Profile of UGBEAR

Jump back to quoted post4 Sep 2013, 05:35 AMc r u C e

Off-Topic : Oh and they says maxim trades surpression for DPS?...MG 42 has 24 DPS where the maxim has 21...well that's balance for you

On-Topic : had a game where a Elefant two shot my ISU-152 and the ISU shot 5 times at the Elefant(managed to flank,to no avail),draining just half of the health...which raises the same question,why is ISU more expensive then a Elefant,which has superior gun,range and armor,where is logic...and again,don't give me the "It has splash damage and slices through infantry"...

Jump back to quoted post4 Sep 2013, 03:37 AMJohanSchwarz

It doesn't really matter how often Germans lose to KV-8 commanders - the unit itself breaks one of the core concepts of CoH: allowing the player to press retreat on his infantry. This is a cause for concern no matter the circumstance - it'd be like saying in a MOBA game there's a hero that doesn't need to last hit to get gold.

I do agree with you that the Soviet faction is out-of-wack and the KV-8 at the moment is not swinging massive amounts of win percentage despite its ridiculous stats - doesn't mean it's going to stay that way after the next patch once they adjust things. At the current stage, several Soviet units are just ridiculously UP (cough, Maxim, cough) whilst others are ridiculously OP. That's just wrong no matter how you look at it.

P.S. In that case, I take back what I said.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2013, 17:24 PMbigchunk1

I have been a long time relic fan but what are you guys thinking here?

An IS-2 costs 680 manpower and 300 fuel. That's almost enough for 2 panthers and more than enough for 2 panzer 4s. That would be perfectly fine if the tank didn't perform so poorly. It is slow and has a slow turning turret, understandable. Its armor feels like paper and does not penetrate all that well considering it is a heavy tank, now that I don't understand.

A tiger costs 250 fuel, 50 less fuel than an IS-2... what? Just because it's German? I'm also pretty sure than an IS-2 will lose in a straight fight with a Tiger. At LEAST put them on equal footing. The only historical disadvantages I have read about the IS-2 compared to the Tiger was that it was difficult to reload the main gun and that the tank crews weren't as well trained. It did however carry a 122mm cannon, which is more than a match for any opposing German armor even at long range.

An IS-2 can't take a panther head on either, I sort of understand that since a panther is a dedicated anti tank, but this is a 300 fuel doctrinal tank we are talking about here.

I see what you are trying to do. A tiger is better against armor but only fairly effective against infantry. As opposed to an IS-2 which is better against infantry and only moderately effective against armor. I don't think this balancing works. IS-2s only come out late game where armor superiority takes priority over infantry superiority. The issue is compounded by the fact that IS-2s are also more expensive.

It's a somewhat similar situation with ISU-152s. Why are they more expensive than elephant tanks? Why can they not stand toe to toe in 1v1s with them? ISU-152s are also more expensive. Can anyone explain to me how that is balanced?

I usually play medium tank games but I tried to switch it up and was horribly disappointed. Right now getting soviet heavy armor is more for bragging about how much further ahead you are than it is about actually trying to win.

Jump back to quoted post30 Aug 2013, 10:53 AMNullist

@UGBEAR: Nobody has even mentioned nerfing 82mm in this thread until you did.