Profile of ofield

Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2015, 13:54 PMausterlitz

1.Not excuse,just another reality of a small disadvantage for ost.Cruzz fixed this in kappatch.S-mines are still far less effective than multipurpose 1-shot soviet mines with that silly signboard.

2.Are we even playing same game?Rifles can close with impunity,grens can't stop them.Even at long range its very situational and RNG dependant,mid and close range rifles asswipe.As for not afford to fight another battle..plz don't try to be foolish.US field presence is far superior with ambulance both healing and reinforcing available right from start and also free units.Forget buying BArs,lieutenant comes with free BAR.Wake up.

3.No you gave a totally biased reason.IF I'M GOING TO PAY 340 MP AND 120 MUNI FOR A INFANTRY SQUAD,I BETTER EXPECT ALPHA DMG.I'm not asking them to be invulnerable i just don't want that enormous investment not to be one shotted..3 members lost ..even that is ok...1 shot..UNACCEPTABLE.340 MP AND 120 MUNI doesn't grow on a tree.It costs a pair and a leg.
And none of this changes the fact..that the 'design' makes ost completely helpless vs enemy elite infantry,because pzgrens AI is only good for cosn and vanilla rifles.

4.That amazing tier 1-all 4 of its amazing units is outperformed by single american unit.So what good is it?
When blob fix is implemented u won't see me asking for mg42 buff,till then i will.

Now stop sidestepping and making false accusations .Even aside tech costs,
1.Sniper-survivability issue
2.Mg42 - Unreliability issue(mix of survivability,unreliable suppression performance)
3.222 halftrack - Surviavbility issue.Dmg needs to kill snipers consistently at least,which pathetically it doesn't.
4.Pzgrens -Survivability issue.
5.Stug - Good for nothing,neither here nor there.Lack of defined role issue.
8.Panzerwerfer -Damage and accesibility problem.

Of the above....asking for buff of which is crying or whining?They are all justified requests against genuinely underperforming units.
But usf fanboys like you cry whiner at slightest ost buff sop u can enjoy ur autowins,its u who is the whiner.Or answer point by point which is whining.

Jump back to quoted post17 Mar 2015, 09:29 AMausterlitz

Right ostheer is balanced and needs a nerf to LMGs.Excellent observation.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2015, 11:59 AMturbotortoise

yeah, i understand your point, but i would hope for a system to be slightly more inteligent, making actual changes to how things operate instead of just changing values about. i would try and create a system forcing a player into hitting a threshold. they mightn't enjoy or want to tech, but they'd have to, or be entirely routed from the field. try and create a more gradual income climb, adjust prices to be fair within reasonable tier times or perhaps cap income to tech, like in rise of nations, there's ways around it, the most reasonable in my mind attaching certain units to certain tiers, para's to an officer, etc. etc.


the way i look at it in game is generally always a value proposition over how much i'm in need at the moment: i may get X tiered unit, or, can i hold out for CP's + resources for call in unit Y. make one of those criteria unobtainable, i'm forced into option X.

Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2015, 21:06 PMMortar

Yes I completely agree.

But even symmetrical maps made by talented mapmakers (i.e. Crossing in the woods by Onkle Sam) get trashed as unbalanced by many players. In other words, in many cases balance is in the eye of the beholder based upon faction/commander preference. Its not even a LTP issue. Its a learn to break out of your rut issue.

it does take time to make a map from the scratch. i know that. i think out of 4 maps i made, only one (remastered one) is remotely close to relic map quality in terms of details and cosmetics.