Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: How are Jäger Light Infantry OP?4 Jan 2019, 11:27 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 10:31 AMblancat ... lmg obers is OP ... Obers are hardy OP that is incorrect. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another JLI Idea4 Jan 2019, 11:24 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 00:50 AMJae For Jett The thing about hard caps is that they artificially restrict builds. Build diversity has recently been increasing, in my opinion, and thats a good thing. I like being able to puruse alternate build paths and imagine other people do too. Thats why I push for units to have as low of a cp as possible (or be tied to tech), and 0 cp callins to not start on cooldown. Coming up with a cool build you would like to try and having the game tell you "you're straight up not allowed to do that" sucks. Spammy builds should be prevented through good design and meaningful weaknesses (...and good number tuning, which can take a few tries...), not artificial hardcaps. As for heavy tanks, the hard cap in current coh2 has likely stayed out of both principle and a fear of creating another callin meta. If heavy tanks were tied to teching, I would imagine hard caps could be done away with and the vehicles rebalanced. Yet the game has a pace and that should not be upset by dropping units that are simply from another time frame. In the February 18th, 2014 Relic had to revert the change of Shock troops/Guards(/DShk/M-42/120mm) from 1 to 2 simply because these unit although weaker than now completely dominated the field. So did assault grenadiers on release and they had artificially toned down "Dispatch Cost from 280 manpower to 200 manpower and 50 munitions", "Assault Grenadier dispatch cost from 200 MP and 50 MU to 320 MP" and then simply nerfed. So did Osstruppen who are now on cooldown. Unit available before minute one should be balanced vs stock units available that time (mainline infantry) or quickly loose power like assault grenadiers. If these call-in unit need to scale better than they should have weapon upgrades available to them gated behind tech progression. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Dropping mp price on the maxim and the soviet mortar.4 Jan 2019, 09:57 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 09:45 AMKatitof And incendiary rounds HMG42 got 80+ dps. A) You are comparing and vet timed ability with vanilla DPS of Dshk which is simply misleading. B)Your stat seem to be wrong pls provide source Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 09:45 AMKatitof Plus, DSHK had literally all of its stats nerfed hard, not just DPS, making it most expensive and most cost inefficient HMG in game. The suggestion was to revert change and that would mean also the DPS and that would simply be wrong unless in your opinion the DShk should have that high DPS. I have to point out that the high DPS was actually due to an intentional change by Relic during a patch. (ninja buff) Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 09:45 AMKatitof However, before buffing maxim, I'd first beat some sense into relic and made conscripts actually scale, without that it will ALWAYS be penals or maxim spam into elite infantry instead of cons being supported by a pair of maxims or penals. I would wish you good luck with that but I am against violence. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Feelings after the Decemberpatch4 Jan 2019, 09:22 AM Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 05:54 AMmons7erz ... USF mortars: Do in fact have less range than OST mortars, *and are less accurate, and OST Mortars have access to counter battery at veterancy. besides this, there is more value in a rifle squad than a mortar, and if mgs really do become a problem, an early grenade unlock is often preferable. (access to smoke and frags.) ... However, disregard this to stay on topic. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will stand only on this point since stats simply do not lie That scatter values of the 2 mortars are identical Scatter Scatter angle 10 Distance offset 0 Distance ratio 0.08 Distance max 8 If you want debate anything else pls start another thread. Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 05:54 AMmons7erz back on topic, As it I save stated previously, Its a race to whoever gets to cover first. assault engineers will almost always trade down if they are not in cover first,* they are a rather squishy unit that has a pretty expensive reinforcement cost. Not to mention the rest of the commander is nothing overly amazing, and is rather average. Not really Assault want to get close and bellow range 10 the point blank mechanism kicks in that makes cover useless. Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2019, 05:54 AMmons7erz I do not believe in the slightest AssEngies are Overpowered, they are competetitve now which is what seems to be a problem for a lot of people. however I do agree that the MP cost should slightly be ramped up to 290 or 300 at MOST. Another fix is give the extra member to its vet 1 bonus, but reduce the requirements for vet 1. Then I suggest you play a game with you a friend of yours where you spam assault grenadiers vs his assault engineers and see who wins. In: Lobby
Thread: Dropping mp price on the maxim and the soviet mortar.4 Jan 2019, 00:19 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 23:44 PMblvckdream .... Dshk needs to be reverted to pre-nerf levels so it actually has a purpose and the now-useless Lend Lease and Defensive Doctrine become useable again. Pre-nerf Dhsk had something like 70 DPS close so no it should no it should not be reverted. A slight buff might be OK but its DPS was simply too high. The maxim I would test having its vet 1 ability scale with veterancy gaining lower reload with each vet level. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Brit cancer emplacements regiment3 Jan 2019, 18:15 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 18:13 PMmurky depths In that game that AE cast, it looked like the sim city got countered pretty well. Then again, Stuve is one of the recent tournament winners, so he's probably a pretty good player regardless of what strategy he uses. So, you know, that's a bad example. It is a bad example/theory but on the other hand the argument that since Top players do not use a specific strategy it is not problematic strategy(/it is balanced) is being repeated regularly in this forum and it is an even worse theory. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another JLI Idea3 Jan 2019, 17:44 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 16:52 PMblancat Reducing the close DPS of K98 of JLI would help allot in establishing them as long range inf with a weakness in CQC. (relative positioning) i just talking about this wrong quate is my bad Ok no problem,reducing the close DPS will not fix all the issues of JIL it will only fix one. Their performance Vs CQC units. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another JLI Idea3 Jan 2019, 16:47 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 16:10 PMVipper They (pathfinders) die to easy from explosion especially since the bunch to become invisible. 3 men squad are problematic. Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 16:23 PMblancat reducing kar98k close dps cant solve JLI problem because they spamming and blobing with volks and allies infantries cant CQC with them especially tommies nerf MP to 290, vs heavy cover bonus 90%->60%, increase recharge time will be answer PLS do not quote me if what you are going to post is completely irrelevant. I am talking about pathfinders you are ranting about JLI. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another JLI Idea3 Jan 2019, 16:10 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 15:18 PMLago I&R Pathfinders had one sniper rifle with a 40% crit threshold. Even at 4 men they kinda suck. 3 man I&R Pathfinders with 0.9 cover accuracy, +50% accuracy First Strike bonus and 75% crit threshold'd probably be pretty good. They die to easy from explosion especially since the bunch to become invisible. 3 men squad are problematic. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another JLI Idea3 Jan 2019, 15:11 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Jan 2019, 14:35 PMLago IR pathfinder where 3 men and where buffed to 4 for a reason. Reducing the close DPS of K98 of JLI would help allot in establishing them as long range inf with a weakness in CQC. (relative positioning) In: COH2 Balance