Profile of wongtp

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 647

General Information
Last Visit Time: 1 Mar 2020, 04:45 AM
Steam: 76561197993238990


Thread: My wish for better infantry combat24 Oct 2014, 06:36 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Oct 2014, 03:44 AMGlassfish well when you talk about LMG units i assume you are talking about Grenadiers mainly, they do loose the ability to shoot on the move makeing then less effective in offensive situations or any situations where micro is required or where they have to move often, they also loose effectiveness as the enemy closes in range and at close range the LMG-42 does the same damage as a regular Mauser K98k and considering the 60muni price tag they should gain the advantages you also have to remember the grenadiers are not durable due to having only a 4 man squad which makes the purpose of Grenadiers clear long range only, lmg just gives them more relevance late game what micro? A+move with lmg blob. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: My wish for better infantry combat24 Oct 2014, 00:41 AM lmgs are the core of the problem. long range units are much safer and also more effective to use than short range troopers. together with good grenades on some of these infantry, they can fight smg troops in a pinch or rape them from afar. there is no fun in infantry combat once lmg upgrades and obers come to play. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Thoughts on the Blob, Hard/soft counters22 Oct 2014, 16:30 PM its because blobs are usually armed with massive long ranged dps. its not really about the suppression or the effectiveness of hmg. the thing is blobs more or less are going to kill the gunner on the 1st burst of fire within the 1st burst of fire. so unless hmg are going to suppress in the 1st burst, blobs are going to be superior. and honest, i doubt anyone sane wants hmg to have that kind of suppressive capabilities. so the solution is rather simple, tone down long range firepower on infantry weapons. but will german players be willing to give up their lmg superiority? i fucking doubt so. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Open Beta first impressions22 Oct 2014, 16:04 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Oct 2014, 14:34 PMbraciszek IS-2 is surprisingly good against the KT, and expect to see less JT to counter it. what, the kt eats is2 alive in a brawl. there's almost no contest here. more hp and much more frontal armor. i dont see how the is2 works against the kt. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T1 unbeatable?19 Oct 2014, 16:25 PM snipers being snipers, they dont shoot fast and are shooting at cheap 5 men squad which makes them difficult to force a retreat. spam them volks, baby sit your kubel and dont commit sturmpios. stick around the kubel to repair and fend off flanking m3s. they are still quite effective at rifle range. good sturmpio play is key to early game. seen too many players committing sturmpios into the fray only to retreat after getting focused down and leaving the kubel open to m3 at the point when volks dont have schrecks yet. volks match conscripts and penals well at range and are cheaper than both of them and kubels swings ranged infantry play heavily into okw favour, just need to keep ur guys together and support each other. then go luchs to end the infantry contest and watch him scramble for AT weapons. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Getting Rid of "Crutch" Units12 Oct 2014, 17:03 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2014, 06:37 AMNinjaWJ I was browsing a topic on the official COH forums and came upon a thread discussing the early arrival of the OKW Puma. Here is a quote that i found quite interesting "The Puma is a life-line for early game if the allies are using any light vehicles or armor of any description, as it takes the OKW a whopping 295 fuel (minimal teching costs and unit cost), without making any outside purchases, to gain access to their first and only dedicated heavy anti-armor unit that has the mobility and defenses to deal with allied threats effectively." Now i started thinking, "Why are these "crutch" units allowed to exist? By "crutch" i mean these units are the only things keeping that faction in the game, no matter how OP, annoying, unrealistic, or silly it may be. I can think of several other examples: 1. Maxim spam due to bad Soviet core infantry 2. ISU152 being good at AI and decent at AT probably since Soviets have no heavy AT 3. LMG Grens being super good (because you got nothing else to build) 4. Schrecks on Volks because Raketen is unreliable I don't think Relic ever intended to "force" us into using a particular unit. I am sure they want players to experiment and use different units. However, players have learned which are units"good" and which are unreliable (bad). This leads to players defending a unit that may be OP because the alternative would be very unfavorable. I personally think that these "crutch" units should be fixed and/or their alternatives changed/buffed. I am not asking for all factions to be the same, but i think some units and upgrades are just a no-brainer. To make matters worse, factions lack varied units because all of the other alternatives are commander-specific. This issue may also seem worse depending on what is the dominant meta Relic needs to open up more RELIABLE alternatives for players. This could be done via adding more nondoc units or alternative counters more reliable and better. I am tired of seeing the same unit(s) and upgrades being made over and over. Tell me what you think okw has tons of good anti tank units, they are just in different tiers. volksschrecks is a core unit, they can synergize with pumas/jadgpanzers/rakaten well enough to scare away light vehicles. okw wont crumble to bits without puma, they can still combat competitively using a different set of playstyle. a good example of a crutch unit will be elite infantry for the soviets. soviet core infantry are pretty abysmal, scale badly and offer nothing in late game. guards bring in desperately needed ranged firepower and shocks are durable and deadly in CQC to beat late game german infantry. without these units, soviets infantry lines will crumble, ALL THE TIME. even now, it is not a perfect balance, obers can still a move all infantry to hell with that absurd dps on lmg34. quite expensive but too damn efficient, durable in almost all situations unless they meet tanks, not sure why they havent been nerfed but that is another issue. ZiS is also another good example of a crutch unit. horrible but essential. soviet has got no proper AT until su85 which has a whole plethora of issues but that's another issue. t34/76 doesnt count since it comes so late, its more AI than AT and when its out, it is effectively checked by pumas/rakenten with schreck support. in the end, no matter what kind of