Profile of Balanced_Gamer

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 783

General Information


Thread: AT / Raktenwerfer OKW revamp9 Jun 2019, 22:55 PM Jump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 17:36 PMblancat camo and retreat are raketen's identity It's not good to get rid of that identity, and you can improve it in other ways my suggestion) cant move while raketen is camo non-camo : range 50, sight 35 camo : range 55, sight 35 fix veterancy bonus add sight+5(only camo) in vet 1 add range+5(only camo) in vet 2 add 5th man in vet 5 Its current identity is overall crap as its currently not even a proper support AT weapon. OKW lacks proper AT tools in general. What I mean by that is even a mobile AT infantry unit which is limited to only 1 Pzshrek without snares is crap. It does not even have the power to scare like the rest of any other factions AT infantry unit. It does not fulfill a role as an AT unit as it fails miserably. The Raketenwerfer you can just in most cases evade it and even counter Rak with ease. Rak does not stand as either as potent or even a supportive weapon. It fails miserably in many cases and situations. Every other faction, it fulfills the role and it is hard to ignore their devastating effect because what scares them is is its surprise cuz of the use of the fog of war (used as a surprise tactic n camo is not even required) and its range. Rak just surprises and it does not even have a dangerous enough effect. Nothing good about it. Most of the time 1 AT gun with other factions is fine as it can always make a follow up and it is very consistent and devastating. With just 1 Raketenwerfer is not even enough because you need 2 to actually do something. Raketenwerfer is the worst AT gun in game and that is a fact. Even then, the other AT guns range is long enough to even catch the enemy by surprise without even the use of camo. Your suggestions does not change its problems, in fact does not seem to make any real improvements. Vet 5 to get 5 man. Are you serious? Nobody ever gets Vet Raketenwerfer as their chances of survival is the slimmest of all. Always when I use it as properly as it can possibly be used. It gets usually one shot because of its immensive received accuracy. It's current identity I must say, is very poor. *Its current function is very poor. Same goes with Sturmpio with 1 Pzshrek. Although you can put it in buildings the rak, there is no real advantage because it shoots the infantry most of the time as there is no button to command it only to shoot vehicles. In fact most of OKW identity is screwed up. The reason why anyone uses Puma mostly for OKW early since there is no other proper AT. Rakentenwerfer and Sturmpio Pzshrek fails to cause an impact of AT role in the game. Getting Raketenwerfer although comes early is a piece of crap as it scales and its adaption is very poor. For 270 manpower compared to USF 280 manpower AT gun. What a blasting difference and we all now that if we had to choose between the 2. I am sure mostly everyone would always go for the range and better support weapon. Even then, it causes such a huge disadvantage as they can barely stand on one foot. The SU, WEHR, USF and UKF have proper AT weapons and utility. OKW is just lacking that area utterly, AT utility. Ignore the tanks. Just the AT utility available, it is lackluster. Here is a real resolution to their lacking AT role:* - Make the range the same as any other AT gun in the game. - Remove Camo. It is already unique as it can retreat. This is already unique. - Make it 5 man Vet 0 (cuz Vet 5 is ridiculous) and keep the received accuracy. To have some sort of compensation. They will still sustain casualties but no as often as they currently do - Make this AT gun by default move faster than any other instead of camo AT gun due to its size and vulnerability. Resolution for Sturmpio: Replace it with 2 Panzerbursche for 60 ammo. Why 70 ammo as it currently is which ridiculous. Penals costing the same manpower and AT package which is overall far more devastating for costing 60 ammo and have the strongest snare although range is shorter. For price differences, it is simply unjustified! Devs please consider these points. I am sure everyone else have too valid and strong points. These are just my arguments and opinion. I just want these elements to be improved and diverse! Make it more playable! Thank you also for bringing this new update tmrw! Continue the hard work! In: COH2 Balance
