Profile of Pip

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1594

General Information


Thread: Should SU76 have 160 damage vet3？12 Sep 2021, 16:49 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Sep 2021, 05:41 AMWAAAGH2000 If must say...M10 and Stug3 need medium tank tech.....for balance it coming later so have 160 damage is fine，but look su76，as light TD，is coming later than OKW puma，and cost more，for now even it vet 3 it not have 160 damage so it useless in late game. For those TD like M10 and Stug3 in late game they default 160 damage also could punch most medium tank，but don't forgot Allied without commander and UKF Comet and Churchill not have tank HP more than 640，so Allied should have more powerful TD against German heavy，but still that problem，SU76 not have enough damage to use even in VET3，even vet3 it can not beat new Stug3. The SU-76 has a dual-purpose as both a light AT vehicle and as an AI vehicle through barrage. That's how it scales. It outranges and outpenetrates both the M10 and Puma as well. People talking about the damage as though that is the only component of AT performance are being kinda dishonest at best. The SU-76 struggles because it simply doesn't have a place in the SOV arsenal, nor in the timing that it arrives. I've said before that it would be much better off being made a "pure" AI vehicle, like the STUG-E or even the Scott rather than bothering to try and make it's AT performance better. If you want lategame AT vehicles as SOV you get an SU-85. Also: Are you seriously using the Stug against allied heavies? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Should SU76 have 160 damage vet3？11 Sep 2021, 15:37 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2021, 15:27 PMMr Carmine And afaik the su76 doesnt get any pen buffs with vet. You're right, my mistake. The statistics spreadsheet I was looking at is outdated. I don't know that the Barrage is all that situational though, It's an absolutely core part of ZiS strategy, and i have no reason to believe that using it on your SU-76 is worse. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Should SU76 have 160 damage vet3？11 Sep 2021, 15:07 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2021, 13:46 PMKatukov its a vet 3 buff lmao, and it only lets the su-76 have the damage of the zis gun they can always make it a bootleg sherman with HE if you think the su doesn't deserve better AT "Only" lets it have the damage of the ZiS (Or The P4, Cromwell, Sherman, SU-85, Jackson, etc). 160 damage is an important breakpoint as you well know. Not really sure why you're trying to downplay it. Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2021, 14:16 PMMr Carmine The longer range being cheaper and barrage do make the su76 fine intialy. But unlike the stug the su76 lacks scaling. Esp considering axis get 260 armour 900 plus hp tanks stock. The sturdier stug with vet becomes faster then the flimsy su76. Why does the stug get to have simaler/faster mobility with vet and the su76 should not have comparable at with vet 3? The 160 damage at vet should be the reward for keeping a turretles flimsy low damage unit alive. The Stug gets better mobility because it has lower range. That's the tradeoff. The SU-76 gets scaling through an improved barrage range and cooldown, alongside better accuracy/reload. (and ultimately better penetration values than the STUG). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Should SU76 have 160 damage vet3？11 Sep 2021, 13:10 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2021, 13:07 PMKatukov The SU-76 has basically no stopping power, no durability, speed is not superior to the panzer 4, panther and not even a (vetted) stug, and has no turret. the 10 range don't justify that a stug-3 has better AT (vet 0) stats than you at vet 3 The ten range, barrage, and lower price, you mean? If it retains barrage, the lower price, and the extra range, then the SU-76 should not have comparable AT performance to the STUG. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Patch Heads-up Notification10 Sep 2021, 12:30 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2021, 06:59 AMHannibal I think your wish has been indirectly granted since this is likely the last patch CoH2 will get To be fair, people have been saying "That's the last patch we're ever getting" for about a year now. In: Lobby
