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: Moderation and Order31 Jul 2014, 02:28 AM This is great news Looking forward to the improved forum moderation! Also, good luck to everyone that applies to be a mod. In: News
Thread: Action Items: Balance Feedback Required!30 Jul 2014, 22:02 PM Jump back to quoted post30 Jul 2014, 15:44 PMBulgakov I know what you're saying but please look at this: all MGs have a special ability - supression. As such, they should have weaknesses. They should not be able to walk around the map alone without support, caping territory. If this ability was removed, nobody would be able to spam them. Yes, MG spam is viable. It's absolutely viable. But it's boring. It's so so boring to play against. All the joy of flanking is removed from the game as you walk into Maxim after Maxim after Maxim after Maxim after Maxim. So, take MG's cappign ability in exchange for their suppression ability and power. I thik that's the fairest way. The drawback of MGs is immobility (compared to normal infantry squads), no possibility for weapon upgrades (which, on a whole, are very arguably too powerful in their current state - except maybe the PPSh), no grenades, vulnerability to indirect fire, vulnerability to flanking/green cover (MGs can't suppress squads in green cover - it takes like 2 full minutes of shooting), lack of AT utility (lowered access to AT nades/fausts) etc etc There are plenty of drawbacks to spamming MGs - especially in 1v1, which is why you never really see top players spamming maxims or MG42s (maybe like 15 patches ago when the MG42 was instant suppress/crazy OP). The issue primarily presents itself in team games where your ally(ies) can cover the weaknesses of spamming Maxims/MG42s. I don't think removing the ability to cap would really solve anything. MGs would become border-line extinct in 1v1s, and team games would largely remain the same - you'd just let your ally cap while you suppress everything. Lowering the durability of Soviet weapon team squads is a band-aid fix at best, especially considering they'd need to be significantly buffed to compensate for the reduced durability (see the screenshot of me/PQ above). In my opinion the real issue, if you could call it an issue at all, lies within the Soviet tech system. Since you're forced, in almost every case, to pick two of your four tiers of tech - you always lack a variety of options - which inherently leads to more "spamming" of the options that you do actually have available to use. Personally I'm fine with this tech system, I don't think there is anything inherently "wrong" with a faction that is somewhat designed around "spammy" gameplay. I can still sympathize with those that find it to be boring to play with/against. Overall I'd much rather see Relic re-work the Soviet tech system rather than try to put a band-aid over Soviet weapon teams. Either they'll be glass cannons (4 men, very powerful weapon stats) or durable (6 men, weaker weapon stats) but either way they'll be spammed because of the limitations present in the current Soviet tech structure. Might edit this later, was getting my thoughts down quickly before dinner. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: US faction too effective?30 Jul 2014, 21:51 PM As amusing as I find McFarland's detective work to be (given Cannonade's consistent hostile behavior towards me) I must echo sheepeh's sentiment. Back off. This thread has been derailed enough (admittedly I played a role in that). I will personally make sure that any further posts directed at this off-topic discussion will be reported to admins of the site. And if I screw up and make another off-topic post in this thread... well you guys can have a field day spam reporting me to the admins Back on topic please. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: US faction too effective?30 Jul 2014, 01:51 AM Jump back to quoted post30 Jul 2014, 01:26 AMausterlitz Main issue with ostheer too many useless units,bad teching and highly predictable. USA has very few useless units and lean teching. Unitwise the early halftrack swings the thing in favour of usa.Rifles alone can be fended with mg support till lmg 42s unless u made blunders.Lategame easy eight call in is the other problem.Other than this its not that much issue. Yeah, can't disagree with you at all. All of Ostheer T4 is pretty much non-existent when it comes to 1v1s. Against USF you're pretty much pigeon-holed into holding out for a Tiger. T4 is too expensive and T3 loses horribly to E8s or Jacksons. Against Soviets T4 is just too expensive. By the time you have a Panther they'll have 3+ T34/76, or a pair of T34/85 which will #RektCity your poor Panther. The Ost T3 vs Soviet T3 is actually incredibly well balanced, but a pair of PaK40s can generally camp against T3 until you have a Tiger - and the Tiger is so strong there's almost no reason to tech T3 on most maps. Plus the Tiger is a lot safer against T34/85s than a P4. I'd love to see some love for Ost T4 in the future. While they're super strong once they hit critical mass, they're certainly the most narrow faction in terms of viable builds. You have to crutch really hard on MG42s, LMGs and PaK 40s. