Profile of CieZ

Avatar Area

Offline United States
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

General Information
Broadcast: https://www.twitch.tv/riseofthephoenix_
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjV_ujoRNpEU_ERL9dW8H9w
Steam: 76561197995165748
Residence:

United States
Nationality:

United States

Show Latest Posts


Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?19 Jul 2015, 11:48 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Jul 2015, 02:42 AMnekron fuck off +1 another solid post from a vcoh fan. Thank you for your valuable addition and expert insight into the topic at hand. @generalch I know exactly what inverse is talking about, I just disagree with his assessment that coh2 lacks strategic depth. It doesn't. There are plenty of viable strategies in coh2 and plenty of important timings to know/hit. But you're right. That's off topic. I still fail to see why coh1 and coh2 can't exist in harmony. Why won't the vcoh fans stop derailing threads on this site to crap on coh2? Just play whichever game you prefer and support the community of the other. Coh2 is the objectively more competitive game but coh1 could still have a bright future if people would stop QQing and trashing the coh2 community and do positive stuff for their game. It just boggles my mind why a handful of people seemingly enjoy sitting of the forums and actively whining about a game they don't even play. In: COH Central
Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?19 Jul 2015, 02:02 AM Jump back to quoted post19 Jul 2015, 01:30 AMpigsoup how? -------------------------- wait. so as soviet (rank ~200 2v2 and top 3v3/4v4 games) i have tried 1. con heavy 2. con mixed with t1 3. con mixed with t2 4. t1 heavy 5. t2 heavy 6. CE mixed with t1 7. CE mixed with t2 8. CE heavy with heavy emphasis on 1 flame car. etc etc are those different strategies or just tactics? Strategies, with the specific ways you use your units on the map to achieve victory being your tactics. Playing con heavy is a strategy, flanking a mg or controlling a house is a tactic. Just ignore inverse when he says that coh2 lacks strategic depth. He has no clue what he's talking about. Overall there are a lot of viable strategies in coh2. Except maybe USF. They're pretty one dimensional right now. In: COH Central
Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?18 Jul 2015, 23:56 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Jul 2015, 22:38 PMkorgoth Does CoH1 have a future? Yep, its called CoH2. QFT. Coh2 tournies have seen better prize pools and significantly higher viewer counts than vcoh tournies. I don't see why both games couldn't succeed simultaneously though. It happens in plenty of other cases - ssbm/ssbb/sm4sh being a good example. In: COH Central
Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?18 Jul 2015, 20:13 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Jul 2015, 19:49 PMInverse Just that if that's what you think strategy in RTS games is about, it makes sense that you have a hard time understanding why most top CoH1 players don't like CoH2. Apparently you lost to a rank 5000+ 1v1 player. Probably why you have a hard time understanding why people like Coh2. I was a rank 1 master sc2 player, never made GM, game was too hard for me. Top aoe3 player, decent enough wc3 player... Blah blah. I realize there's a lot more to RTS than just building units. There's also a lot more to coh2 than just building units. If you can't realize the sarcasm in my initial post I think I'm wasting my time talking with you. As usual. You'd think I would have learned my lesson by now honestly. Yet another decent thread being derailed by the great Inverse and his shitposting. As I said before, vcoh could still be a successful game. Just do like the dota, aoe2, ssbm, cs 1.6, etc communities did. Go do positive stuff for your game instead of griping about games you don't play. In: COH Central
Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?18 Jul 2015, 19:46 PM Jump back to quoted post18 Jul 2015, 19:37 PMInverse That actually explains a lot. Great post, +1 would read again. Maybe you can enlighten me as to how this post is at all relevant to the topic at hand and not a poorly veiled attempt to insult me? Thanks for proving my point though. In: COH Central
Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?18 Jul 2015, 19:29 PM Isn't every RTS ever about making units to counter other units... basically you wrote a super long post to say you prefer coh1 because that's your opinion. grats. You're entitled to it. Just like the tens of thousands of us that prefer coh2 for any myriad of reasons. But back on topic, if the coh1 community wants coh1 to have a future - do something about it other than repeatedly bitch and moan about coh2. It was old 3 weeks after release. We're pushing 3 years now. Move on. Wanna know what happened with the aoe2 community when aoe3 was released and the msn gaming zone was shut down? They made their own balance patch. Their own lobby system/website, their own ladders, their own tournaments etc etc. and now 15 years later they're getting an officially sanctioned expansion. Coh1 and coh2 are both good games respectively. If you guys want coh1 to survive/thrive then do something about it already. In: COH Central