Thread: Why are snipers getting nerfed?6 Sep 2021, 15:56 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Sep 2021, 12:55 PMTickTack It is though. Literally being unable to build something is not, in fact, the same as choosing not to build something. If building tier 1 locked out tier 2 then you might have a point, but there is nothing physically preventing you from having both a ZIS and a squad of penals. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Why are snipers getting nerfed?6 Sep 2021, 11:41 AM Jump back to quoted post6 Sep 2021, 08:05 AMTickTack If russians have to use a commander to get both penals and an AT gun, then why is it so bad for OKW to use commander to get JLI? SOV do not need to use a commander to get both Penals and an AT gun. They have them stock, their teching situation isnt the same thing as literally not having access to an unit type. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Relief for USF teching problems5 Sep 2021, 15:28 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Sep 2021, 05:18 AMKurobane One of my biggest complaints with USF is the fairly static nature of their build order. 95% of the time you are going 2-3 Rifleman every game followed by Officer of choice which leaves very little flexibility. Compared to say Soviets who have probably the most diverse Build Order diversity in the game. As Soviets you could go Conscripts, Penals, Maxims, a combination of these units. You never know what to expect while with USF you know exactly what to expect every game. In that aspect I consider the USF tech rework to be a huge failure due to how limiting the strategic diversity is. Outside of Commanders (such as using Pathfinders for example) USF lacks non doctrinal strategic diversity. I think a fair trade would be to get rid of the free officer squads in exchange to having easier access to HMG/AT Gun. I believe that Lelic have mandated that the Balance Team not remove the Free Officers. The compromise in one of the most recent patches being the ability to send an officer squad off of the field. A lot of the balance issues present in the game are there because of Relic hamstringing the team, honestly. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Gren Rifle nade is to powerful.5 Sep 2021, 15:25 PM Jump back to quoted post5 Sep 2021, 02:42 AMMr Carmine I see your point, but it has been evident over the last couple of years that the devs or balance team implemented many changes so that squads dont get one shotted often or at all without requiering player input to avoid it. Model caps, damage reduction, aoe nerfs. Most (if not all?) of this has been introduced in order to tone down autofire explosives (tank cannons, mortars, etc), mines, or rocket artillery though. Other than Gren damage reduction grenades have largely been left "as-is", since they're a targetted and short-ranged munitions ability rather than something "free", so they're i suppose "allowed" to geek entire squads. I will say that I don't like that grenade oneshots of squads are a "thing" though. It's difficult to solve that issue entirely though, due to the wide range of squad sizes, and a lack of granularity in balancing certain tools vs certain units. Model caps on grenades, for example, benefits factions like SOV rather more than OST, due to the former having individually less valuable models (and simply more models in general). Hopefully CoH3 has a more elegant solution to this. I really don't think a momentary lapse in concentration should result in an entire squad evaporating, with how focused the game is on veterancy acquisition and maintenance. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Stupid questions but no answers4 Sep 2021, 18:12 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Sep 2021, 17:11 PMSkysTheLimit You know what I mean. OKW has a stowable sweeper AND it's not mutually exclusive with the shreck Ost and soviets need to get a 2nd engineer for sweeper if they purchased a flamer and it sacrifices their combat ability I mean, sure, but these factions will typically have that second engineer regardless, as they need it for repairs later on in the game. Sturms have the stowable sweeper primarily due to them having a higher population tax than other factions' engineers (as well as the increased price of them relative to other factions), on top of them being an absolutely vital combat unit for OKW early game. Without the stowable sweeper they'd pretty much be forced to forgo it until significantly later in the game (If they even could get it at all). Same reason they made the Shreck non-exclusive recently. It's also worth mentioning that Sturms have an absolute ton of shit to do early-mid game, and don't always have the time to sweep everything. SoV practically always purchase flamers on their engineers due to the ludicrously good synergy with Merge, but honestly I don't see THAT many flamer pioneers. You've no such excuse for USF, incidentally, since they sort of don't need RE's combat ability, and they can ALSO get non-exclusive AT. Anyway, my point is that I don't think OKW are uniquely more "able" to get sweepers than other factions. I'm not certain it's good design that OST (and USF) have oneshotting mines stock, but I definitely don't think regular mines should oneshot ultralights. In: COH2 Balance