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Action Items: Balance Feedback Required!30 Jul 2014, 01:07 AM For those that are approaching this discussion about Soviet Weapon Teams with the assumption that the weapons themselves (the stats of the actual Maxim/Mortar/ZiS) are asymmetrically balanced - without factoring in the squad size... http://i.imgur.com/8cDsceY.jpg So yes, as I've claimed in the past, the squad size WAS/IS indeed a concrete factor in determining the performance of the actual weapons that Soviet teams yield. If Relic was to reduce the squad size, which I maybe... maybe... could see being good in the long-run, they'll absolutely have to improve the performance to compensate. This would require a pretty large overhaul, and a lot of testing - I think there are bigger fish to fry at the moment.b In: COH2 Balance
Thread: US faction too effective?30 Jul 2014, 00:40 AM Jump back to quoted post29 Jul 2014, 23:46 PMBled So, to the topic. I'm curious why you'd assess that Ostheer is the better 1v1 faction. If I recall correctly, you stated that you believe the current balance is Osth>US>Soviet>OKW. As another poster mentioned earlier, the level of play is going to weigh in on one's opinion. I'd have to look at each individual poster's opinion as well as the available player cards, but my own personal experience varies from 50's to 300's depending on bracket and so forth. That being said, I really feel the balance is more US>Osth>Soviet>OKW with Osth and Soviet being fairly interchangeable on the ladder. As I've said, and many others, I don't think US is that over the top, but they do have a few obvious leads that I believe put them at top rung. Curious what the counter points are for those who believe ostheer is in the better spot. Basically the combination of LMG Grens, MGs, PaK40s and Tiger is extremely potent. Ost vs USF is a difficult fight for the Ost player, don't get me wrong. It is certainly an uphill battle in the early game, but once your MG42s force a couple retreats and you get your LMGs equipped things become a lot more bearable. This is further helped by the availability of the 251 for mobile/forward reinforcement. Finally the USF AT gun has weak penetration compared to the ZiS, and they don't have a tank that can actually soak hits from a Tiger like the T34/85s or IS-2 can. (Generally Soviets, in 1v1, kill Tigers with Mark + ZiS while T34/85s soak damage) Jacksons are remarkably strong, I love them, but they simply cannot contend with the sheer firepower of a pair of properly positioned PaK40s - especially once one of them gets Vet 1 (which happens very quickly). Currently I feel like neither the Soviets nor the USF have the capability to go toe-to-toe with a properly managed Ostheer late game army (LMG Grens, MGs, PaK40s + Tiger). The trick/difficulty is managing the MGs and PaK40s, there isn't very much margin for error unfortunately. This, I think, is the primary reason (also the M15/Elite Rifle nerfs, among other things has been huge - the poll is a few patches old) for the difference in opinion between myself and others. Ostheer, played to near perfection, is highly potent - unfortunately achieving this level of play is difficult to say the least. I really hope this post does not come off as super ego ridden. I hope that, by now, everyone knows that I spend a lot of time on stream/YouTube trying to help people improve their play. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: US faction too effective?29 Jul 2014, 22:21 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Jul 2014, 18:18 PMCannonade The poll agrees that US is strongest in 1v1, by a significant margin of votes. Of total 170+ voters, 94-97% disagree with Ciez's clear statement in this thread that Ost is strongest in 1v1, and infact vote Ost as the weakest, which is the polar opposite of the claim he made here (which though it is irrelevant to the thread, he did infact make anyways). Anyways, I agree its not relevant to thread, except to point out the almost complete disagreement of community vote with Ciez's statement, as shown by a very valid poll. He expressed his opinion, and I answered it with the poll results. There is really nothing more or less to it. Take from that what you will Lets return to discussing US balance, as is the purpose of the thread, and incidentally the poll agrees with US being the strongest in 1v1, so that was relevant. First of all, I have more than sufficient evidence to support my personal belief that you are in fact Nullist. This includes, but is not limited to the following: 1 - You both have the same cadence/tone in your posts. 2 - Your undying/relentless/pointless/unprovoked trolling of nearly every one of my posts - I seriously cannot recall a single time in which you've had anything constructive to say with regard to something I've said. 3 - Your IP address is close enough to his to reveal that you both use the same ISP, and are more than likely in the same geographic location. 