Profile of Mr Carmine

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1289

General Information


Thread: Raketenwerfers should not have retreat anymore.4 Jul 2020, 16:20 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Jul 2020, 14:10 PMKatitof ??? PFs were AI squad up until recent rework. I think he meant the volks shreck blob. 1 vollying mediums and single handidly shutting down all vehicle play vs okw and sniping models with shrecks, vetting insanely fast. Glad that they are just a bad memory lol. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Grens changes29 Jun 2020, 20:31 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Jun 2020, 19:06 PMachpawel Two important points that could be added: - cons are much better at recrewing stuff due to higher model count and stock (and free) merge vs. four men grens and pios who very often have to die to do that (often a gamechanger). - can can build sandbags and have hoorah (both stock and don't require tech) At 6 men men soviets only recrew at 50% models. All others at 75%. So yes 7 men allow cons to do a full recrew. Its kinda their bread and butter since they get no nades or ai upgrade stock. And even with doc it locks out 7th men. So 240 mp 50 muni and 3rd tier plus extra tech or full tech allows them to do it better. Kinda justyfied aint it? Since they lack other stuff. Grens get faust and bunkers out of the gate. Next to a t0 mg. Extra starting mp it seems. Next to the other t1 units. Their lmg and riflenade gives acces to paks pgrens etc as well. The fuast and bunker are not entirely free but pretty dam close. And put the techless mg42 into the equasion where sovs need tech for a worse mg you get a thing known as balance. Ost and sov imo are well balanced vs eachother. All 4 men grens need is be a bit better at long range with the lmg 42. So they can bleed approaching inf a bit better and increase their chances of winning a bit if the enemy squad chooses to comit after dropping a model or 2 on aproach. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: German Infantry Doctrine27 Jun 2020, 10:27 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2020, 08:48 AMJames Hale I'm not a fan of this squad size creep; 7-man Cons was already unnecessary, but 5-man Grens is just silly. There's a reason at least one player on all these tournament team games seems to go Ost Inf now. I'm certainly not saying that the doctrine couldn't have done with changes (it was very Munitions-heavy and rarely got used in MP) but I think giving the faction's main squad an extra man maybe overdid it, as that added survivability is always going to be a better investment than extra DPS. The 7th man on cons whas the right choice. Cons are about durability and utility. As six men they had no late game outside doctrines. Dps and dps gained from upgrades trump hp, cons had 0.6 rec acc and rng 16 damage rifles once and still they got hammered by any and all inf. Snaring became their only role wich very often resulted in even vetted cons being wiped. Again imo dps trumps hp. 7th man perfectly fits cons focus on durability and utility. Merge benefits greatly and they can survice snaring more often and outlast most basic inf. Their dps doesnt increase that much esp at long range. Grens are about long range dps low hp higher dps, while supporting and being supported by team weapons. Adding 5th man stock with their current damage per model is bad. Just as making ppsh stock for cons is. Imo the lmg should be buffed at longer ranges esp to pick of models as they aproach. At bp 3 or t4 this could be a passive or active ability. This would fit grens more without redoing or nerfing all other main lines. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: German Infantry Doctrine26 Jun 2020, 19:45 PM No 4 men grens should be buffed via lmg esp on long range. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: US Pak Howitzer Is Out Of Control 26 Jun 2020, 19:44 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Jun 2020, 20:08 PMachpawel Because it is used against 4 model infantry and 4 men support weapons? Ost units are geared to fight 6 men squads and teams. So ost is op vs usf and brits? The 4 men squads are supposed to be a weakness. While they have nades popcap free bunkers top notch mg etc. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15226 Jun 2020, 08:02 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Jun 2020, 06:42 AMachpawel The real balance issue is that you may never be able to really balance out the dual purpose units vs one purpose units. If dual purpose units are significantly worse at both jobs than dedicated units, people will call them crap (ZiS case early game stage). And it does not matter if they get extra crew and abilities. Those specialist units will be better. Once those dual purpose units become better (ZiS and ISU now, guards), they will be OP. One method could be to increase price on them. ZiS being just too cheap atm. It should probably be around 370 manpower for what you get. Same with ISU - it should be significantly more expensive for what you get in its current state. But then, suddenly, they become elite units, which is against game design in the first place. Conscript cost is already inflated through the roof. No need for more of that. Zis is fine. Its at is slightly worse then the pak 40 while axis do have higher armour stock. Its barrage or ai is behind muni cost again fine. Its crew size is justified because of how lethal axis inf and tanks are compared to soviets. 