Profile of Cardboard Tank

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 978

General Information


Thread: Concepts of soviets is wrong that why they so boring8 Apr 2014, 10:59 AM I agree that Soviets are boring. Reason is you lack flexibility. You have to decide between T1 or T2 and T3 or T4. That´s frustrating. I disagree that Soviets should have better late game. Late game is tanks and Panthers etc. were simply better. Soviet early game should be buffed however. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: My take on tank battles7 Apr 2014, 17:51 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2014, 17:34 PMKatitof Well, then you're up for a surprise, because germans will loose the late game armor advantage just like soviets lost their early game infantry advantage. While a T34 might not win head on, 2 of them probably will against a panther. that is just a pure assumption, we'll have to wait and see what patch will bring, but the late game german armor advantage going away for the sake of equal late game is something that is already set in stone. I have no problem with 2 T-34s beating a Panther if one is flanking. A Panther kept at range and with the front armor to both T-34s should however win. If the T-34s however go through the frontal armor anyway, the game has totally lost any strategic value. I doubt they would fuck it up that bad. All we know now is that the anti tank of IS-2 and ISU-152 will go somehow up and that Panthers will get nerfed vet2, which is a lot already. but further buffing T-34s wasn´t announced anywhere afaik. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: My take on tank battles7 Apr 2014, 17:10 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Apr 2014, 06:19 AMOmega_Warrior This is why I hate the forum communities for these WW2 games. They're always filled with WW2 enthusiasts who want to reinact WW2 battles and think that balance should be totally based on real life performances, even though their real life performances are completely subjective. It makes no difference in the actual game. Someone here posted the statistics on lost tanks already. Turns out Russians lost more tanks. There are sources that claim the 10k StuGs destroyed almost 3 times their amount in vehicle numbers. That´s not subjective, that´s statistics. Some performance should be represented in this game. If it didn´t matter at all, then we would end up with T-34/76 beating Panthers head on. Or Command Panzer IVs destroying IS-2s single handedly. There has to be some reference point from reality. And that is that German tanks (?magically?) performed better. I´m not demanding StuGs to beat 3 T-34s on it´s own. Rather Germans should keep their slight armor advantage. A Panther nerf and IS-2 buff won´t turn out good. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: My take on tank battles6 Apr 2014, 21:44 PM This has turned way off topic. The thread starter said, he wanted stronger Soviet tanks. Point is: On a 1v1 basis German tanks are stronger to their Russian equivalent. Thus Soviets shouldn´t have the "dominant heavy tanks" as he claims. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: My take on tank battles6 Apr 2014, 11:48 AM Jump back to quoted post6 Apr 2014, 09:15 AMraw what matters how ever is the fact that the soviet union won the war, hence they had the better army. this war was decided largely by massive tank battles, like the battle of kursk. therefore, the SU had the better tanks. T-34 es numero uno That logic is totally ignoring the fact Germans were under constant air bombardment of Britain by day and the US by night, were fighting in France, North Afrika/Italy the Atlantic at the same time while having to keep troops in Norway and other countries. This is totally ignoring supply lines also. Those were the deciding factors of the war. If you lose more stuff your army is most likely not better. If you lose a multiple amount of tanks, your tanks are likely not better. I highly doubt you would find the T-34 acceptable if you were sitting in one and were asked to attack a German tank. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Shreked PGrens... Balanced or no?6 Apr 2014, 00:48 AM Panzergrenadiere and Schrecks are balanced. The Schreck upgrade costs as much as two MG42s or a flamer halftrack. Usually you only get off one volley (2 rockets) with them before you have to hit the retreat button: Every decent Soviet player will try to run the PGs over with the T-34. This or the PG squad gets halfed in 4 seconds due to explosions or flames (T-34/85, IS-2, KV-8). Then you have to run to not give away a Schreck. I had games where Schrecks were the only viable AT choice, as Su-85s and Zis were spammed which instantly shot down any Panzer IV or Panther. Paks were simply to immobile to cause any threat. Nerfing Schrecks now would be incredibly boring as they are the only viable infantry AT. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: RIP Flame Halftrack4 Apr 2014, 17:04 PM I don´t think it´s underperforming. I neither faced a flame HT nor built a flame HT since the latest patch. It just comes too late. At that point (Tier 3) you are usually better off with Schrecks as Germans. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: My take on tank battles4 Apr 2014, 15:36 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Apr 2014, 11:27 AMOrkfaeller Wittmann, Michael - 138 Woll, Balthasar ("Bobby") - 100 [...] Ain´t that a doubling of those 100 kills - or a huge chunk of them? Woll was - for a large part of the war - Wittmanns gunner. How was decided who got the kill? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Interview Greg Wilson & Quinn Duffy on Expansion!!3 Apr 2014, 12:58 PM Jump back to quoted post3 Apr 2014, 11:44 AMBeltFedWombat As usual, the design paradigm is skewed. The German army was defensive but mobile in 1944-45. Their obsession with heavy armour wasn't matched by reality - and they squandered the cream of their panzers in the Ardennes. The truth is that the Panzer Elite is the most stylistically accurate representation of the Wehrmacht in the late-war - mobile, tough but reliant on rationed heavy armour for exceptional support, not routine deployment. Actually half the German army relied on horses. Especially in the west the Germans were static as in the day they couldn´t move without risking to get attacked from the air. The Americans (I think the British also) on the other hand were the only army to be fully motorized. So the Americans taking on the role of the Coh1 PE seems quite good to me. Infantry spam already works with the Russians. In: Lobby
Thread: My take on tank battles3 Apr 2014, 11:37 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Apr 2014, 10:04 AMHS King Statistics can be decieving.. germans destroyed hundreds of tanks in the first part of the war as the russians retreated and i doubt the figures are adjusted for this. I bet in later battles the kills very similar. You bet wrong. StuGs alone - while not impressive on paper vs. the sheer armor and giant gun of an IS-2 were the vehicle with the most vehicle-kills in the entire war. And that with only 10k produced. And most of those kills were achieved past 1942 when the StuG was finally outfitted with the long gun. Jump back to quoted post3 Apr 2014, 10:04 AMHS King Look at modern tanks do they look more like german vehicles such as tiger or panzer or more like the russian t models and is2.. yeh i though so. Again, you are shooting into your own leg. Modern tanks are rather similar to the Panther or Pershing. The Panther was the first step to a main battle tank, which is standard in every army today. Behemoths following the concept of the IS-2 are outdated. You will find fast firing tanks, with a big ammunition loadout and a decent rate of fire today. The IS-2 and Tiger were breakthrough tanks - a concept not very common today. In: COH2 Gameplay