|
Penals are just terrible. They will actually lose to a lmg gren squad 1v1 (without flamer upgrade) even though they cost 50% more and don't have AT nades or orrrah.
With the flamer upgrade, it's a complete tossup depending on the RNG crits.
Basically, they are horrible cost ineffective even against their IDEAL target (grens).
Their only use is to get very cheesy squad wipes with their satchels charges due to the the terrible input delay and autocover mechanics of this game.
No I would not want them to have PTRS rifles. That would make them even less useful to me. They need their armor increased or cost decreased. |
The discussion isn't whether or not the tiger should beat the is-2.
The discussion is that the tiger beats the is-2 with the tiger firing into the front armor of the is-2 while the is-2 is firing into the rear armor of the tiger.
Who cares? The IS-2 is not cost effective right now, but it's not because it loses horribly to a Tiger.
|
|
This the probably the most retarded discussion I've seen yet on this forum, and I've seen some dumb shit.
The Tiger should beat the IS-2 because it's an AT focused tank while the IS-2 is an AI focused tank.
HOWEVER, that comparison is meaningless in discussions of whether the IS-2 needs a buff (I believe it does). The only discussion that matters is whether a unit is COST EFFECTIVE.
|
|
This would be pretty easily fixed if Conscripts were better at short range and Grens better at long range like in vCOH. I miss the Gren vs Riflemen dynamic. |
Bundle and Guards nade are the same
Guards nades are much better because they are against 4 man squads, not 6. |
|
They really need to remove heavy snow from all winter maps. It serves no purpose except making Soviets angry. |
|
I actually think it favors Soviets because of the sheer number of houses. |
|
The ISU is far better than the Elephant because it's effective against all units. Other than that, your argument with the IS-2 is agreeable. Soviets do need AT more than AI in the endgame, usually. |
|
Damn that thing wrecks infantry better than I thought. |
False.
It absolutely does lowers to skill cap. As it is an intended part of the fundamental design of the game and its concept and how it works, it's deemed acceptable, but it lowers the skill cap regardless of that fact.
You seem not to be aware of what a skill cap is. Essentially, it is the maximum potential of what a player can achieve with the things he has within his control. Every single random number generator in this game is lowering the skill cap because by definition a random number generator is taking things out of the player's control.
Your(terrible) argument is essentially that "It is not lowering the skill cap because you can still place your units right". Horrible, horrible argument. I could still place my units right before AND not have a number generator.
If I could target models individually as opposed to having a dice roll when an engagement starts, that would be higher skill cap because it adds more tactical complexity.
If I could place specific models and have them move in such a way, that would be a higher skill cap because it adds more nuances to squad control.
I am not arguing for these. I am stating simple fact.
That simple, irrefutable, unarguable, fact, is that when you add a % modifier for something to fail, a random generator, or anything of that sort, you are lowering the skill cap. This is fact. Undeniable. Every time you deny it you are a blatant liar.
You can make other arguments pertaining to balance, unit design, or any of that in order to attempt to justify the changes made. But my point is unshakable. The skill cap has been lowered. Simple fact.
Telling me to simply "adapt" is not the issue. I will adapt to a balance change. I will adapt to a unit design change. I refuse to adapt to lowering the fundamental level of skill required to play the game in the first place.
If you're a bad player you will like this change because it rewards your bad play because you were too bad before to not overextend your vehicles. You are the crowd Relic is catering to.
If you are a player with a modicum of sense(Being good is not a prerequisite), you will see the fundamental issue this raises, the design flaws this causes, the balance issues it creates, and say without compromise that not only was the decision to add a random element to a fundamentally important ability integral to faction design was a bad idea even in concept, but that the balance chain effects as a result are also clearly a negative and bad idea in a metagame already dominated by late game tanks.
+1, Well put.
I've always described COH to friends as a game with brilliant gameplay but with too many RNG factors that limit the player's control. |
6
link0
Surprise
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
