go through the cheesy and gimmicky route and not instead make them a 5 man squad and balance them another way. The conscripts on the other hand represent the other extreme of being a 6 man squad but having low utility, scalability and usefulness without a doctrine (Conscript repairs, PPSh packages, etc.). People replaced them with the Maxim MG squads before, now they're being replaced by the Panels, why not just make them a 5 man squad with non-doctrinal upgrade(s) and be done with it, why the need to constantly have a non-doc replacement for them when they're meant to be your mainline infantry unit and not a support such? It's these reasons that I deem why the EFA are so unpopular compared to the WFA and how their designs are also very flawed, so having them as "your benchmark" means that you're only going to ruin everyone else and get rid of any pleasable gameplay experience. In the end the EFA are as gimmicky if not more than the WFA relying on unreliable mainline infantry units, no alternative repair methods non-doctrinally, no forward retreat points non-doctrinally, heavily relying on strong commander choices or risk losing the match 90% of the time in the Soviets' case and having to heavily rely on call in infantry units in the case of the Ostheer, why do you think Osttruppen are so popular, or why Ass grens dominated back when they aren't so shit? This system of seemingly crippling an Army forcing the player to choose the same commander over and over again to plug a huge gap seems to be very detrimental for everybody. Actually no. This is not my idea this is how Relic balanced the game. I have provided the documentation for it and but since you miss it I will do it again. Which unit you will choose is irrelevant but Ostheer where chosen because they are the most "complete" faction. But ask yourself how can you determine if a units is balanced or not if you do not have something to compare it with? http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/PeterQumsieh/20150115/233644/Balancing_Multiplayer_Games__Intuition_Iteration_and_Numbers.php http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/PeterQumsieh/20150414/240950/Balancing_Multiplayer_Games__Opportunity_Power_and_Relativity.php In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Heavy Tank Call-Ins7 Apr 2019, 18:42 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2019, 18:35 PMCrecer13 Pershing was originally created as a medium tank, but at the end of 1944, to raise the confidence of the crews, it was reclassified into a heavy. In May 1946, with the changed American concept of tank forces, the Pershing was again reclassified into an medium tank. During operation in WWII Pershing was classified by the USF military as a heavy tank. In: COH2 Balance