Profile of NaOCl

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 378

General Information
Last Visit Time: 22 May 2024, 07:57 AM


Thread: Commander Revamp ideas 11 Mar 2021, 01:47 AM Ostheer-Lighting War (0cp)- Panzer 4 J (Replaces relief infantry) (2cp)- Jaeger light infantry equipment (reworked for all commanders with this ability) When Grenadiers are upgraded with G43s their rifle grenade is replaced with Model 24 Stielhandgranate (4CP)- Tactical Movement (6cp)- relief infantry (removed) (12cp)-Stuka Close air support (12cp)-Tiger tank Relief infantry needs to go, but giving P-IV here would make this doctrine a pick always. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Does Ostheer Puma really req 5 cp?11 Mar 2021, 01:44 AM Jump back to quoted post5 Mar 2021, 08:09 AMKatitof Just like it always did. That is incorrect. You make quite a habit of being wrong. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: About personal weapon upgrades11 Mar 2021, 01:43 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Mar 2021, 23:38 PMSpoof No, because the muni doesn't always equal the weapon dropped. Muni can be spent on other abilities. Now, the real question is, why can't I give SVTs to my Volks? SVT Volks please In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Intel/Recon - key to victrory11 Mar 2021, 01:35 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Mar 2021, 01:19 AMgeneral_gawain Axis already has the same TD range and doctrinal better (Elephant/Jagdtiger). JPIV has 60 range and will win every 1vs1 TD duel because of better ROF and smaller target size and even more health at Vet2. It just struggles a little more versus the real allied heavies because of lower penetration values compared to allied TDs. A pair of JPIVs synergies very well if not too good with IR HT in picking off reckless enemy tanks/vehicles at the frontline. I use it a lot when playing OKW and always wondered why everybody is rushing for Panther. Panther on the other side is a complete other design with lots of armor, speed and health. It already has 50 range. Do you want it to have 60 range without changing the other stats? Beyond that nerfing allied recon mode an SU-85 sight where part of this discusion too. The arguments are always the same. What you have written, looks good on paper, but doesn't play out in game. -The panther is unwieldy to use, has a low ROF and usually is on half hp in the late game, due to the superior SU-85, USF Jackson or British Firefly initial shot at greater range. Hence why only P-IV is built. -JP-IV has too low pen to do anything until vet, which it takes too long to reach. -Tiger has the same problems, whilst being limited to one. -The only option is to spam pak 40 as OST or hope you can capture AT guns as OKW. Before you scream bias, I don't care about which faction I play, I play the factions I win the most with, that has led me to playing SOV>USF>OST>UKF>OKW. When I play allies, I am confident in the late game. When I play axis, I never feel confident, early or late, unless I significantly outplay my opponent early and deny all fuel. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Intel/Recon - key to victrory11 Mar 2021, 01:08 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 12:42 PMgeneral_gawain Since CoH2 is all about having the right intel at the right time, the game is all about knowing where the units of your opponent are to position/move your units in the right way. This is pretty much realistic because it was the same in reality. Intel is the key to victory in every battle. There are three main ways to get direct sight 1. planes (Commander / nondoc officers) -> medium munition cost / short-medium timed / counterable with AA 2. recon units -> get better with vet / constant 3. unit flares -> low munition cost / long timed (commander flares will be probably and rightfully patched out of the game as it seems, so I won’t include them) Since vision is so important in this game I don’t understand the huge difference between factions. Especially at recon units. While I found no allied unit which has more than 55 sight including Vet we have the doctrinal scope and the Infrared HT. Infrared HT gives 75 sight, scoped 222 gives about 70 sight without vet and 90 sight (which is really “overkill”) with vet while not moving. Its already 60 sight for vetted 222 without scope. The 55 sight seems to be carefully balanced about risk vs reward, you always risk loosing your vetted M20 for example because there are AT units which can snipe you at that distance if your opponent has vision by himself (nondoc: PAK at Ostheer, JPIV at OKW / plus doctrinal ones). So I don’t understand this riskless “overkill” constant sight at axis factions while extra sight at doctrinal Vet3 Greyhound was stripped for example. Proposal: - all recon units should be capped at 55 or 60 (222/Puma) sight with vet - Scopes and Infrared HT should have timed munition costing abilities that give them their sight range bonus (similar to timed sight from unit flares) - 90 sight for vetted and scoped 222 is overkill, lower a bit even if timed - Greyhound should get back its sight bonus in form of a Vet 1 munition costing timed ability (as proposed for IR HT and scoped 222) which should disable the weapons too while activated. This is RECON company and it has neither flares nor a vehicle that has better sight as the nondoc M20 (only the Pathfinders which you get without artillery call-in at Airborne too = same sight as M20) Yeah this seems to be all about nerf axis, and to be honest yeah it is. But you can’t just make such huge differences at the key element of this game. Axis recon vehicles counter allied recon vehicles, since IR HT or 222 (with vet and/or scope) plus PAK or JPIV = dead allied recon vehicle. This isn’t the case in reverse. The huge sight bonus of recon units wouldn’t get stripped from axis, this would be unfair, because soviet has nondoc mortar flares and UKF/USF get somehow nondoc recon plane in the course of the battle. The difference is, that all recon abilites that give more than 55/60 sight should be activated for a given time and cost some munition. That way recon would be standardized about ranges and cost somehow but still be asymmetric in its form. If you nerf axis sight, then you must make axis and allies have the same TD range. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta17 Mar 2020, 08:51 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2020, 08:47 AMKatitof I can't imagine a situation outside of 4v4 where you'd have that kind of composition, but yes, in equal numbers, JP4 got advantage, vet1 onward its a stomp. SU-85 would have an edge until JP4s got vet1. I would have used 100 vs 100, because larger numbers make the comparison more obvious. I said nowhere, that this was a realistic composition. Please try and not leap to conclusions so vigourously. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fallshrims got completely neutered over the years17 Mar 2020, 08:48 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2020, 08:45 AMKatitof Reread the line you've quoted until you understand it. English is not my first language, obviously. I will try rewording it for you. How are stealth units a problem for OKW, yet not for other factions? Please elaborately explain this to me. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta17 Mar 2020, 08:44 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2020, 08:41 AMKatitof Players with a clue build it against TD spam to hardcounter it, as TDs can do nothing to JP4 as it got all the advantages over other 60 range vehicles in regular situations. Would 3 JPIV not lose to 3 SU-85 or 3 Jacksons? I can't argue about British TD, because I honestly believe it is in an abysmal state without the 17 pdr, which suffers all the drawbacks of an emplacement. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Fallshrims got completely neutered over the years17 Mar 2020, 08:42 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2020, 08:40 AMKatitof And assumption the 2 units in question would not lead to only more problems is a delusion. Why would infiltration units not work for OKW? Please explain elaborately. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta17 Mar 2020, 08:37 AM How come you never see JPIV then? In: COH2 Balance