Thread: StuG and JPIV Penetration8 Jun 2019, 18:13 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Jun 2019, 17:38 PMthedarkarmadillo You might not chose to so to speak. If you have a Rocky early game it's nice to know you have stugs to fall back on and they preform pretty well. Perhaps having battle phase 3 unlock and upgrade that gives stugs +5 range might be a route to allowing them as a defensive choice that can transition and scale a bit better? A 60mu upgrade maybe so it's attainable but still not easy to spam. Good for 1 maybe 2 kinda deal? I really feel like the battle phase system is sorely under utilized as a means to allow units better scaling.. I do agree on the Battle Phase being under utilized as a means to allow units better scaling. Battle Phase should emphasise more since it is an upgrade purchase which takes time to acquire. Nothing comes out of it except the ability to build the next tier building which is a bit dull system. The system as it is if anything could be like the Soviets which is more or less as it currently is but more time consuming. Currently there is no need to really have this battle-phase system if there is nothing more to emphasise rather the ability to build just a building. Now it just needs upgrade to build base after another which is unfortunate. Since it conveys of little significance. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Increase grenadier damage, but move RA to battlephase 2&38 Jun 2019, 17:56 PM Nerfing throws off the balance. It has to be adjusted accordingly to how all else are. For example if all or everything, the technology of electronics for instance is updated or enchanced, it needs to be updated. Like most Computers nowdays. Cuz you need those programs and updates. If you downgrade it or dont update it, it becomes either derelict or useless. Lagging behind. Nerfing can be taken to consideration to an extent but with high precaution because things that has been nerfed, has been misplaced poorly as we all know it. Glad the update though would put things right or accordingly. Rather we should seek to improve things and make according adjustments. _____ Now comparing Tommies. If just look closely when both out of cover. Tommies shoot even faster than any other Bolt action user in game. With Cover makes them faster or of no difference. Do not know if it is a bug but just by looking you can see the timing. Tommies have a distinct advantage in rate of fire even without cover. Now grens are somewhat a decent mainline infantry which Wehrmacht heavily relies on. Most of Wehr infantry are vulnerable due to squad size and their probability of winning engagements since they are outnumbered. What Grenadiers could do with is a Defensive Passive Ability which it requires. Maybe an ability that is acquired upon activation. For instance Conscripts play a proper role of support and is a great unit for flanking and catching up with units but suffers the ability to not purchase upgrades. It plays both an Aggressive and a Supportive role. Aggressive in the form of having an ability "Oraah" which suits its Aggressive role and resupply other units as a supportive role plus sandbags. It is perfect unit of its own purpose or designated role. What grens need is a defensive bonus to suit their role. As a "Defensive unit" meaning cover should give them some form of bonus. Maybe that bonus should be significantly faster reload, shoot for longer and consistent periods, maintain accuracy under-fire. To compensate for the loses that they would suffer or sustain from indirect fire and being outnumbered out HP'ed later on. Possibly even outgunned. Giving them extra man would really throw off the balance since that is a huge distinctive advantage. Therefore the "Extra Man" should not be for Wehrmacht. "A Passive Defensive Ability" would compensate for their weaknesses and vulnerability as the game scales on. It should play a Supportive and at most a Defensive role. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: AT / Raktenwerfer OKW revamp8 Jun 2019, 17:21 PM Raketenwerfer should have the same range as any other AT gun. Currently it is inferior due to the fact it does not scale and adapt to many situations as other AT guns. I does not play a good role in supporting which all other faction AT guns can properly do. Penetration also being bad which makes AT gun bad in most situations. Its lackluster range and on top of it being the utmost vulnerable makes it utterly useless in most situations. Since it does not scale well and adapts poorly. Range is important which we all enjoy that privilege. It is limited as we all know it. Has the highest received accuracy of all AT guns in addition to having the least range. Make this overall having the least survivability of them all. Camo, which is an unrealistic and to an extent abusive