4 vs 6 crew balance this out. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15226 Jun 2020, 06:24 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Jun 2020, 05:22 AMachpawel That is a complete nonsense. Another myth that keeps being repeated. Soviets have very powerful tanks and infantry. Especially through the abundance of doctrines. But stock stuff is also great. All patches made Soviets much more elite than those elite units but the low price of reinforcing and units remained. Dual purpose remained. ZiS should shoot one HE shell max. It used to have terrible penetration. Barrage and larger crew were justified. Now it is just another typical AT with a barrage that is just sick. Nope. It should be at an Elephant price tag. If it had any AT capability it should be more expensive. It could remain as it is if its cost got increased imo. Soviets heavie armour is limited in acces. The only nonsense is you keep saying its a myth. The faction is balacend without doctrines, doctrines give extra options. In sov case heavy armour and elite inf with upgrades and nades. While sov stock tanks are indeed good, i still need 2 t34,s to beat a single p4. Thats thats 600 mp and 180 fuel to beat 300 isch mp and 125 fuel. Not to mention the pop they take. The zis having terrible pen and lower rof was bad design. Now is just lower rof. The fact that okw just comes out with vet 2 skirts (esp since they got the p4 stock) made it neccesary to buff the pen of the zis. It would be dead weight after the luchs otherwise, and okw is to mobile for the barrage to be its sole use vs okw. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15226 Jun 2020, 06:07 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Jun 2020, 05:28 AMzerocoh this, for 35 munis 3 long range barrage shots are too cheap. but this topic is about ISU and nobody showed it once it being useful in any game. Then it should land dead center of where you click. If not 35 muni is to expensive. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15226 Jun 2020, 04:35 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Jun 2020, 15:10 PMachpawel Insanity happens when players build ZiS guns to use them as mortars and pak/mg clearing tools, and You keep defending such design, and don't see a blatant balance issue. Same here. ISU is simply better than axis units of similar price. The abundant dual purpose units of soviets stems from them not having ai upgrades nades or powerfull team weapons and tanks stock. Its a good and interrsting design. Just as ost have stronger team weapons actual nades and strong tanks, but squishier inf. You wanna give the zis a snare or high pen high damage mode? Give it retreat? And most important give soviets normal nades stock? In regards to the isu152 if you nerf it by removing its at and lowering its ai, it will have to become a lot cheaper. A lot cheaper, and then people will still bitch about it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Raketens should lose their received accuracy bonus18 Jun 2020, 17:10 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Jun 2020, 15:07 PMAlphrum i think what hes saying is having a little bit of extra armour on 1 tank over another doesn't make much difference ingame as the chance to pen only changes a little bit, so small its really insignificant. Ther are more important values that make more of a difference like health, accuracy etc. Look at the panther, it had its armour nerfed and vet 0 health increased and it was a considered a survivability buff for the panther. People need to stop with this myth that allied tanks don't have well armoured tanks. One other reason as to why heavily armoured tanks on allies makes so much more of a difference when on axis, is because axis simply dont have 60 range high pen TD's so they tend to struggle more vs tanks like churchills compared to when allies have to go VS a KT. And srsly OP, REKETEN IS THE WORST AT GUN IN THE GAME AND MAN WANTS TO NERF IT. srsly OP list for me in order which u think is the best to worst AT gun : (6 pounder, reken, USF m1, PAK, and zis) All this bickering started over claims of usf atgun being op. Because if okw got a usf atgun clone that would prove it somehow. Nobody said that allies dont have well armoured tanks. They and i said almost all of them are in doctrines or exclude eachother. In: COH2 Balance