Thread: Does CoH1 have a future?18 Jul 2015, 16:51 PM Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2015, 17:39 PMInverse If you look at any CoH game from the perspective of 2v2+, it's always going to be shit. CoH1 team games were shit because of Brits and snipers, CoH2 team games are shit because of heavies and call-in spam. Removing things like snipers and purchased vet made 1v1s less interesting and didn't improve team games at all. There's always going to be fucked up shit in CoH team games because the game wasn't designed for that many players. When was the last time you played a coh2 1v1 or 2v2? Please keep telling me more about how bad coh2 1s and 2s are. Your plethora and wealth of in game experience would go a long way to helping me understand just how superior of a game coh1 is. Coh1 has as much of a future as the coh1 community wants it to have. Plenty of games have thrived without developer support and some have survived in spite of developers actively trying to stifle the competitive growth of the game. Unfortunately some community members would rather whine about coh2 and reminisce about the good old days instead of doing anything positive for the coh1 community. P.S. Coh2 snipers are way more fun/fair/interesting than vcoh. You have to be careful to micro your sniper around cover instead of just LOL YOLO IM CLOAKED EVERYWHERE NO MICRO NEEDED DERP DERP coin flip oops I missed my countersnipe because fuck rng that's why. Oh and true sight. Way better than not having it. It opens up so much tactical depth. And even increased opportunity for strategic depth by incorporating LoS blocking/hindering abilities into your strategy. In: COH Central
Thread: Windows 10, anyone?17 Jul 2015, 01:50 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Jul 2015, 00:34 AMNeffarion Even if it says so in the wiki it just does not happen like that anymore, they keep pumping security updates True but it is decent/good in most areas in computing, where the others are good at something and bad at others http://www.its.ms.gov/Services/Pages/Security-Calendar-of-Events.aspx http://www.methos-it.com/blogs/when-is-the-next-patch-tuesday https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/Dn903782.aspx Want more links? I work in health care IT. We are legally bound to have all important security updates pushed to our production network within a week of their release. I'm quite aware of how often Microsoft releases security updates. I only gave the wiki link cuz I'm on my phone and didn't feel like putting in that much effort. Plus you should always install every security update asap. There's just no reason not to. Windows is good for gaming, only because other OS lack the support from the gaming industry and the office suite. Other than that windows is pretty meh. OS X just handles so many things so much better for the average user. And I can't stand freaking retarded command prompt after using the Linux command shell. Anyways, getting a new version of windows before it has been out for about a year is just asking for trouble, simple as that. In: Hardware and Tech
Thread: Jason Lee17 Jul 2015, 01:26 AM Jason Lee = awesome. This last patch series has been wonderful and letting the community test and give feedback ahead of time is a huge step forward. Fan club signed. Brad needs a fan club next. He puts in a lot of work alongside Jason to get these patches worked out for us. In: Fan Clubs
Thread: Update on beta patch by Jason Lee16 Jul 2015, 12:56 PM Jump back to quoted post16 Jul 2015, 12:03 PMGN21 While I agree that soviet sandbags were too hard to destroy, now they have the same hp as the OKW ones but with way lower armor. This will result in small arms fire being able to destroy it rather quickly. I suggest to align it's armor value with the okw sandbags. Moreover, I liked to use the 221 without upgrades. Why would they remove a unit? They could change the upgrade costs from ammo to 20mp and 5 fuel to align it with the suggested change while still keeping both vehilces. Last but not least, Wehr T4 only costs 40 fuel more than T3 now (including the buildings). Why is that intended? It seems to me like Wehr has to make a decision between T3 and T4 now (since the builidings are more expenseive) while Soviets have to tech T3 and T4. Relic stated that they disliked the binary approach of Soviets, but now we have a somewhat binary approach to Wehrmacht. Or am I missing something? You still get every role covered in t3 or t4 as ostheer, as well as having full access to a supporting army in t1 and t2. Previously soviets were always lacking something, now they'll have much better access to their full arsenal. Hence, neither faction is very binary now. In: Lobby