4 - You both use the word "efficacy" like it is going out of style - I've never seen/heard anyone else use that word. 5 - Your argument about Soviet weapon team durability is basically his copy/pasted, despite it being one of the weakest/most flawed/most ignorant arguments that I've ever witnessed in my life. Clear enough yet? Second of all, I made my statement about Ostheer being the strongest 1v1 faction, currently, because it was a direct reply to the OP, in which he stated: "Wermaht is the weakest faction crippled by its over priced tech system." So despite your, failed, attempt to try and claim that my post was off topic. It was, absolutely and irrefutably, directed at the OP. It is completely relevant to the thread. Sorry. Third, my claim is rooted in countless hours of 1v1 and team-game play with and against the best players that this community has to offer (would love to see your playercard bud). Yours is grounded in a three week old, opinion based, poll of the general community. Further, there have been multiple patches since the date of that poll being held - including numerous, very significant nerfs to the USF. Sure, USF probably had an advantage over Ost back then - especially with how absolutely ridiculous the M15 was - but your poll is completely irrelevant to my statement (and to this thread entirely) - which was strictly pertaining to the current state of the live game at the time of posting. Not a month ago. Finally, I'm going to ask you officially to just leave me alone. As I stated before, I cannot think of a single time that you've posted anything constructive in response to one of my posts. My personal opinion (based on the summation of my experiences with you) is that you're an insufferable troll, but maybe we just simply don't see eye-to-eye on anything - in which case it is better for everyone if we just ignore each other. So please, as of this moment, just ignore me and I'll ignore you. Simple, right? I'm sure you'll quote this post in, yet another, pathetic attempt to get in a jab at me - because you're that kind of petulant man-child. Don't expect any further responses from me, it's only a matter of time before the rest of the community sees you for what you really are, you're not as transparent as you seem to think you are. Find something better to do with your life. P.S. - ROFL at you trying to claim that you were part of Relic's beta (in one of your more recent stabs directed towards me) when you were, self-admittedly, not. (Thanks McFarland) "For me, the single and only exposure I have had to the release, has been from this site, the ingame splash screens, and a single entry on the biblical IGN PC "Games to be released soon" listing. Thats it." Not to mention the fact that I'm one of the moderators of the beta... #Rekt In: COH2 Balance
Thread: US faction too effective?29 Jul 2014, 01:18 AM USF is definitely over-performing, pretty sure Relic is aware of this. However I'd say Ostheer is the strongest faction, at least in 1v1. Ost > USF > Sov > OKW currently in 1v1. Allies >>>>>>>>>> Axis in team games as of the time of posting this. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Quick Wishlist28 Jul 2014, 23:13 PM I'd like to see Relic focus fully on balance/bug fixes for the time being. WFA has the potential to be even better than vCOH 2 was, but right now there are so many game-breaking units/abilities (Obers, Katy, M15 AA, Easy8, USF 30cals blah blah) While I certainly would LOVE spectator mode, I think the game needs to be a bit more balanced and more or less bug-free first. Once balance gets sorted out: 1 - Spectator mode - this will really help Ami/Ipkai/Rogers and others produce top notch content for the community which will, hopefully, bring in new players. 2 - Crafting/trading system - the war spoils system has a lot of potential, but we need a way to get rid of the stuff we don't want/duplicates and turn it into what we want, this way every drop would feel meaningful in some way. 3 - Bulletin Overhaul - I'd love to see some sort of trade-off with bulletins where they become really important. (Ex: Your MGs have 20% increased suppression but your Grens deal 20% less damage) [don't judge this on numbers, just the concept of trade-offs] In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Thoughts on Conscripts getting a 1x DP-28 upgrade28 Jul 2014, 23:06 PM I'd rather see other infantry scale more reliably cough Penals cough It is no secret that Cons definitely scale worse than Grens, by a lot, in terms of DPS/killing power but their utility easily exceeds that of Grens in most cases. If Relic were to make Cons scale throughout the entire game then there would be no reason for Soviet players to make anything except for Cons (We already see this with USF and Rifles). So with regards to this topic in a strict sense, no - Cons should probably not get a non-doctrinal upgrade - but other Soviet infantry (except Guards, Guards perform really perfectly at the moment) could use a small amount of love. Soviet pretty clearly has difficulty dealing with mid/late game Grens once the LMGs and/or G43s start kicking in. I'd take LMG Grens over having 6 models in a Con squad any day. Late game Ost is significantly better than Sov, early game is in Sov favor though. In: COH2 Balance