Profile of flyingpancake

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 186 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: Simple Fixes: Tank Meta Issues19 Dec 2019, 10:03 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 09:40 AMKatitof I love this kind of threads. "simple meta fixes" -proceeds with a list of stuff that flips everything upside down Atleast it's constructive and people put actual thought into it. I much rather see these treads over X unit/X commander/X faction is OP and then leaving it at that. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the Soviets15 Dec 2019, 14:36 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Dec 2019, 09:55 AMSmartie Armored Assault offers - radio intercept that gives you a huge advantage in sniper play - 2 doctrinal tanks - super strong off map The T34/85 and IS-2 close EVERY weakness the soviets have in their tank department. Where is is the trade off of these doctrines? Ost has Strategic Reserves that offers 2 nondoc tanks but dont have off map arty / airstrike. Pershing gives USF a heavy tank but heavy cav offers no strong off map either. You mentioned rightfully "German infantry" that gives you 5 men squads and erases the glaring weakness of the Wehrmacht. But what do you think would happen if we include a TIger in this doctrine? Its highly problematic if commanders turn the faction design around and take away nearly faction specific weaknesses. Thats why the IS-2 needs to be toned down. Maybe we could replace the T34/85 in this doctrine with a M4C Sherman. It's a bit less all purpose but still a good tank so it wont want armored assault such an all round obvious choice. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Some QoL Changes10 Dec 2019, 14:00 PM I would like to add to this list. A prioretize verhicle button for panzer schrek, bazooka and piat squads. I'ts really anoying if your Pgrens shoot there volley at infantry just before the enemy tank arives. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 19:00 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 18:50 PMT.R. Stormjäger What the hell does the B4 killing mediums in 1 shot have to do with ambushing and having quick strike heavy damage abilities/tactics that rely on said ambush? Lik I said earlier, the B4 takes forever to traverse which makes it non-viable for this doctrine because it would take forever to use unless the ambush is right in front of it, in which case might as well get rid of ambush abilities and get recon ones to spot for the direct shot ability, then rename the doctrine to counterattack tactics. B4 doesn’t fit the theme. Stop recycling arguments. You need to stop recycling counter bad arguments. The doctrine is called Tank Hunter not Tank Ambusher. It doesn't matter that the B4 takes time to traverse because predicting where a enemy will be is a big part of hunting. People tend to repair their tanks at the same places and push the same avenues of attacks with their tanks so it's perfectly possible to aticipate and kill a unit at long range with a B4, ''hunting'' if you will. The direct shot of the B4 is for emergencies. The normal shot is perfectly capable of shooting and killing tanks at long range. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 18:41 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 18:25 PMT.R. Stormjäger ??? Thematic: Soviet doctrine used artillery to destroy tanks in both a direct and indirect manner with both individual guns and large sized batteries and had amour piercing shells for the job. Gameplay: In game the thematic aspect will not translate well to the ML20 but it will to the B4 that can kill mediums in 1 shot and make heavies think twice about punching. This commander lacks serious punch late game so a dual perpouse super heavy artillery piece would round out this commander nicely. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 18:09 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 18:04 PMVipper And the point of revamping them is to make abilities available that better fit the theme. In addition the commander has little reason to have an artillery because it its bombing run can delete enemy howitzers. And as was already established, howitzers fit this doctrine from a thematic and gameplay perspective. Whatever artillery the enemy might decide to get has no bearing on the doctrine we are discussing right now, especially the at nade airstrikes (which is in a fine place by the way). In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 17:54 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 17:50 PMVipper I used it today. Regardless of its AT capabilities it also has AI capabilities and unless that changes it is not suited for the commander imo. This is a non argument. Many commanders have 1 or sometimes even 2 abilities or units that fall outside of it's theme. The B4 does fit theme regardless. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 17:49 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 17:46 PMVipper The idea of "tank hunter" commander is to give better tools to deal with armor and providing a tools that is good vs AI is a step in the wrong direction imo. The idea of artillery is flawed even if it was originally intended by MOD team. Have you used the B4 recently? It deletes mediums in one shot and heavy become repair trap for the next shot. