Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: OKW - Grand Offensive - Feedback23 Mar 2019, 12:59 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 11:30 AMSander93 The sprint from the Panzerfusiliers' vet 5 passive and the Tactical Movement do not stack. I've tested it. In addition, their vet 5 passive sprint will probably replaced if Panzerfusiliers keep their Panzerschrecks upgrade path anyway. It does not matter if stacks or not (and it did not actually vetted a PF just to test it). If it stacks the same JLI stacks it would ridicules if it does not it loses meaning in late. And my main point is that passive sprint should be removed from all units or replaced by an active ability even if it at no cost. Jump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 11:30 AMSander93 Smartie is right here. Volksgrenadier MP40s get changed with the Assault Grenadiers changes because they use the same weapon "1: assault_grenadier_mp40" (Artillery Officer as well). The Offensive Package is in the commander because it was in the winning proposal. The Volks MP40s would've been changed regardless. Again there is a little point for this upgrade since PF are designed to replace the VGs especially since the allot weaker/inconstant with the PPsh one. And unit should be using different files else you get unintended buffs like the one T-34/85 got. In: Lobby
Thread: [POLL] Assault Rifles in COH23 Mar 2019, 12:52 PM Imo assault rifles should be designed to be good at range 7.5-17.5. That roughly translates: They should be inferior to SMG bellow 10 and even more so at range 5-0. They should be inferior to Carbine (semi auto) above 25. They should be very inferior to Bolt action above 25. They should be available to units designed to fight Mid range 10-20. Ostheer/OKW by definition the ST44 is their assault rifle since it was the first "assault rifle". If there is a need for UKF to have an "assault rifle" one could try giving that role to Bren keeping Vickers K as LMG. Same goes of USF with Bar. Soviet in game do not have a weapon suited for that role. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: OKW - Grand Offensive - Feedback23 Mar 2019, 10:28 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 09:22 AMSmartie 1. You're completly wrong about the "Offensive Packages". There was NO reason for the mod team to include the ability in the doctrine only to "improve OKW Mp40" because the MP40 buff came via the reworked Assgrens. You can find that explanation even in the patch notes! And please dont always come back with the same mantra - "Dont include abilities /units that need a rework"-... you could at least acknowledge that there are abilities /units that fit thematically AND need a rework. Thats the reason for why i want "Offensive Package" to be replaced with a reworked "Sector Arty". The buff come only to Assault Grenadiers that are Ostheer unit and did not even effect the Pioneers let along a unit in another faction. I am not sure what you are arguing here since you yourself agree with me and want the ability removed from the commander. Jump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 09:22 AMSmartie 2. There was a vote- you remember- and the community decided that the new OKW doctrine should get a Tiger I. You dont have to like it but we all should respect the decision. Yes, changes are needed but you can't take away such a huge unit after the vote. And OKW can already combine elite infantry with a, all around tank: JLI with KT, Falls with KT, Obers with KT. Yes, these units are not available from the start but there in a lot of games OKW players replace Volks with these units. What people voted does not necessarily translate into to good design. And Relic has a long tradition not actually base their decision in votes. Do I really I have to explain the difference in call in tank and KT? The commander is simply a better version of special OP providing a better all around units and having superior abilities. The only thing Special op has is the flares and those are only good in team games. I have little problem with Tiger itself but if ones does use it one should make the rest of abilities really weak or tie Tiger to tech cost (maybe have the same requisition as the KT). In: Lobby
Thread: OKW - Grand Offensive - Feedback23 Mar 2019, 09:46 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 09:34 AMKatitof You keep repeating that like a holy mantra. You a Relic developer? Or do you actually work as a game designer? No? Then sorry to burst your bubble, but its not "design point of view", its "Vippers point of view" and as much as you try to make them the same, they are not, were not and never will be the same, so use the correct one. ... Let me help you with you reading comprehension because you are simply putting words in my mouth. I did not write from a "designers points of view" but from a "design point of view". That means that my comments do not have to with balance of units/commander but with design of the commander but certainly it does not mean that I consider myself a "game designer" In addition let me explain something else to you, Imo means "in my opinion" and I have used in my post, while you never do. The only one with delusions of grandeur here is you, that keep insulting others and try to prove that everyone else is biased when you are biased yourself. Have nice day. Be bye. In: Lobby
