Profile of Storm Elite

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 246

General Information


Thread: OKW's Current Design Problem: The Why and How2 Mar 2017, 06:39 AM Removing suppression from the Kubel and making it a capping unit was one of the worst hits to the faction's uniqueness, since it's such an early game unit. All they needed to do was make it more durable so it wouldn't blow up to the very rifle-wielding squad it was suppressing. The current version is just boring. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Fixing Stealth Cooldowns Isn't Enough2 Mar 2017, 06:35 AM Was just watching this Propagandacast and noticed a Raketenwerfer being used as a forward scouting unit because it's possible to use its sight range to scout while keeping it far enough from any enemy units to remain stealthed... And a while back, saw one with UKF Commandos who were moving between cover over considerable distances with no cover and remained in stealth the whole time. The cooldowns on stealth definitely needed fixing, as the mechanic was acting as some kind of combat invisibility cloak, but I don't think that'll be enough. Is there any real reasoning for allowing stealth to work while moving? After all, the tactical idea behind stealth is to allow ambushes, right? So does it really make sense for a Raketenwerfer to be able to just move around under a magical invisibility cloak despite being in the open and in sight range of enemy units? And would it really harm the usability of stealth to limit it to only working while stationary? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Arguments against possible upcoming OKW/UKF nerfs2 Mar 2017, 04:15 AM ...who in blue blazes is complaining about Volksgrenadier veterancy?! WHO?! Volksgrenadiers DO NOT DO DAMAGE. They are effectively an Ostheer Pioneer squad with more health. No damage at max range. No damage at mid range. No damage at close range. Volksgrenadiers are not a unit in the game Company of Heroes 2. They're a terrain decoration. And yet someone has the gall to ask for a nerf...? Edit: Veterancy levels don't matter. Balance is decided by what the unit is like at 0 veterancy. You cannot and should not, ever, balance or design anything around veterancy levels. So asking for three veterancy levels for Volksgrenadiers isn't a nerf request as portrayed in the OP. It's just irrelevant. Give Volksgrenadiers the ability to actually wipe units with direct fire like other infantry squads, and you can take away all veterancy levels for all I care. In: Lobby
Thread: Is there ANY comprehensive, updated source of CoH2 stats?2 Mar 2017, 04:12 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2017, 15:25 PMMr.Smith stat.coh2.hu is always up-to-date. Terrible usability, and certain stats/fields lead directly into a spreadsheet of game ripped stats. Though that's really to be expected, since it's community-created, and the community has no obligation to devote proper effort and time to it. A developer should always create a proper wiki with good readability/usability for a competitive multiplayer game, especially one with such relatively intricate systems as CoH2 (compared to, say, something like a hitscan FPS). In: Lobby
Thread: Have Relic abandoned the game?2 Mar 2017, 04:05 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2017, 21:09 PMelchino7 I'm sorry you miss the opportunity to use some of this: ...are you seriously implying that veterancy has anything to do with proper design? If you are, I'm not sure anything I say, or any evidence I present, can sway your position. You do NOT, under ANY circumstances, EVER design characters/units/classes/factions/etc. based on specific, mandatory use patterns. When designing a VIDEO GAME, you are not creating a finite, consumable product like a movie, TV series, book, etc. -- you are designing a SYSTEM that users must be able to use fairly. 222 ARMORED car not being armored while the other factions' ARMORED cars are is unfair. Instawipes due to objectively wrong game design that they have ADMITTED TO in the patch notes for the upcoming Winter Balance Patch (if you refuse to believe me and you refuse to believe when Relic admit to their own failure, then there's really nothing more I can say to convince you) are unfair. Some infantry units being able to run directly into enemy fire and lose no health or models, while others lose their first model instantly even in heavy cover -- that's also unfair. etc. etc. etc. Do you see the pattern here? It's objectively wrong to design a game that makes things unfair for players at ANY stage of the game, in ANY situation, EVER. I MUST be able to use every unit effectively without needing to exert unjustifiably larger effort than my opponent using the same kind of unit, and every unit must be potent enough to perform its role no worse than similar or equivalent units in my opponent's army. (And before anyone chimes in with another fallacy, none of what I just said means the factions have to be identical -- they can be different but equally potent, which is objectively correct game design.) Also, "Wehmracht is a defensive faction that relies on its tanks" is NOT AN ARGUMENT. That is objectively wrong game design, yet when Relic released those infographics classifying factions as either offensive or defensive, people ate it up, because most people don't know any better and believe the cancerous lies Relic and many other devs spew to cover up their ineptitude. My infantry should never be inherently inferior to enemy infantry. My armored cars should never be inherently inferior to enemy armored cars. And yes, my tanks should never be inherently superior to enemy tanks. In simple terms, the rule is: if any player is ever unfairly at a disadvantage due to the mechanics of the game (something the player has no control over), the entire game is objectively incorrectly designed. Until Relic either realize this (if they really are so incompetent that they don't understand correct game design) or admit it (if they've been intentionally hiding it and slowly fixing one issue at a time due to not giving enough of a damn about delivering a correctly designed product), the game will continue to receive questions like the one asked in the title of this thread. In: Lobby
Thread: Best range for Volks with STG upgrade?1 Mar 2017, 07:55 AM The best range for Volksgrens is always max range and halted in place. The trick is to calculate whether, by the time the opponent's infantry unit reaches cover-ignoring range while running at your Volksgrens, the opposing infantry unit will have suffered sufficient damage or not, and if not, simply retreat. The STGs make it more likely that the Volksgrens will, in fact, damage the enemy infantry squad rushing into mid or close range with them fast enough to force the enemy squad off. In: OKW Strategies
