Profile of Storm Elite

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 246

General Information


Thread: Why this game are soo arcade and with no realism?3 Aug 2017, 00:05 AM Jump back to quoted post2 Aug 2017, 22:12 PMdasheepeh you're better off by quitting the game and punching the wall instead of posting this emotional nonsense So you're discounting the points he made by claiming they were "emotional"...? It really is absolutely absurd that Allied units don't need cover, ever. USF troops run directly into enemy fire through open fields and take no damage whatsoever, then retreat with 1-2 models and never get wiped by anything the Axis factions have. Same with most other Allied infantry. It should NEVER be possible to simply move ANY faction's infantry through open ground under enemy fire safely, yet that's exactly how the USF, UKF, and to a much lesser degree Soviets work. Try that with Axis units, and they die off HALF way to the enemy in green cover. Reverse the tables, and the Allied infantry runs directly into enemy fire, gets into the SAME cover as Axis infantry has been sitting in all that time, and wins the engagement. It's ABSURD, and it has absolutely nothing to do with emotions, wins/losses, or anything else. It's an objective fact. You can lab it easily if you're somehow so inexperienced with the game that you've never seen this happen. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Why does capturing territory do absolutely nothing?2 Aug 2017, 23:55 PM Jump back to quoted post1 Aug 2017, 05:41 AMKamzil118 As for the sudden appearance of tanks, I have a few theories since you haven't presented a replay: 1. Player was hiding his tanks. (Very unlikely) 2. Had an ally that provided fuel for said player.* 3. Players was saving his fuel for something big.** Well, it's actually the first point. I only play 1vs1. And people literally hide them until there are two or three, all while losing the entire map. Which is why this doesn't make sense to me. The opponent basically just loses the entire map to my overwhelming infantry and tactics, and yet still produces two huge tanks that steamroll everything. With a fuel point in the enemy's hands, that number increases to three or even FOUR huge tanks. This has nothing to do with winning or losing, nor with relaxing and expecting the match to be won. It just doesn't make any sense to me why players aren't punished for losing the entire map. What incentive is there to capture territory at all like this? Why should I expect ANY tanks if I dominate resource points? I specifically started experimenting and playing full defense, letting my opponent have resources on his half of the map and... there's no difference. They still bring out tanks, and I still either demolish them or get demolished by them depending on the map and faction in question. But the outcome is the same, regardless of whether the opponent managed to maintain a fair amount of point control or lost the entire map. Seems to go against the core mechanics of point control. And I'm not even talking about non-fuel and non-munitions point control. That doesn't seem to have any impact whatsoever. People literally leave non-fuel/non-munitions points uncapped for half the game in some Propagandacasts I've seen... In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Why does capturing territory do absolutely nothing?31 Jul 2017, 20:42 PM I'm not talking about subtle differences in income though. I mean, why is it possible to even build ONE tank at all if you lose all resource points on the map in the early game? Why is it possible to do anything at all when you completely fail to hold any territory? It just seems to make it so the only thing that matters in the game is micro. The macro strategy just doesn't play into whether you win or lose. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Why does capturing territory do absolutely nothing?31 Jul 2017, 19:12 PM In Dawn of War II, if you capture the entire map, you deny your opponent resources, and they can't even build INFANTRY, let alone armor. In CoH2, EVERY SINGLE MATCH is just the opponent sitting back, losing the ENTIRE map, then building two or three tanks and winning without any actual tactics and without being punished for failing miserably at holding anything early on. Why is this? Why is a player who loses both fuel points, both munitions points, and the vast majority of control points allowed to build any kind of threatening units at all, let alone several of them? Why does capturing said resource and control points not actually accomplish anything in terms of harming the opposing player? What is even the point of capturing territory, when it has absolutely no effect on anything? The announcer shouts "The enemy has cut off our supply line!" in an exaggerated tone, as if there's real danger in being cut off, but in reality, there isn't... And was it always this way? Or did CoH2 start out like DoWII? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: USF need changues & remake commanders11 Apr 2017, 22:58 PM As long as the Western Front faction infantry squads remain 5-man and retain their absurd durability/damage compared to the original factions, they will always be overperforming. USF infantry can push an Ostheer player into his base and lock him there in the first couple minutes of a match, and the same goes for OKW vs Soviets, though Volksgrenadiers for some reason only have the durability of Western Fronts factions without the insane damage output that Riflemen have up close. But even then, it's just different pairs of factions from two different games stuck into a single game and allowed to play against non-meshing factions. As long as this remains the case, balance will remain a dream. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panthers need adjustment11 Apr 2017, 04:57 AM The entire Ostheer faction makes no bloody sense. Bunch of tanks that either don't damage infantry at all (a StuG with a mounted MG can stand right in front of an infantry unit for half a minute and not take out a single model) or very little, thus needing to be supported by infantry at all times, and... ...bunch of infantry that is drastically less durable than any other faction in the game both on a per-squad and a per-model basis, thus unable to reliably support armor, especially in the mid-late game. The Panther is just one of the many absurd symptoms of this, alongside the unarmored armored car, the impossible munitions expenses (either upgrade Grenadiers/Pioneers with weapons to have any chance in direct firefights against other factions' basic unupgraded infantry, let alone upgraded, or use grenades/mines, but not both), and the instawipes (now seemingly more or less fixed via the model spacing adjustment). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Instant garrisoning/ungarrisoning NEEDS to go.7 Apr 2017, 00:43 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2017, 00:04 AMmongalong247 We have the code in Wikinger: European Theatre of War for all units to garrison/ungarrison one at a time, will dig it out and get Olhausen to share it here. Why? Relic themselves have the code for their own damn engine from Dawn of War II. The instant garrisoning was done intentionally, as a crutch game design decision, to avoid spending more time/effort on fine tuning the gameplay. The only question is whether they're willing to actually implement proper garrisoning after all this time, not whether they can. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Mechanized Assault Doctrine and Panzergrenadier imba3 Apr 2017, 22:11 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Apr 2017, 20:54 PMFray2 Only way to counter enemy blob is your more powerfull blob or arty strikes,in other happens i not blobing ...Ostheer literally can't blob. Ostheer has FOUR-MAN SQUADS. One model down = the squad has to retreat. And USF consistently outnumbers Ostheer forces on the field because of... I'm really not sure why, but hundreds upon hundreds of games both played and watched have shown me that USF always have resources for anything the USF player wants. My guess is that this is due to USF infantry being indestructible, losing practically no models ever, and that's not even mentioning access to caches for some reason (though the biggest symptom seems to be just how much manpower USF players have at their disposal throughout every match, not just the fuel/ammo). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Demos vs Teller mines (one shooting units) 3 Apr 2017, 20:53 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Apr 2017, 11:27 AMWilliam Christensen The only thing makes demo so bloody annoying, besides its ability to insta-wipe, is the fact that despite sweeper detects it, the unit does not shoot at it! This and the absurd magically locked unoccupied British trenches are two of the most ridiculous issues in the game right now. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Mechanized Assault Doctrine and Panzergrenadier imba3 Apr 2017, 20:48 PM Ostheer and Soviet infantry are effectively from a different game than USF and OKW infantry. If you're having trouble against the slightly buffed Ostheer infantry and untouched Ostheer tanks as USF, perhaps it's time to learn to play USF properly, rather than just throwing blobs of invincible Riflemen at the enemy out in the open. USF can still easily win a match in the early game by literally keeping an Ostheer player locked in base due to the Western Front infantry being superhuman, with twice the durability and DPS of the original factions' infantry, so complaints about Ostheer tanks are ridiculous. In: COH2 Balance