Thread: OKW - Grand Offensive - Feedback23 Mar 2019, 09:00 AM OKW - Grand Offensive from a design point of view. Panzerfusilliers Imo the best implemented doctrinal infatry, because it combines being built from a building and weapon scaling follows mainlines infantries. The JUNE 21st BALANCE UPDATE made units spawn from buildings and not off map and the current CP 0 call-in are bypassing that mechanism. Imo the current implantation of CP 0 call-ins with some starting on cool down and other not should become more consistent by following PF and moved to HQ as build-able units. The weapon upgrades locked behind tech is also the way to go since it does not mess with the timing of these weapons. Stuka smoke Drop/Tactical movement This combination is a bit problematic since it can be used to easily bypass enemy defenses even base hmg nests. In addition the combination of PF sprint and tactical movement is ridiculous. Actually passive sprint should be removed from all units including USF officers. It could however become a timed ability. OKW Offensive Package The offensive Package is completely UP ability and imo simply introduced to "fix" OKW MP-40. That is a step in the wrong direction since those fixes should be done in balance patches and not commander patches. Since the commander is designed replace the VG with PF adding a "buff" to VG is bad design wise. In addition the ability is simply UP compared to PPsh upgrade and one should bring these abilities in line. PPsh provides 3 weapons allow the units decent performance at all ranges while having good DPS once one closes in. Imo their should be consistency here either be having 3 MP-40 for VG or 6 PPsh for Conscripts. PPsh leaves the Conscript weapon slot open (and now they can equip 3 Ppsh+3 SVTS) MP-40 take up all weapon slots. In addition the PPsh gives access to "hit the ground" making more useful. (imo hit the ground should become conscripts vet 1 ability and then ourah could replace it with the PPsh upgrade). The MP-40 on the other hand provides smoke grenades which is good but replaces the incendiary grenades with grenades which is actually a nerf. (imo the MP-40 should replace the ST44 upgrade that could become doctrinal and frag grenades should replace incendiary that could become doctrinal or available to SP from vet 0). But once more a "buff" to VG has no place is a commander with P.F. OKW Tiger From a design point of view imo the Tiger has no place in a commander that provides the faction with a superior mainline infatry. Super heavy tanks and superior infantry should simply not be in the same commanders. That is especially more important in OKW that with commander can stop their tech in T1, T2 and then fight until they can call the all-around Tiger. In: Lobby
Thread: OKW - Grand Offensive - Feedback22 Mar 2019, 16:33 PM As far AT weapon on P.F. goes if ahead I would suggest they get an upgrade that allows them to get 2 panzerfausts as weapons not snares with bazooka characteristics. These weapons could have to option be put away similar to SP minesweeper. One has to keep in mind that buff like these in P.F. will make JT allot harder to counter thou since it will have good support from AT infatry. From a thematic point of view Panzer Fusiliers are more of reckon troops and double shreck feel rather odd on them. In: Lobby
Thread: OKW - Grand Offensive - Feedback22 Mar 2019, 16:31 PM Imo not sure why a commander like this need an AT infatry especially when the AT commander was rejected. On the other hand I have no problem with AT grenade coming early and actually P.Faust should come with truck built not set up especially with OP WC and M3/flamer are. As far as AT rifle-grenades goes imo minimum range should be removed. In: Lobby
Thread: New Commander patchnotes discussion thread22 Mar 2019, 14:07 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Mar 2019, 13:34 PMKatitof True, true, its deflection damage that is 80. Fausts still have 40 more penetration. Shreck is alpha strike weapon. PTRS is chip damage weapon. Blobbing them is extremely different in efficiency. Think of attacking gren squad with 4 snipers vs 4 con squads. What is going to give grens more chance to react and retreat and why? Well, that's the difference between PTRS and shrecks and this is why PTRS is a non issue here. In fact, PTRS blobs are non issue ever since their AI accuracy for non guard PTRS was gutted and they stopped destroying team weapons. If shrecks will do 40 damage with low penetration and 3-4 sec reload, you'll find no one complaining about them, hell you can even have AT nades as well. So no, no hypocrisy here, just wehraboo who doesn't understand how AT weapons work and why alpha strike is scary while chip damage is not. PTRS use a magazine so it is their cooldown that is more important than reload. The values though are 2.2 Cd and 3 reload. In addition PTRS have almost 100% chance to hit. What is being described is bazooka version with half the damage and not a PTRS. In: Lobby
Thread: USF Urban Assault -Feedback22 Mar 2019, 13:41 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Mar 2019, 13:15 PMblancat i agree rifle company and urban company changes but dont agree recon company change recon company is fine now The suggested changes in reckon have to with overlap between Reckon and Airborne and the theme. Riflemen could easily take the role of current I&R Pathfinders. The is little to justify that para drops in the theme. In: Lobby
Thread: USF Urban Assault -Feedback22 Mar 2019, 13:12 PM My suggestion for USF abilities would be: Urban Assault Company Flamers for R.E. moved to urban defense, maybe WP barrage also. Both abilities are good vs buildings. An ability increasing modifier vs garrison and increasing modifier when in garrison similar to Nigo suggestion. These changes could be in a another patch. Rifle Company Rifle grenades move to riflemen taking up all weapon slots. The ability will increase the riflemen's utility vs cover/garrison without being spammed. In addition will fit the commander thematically. Reckon company I&R Pathfinder removed. Riflemen can now upgrade with "observation kit" as voice line says gaining more LOS a single scoped rifle, the ability to call in light mortar barrage (for 50 mu?), (and possibly the ability to set beacons if paratroopers mechanism remains). Paratroopers now is modeled after the units that fought in Bastogne and are no longer delivered with parachute but are cheaper can come at CP 2. Airborne Company Pak howitzer drop now merged with HMG and ATG or with one or the other opening a slot. In: Lobby