feature should be removed. Maybe to an extent where it can camo but can not move slowly. Can rotate only. It plays currently role of recon. That is not what it should do. It should play a supportive Anti-tank role properly. If you compare 2 AT guns this one and the USF AT gun, the prices are 270 to a price of 280. USF AT gun is unspeakably one of the best AT guns in game due to the fact it can enhance both its range and penetration. A huge distinctive advantage and difference for that price. A bug: Currently in my experiences, it has been a bit buggy also. Sometimes it takes longer than necessary to shoot and then within that period it takes sometimes 2-3 seconds to shoot when deploy under camo. It sometimes happens which is frustrating. Something buggy with the Camo ability affecting it. Also, when trying to shoot under camo, it somehow decamo's first before even shooting making it utterly vulnerable. As it is now, it should shoot before it decamo. Sometimes it even decamo's while it is trying to acquire the target, it does not shoot. Either way it is a current issue. Personally I would rather not use camo due to the way it currently is buggy as it is. It needs to play a consistent role like every other AT gun. So, the changes I believe it requires are the following: - Improve range to the same as any other AT gun - Nerf Camo, as stated how on paragraph 3. OR Completely remove it. - Improve Survivability to 5 man and keep the received accuracy. (Some compensation) - Make this AT gun by default move faster than any other AT gun due to its size and vulnerability - Locked first. Becomes available after 1 Base built. Then it should play a suitable proper role as Anti-Tank rather than currently being a sneaky assassin which only attacks when the enemy is either stationary (due to the bug) or arrives at its own convenience. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: StuG and JPIV Penetration8 Jun 2019, 16:56 PM Jagdpanzer I am not too sure of its penetration stats but from what I have encountered, has worse penetration than Panther. Jagdpanzer has the exact same barrel as Panther and penetrates less which is wierd. It should have the same penetration stats. Just saying. Does not make sense to make a duplicate worse than the other. Stug needs maybe an ability to increase penetration. Its current Stun ability being derelict/useless stun for 1-2 seconds, dealing 80 damage and for what. It needs some ability that serves a purpose. That is what it needs or a change. Maybe a HE shell for STUG would be interesting. Just saying! In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Increase grenadier damage, but move RA to battlephase 2&38 Jun 2019, 11:17 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Jun 2019, 00:04 AMporkloin I'm not a fan of adding HP. Not only does it mess with the uniformity of the game, but also the character of the army as, historically, the germans avoided attrition fights at all costs. I'd much rather see greater lethality that gives defense through offense, but still leaves them vulnerable to poor positioning. You are right also. I think increasing lethality would give them better suit to their current purpose. True to their historical aspect, they should acquire some strengths as a defensive unit. I suggested in another post also but I think it would be great if the MG42 got some special passive ability. When behind cover and only MG42 user, the bursts are longer and shoots more frequently. Only applied to the user of the MG42. Since they are defensive unit, they should get some form of defensive passive ability. OR Maybe when behind cover. Increase their damage output by around 15%-20% of the whole squad when behind cover. Make it different and make them a potent defensive unit. They already have strong mortars against the grens and blobs. At least it would give them some potency against blobs which is very common amongst allies as they are a formidable force at most times. In addition to their current mortar firepower which decimates most of the Osteehr infantry. Give them the potentcy the ability to at least counter blobs rather than being easily decimated with the current allied infantry and mortar firepower. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: AT / Raktenwerfer OKW revamp8 Jun 2019, 10:55 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Jun 2019, 00:46 AMthedarkarmadillo Also fuck no to volks Shreks. It was actually removed from volks because a cheap 5 man Shrek squad that can also do... Everything is bad design. It was LITERALLY removed because it's bad design. It's not coming back. 5 man rak with adjusted abilities sounds good though. I'd like to see that in testing. It was a mere suggestion. I understand why it was a bad design the Volks and that it should not be implemented. The current version of Sturmpio with 1 Pzshrek is even a terrible design also (being currently underpowered and not self sufficient). Since OKW does not even have a proper mobile AT infantry unit compared to rest of any other factions in game. Giving them instead 2 Panzerbüchse would be better. Should shoot slightly more frequently than Penals with PTRS since there is no snares and suffer models plus AT firepower. All other factions have proper mobile AT infantry unit except OKW. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: AT / Raktenwerfer OKW revamp8 Jun 2019, 10:39 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Jun 2019, 08:05 AMVipper Pak36 was used even it end of the war firing Stielgranate 41 Yes, they did but the Pak38 was the successor to the Pak36. It would be great if anything if OKW acquires either a Pak36 or Pak38. Raketenwerfer is not even a proper support weapon in game. IRL it was made in lesser quantities than the Panzershreks. It is also said to have double the range of the Pzshrek. Apparently in this game it is the same range which is a big lol. According to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Raketenwerfer_43 In: COH2 Balance
Thread: AT / Raktenwerfer OKW revamp7 Jun 2019, 21:39 PM Raketenwerfer needs to be changed as we all know. It play a better supportive role rather a sneaky backstabber, meaning has to get closer due to its range and sneak cuz of camo. Which we all know is a disturbing feature and it should be changed. Remove Camo and Retreat completely and make the range the same as any other. Rak should be 5 man and should be able to move faster as passive ability than any other AT gun. Since it is vulnerable, that is why it should be 5 man, to give a little edge. No abilities. Just has the passive to move faster. Although it is the most vulernable AT gun as it is currently but it should be not made too weak its survivability as it currently is. That is why 5 man is enough. [/u] Currently on both sides, allies and axis it is frustrating. Please change it. ___ OKW has no proper mobile infantryAT unit. Sturmpio with 1 Pzshrek is lackluster for 70 ammo which is a lot. It is not worth it and if anything it should be improved. They should be able to get 2 Pzshrek and each costing 60 ammo. Why should it be 70 ammo. It is a lot just for one only that proves with little effect. Every faction has proper AT mobile infantry unit and OKW with the worst. What is the definition of proper mobile infantry AT unit is the following. Has high Vehicle Damage per second and has has snares in addition. Sturmpio with one Pzshrek has the lowest Vehicle overall damage and no snares. It would make more sense if they had 2 instead. 1 Makes no sense and it is useless. If it should remain 1 Pzshrek than I suggest Volksgrenadiers to get it instead but locks their STG upgrade if the AT upgrade is acquired. Because factions such as USF and UKF can have a unit Royale Engineers with 2 AT plus snare and Riflemen with 2 AT with snare. That is my point. ___ To sum this up. Rak should be locked in the beginning and becomes only available after 1 base built. Volks can use Pzfaust in the beginning like Wehr does. So now not only the MG is locked as it currently is and now Rak. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet Infantry Design7 Jun 2019, 21:01 PM Guard Rifles are cool but I think the "Hit the Dirt" ability is very strong. They get positive bonuses such as rate of fire and improves survivability/ (received accuracy) I think and reduces the liability to suppression. I am fine with their overall capabilities and being the strong elite unit they are but "Hit the Dirt" has to be removed. Using MG34 to even do anything against or speaking of using light vehicles, it is useless. The MG gets sniped because they are surprisingly accurate with their PTRS dealing 27 damage on infantry on top with the LMG upgrade. Guard Rifle alone with "Hit the Dirt" makes them overall too strong. It comes when the unit acquires Vet 1. They currently have a lot of strong abilities and this one specifically be removed for balancing also. They already can handle infantry and vehicles perfectly. Please not counter MGs also as it currently is. They are such a versatile all around unit. An army alone with Guard Rifles is better than any other self sufficient infantry unit in game. They already have "Mark Target", making vehicles slower and more vulnerable. Hit the Dirt on top of it is just too much. DEVS, remove it please. In: COH2 Gameplay