Thread: The issue with Ostheer Tech 4.1 Mar 2017, 07:14 AM Both Ostheer and OKW need a max tier infantry unit. If Soviets get to have bulletproof cancer infantry, then we should too. Put a single model Storm Elite type character into the Ostheer T4 and an elite SS squad into the OKW final tier. Panzergrenadiers and Obersoldaten are both high DPS units, one for close range, the other for long range, and are flimsy to compensate. So the final tiers should have elite infantry that are the opposite: standard damage (not high DPS, not low) and high durability, with elite abilities that allow them to impact the kinds of units and fortifications one can find in the late game. In: Lobby
Thread: Have Relic abandoned the game?1 Mar 2017, 06:14 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2017, 04:28 AMGbpirate Wow there's a bit of bias here and a lot of hyperbole that really isn't justified. No faction has been unplayable, really. Sure, the model positioning has been an issue and it's taken Relic way to long to address it but to say that Relic is utterly failing is a bit harsh and unwarranted. They're certainly not failing because they've got DoW3 on the way and hopefully CoH 3 being planned and on the way. There's all that $$$$$ from SEGA. Not to mention the beautiful city of Vancouver. Have you seen their web page? https://www.relic.com/#pictures Failing at game design isn't exclusive with having other games in development or anything else. I should NEVER, EVER have had a SINGLE squad instawiped from full health throughout the entire 3.5 years of the game's life cycle. NOT ONCE. THAT is proper game design. But I did have squads wiped non-stop for YEARS regardless of any tactical positioning or awareness, while USF players and Soviet players alike got off scott free, being able to directly rush infantry units into enemy fire like it's Starcraft (actually, no, Starcraft units actually take damage from incoming fire). And I wasn't the only one to experience this, obviously. And this isn't hyperbole or exaggeration, but the result of playing and also observing hundreds, if not thousands of matches over TWO AND A HALF YEARS, since the release of the Western Front factions. It's objectively unfair for MY Tier 1 armored car to be NOT actually armored and killable by bullets, while my opponent's armored car is armored and COMPLETELY IMMUNE to bullets. It's objectively unfair that MY infantry squads lose a model INSTANTLY upon engaging ANYTHING, while my opponent's five-man Hercules squads not only run DIRECTLY into enemy fire and don't lose any health or models, then murder my squads in melee range without a care, but can actually OUTNUMBER my faction on the field. It's objectively wrong game design for a TANK to hard counter an ANTI-TANK gun. It's objectively wrong game design for ANY infantry to be able to survive being bruteforce micro'd across an entire screen's worth of distance at enemy squads, while taking fire, being able to WALK AROUND the cover the enemy squad is using, and murder that squad there, in a tactical game where other factions have no choice but to use cover and clever positioning at all times. That should literally never be possible. It's objectively wrong. I can keep going, but you should see the pattern here. Game design is not subjective. It's not a matter of opinion. It isn't a matter of win/loss ratios. It isn't up for debate. There are objectively correct ways of designing things in a game, and there are objectively wrong ways of designing things. Relic have allowed objectively wrong game design to persist in CoH2 for TWO AND A HALF YEARS. That is inexcusable, and that is, in fact, utter failure. Anyone who takes pride in their work and is honest with themselves wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing that the people for whom they've built such a badly designed product will experience blatantly cancerous gameplay and an unfair disadvantage. But it's easy to not give a damn about your users when, as mentioned above, you've got sacks of SEGA money to sleep on. In: Lobby
Thread: Is there ANY comprehensive, updated source of CoH2 stats?1 Mar 2017, 05:56 AM Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2017, 03:06 AMTobis Here is the DPS googledoc. Should all be right, they haven't changed the game in months anyways. You can always check the game tool yourself if you want other stats. Well, this is what I mean. It's not really very usable. Not only does it use code names for the weapons, since it's a game rip, but it has nothing other than DPS, and there are SO many more stats about the units in the game, the buildings, the abilities, etc. etc. etc. I really think lack of an official, updated, detailed wiki has contributed immensely to the lackluster player base over the years. In: Lobby
Thread: Have Relic abandoned the game?1 Mar 2017, 02:01 AM They haven't abandoned it. They've just utterly failed at developing it. Just look at the Winter Balance Patch. It's taken them TWO AND A HALF YEARS to address model positioning/bunching that's been making the Wehrmacht unplayable against anyone with any semblance of skill due to instant wipes. And every major balance patch over the past two years has been buffing the Wehrmacht and OKW because of how utterly wrong the USF faction game design is (Riflemen: five model squad with insane durability that rewards the player for rushing directly into enemy fire and into an enemy infantry squad's face in a tactical game where all other factions have to use cover to have any chance). As someone above said, Relic are, in fact, their own worst enemy. They haven't had a single proper game designer on their team since DoWII. Instant squad wipes from AoE Broken formation mechanics Instant first model death upon engaging any threat even in cover (WM 4-man squads with no armor or health boost to compensate) ENTIRE SQUADS THAT DO NO DAMAGE (WM Pioneers, OKW Volksgrenadiers) Units that lack survivability to such a degree that certain units simply couldn't be used for ages (222 still takes bullet damage) Utterly unusable upgrade distribution (such as the Panzerschreck upgrade being on Volksgrenadiers for TWO YEARS) Anti-tank guns hard countered by tanks (this years after releasing a game where AT weapons properly snare vehicles) The list goes on and on and on and on and on. All these kinds of issues have either been fixed extremely slowly in previous major balance patches, are about to be fixed in the Winter Balance Patch, or have yet to even be addressed and may never be. Any other game developer failing this hard would've been laughed out of the gaming industry ages ago. In: Lobby