Profile of Lago

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 3260

General Information
Steam: 76561198031945233


Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal4 Nov 2019, 22:22 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 19:59 PMCODGUY A tank cannot effectively counter a tank destroyer...OMG! Get out the nerf hammer! Infantry can counter their counter (machine guns) with clever maneuvering. Tanks can counter their counter (anti-tank guns) with clever maneuvering. Casemate TDs can be countered by what they counter (tanks) if those tanks maneuver cleverly. The Jackson cannot be similarly outmaneuvered because of its 0.75 moving accuracy and its turret. Is it wrong for a tank destroyer to be that flexible? No. But we shouldn't pretend that it's not a huge advantage over the SU-85 and Firefly. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal4 Nov 2019, 19:17 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 17:52 PMBlueKnight 1. You are dodging my point, JPIV counters every single nondoc USF vehicle. Not only that, but also USF AT gun and bazookas bounce on JPIV's armour. 2. If being a casemate is such a huge issue as you say, I guess soviets shouldn't exist with their stock TDs all being casemates and the other vehicle being Snare34. Puma can take them out if it gets good angle on them. Also JPIV gets higher accuracy + higher rate of fire + higher survivability due to more HP and armour than SU-85 while not needing as much pen due to fighting mostly medium armour vehicles. You're missing the point. Being a casemate means you can be circle-strafed. Something as small as an AEC or Puma can kill an SU-85 or JPIV if they get behind it. This positionally limits casemates heavily. They've got to stay in range of AT support or have their flanks defended. In essence, they play like anti-tank guns. This positional restriction offsets their firepower advantage and gives weaker vehicles a way to fight back. That doesn't make casemates bad any more than it makes ATGs are bad. But can you really argue that an ATG with a turret isn't more powerful than an ATG with a fixed firing arc? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF Commander Reshuffle4 Nov 2019, 17:42 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 16:36 PMSander93 I don't think Airborne Company struggles at all, it's a very good and popular commander for team games, particularly because of access to the rocket planes to help fight Axis superheavies. Taking that away would actually be a significant nerf. That sounds fair. If you had carte blanche to shuffle up the USF commander abilities, what would you do? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The USF Major and Off map4 Nov 2019, 15:52 PM They could stand to lose Shared Vet. That's a mechanic better suited to support units like halftracks. Officers (apart from the Major) are all frontline combat units. Beyond that, though? USF officers work fine imo. In: Lobby
Thread: USF Commander Reshuffle4 Nov 2019, 15:48 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 14:50 PMSander93 How is it lame that the commander offers the flexibility to skip one of the officer techs to get access to both support weapon, resulting in faster tank tech (and avoiding another line infantry squad, so that calling in Paratroopers is easier). The commander has good synergy, besides being a bit munitions heavy. That was a big deal with old USF, but is it that much of a big deal any more now sideteching is that much cheaper? The main advantage of the airdrops now imo is less tech skipping and more the opportunity to make those weapons susbstantially stronger. Pathfinder crewed team weapons spot for themselves, and Paratrooper crewed weapons can reinforce from beacons. Nevertheless, a straightforward commander like Airborne is bound to struggle against more recent, very versatile commanders. That's the main thrust of this suggestion: move some of the toys out of saturated commanders like Mechanized that can't realistically use them all to buff up the less favoured commanders. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF Commander Reshuffle4 Nov 2019, 14:15 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 13:38 PMVipper A good effort and I agree with some of the changes. Things I disagree: Current TOT in infatry Company is problematic. Having Priest an off map that can finish off OKW truck/Lefh and stock recon extremely difficult to counter in the same commander is actually bad design. Priest is already difficult to counter and being able to delete Lefh should not be available. Urban Assault Kits, the ability is problematic and should be removed. Apart from the issues I have already mentioned the Sherman dozer upgrade is an abomination. The unit become superior to 105mm and one of the most cost efficient tank and in addition it can be exploited and be given to other USF players so that one can upgrade all the Sherman fleet. Your suggestion for Infantry Company is good, but I'm going to leave it be for now. This thread is as much suggesting the concept as the specific changes, so I want to keep edits fairly minimal. I left Urban Assault Company alone mostly because I hate it and don't believe I'd be objective with it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal4 Nov 2019, 13:47 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 13:29 PMBlueKnight With Jackson HP decrease, JPIV would counter all USF vehicles even more than it does now. You are making it look like Jackson is solution to every problem which is just not the case. The JPIV is a casemate like the SU-85. Even the AEC can take it out if it gets a good angle on it. The two TDs that isn't true of are the Jackson and the Panther. The Panther has a higher price point than other TDs and limited range. The Jackson used to have lower health, meaning it faired poorly in close range engagements. The Firefly, SU-85 and JPIV fare poorly if flanked, meaning they have to play much more safely. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal4 Nov 2019, 13:23 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 12:59 PMdistrofio USF has many doctrinal units that could fill that missing space you mention. PTRS Penals were introduced in the fast place because it was decided making a faction reliant on commanders was a bad thing. I'm convinced the right design for the Jackson is return it to 480 HP, restoring its identity as an agile sniper tank. But if you did that, you'd have to rework USF's other AT units to compensate. Until that happens, the 640 HP Panacea Jackson is a balance necessity. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF Commander Reshuffle4 Nov 2019, 13:15 PM Updated based on feedback. Recon and Airborne reverted back to their original states: I still think they're both too munitons heavy, but there's not much else you can do without editing the abilities. P-47 Loiter moved back to Airborne, with the MHT taking its slot in Tac Support. Tac Support now restores the LMG/MHT combo. Swapped out Combined Arms in HCav for the old 155mm artillery. A light off-map and a heavy tank is a pretty common combo, and Combined Arms is Mechanized's thing. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal4 Nov 2019, 12:34 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 09:05 AMddd Are you trolling right now? You asked for changes to make jackson vulnerable to flanks, there is no need for such changes because cheapest generalist axis medium tank wins frontal engagement if it gets in range. Nobody said p4 counters jackson but you. It doesn't. It's an even fight. You can't positionally counter a Jackson and it's a top-tier dedicated AT vehicle, so the only direct counter is infantry AT. The Jackson's in this state by necessity (every other nondoc AT unit in USF is geared towards countering LVs for some reason) but it's not a good design state. Reworking the Jackson to be more like a Firefly and less of an AT panacea would be a good thing, but it'd need to come with changes to the Stuart and the M1 ATG to fill the gap. In: COH2 Balance