Profile of SuperHansFan

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 833

General Information


Thread: Suggestion: sight options for Ostheer and USF27 Mar 2020, 08:58 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Mar 2020, 04:57 AMSkysTheLimit Not true at all. Pathfinders, Jaeger lites, 222, m20, just about any unit that is meant to scout has better vision than sniper. All of those have 50, sniper has 45 as Shadow pointed out Those are not UKF units In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Suggestion: sight options for Ostheer and USF27 Mar 2020, 08:55 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Mar 2020, 04:01 AMShadowLinkX37 OST sniper sight range: OST sniper reveal range for AEC Sniper max range vs revealed units AEC sight range So as you can see, the OST sniper has 45 sight (guessing) and 50 attack range. The AEC does have 50 sight range. Ok I was wrong in AEC, mixing it with UC But maybe you should post sniper vs pyro Tommies out of cover. Even in cover it's 42 vs 45 iirc. But also extended at vet If I had it my way snipers would be like they were in blitzkrieg another RTS, short LoS in combat mode and a "observation" mode that gives them extra Los but low crawling mobility. This would increase utility and combat current sniper cheese we currently have. Snipers wouldnt be able to self spot this way while retaining recon ability to promote combined arms. No more moonwalk sniper shooting In: COH2 Balance
Thread: ISU-152 HE shell range should be reduced?26 Mar 2020, 03:22 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Mar 2020, 17:40 PMVipper I have simply provided TTK as suggested by elchino7 and actually said that TTK of these vehicles is quite close ( and when it comes to TTK most of the other stats are irrelevant). I have provided the relevant stat and you started a conspiracy theory about how I stretch stat to create the wrong impressions. That is simply BS. PLS give it rest. You're making the same argument as before with allied TDs, claiming it's "close" and therefore "problematic". Eg your lumping Jackson in with FF and SU85. ISU AT is fine, it needs some form of AT ability. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Suggestion: sight options for Ostheer and USF26 Mar 2020, 03:14 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2020, 05:25 AMporkloin AEC has 50 sight. More than sniper and pyro tommies. No this is simply false Go check coh2stats, AEC los has forever been trash compared to other lights Sniper also has better LoS than all. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Sturm Pioneer best infantry in the game?26 Mar 2020, 03:09 AM They are the best engineer unit in the game, there's no doubt about that In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Suggestion: sight options for Ostheer and USF25 Mar 2020, 03:55 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2020, 01:31 AMT.R. Stormjäger I dislike the mortar flares idea for Ostheer because that’s a Soviet thing and it kinda feels cheap to copy that for the Ost mortar which also has counterbarrage. I’d be up to maybe remove sight with vet from the 222 but give the scout car an observation package upgrade once T4 is up for a sight increase to 70 but also lock out spotting scopes from being used on it. That way you’d be able to pay for a spotter in the late game without having to grind the 222 vet with IS2s and SU85s around. For USF, perhaps the Captain could get 5-10 extra sight vet 3? 222 is pretty easy to vet up in team games, just park it at the back to shoot planes and run off the odd sniper or infiltration squad. Planes give crazy vet for some reason In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Suggestion: sight options for Ostheer and USF25 Mar 2020, 03:53 AM Jump back to quoted post25 Mar 2020, 03:05 AMkitekaze While I think it's good option for engineers of all factions to be more useful, it will take away the necessary of light vehicle (Kubel, 222, Bren, M20, Scoutcar) and leave it with only anti-sniper duty. So unless you can improve roles of light vehicle, I would choose no. Bren carrier actually has very poor LoS, same with AEC. Brits have sniper and pyro Tommy for LoS. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: ISU-152 HE shell range should be reduced?24 Mar 2020, 11:31 AM I will say there is a double standard in people saying ISU engaging AT guns so they can't fire back is OP but apparently brumbar doing the same with bunker buster is fine. Usual suspects as always. My outlook is that this is not really an issue (plenty of heavies like croc bully ATguns and they should, double PAK shouldn't counter everything.) But ISU armor could be a little lower so meds bully it a bit more. 70 range is protection enough. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: ISU-152 HE shell range should be reduced?24 Mar 2020, 10:52 AM Jump back to quoted post22 Mar 2020, 17:04 PMShadowLinkX37 I find it odd that the doctrine that has probably a 70% pick rate in 3v3+ has people saying it's completely fine for either side. If the doctrine is causing issues, nerf it. Surely if it's OP we would see it a lot in 2vs2, it gets use but not as much as IS-2 In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Tiger main gun nerf too much? (Winter patch)23 Mar 2020, 04:40 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Mar 2020, 00:24 AMKurobane Personally I feel the best way to balance all of the heavy tanks is to give them ammo switching rounds like the Sherman. AP Rounds for Anti Tank, and High Explosive Rounds for Infantry. This way Heavy Tanks cant solo entire armies and must choose what target they must be good against and promote the usage of combined arms. This is a good idea In: COH2 Balance