soviet tanks, be it t34/76, t34/85 or is2, without the ZiS for 60range AT support and fallback point, soviet tanks cannot effectively mount an armoured assault especially when jagdpanzers/pumas/panthers can all penetrate that paper thin armour on medium tanks and do a good number on is2 which is outranged by all those tanks. in all my games, i always need these units or else i cannot respond to threats properly. maxims can be replaced with good scout car + penal play, mortars can be replaced by snipers but nothing can replace elite infantry and ZiS AT guns. as for grens/rifles, they are core units. like volks, they must be massed in numbers because they are rarely replaced by elite infantry later in the game, thus they must scale well later in the game. however, grens are scaling way too well, bars are perfect in terms of scaling, they bring a lot of close to mid range firepower but only give a small boost to long range which doesnt fuck up rifle infantry combat in general, but people being people, grens somehow must have 150% their entire squad long range firepower in a single LMG else they will hemorrhage axis tears to flood the world, because fuck balance, thats why. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PAK 40 is overperforming when compared to other AT guns11 Oct 2014, 01:24 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Oct 2014, 18:17 PMStephennJF SOV possess a lot more utility than USF when in comes to displacing or killing support weapon teams including HMG and ATG. Sniper forces the unit to immediately move or risk squad wipe. Mortar is significantly cheaper than pack howizter and provides more reliable high angle fire. Not to mention it provides smoke for free to cover tanks if your not sure where exactly to barrage. Zis-3 has the potential to be a threat with barrage. Access to on-map artillery is more readily available to SOV via T4 (katuysha/SU-76) and doctrines. Both T70 and T34 can easily survive from a pak40 as long as you do not over commit. T70 also has recon run which can more easily determine the exact location of a pak40. Heavy tanks can destroy pak40 outright. There is probably even more reasons that I can't think of, but yeah SOV have heaps to deal with it. USF has few that does not result in a risk in losing MP and catching the pak40 out of position for an easy flank with infantry/armour. The chance of pak40 being poorly placed in the hands of a good player an a high LMG gren army (more vision control) composition is low. i dont quite agree with all that you say except snipers. snipers are the only thing holding off german support teams. however, german teams are still superior to soviet ones, the mortar has good accuracy and high rate of fire, often always displacing soviet mortars 1st before soviet mortar can land a hit on it, mg42s suppresses over a larger area and is much more difficult to flank than a maxim. this is coming from a 2v2 perspective. the earliest artillery is still the stuka, which is still amazing. t4 takes too much fuel to tech to and buying kats/su85s means no call ins that can go toe to toe with early german armour. get caught offguard by a puma/pz4 and you are going to lose that kat/su85, because smoke/blitz + abysmal soviet infantry/ATG support. the closest thing for soviets to flank a stuka is the t34/76, no escape ability, often a suicide mission and stuka having twice the hp as a katyusha doesnt help too. heavy tanks vs pak40 is pretty much rng and luck. you can take half a is2 hp to just land a single hit on the pak, not a very good arguement. unless you were talking about isu152, then i agree. barrage is also a hit or miss, huge spread, slow projectiles, easily dodged and cost 60munitions per use. while useful, more often than not, its not a very reliable counter and thats 60munitions down the drain. germans units are designed around quality and superiority, but no necessarily more expensive to deploy or reinforced, this is where the imbalance is. combat effectiveness is just a much better advantage to have than just having more meatbags to shoot at. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: RNG? lol... Relic you are kidding )))10 Oct 2014, 04:27 AM planes landing on my ally's B4 and destroyed it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: PAK 40 is overperforming when compared to other AT guns10 Oct 2014, 04:25 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Oct 2014, 05:39 AMbraciszek I havent had a problem against the pak 40, but the USF 57mm AT gun is crap to me, and the R43 cant seem to hit anything... It takes 3 USF AT guns to scare off a panther, and you need to spend munitions in order to get penetration that is close to normal AT guns. Range in this case doesnt help that much when the AT gun bounces off of everything... and it will die trying to kill a tank, and then you lose all your vet that was needed to make the AT gun useful in the first place. Raketen takes too long to aim and misses when it tries to shoot somthing. It is only good in buildings and nothing more. However, vet actually makes it plausible. But for the USF AT gun, i see no bastion. It has failed me time and time again and i have laughed at it with my tanks time and time again. Give ZiS back its original, useful vet ability, and ill be fine with it. Target weak point is a very strong ability, but i still dont get the deal why the target weak point for pak 40/pak 43 is different than target weak point on tanks.The TWP on tanks tracks other tanks. TWP on the AT guns targets the ground where the tank once was. What is the deal with this? Its as trivial a bug as not being able to buy back rifleman flamers and DP's and PTRS on Guards. Its like that easy math problem that you are too lazy to complete, but you know how to solve it because it is solved the same way as the other problems you already did. Its really embarrassing since its been around for many months.. 57mm gun for paradrop with crew please. m5 3" gun for non doctrinal AT gun please. paks just need a slight nerf to their dps and they are fine. zis needs to be made cheaper like 280/300mp, if its going to perform at its current stats. su85s while having decent gun stats, is nerfed to being rather vulnerable with that kind of mobility, bring it up to jadgpanzer chassis stats please. problems with zis vs KT is that massive frontal armour and KT being able to tackle AT guns head on with that kind of anti infantry power. either 1 has to go, KT needs thinner frontal armour or lesser AI power from its main cannon. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Captain fuel cost8 Oct 2014, 01:28 AM as long as bazookas remain shit capt will always be shit. he is perfectly useless in a fight and focused the hell out of combat for being the only one with bazookas. if zooks have a longer range while remaining as shit as it is, maybe he might have some use. 120damage zooks with more range please. In: COH2 Balance