I am still not sure if all of Canada speaks French, or just Quebec, but every Canadian page or website I see there is an option for French.
Plus I really liked the Canadian-French accent from the first game, like I already said.
And I'm only cutting him slack IF he speaks French, which would justify his bad grammar.
And yeah I know about how hard it is to be a community moderator and that you take a lot of flak for the developers and that you need to have a thick skin and all that but I mean, if he's not up for the job then why apply in the first place at all? We all need money, but if we suck in a job I see no reason for doing that specific job then.
There were no such grammar mistakes in CoH as far as I remember.
Kyle is not known for his grammar or skills at the game, come to think of it he is far worse than the previous moderators, I guess he just doesn't ban as often as the previous mod and streams more than her and Noun combined.
I'll cut them some slack for also having to speak Canadian-French tho, so at least there's that.
I love hearing a Canadian-French accent.
They speak Canadian-French in Vancouver?
Nice of you to cut Kyle some slack, I'm sure he'll feel very relieved.
To think of the counterplay to flamer-Penals, try to think of how you counter Sturms in the early game.
If Sturms push, and they are at full health, you fall back to a supporting squad and gun them down. If Sturms take the cover, you harass them from far. Sturms will either have to move out, or be bled.
You do the same thing vs Flamer Penals, only that it's easier (they drop models faster).
In the lategame, when everything revolves around long-range, Flamer Penals will be terribly outscaled. Thus, your enemy will not want to upgrade more than 1 (2 max) Flamer Penals.
If Sturms rush a green covered squad from distance, they will likely lose since their small squad size and power range.
Penals can push a axis infantry out of cover, then push forward and gun them down, moving units backwards means they don't return fire.
Penals will beat axis infantry in the open so axis infantry lose either way.
I'm concerned that you don't play enough to understand how engagements actually work in game and rely too heavily on stats.
At close range, cover is already irrelevant. It gets ignored by all weapons at ranges 10 and below. By clumping up in cover, you are throwing yourself to the AoE. Precisely like the Tommy Grenade example.
Next time a flamer Penal squad comes for you, step out of cover, chin up, and murder them as they approach.
You can dodge grenades and return to cover, the aoe in flamers can constantly deny cover.
That doesn't happen, you will end up like live with 3 penals all with flamers just pushing units out of cover constantly and forcing to move and fire with rifles... while they fall to the ground because of the fire effect.
Penals with flamers are not fun to play vs, it breaks one of core gameplay designs of using cover feel redundant.
The Volks in this video would rightly earn the Darwin award.
This would be like throwing a Tommy grenade at a piece of wood, and then taking your vet5 Obersquad to hug that grenade and get wiped.
.. and then used that video as a proof to claim that Tommies are OP.
The counterplay to flamer Penals is simple.
When you see them approaching:
- You can either turn the other way. Since their range has been shortened, they can't damage you. Now you can rendezvous with a supporting squad
- Or step out of cover. Flamers are AoE weapons and do a ton of damage to clumped up squad. They also do extra damage to squads behind Green cover
Finally, note that all weapons ignore cover at short ranges, which is the range the PPSh has to be in order to operate. Thus, by stepping out of cover you aren't exposing yourself in danger to the squad.
It should fire heat-seeking missiles as often as the other anti-tank guns now.
However, missed shots (and attack ground) still have a higher chance to collide with terrain, since the barrel of the gun is closer to the ground.
We could try whatever value Cruzz used in his Kappatch to raise the projectile a bit, while still making it look like it legitimately exits the barrel. I wouldn't be hopeful that we can do this for WBP though, since we have already modified far too many files, and Relic wants to keep things tidy for when they have to reimplement stuff for the main game.
The good-thing about super-vetting halftracks/vehicles/etc is that they cannot get to vet3, then pick up an LMG34 and wipe everything with it. Thus, if a vehicle vets too good, we can mess however much we want with its bonuses with 0 repercussions.
AoE weapons tend to have higher vet speeds, I'm not sure if this is linked to the fact that they damage all models at once, or there's something extra. For instance, Penals with the AT satchel do get a ton of veterancy off if you manage to land it.
Unfortunately the workaround I used for pschrecks/zooks won't work that well on AoE weapons.
Moreover, the workaround looks super-messy, and I'd rather we contained that to only the weapons that really need it (i.e., the ones we changed). I would consider expanding the same rules to AT snares as well, but they are buggy enough as it is for now.
Apparently The Scope does not include underperforming doctrinal vehicles. Note that we can't give WC51 shared veterancy for technical reasons:
- Every time you jump out of the vehicle, the crew (and the vehicle) loses all experience gained through the shared-vet mechanic
Nope! There's another one!
Hint: Think of a light vehicle that becomes completely obsolete even when it reaches max vet.
Wait what? No, it isn't the same, you can dodge a grenade and then return to cover.
You seem to not understand the fundamental problem here, a mobile, durable flamer thrower unit is the problem, it still denies cover too easily since there is none to little micro to be done.
Sweden
DeathlySilent
wmm//wuff
DeathlySilent
wmm//wuff
Relic Entertainment
