Profile of SuperHansFan

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 833

General Information


Thread: State of the ISU-15224 Jun 2020, 13:35 PM I'm still trying to find these replays of ISU oneshotting squads In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15224 Jun 2020, 13:26 PM Jump back to quoted post24 Jun 2020, 13:09 PMVipper Every thing in that post is accurate. Your response on the other hand is full of inaccuracies as other users have pointed out. Can you pls tone down the hostility in your post a bit? Let me explain this once more, comparing ISU-152 and Brumbar is totally misleading for a number of reasons including the one I have already mentioned. On top of that units work differently. Brumbar needs to be aggressive to auto-fire while it is facing allied TD that can penetrate it reliably while outrangeing it by double its range. ISU-152 can sit back and snipe units because the are few units that outrange it and even those by small margin and need spotter to do so. Regardless if Brumabar has better AI or not ISU-152 has much better AT. Accept it's not, actually you're wrong on the micro and range front because you forget Brum has bunker buster. ISU actually has to expose itself on the front line and can't fire behind houses or shot blockers. 43 people disagree with you and think the ISU is fine but I don't use this against you in a discussion about the unit. Actually this is pretty irrelevant so let's keep the discussion on topic. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of the ISU-15224 Jun 2020, 12:19 PM Jump back to quoted post24 Jun 2020, 09:52 AMVipper 1) ISU has twice the range of the Brumbar 2) ISU has a much faster projectile 3) ISU need a lot less micro since it does not need manual aiming 4) ISU is firing generally on units with less entities 5) ISU has also AP rounds. If some one compares the unit with the one of the best AI axis units in the game it is evidence that the dual role average in both roles Soviet design does not apply to ISU since it one of the best AI units in the game and has decent AT. Half of what you typed is false, watch some hans streams with him microing both units, he pretty much uses attack ground every time due to how unreliable they both are vs moving squads. Brumbar also has pretty much identical range with bunkerbuster so nerfing the ISU when nondoc brumbar stays the same would be crazy. Brumbar is actually viable in 1vs1 too, ISU is only really useful in team games that have open lane areas. Brum projectile can shoot over shot blockers but in true vipper fashion you conveniently ignore the perks of the axis units. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Mini Patch - June 22 202024 Jun 2020, 08:51 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Jun 2020, 07:59 AMblvckdream I don't think this hotfix has actually achieved anything. I said it 100 times already but will say it again: Infantry Sections are too strong and locking bolster behind T1 is not going to change it. If you go Infantry Section (starting unit) - Infantry Section - Infantry Section - UC - Tech - Vickers K upgrade on UC the timing of the Vickers on the UC is exactly like it was before because the moment you have 3 Sections + UC + tech is the same moment you reach 60 munitions. Reason for this is the super short build time on the T1 structure. I imagine it was a change to prevent long TO play in team games? Quick bolster is not really a thing in ones before tech In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Mini Patch - June 22 202024 Jun 2020, 08:49 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Jun 2020, 22:10 PMBrick Top The reason it would make sense is because currently once you have upgrade, the more tommies you build the better, each extra squad decreases the shared cost of the upgrade = more for less. But if you had to pey based on number of squads you have, it makes pure spamming more expensive, and a bit more combined arms rewarded. If you felt the initial cost of the upgrade was to much you could just reduce the ammount of manpower you pay. This would just be an indirect nerf to sappers Bolster shouldn't have been touched until we get an entire UKF infantry rework similar to how OKW had Volks reworked. Otherwise it's just making UKF design even more sloppy and restrictive when the original design was one of choices and trade offs Right now that choice is just being funneled into "upgrade bolster to survive", same with AEC and how Bofors tech doesn't really offer any AT. (Emplacement could have been moved and swapped with AT section package or something). Brits needs some design overhauls not bandaids only to rip the bandaid half off next patch. This has been a cycle for a long time now thanks to relic not giving the balance team the greenlight to change emplacements and the mortar. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Top 5 reasons for the good high rank game24 Jun 2020, 07:16 AM After playing a game I find yoga or just walking around outside for five minutes really helps to refresh the brain The tac map point is an interesting one, tac map gameplay is very boring and difficult to look at for spectators. This is why Skippy and hans have the most twitch viewers. Tac map aids players with slow micro, and provides a little clearer map awareness but you miss out on grenade calls which can be costly with wipes. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: USF on life support23 Jun 2020, 15:05 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Jun 2020, 14:53 PMGeblobt Cause mixed factions was forced? So you had to play okw. And allies can just go UKF+Sov. End of story. Which is exactly my point Even with mixed teams USF were hardly used, in team games arty is king and they're suffering from Scott and indirect changes. Scott should have its barrage range doubled and auto attack and smoke removed. Give USF an actual indirect fire vehicle and not this hard to balance hybrid In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF on life support23 Jun 2020, 14:06 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Jun 2020, 10:50 AMLady Xenarra Yes. Then why were OKW seen in every game last tournament? USF were seen five times In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Mini Patch - June 22 202023 Jun 2020, 03:43 AM I would like to see ostruppen given extra 20 percent cap with T4, the doctrine has no capture abilities to bug things. But this is a good first step to fixing five man grens In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: USF on life support22 Jun 2020, 10:39 AM Jump back to quoted post22 Jun 2020, 09:13 AMHannibal Since SOV is a given in team games due to the Katyusha, we maybe should take a look about what USF and UKF have to offer compared to each other. UKF has: - mines - a normal ATG - a mortar pit that has proven to be very resilient due to hiding behind shot blockers and the OKW T2 teching (at least true for the recent 2v2 tournament) - a more beefy Comet if needed against Panthers - the AEC that synergizes well with the T70 - decent recon options with the AEC and the pyrotechnic sections (and flares on Royal Artillery as one of the most prominent commanders) - can build both an MG and a ATG USF has: - the Jackson (however I'd argue that it is only that great because it's USF's only reliable late game AT) - the PaK howie - the HE Sherman USF's ATG is quite a muni sink though if you want to use it in the late game, and people tend to spend more muni on commander abilities and grenades. USF's LVs don't synergize with Soviets and scale worse into the mid game. And the lack of mines and either ATG or MG makes them more prone to being overrun. USF is good in 1v1, but since team games focus so much in late game artillery there is not much USF can offer beside the doctrinal Calliope. And in the early game it's better to have an AEC against the inevitable Puma that can actually force the Puma back than having a Stuart or AA half track that are just prey. Yes the ATG can fight the Puma very well, but then you end up with a munition sink in the late game and you're locked out of an MG for quite some time. You've summed up what I wanted to express perfectly, I agree with everything here and to respond to the trolls ITT I was only trying to highlight how dead in the water USF would be without the Jackson, rifles Etc people test in a vacuum then complain about in other threads. The scott used to be the big indirect threat that would make USF/UKF teams viable, double Scott's and Jackson used to be a pretty formidable addition to beefy UKF Churchill's but builds like this have been nerfed into the past. Sovs are mandatory now as they have the only reliable allied indirect. (Non doc) In: COH2 Balance