Profile of Bulgakov

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 987

General Information
Steam: 76561198061121041


Thread: Riflenades vs. Maxims19 Apr 2015, 10:43 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Apr 2015, 10:21 AMBrachiaraidos One of these requires sprinting (for munitions), getting shredded by MG fire (costing MP), and throwing said molotov (muni again). The other requires standing in your base with vet 2 grens and laughing as your rifle nade mortar makes the maxim cry (Muni) Slight difference. He didn't say it was munitions-free. Stop throwing straw men. And show me a replay where scripts get "shredded" by MG42s. They lose a model or two in 99% of cases just as grens do vs a Maxim. The emotional nature of your post betrays your bias. "vet2 grens laughing". Sheesh. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Early game for Ost18 Apr 2015, 01:23 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Apr 2015, 23:14 PMLenny12346 In my Ost games I tend to get one of the two buildorders: 1) (pio), pio, gren, MG, gren (T2 if USF, pak <-> MG if russians, more grens) Use your double pios to get ground fast, wire stuff for defence so the MG will fuck up any advancement from allies. You need to try and see the bigger picture when you are using MGs on axis side. "where will he attack from, where can I wire off the best for the next engagement. Camp or cap?" Ask yourself these questions and it should be OK. Engies also get nice view-range for defence! 2) (pio), gren, gren, MG, gren, T2(if USF) This is a buildorder where you can get the most firepower from, so this should be used in engagements rather than simple capping. Double gren have a good chance vs 2 engaging rifle squads (if in cover) I tend to get 40% of the map on most maps, I like to defend in the beginning (especially vs conspam, cause I read that kind of play pretty easy IMO - cause conscript-king Kappa). From here on I tend to grap a bit more territory as time passes if I'm successful, due to the enemy retreat time. Please do note that it's very important to support your MGs, because they aren't supressing like in CoH1 They are insane for the dmg output these days! + PENETRATION-rounds! If you get 4 units the USF can get an M20 before you grap your pak, simply bait into a mine or faust if for more time. you should have your pak in time before the M20 should be able to annihilate your army. This just tend to work for me... Edit: Also recommend you to: Preserve munitions for double shreck on PGrens Think about getting a 222 While that might work for you, and while it might work for others and may improve my success rate too (or not), you didn't address the points: 1) Is it true about the tendency for Ost to lose map control to US? 2) Counterable or not, is it fun to have the game this way with map dominance being so strong for one side? Also, feel free to post some games vs players of your level where you demonstrate what you proposed here. 7 would be a suitable quantity. To everyone else, thanks for the replies! I agree with everyone about the maps, there are serious issues with many of them. What is needed? To spread out capture points or add shot blockers or remove cover...? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Early game for Ost17 Apr 2015, 19:44 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Apr 2015, 19:41 PMm00nch1ld As far as i see it the main problem are the maps. Einhoven is the perfect example of this. Left side kharkov too. Maps are a huge problem too, I've said the same. Would you not say that any of the reasons I listed cause or exacerbate the OST/US issue? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Early game for Ost17 Apr 2015, 19:39 PM Heyo, In most games I watch (med-high level) I see Ostheer with very little map control vs both US and Sovs. Who would say that this tends to be the case? I have a theory why they struggle vs the US not connected to riflemen/gren stats. Doctrines are irrelevant. Small disclaimer: This is not a US OP thread. The US are not OP. The units I mention are not OP. Ost aren't exactly UP. If (and it won't be I know) this situation was changed, it would require other things to be changed to keep the balance. This idea will not magically fix CoH2. Trolls, please be still. I think a change in this area would open up the early-game infantry flanking battles, which I think would be more fun. This replay is an example of how things often (not always but often) go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgazHLXrJ1Y (20 minutes US huge map domination with equal-skilled players) The problem seems to be all about the way US techs. When Ost techs, there is a lull in their strength (time to tech up + time to build T2 + time to build first unit) During this time they find it difficult to maintain map control and so, in the majority of games, Ost have a resource disadvantage vs US. They also have a positional disadvantage. The less ground you have, the more avenues there are to flank from. The longer the enemy holds ground, the more they can dig in with fighting pits, mines, wire. Ost has to tech quickly vs US to be ready for the AA ht or the M20. They cannot go long T1. M20 can be on field in under 5 minutes, which gives very little time to get enough units to hold off the rifles and get a hard counter to the M20 before it starts to bleed them. The US however can go for a long T0 for these reasons: 1) Their tech gives them another infantry unit. 2) They do not have to rush their tech as the Ost AC is not so devastating. It can be pushed off with small-arms fire or the Captain's zooka. 