Profile of Pip

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1594

General Information


Thread: MGs need to be looked at8 Apr 2021, 18:04 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2021, 18:02 PMKatitof If there is not enough sandbags for you now, its because you are not building enough sandbags anymore. Yes, because they take longer to build, and are therefore fewer are able to /be/ built due to time economy necessitating other actions. What are you even trying to convey here? The patch was intended to reduce the amount of sandbagging being done across factions (with mainline sandbags), and it did exactly that. The cause and effect is pretty clear. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: German Infantry Commander adjustments8 Apr 2021, 18:02 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2021, 16:19 PMmrgame2 no place for stormtroopers, replace with lefh....hmm i rather replace with command tank though also for grens with lmg, sure they are better long range, but most allies will just rush in on them. so range is not like a sure win The idea is you prevent the allies "just rushing in" by using MGs and Pgrens to corral them. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - British Feedback8 Apr 2021, 17:02 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2021, 16:35 PMVermillion_Hawk Stealth-capable AT squads are a terrible idea with too much potential for abusive gameplay. Big no. To be fair, OST can get such a thing already, with some docs giving Pgrens Ambush Training. Admittedly I think the camo is weaker than Commandoes' camouflage. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: German Infantry Commander adjustments8 Apr 2021, 15:15 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2021, 13:18 PMLewka Really? I thought the buff looked so strong in the patch notes Ehh, you're paying 60 muni to turn Grens into an "almost" close range squad, Panzergrenadiers do basically anything that G43 grens can do significantly better. It still feels like a worse version of the VSL upgrade, but without anywhere near as much of a survivability boost. I can't envision many scenarios where I'd want to really bother with it. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: German Infantry Commander adjustments8 Apr 2021, 13:17 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Apr 2021, 01:01 AMLewka I like the change of weaponry for the veteran squad leader grens and that they still retain improved rate of fire. However I feel like with the survivability nerf to vsl everyone is going to use G43 grens in the coming patch instead. I have thousands of hours played but am of low ranking so my opinions on balance matter very little. However, in my opinion (take it for what it's worth) VSL grens could use a slight buff or change. Like decreasing their RA again, and maybe taking away their ability to heal for free. I don't think that G43 grens are going to be massively used, I still don't think they're particularly good. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: The current state of infantry - DPS and Utility7 Apr 2021, 18:42 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 18:23 PMelchino7 I don't think it should be an issue to display as yellow. Right now we have green for both heavy cover and garrison cover which are different modifiers. True, but "in a building" vs "behind a wall" is much more readable and intuitive than "In a crater" vs "In a crater, but it's one the mapmaker placed", y'know? Doesn't "building" cover have a slightly different icon to "green" cover anyway, though? Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 18:23 PMelchino7 Ideally i would say give a small green border for yellow light cover to signify that it provides some sort of suppression resistance. Sure, that'd probably be enough, if it's actually possible to edit these sorts of UI elements. If we're going down that route I'd suggest the yellow shield, but with it being bisected diagonally, be used for "no suppression resistance" yellow cover. Having a gap in it would be a reasonable indicator that it's "worse" than regular yellow cover. It would probably be cleaner to just have a different colour though. Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 18:23 PMelchino7 Alternative just give it the grey colour. I still think light cover created by any explosive is too strong for how "passive" it is available. It's 0.50 RA and 0.50 suppression modifier AND 2.5 suppression recovery rate. That's even WORSE, it's not recognisable as cover at all if it's using the "no cover" ui elements! Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 18:23 PMelchino7 While at first i thought of simple removing any cover properties, i thought it would kill any viability of camouflage units late game. I think a more "neutral" cover should be added with 0.75 RA, 1.00 suppression modifier and 1.5 suppression recovery would been better. Leaving light cover generation to either big ordnances (offmap, Avre/ST, Howitzers). Probably a good idea, if this is within the scope of the Balance Team. It might be nice to do something sort of similar for player-built green cover too (if Mainlines keep their sandbags), as this would make map cover preferable to player-built cover. Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 18:35 PMKiwiBirb I believe MGs should get +3 range when in cover This would help stop A-move LMG blobs IMO Would going from 45 range to 48 range really make all that much of a difference? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: OKW multiple Battlegroup HQs7 Apr 2021, 18:35 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 18:33 PMT.R. Stormjäger Yes, that is the plan. No way is giving it to OKW stock beneficial to the game, it's a step in the opposite direction of where coh2 should be headed. If such a change were coming imminently, sure, but if we're going to be waiting for quite a long time before getting such changes, I'd argue it's better to provide OKW with similar options to other factions as a stopgap. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: OKW multiple Battlegroup HQs7 Apr 2021, 18:19 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 17:30 PMTiger Baron Mr. floating MG42 on 250 halftrack is questioning your so called "acceptable bar for the vanilla game". I mean, that's a little less noticeable than the rather jarring "pack up" animation implemented for OKW trucks (which seems to be playing sections of the live setup animation in reverse order, rather than actually playing the animations in reverse). I'd love to be able to pack up trucks and move them around (As the Brits could in CoH1), but I would have to agree with G17 that this particular instance might be beyond "acceptable" quality. (Avoiding more minor visual discrepancies like the 250MG is probably good, too) In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback7 Apr 2021, 18:16 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 17:36 PMSupport Sapper Snip Oh, I knew about the "mechanics" behind setting models up to use particular weapons, I didn't quite see how giving them the ability to equip scoped Garands would "overwrite" their normal Garand models, though. Is it something to do with them sharing animations? It seems like a strange bug. Would it be impossible to implement a "new" scoped Garand weapon that doesn't cause the same strange interaction? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The current state of infantry - DPS and Utility7 Apr 2021, 17:10 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2021, 17:01 PMelchino7 The solution should be that map created yellow cover should provide suppression resistance but player generated ones should not. At most it should be limited to heavy offmap artillery. Doing that has the problem of not being intuitive/readable, you'd potentially have two sets of cover that are displayed identically in-game, but with different effects for no discernable reason. If it were possible to simply add a new UI element so we had; Red, Yellow, Green, Building, and a new, say, "Blue" cover, then this'd be fine. Mapper-placed cover could be Yellow, and player created "yellow" cover could then be "blue", identical to regular yellow cover apart from the lack of suppression resistance. In: COH2 Gameplay