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 16:59 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 16:19 PMT.R. Stormjäger The commander’s theme is “tank ambush”. This is achieved by deception and heavy damaging abilities that rely on such deception. More specifically, you have PTRS conscripts which have camouflage and can saturate areas with ultra cheap 10muni stun mines. Tanks and tank destroyers also get camouflage to position themselves to strike at enemy vehicles, either by ramming (76) or shooting (su85). The damaging abilities are the conscript grenade assault, T34s coming out of camouflage to flank and the carpet bombing ability. Here we come to the ML20 or your B4 proposal. You cannot know exactly where an enemy tank would hit a mine allowing you to pounce, hence you’d have to reposition the B4 to actually get it to fire, which is a 15seconds minimum process from starting to use the B4 to actually landing a hit. Most engagements are over way before that. Thus the ML20/B4 does not fit the core of the commander’s concept since it takes too long to deliver a hit. Now, if the B4 had a wider firing arc you could use it defensively with the direct hit ability, but as it stands you”d have to reposition it to get it to fire, which would take too much time and your opponent knowing you have a B4 would avoid close proximity, making it harder for you to utilize the ambush part of the commander since he’ll be very cautious about getting close to the B4. Now contrast this to the T34/85, a tank that can beat a Panzer IV J 1v1 and can brawl with a Panther with favourable RNG. Such a tank would benefit immensely from being able to ambush enemy armour that’s been stunned or grenade assaulted. It would provide a huge late game lift to this commander by replacing the T34/76 as the main power unit in your late game composition, while fitting both commander themes perfectly, being able to ram, camouflage and flank. The commander’s theme is “tank ambush”. This is achieved by deception and heavy damaging abilities that rely on such deception. I agree that the ML20 doesn't fit from a gameplay perspective so no argument there. The B4 however does in my opinion. Who said you need mines to hit/kill tanks with the B4? B4 tank killing is all about anticipation. Most people use their tanks static in combat and this goes double for casemate tanks so hitting is not a hard as people think. This only becomes easier as game goes on and it acquires vet. People also tend to be predictable where they repair their tanks since its usually in the same place, especially for OKW mechanized building. So again I don't agree with the notion that it doesn't fit since it can provide the doctrine with some much needed lategame firepower to counter axis super heavies. But if it is deemed too weird to be in this commander I would ultimately understand. I still think that the M4C would fit better then the T34-85 if you absolutely need a premium medium. It can buff nearby tanks with radio net, a bonus that should not be under estimated and it has more at power then the 85 due to the HVAP rounds. It would also be able to camouflage like the other tanks of course. Besides putting the 85 in another commander would be too way much, if you really need ram you can always get a 76. This game stay interesting due to the different strategies and tactics a person can use. Giving too much of the same tools to commanders breaks the most interesting part of game. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: cons cant uprade mobilize reserves after ptrs upgrade21 Nov 2019, 16:05 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Nov 2019, 15:53 PMT.R. Stormjäger Don’t give me history arguments. Molotovs can’t damage tanks and snipers can’t land criticals on machine guns. This isn’t a simulation. The T34/85 was an upgunned T34/76 to better deal with Panther and Tigers since the F34 gun was deemed inneffective. They would absolutely fit the tank hunter doctrine and would perfectly synergize thanks to their very good main gun, mobility and ability to ram. They would also give a much needed late game boost to a commander that struggles in the late game. I never said it was a simulation. The game however clearly tries to be a abstract representation of a ww2 battlefield so some degree of historical argument is valid. Otherwise why not give every German a STG and give the Americans lasers since historicity doesn't matter? You are correct that t34-76 where upgunned to 85mm to better deal with Panthers and Tigers. "dealing with in'' this case is more trading shots then active hunting as the commander name would imply. The ISU152 that you proposed would fit better in this regard (still debatable though). As far as gameplay is concerned I you must have a medium tank in this doctrine then the m4c with it's HVAP rounds that can more reliably pen panthers and buff nearby tanks rate of fire would fit and synergize much better then the already over saturated t34-85. The overhanging discussion here is how do we define a commanders theme and how strictly should it be followed. In: COH2 Bugs