3) US T0 is capable of handling everything in Ost T0 and T1. In short, early game, the Ost player suffers from a tech-lull lack of units for so long that the rest of the game they are usually on the back foot and don't have the opportunity to go round making fun flanks and exciting assaults. So my questions are: A) Is it the case that most games US/Ost see Ost with less map control? B) Is this because of the reasons listed about? C) If so, is this good for gameplay or bad? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Which Faction Is OP At Present & Why ?16 Apr 2015, 02:11 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 23:36 PMAlexzandvar I agree with your post, but you would need to implement a quite a radical redesign to the came for this to be in: 1. Change all the maps to be much more open, unit's typically don't have a lot of room to move around so they are stuck in a "blob" formation regardless of if you wish them to or not. 2. USF and Soviets need radical changes: Both have numerous weak infantry to make up for a lack of concentration in force. USF especially suffers from this as it gets nothing better than riflemen unless you go air borne, so to match an Axis players more concentrated fire power you need to group your units up. 3. Having more units than another person isn't blobbing. A lot of people give me shit because I keep my units together; that's because I don't like splitting them up by themselves because of how weak single squads are by themselves if the enemy decides to group their units. Keeping your units together in one army or spreading them out is a tactical decision, it's just that in the current meta you get more reward for having 1 or 2 big armies instead of units dispersed all across the map. Yeah it'd require some redesigning for sure. 1. Absolutely. I was making posts from month 6 after release about map design. 2. Agreed, there's a kind of requirement for grouping the weaker infantry together to get enough punch. 3. I haven't said that sending in more units in one place is blobbing. I'm talking about 4-8 squads all together, drag-selected and walking around the map Lenny/Price style. Currently, as you said, this style of play is rewarded and therefore prevalent in the meta. The use of a larger force as you described is fine. It would be a tactical choice (leaving you a little vulnerable on the other side of the map) that isn't easy to pull off. I didn't say they should only eliminate blobbing. They need to provide valid alternatives too. I wanna be able to play with interesting troop maneuvers. 4/5 squads spread out attacking from different angles to flank, etc. Actual strategy instead of Blob+A-move. In: Lobby
Thread: OKW and US lack options15 Apr 2015, 20:32 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 10:04 AMTheSleep3r >gonna play coh 2 >i go usf 1v1 faymonville north versus okw >damned 4 rifles build, garden this pudding, not again >i go for ambulance as first unit >gonna take the center cutoff with medics >i drive there and pack out >suddenly sturmpionieers sturming me >i get in the building to defend myself >these colts gonna rape the sturms >sturmpionieers hit the dirt >no supression, no arty, im confused >they seem to be dead but one of them is still moving >i get out of the building with my medics, they are the red gardening cross dammit >i catiously walk towards them, trying to help >when medics are 1 meter away from the sturms i see it >they got pinned and got on the ground because of massive laughter wave that arrived when they saw the medics >i gardening retreat >my second ambulance just arrived >gonna take the island on the north west >when i am close i see it is being taken >medics bail out, going to engage >suddenly raketenwerfer rocket wipes the squad >gardening unit diversity >meanwhile my rear echelons try to take right vp >i see obers trying to engage >they stop and a timer appears on them >they laugh so hard they actually try to kill themselves with a grenade >i am done, I go recon company and use recon pass >i see every okw truck built >every german truck driver is gardening laughing >my cheeks turn red >drivers put lugers to their heads >all trucks are abandoned >ObersAreOurSalvation is killed >my rank jumped from 12k to 9 that round >2 ambulances opening is still my standard build to this very day Trololol) made me laugh)) But yeah US deinitely lack options and need more. OKW a bit too. Only three units really you can build (raketen doesn't count). But US has only 2. