Profile of SgtBulldog

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 688

General Information


Thread: soviet beta barbed wire back?8 Sep 2013, 10:01 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Sep 2013, 09:30 AMfukymuky because only GOOD players think about utilizing the halftrack for this kind of use. Completely not true. Rushing for half track or scout car is the first thing any noob playing german is doing. Apart from that, I don't find the present wire unusable, as someone said. By far not. It is very useable in the early game and - interestingly - also in the late game where VP panic spreads. I really don't see any good reason to change wire. Creating more equal opportunities for both sides when it comes to building defensive options, however, is a different matter, and one I think should be looked into. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Tanks in city battles: Something feels wrong8 Sep 2013, 09:55 AM Having played a decent number of games I have come to realise - as probably most of you - that most games end in heavy tank battles. Perhaps more so in team games than 1v1. On most maps in COH2 this is not really a problem. They are fairly open and rural maps. Tanks should rule in such environments. But there are a few exceptions such as City 17. All games here also end in tank-onslaughts. Bearing in mind how city battles on the eastfront worked out, it doesn't feel right that tanks also decide the matter here. There may be a few other maps too. It is probably a part of the problem that the SU infantry doesn't have any real AT. They have the AT-grenade, but it's not usefull against tanks for much else than enginedamage. Besides, it cannot be used inside of buildings. Unlike the shrek. But I think a more important problem is that tanks are too good building crushers. Infantry and support units, that should be the natural main combatants in city warfare, have a really rough going even taking shelter in large stone buildings. I'm not familiar with the strength of the various buildings in COH2, but I assume that the wooden buildings found on most maps have very low survivalbility against tanks. So if tank shell damage to buildings was reduced, perhaps the 'tanks win city battles' problem could be reduced without it really influencing the battles in the majority of rural maps? It would actually be nice to see some fights end by other means than tanks, wouldn't it? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does anyone else have CTD?8 Sep 2013, 06:35 AM Untill a few days ago I had COH2 work with no trouble. But now I had a CTD twice within 2-3 days. What happens is that one of the other players takes a long time to load. When the game eventually launches, I get a 'sync error detected' and the game goes CTD. I haven't changed anything on my PC, but ofc. you never know if some automatic update has. It's also possible that this is out of my control since it's somebody else having a loading problem. But I just wondered. In: COH2 Bugs
Thread: Let pio/engie autorepair?8 Sep 2013, 06:11 AM Edit: it doesn't look like I can edit the topic title. If so, I would have changed it to: 'Disrupted repairs: Let pio/engie autorepair?' One thing about repair as it is atm, is rather annoying. Lets say you order your engineers to repair a damaged vehicle and then you turn your attention elsewhere. Only to return later to discover that somehow the vehicle moved 1 mm. or the engineers ended up standing in a position where they couldn't repair (something about how crews split up - aka ending up on two sides ofa wire). In either case, you find that repair failed. Whatever the reason for the breaks in repair, I don't think it adds anything to the game to have to babysit repairs. I guess everyone would rather see their micro spent at good fighting than let randomly disrupted repairs be one of the deciding factors of the game. So why not let idle (and not in combat) engies automatically repair a vehicle if it is within some proximity of it? I mean: idle engie+damaged vehicle near=no question what should be done. So why not automate it a bit? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Sick/bored of MG42 -.-6 Sep 2013, 22:42 PM What is really funny, is to steal an MG42 as SU and turn it on the german player. If it's one of the players who only plays german, it messes up his game suddenly to have to deal with the big arc and insta-suppression. I can almost feel how baffled he is. Anyway, nice to read, that Relic is looking into this. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: COH2.org ladders: Something fishy here?6 Sep 2013, 22:24 PM Ah, ok. That makes a lot more sense. I've passed 50 games in my most played category. I assume the placement should be narrowed down now? I think the last 3 wins 'only' moved me about 10.000 positions. As discussed elsewhere, there seems to be a problem with the way automatcher uses the rating, though. Even in my 'stabilized' category, I still draw teammates with next to no xp. I suppose they just got the game recently and that you don't start over on xp if you rename your account? Or is it possible to wipe your COH2 user in Steam and start at zero xp, but keep the rating? In that case, low xp players might make sense in automatching with high xp, but in general I find that the have no clue and it really does take the last bit of balance out of team games to get someone with <20 xp. In: Site Feedback
Thread: soviet beta barbed wire back?6 Sep 2013, 22:14 PM I sort of suspected that the real reason why some preferred it, was exactly that the unit AI would probably lure a lot more units into their sure death in unobserved wired areas. I.e. players with less micro would pay a much higher toll. If that's what it is, then I don't think it'sa very fair suggestion. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: What do you consider Top Tier players ?6 Sep 2013, 22:08 PM What I wonder, is why does it matter? Why does it matter if 'top tier' starts at 10, 100, 33, 1248 or whatever? 'What defines a very good player', might be a better question. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Should mechanical break-downs be added?6 Sep 2013, 22:03 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Sep 2013, 16:19 PMNoun We do like having the random element in the game, the chance for things to occur every so often that bring the feel of real combat to life, but something like having a unit simply stop working would infuriate the majority of players. My point was exactly that the randomeness is allready in the game. E.g. what's the difference from a rifle grenade sometimes destroying a building in the first go and at other times take for ever? Or a tank getting stuck on the end of a branch so it makes a big detour or turns its rearside to the enemy? Or artillery sometimes scattering quite a lot, while at other times making a perfect hit? Compare all those kinds of events with some - small - risk of mechanical break down. For example due to engine strain. Or overheating. Such events could be linked to player behaviour as some kind of probability and I don't see why exactly mechanical break downs should infuriate players any more than all the other randomeness that players also have little or next to no control of. And let me note - again - what 90% of the replies ignored: I envisaged something like a redistribution of randomeness. I never suggested introducing a lot more randomeness. ---------- As a sidenote, this reminds me of back then ,years ago, when someone suggested introducing a reverse gear for tanks. The majority of the player base was outraged and ridiculed him on the forum. It was hughe. Well, we all know how that turned out In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Matching Making for top tier plays SUCKS!6 Sep 2013, 21:48 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Sep 2013, 17:49 PMundostrescuatro your rank my be on the top but your vocabulary stayed at the bottom. behave yourself. And try using caps at the beginning of a sentence... In: COH2 Gameplay