Profile of Bulgakov

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 987

General Information
Steam: 76561198061121041


Thread: Bofors6 May 2016, 19:18 PM Jump back to quoted post6 May 2016, 19:13 PMturbotortoise A braced Bofors has a rotation of 0*. Besides, you want to flank it in multiple groups, just by nature of practicing good fire and maneuver tactics, but also in case your assault fails. It's paramount that you have cover on the retreat. I've lost games/armies from when I've broke off an assault too late and my troops attempt to retreat after the Bofors opens up. This is naturally a very bad situation where my troops are running straight into it's main arc of fire instead of around an obstacle, or in separate groups, so that the entire army isn't wiped. A braced bofors takes almost 0% damage. So you're still wrong. Unflankable and even if you do some amazing maneuvers with AT, it can still brace until it gets support. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Bofors6 May 2016, 19:03 PM Jump back to quoted post6 May 2016, 17:27 PMturbotortoise Timing is essential when dealing with these bastards. You need to force the brace, and then flank. Although that is a tactical solution, strategically, try playing a little bit more unorthodox. By pressing higher up the map and back capping later, ideally you can control the ideal areas that a Bofors will be deployed in. Consider it like a midgame Maxim spam, you don't want them in those buildings, so you rush the buildings, same principle. A Bofors is only useful in dangerous areas; so instead, try to use timing to your advantage and focus on controlling space. Be prepared as soon as you spot the Sapper Team. You can't flank a bofors, it rotates 360 degrees. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Hotchkiss3 May 2016, 18:00 PM Jump back to quoted post3 May 2016, 15:05 PMBasilone Agreed microtransactions work fine in War Thunder, MOBAs, and fairly decent in Battlefield (and even old COD/Halo before the "supply drop" bs they have today). COH2 microtransactions are probably the worst in the industry. Overpriced af plus break the game. You're right, they do usually wreck balance. There must be a way for Relic to implement them to improve gameplay and maintain a revenue stream. I'd gladly pay 5$ per commander if it meant better upkeep of the game and proper beta/alpha testing before release (what's left could go to the balance team) In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Hotchkiss3 May 2016, 14:13 PM Jump back to quoted post3 May 2016, 13:48 PMBasilone Poll is missing the "no fuck microtransactions/p2w inside a $60 game" option One-off payment for games is going the way of 2D platformers. Used to be a good/the only option but now microtransactions can open up a whole new realm of possibilities for funding and game development. The less you spend, the less you'll get. P2W sucks but I'm sure with the right approach, microtransactions can be beneficial to the game. New content = new interest and more $ = more programmer time. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Hotchkiss28 Apr 2016, 15:51 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Jan 2016, 12:25 PMTobis HotchBUMP Hotchbump rebump I like the idea of an Ostheer stopgap. Right now they're relying on the puma for the light armour. But how would it be done, Tobis? Would it be in T3? Or maybe in T2 after teching next battle phase? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: 30muni mine balance18 Apr 2016, 17:46 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Apr 2016, 17:38 PMAustralian Magic Blame Soviets design, lack of upgrades, not mines. And by the way, I thought mines spam is meant to stop enemy's advance for lng enough to bring VPs down If not, what's the purpose for mines? And what's next? Nerf teller mine cause it kills my full health T70? Yeah maybe nerf teller mines a bit. I wouldn't mind that if it meant that mines were changed to stop wiping squads. You're right about the purpose of mines, but their function (guarding flanks) doesn't require them to be THAT lethal. The game puts an emphasis on keeping squads alive to gain vet. 30 munitions is far too cheap to be wiping squads. This goes for OKW,UKF,USA,SOV mines. I'm not sure about Ostheer mines, they wipe less often and have signposts. But I wouldn't care if they were nerfed too. Just want to play without insta-jib mines! I really like OPs idea for making mines unable to kill units but they do reduce their health severely. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Bofors Needs Some Improvements17 Mar 2016, 17:50 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2016, 16:29 PMsluzbenik Haha, even though I agree with you Aerohank for the most part, the thing is just too much even on some 2v2 maps. But philosophically I just disagree with area denial games. In my opinion good balance occurs when players have an equal chance to contest any part of the map at any time if they have good micro and a good army composition. Like you can take out an Ostheer fortified position but it might cost you more than you should be spending in resources just about anytime with Soviets. You have to use judgement. You just can't do that vs Brit crap, and it's an unnecessary slowing down of the game...There is no judgement involved, you just can't do it. You have to wait for T4 artillery... +1! In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Bofors Needs Some Improvements17 Mar 2016, 15:19 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2016, 13:24 PMsluzbenik I think we should revive the concept of the recon section, which could automatically call out targets for suppression from the Bofors, freeing the player up to eat his potato chips and masterbate. Ahahaha I always thought Brit players started their masturbation when the VICTORY sign came up. "Hmmmm another emplacement win, ohhh, hmmmm." In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Boycotting the game shouldn't be a taboo anymore16 Mar 2016, 16:41 PM Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:11 PMKatitof http://steamcharts.com/app/231430 Bleeding players, yet average player count rises and was higher then now only at release month. Or you could just have said "I'd nerf all allies" while pretending charts don't show all armies being more or less equal with axis being in advantage(yet again) in team games above 2s. Nerfs to the allies would mean we'd have to nerf the axis too. I'm not against that. My suggestions are to remove things that (to my mind) spoil the gameplay. It's likely those changes would leave the allies too weak, so obviously we'd have to buff something else or nerf an axis unit if it became a problem afterwards. The end aim would be fun gameplay without static defensive play being the meta. Does that sound objective? In: Lobby
Thread: Balance feelings after some matches : Not fun at all.14 Mar 2016, 20:10 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Mar 2016, 19:59 PMvoltardark Do you know why i don't play Axis : I play mostly 4vs4 automatch and some 2vs2... Since Vcoh and now in COH2, my perception is that the Axis side is always the best side, with the coolest stuff and the easiest to play/win with. I always prefer playing the underdog. If ever the Axis average win ratio fall under the allies one, i will surely switch side thrust me, but i had never happen for long enough yet. Maybe i like playing underdogs because my job in real life was always to defend the weakest and the most vulnerable, i don't know. The new auto-matches-maker seem to help to have better games, so maybe i will play the other side sonner !? Try some random 4vs4 automatches, you will also better understand my points. Also, to better forge my opinions, i also watch at least 5- 10 high ranked 4vs4 matches per week. Thanks you for you comments ! I hope to face you on the battlefield or as an ally ! The underdog feeling is good I agree. SO: Play some axis and make sure you're actually the underdog. I'll play some Axis with you if you want a decent 2v2 teammate. I can give 3v3 a shot too. I really think you'll see that allies are not as weak and vulnerable as you think, especially in recent patches. In: COH2 Balance