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Which Faction Is OP At Present & Why ?15 Apr 2015, 20:23 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 15:27 PMNapalm I laugh every time I hear 'we need anti-blob' units when the cries for the ISU 152, 120, Demo charge nerfs have been so loud. You can't have an anti-blob weapon that uses an area of affect because it'll increase one shooting squads and that's bad I hear. You misunderstand. I'm calling for: 1) Anti-blob mechanics like negative zeal that will increase hits/suppression on blobbed units. 2) Effective EARLY GAME non-lethal (think suppression) anti-blob units that will make blobbing unattractive. The two squad-deleter weapons you mentioned "ISU-152 and Demo" both belong to the same army. They both detract from the game's 'squad-retention is fun' ethic. I would rather that demo were removed from the game. if not it should be available for everyone. But I would really rather see it removed from the game. The ISU-152 is not actually an anti-blob unit. It's an anti-unit unit. It deletes units one by one from range while spotting for itself. Therefore all the calls for its removal. If it only affected blobs, I wouldn't complain at all. Demo charges are the same. They can certainly destroy a blob (which is fine, I am for that) but they can easily wipe individual units with little effort (not fine). Why say "I laugh every time I hear"? It's not at all objective. You could say "I disagree because...". Wouldn't you prefer to have real discussions? If you adopt a mocking tone, you can probably expect less interesting replies to your posts. In: Lobby
Thread: Which Faction Is OP At Present & Why ?15 Apr 2015, 15:09 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 10:55 AMKatitof Got to agree with Bulgakov on bad design. Smaller then coh1 maps coupled with lack of effective, reliable blob counters is a pain. In coh1 quickly landing off-maps, instant retreat prop arty and light/medium armor that actually destroyed blobs was partial solution to the problem as the blobs were still ever present, but you had more effective tools to deal with them. CoH2? Pinplanes, stuka zu fuss, ISU and thats pretty much it. Usually its just the bigger blob. Agreed, we need more anti-blob units as well as mechanics, especially for the early game. Mg42 and 50 cal should be filling this role but they're not capable of handling large numbers at once, which really they should be monsters for. In: Lobby
Thread: Which Faction Is OP At Present & Why ?15 Apr 2015, 10:32 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 01:03 AMStrummingbird Blobbing is just a way of tackling a problem, nothing more- there's nothing inherently more wrong about blobbing than splitting squads from a video-gaming perspective, when the situation demands it. If the enemy doesn't have the composition and preparation to deal with a blob, doing so to exploit his weakness is fair enough... even if it's aesthetically unappealing and not historical. I agree, it is one way of playing the game to achieve a result. I didn't say it wasn't. Do you agree blobbing isn't a skill or are you with Burts? I'm not criticising players just for doing it. I'm criticising the game's design. I would love to play a CoH2 that: A) Presents valid and enjoyable options that make blobbing less appealing B) Punishes blobbing 4-8 units together. (negative zeal / larger maps / whatever) Considering the current state of the game, I understand why some players lump their units into one derp-ball and splurge them around the map. There are players who will find every possible advantage (remembering Lenny's sandbag spam... "if it's in the game, it's not abuse, lolz") I'm hoping enough people in the community will reconsider and start asking for a change. A change that promotes a higher level of gameplay. In: Lobby
Thread: Which Faction Is OP At Present & Why ?14 Apr 2015, 21:38 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2015, 11:12 AMBurts Also what is wrong with blobbing? . Blobbing is a skill. Thing about blobbing, 6 well microed squads in green cover or even yellow cover, WILL always beat a blob of 6 squads that are not microed. But from what i understand, coh 2 has too high skill cap and that needs to be decreased Spam is a key thing in ANY rts game. ????? And I quote Burts, master of RTS enjoyability "Blobbing is a skill Blobbing is a skill Blobbing is a skill Blobbing is a skill Blobbing is a skill" Burts, CoH1 was the first game to really end blobbing and to introduce amazing, exciting new dynamics. The second design team fckd it up with the Brits and Panzer Elite but for a while it was amazing. Possibly you never played and don't know. CoH2 could be a glorious strategy game... Currently it is not In any case: Blobbing isn't a skill. You should have said "Spamming is a key skill in any boring, typical, unoriginal and difficult to enjoy RTS game" spam/blob games are bad games. In: Lobby