well he's right tho. the event you've described may be annoying for sure but is by no means a bannable offense. and the suggestion to switch to a more competitive / less casual game mode, such as either 1v1 or arranged team, is actually the soundest advice you could possibly get as it would completely eliminate scenarios such as the one you've been complaining about. but maybe the problem lies somewhere else instead, considering the tone of your response kind of speaks volumes for itself...
No one asked for a permanent ban on that guy but shouldn't there be any penalties for doing that? Do you guys believe that the action of intentionally throwing a match should go unintended ? It is mind blowing how low the bar is set for action against the disruption of gameplay. For your reference, in CSGO competitive matchmaking being AFK for a minute or two gets you automatically kicked from the game and subsequently a ban for appropriate hours. This is a game where 1 person can solo the whole team of 5 which happens frequently in that game. Now compare that to COH where a person can literally destroy the whole game experience for 3,5,7 players yet go unharmed and might repeat the same.
Please kindly consider your tone before attacking me personally. I didn't force the opinion of getting the guy banned, any reprimand should be done and this act happens in every other game, dropping at the start of the game is still less worse since not much time is wasted but going afk in the midst of an already won game? GG yeah sure the problem is mine, I should handle and not burden you guys with the same. |
Still being bad or wasting a team mates time is not a reportable offense. And calling him a offender how entitled of you.
If you dont want to have bad people on your team go play 1v1, or make a premade team. There fixed and 1 less non issue for nonsense reporting. 
Are you on the admin panel to decide what makes an offense report able or not? You call this a non report able OFFENSE yet you criticize my use of the word offender?
Here I made it easy for you:
offender: /əˈfɛndə/ a person or thing that does something wrong or causes problems.
If you think playing 1v1 will solve the problem are you the one who is gonna refund me the money back for my game? Because I especially play team games from 2v2 to 3v3 and have top 200 ranks in USF and Soviet. If your narrow brain can only come up with 1v1 as a solution for a bad teammate I suggest you keep off this thread. I understand people like you who don't have a shred of respect for your own time or your fellow teammates time but this gives you no right to judge an offense that happened with someone else.
Again, this is not your thread but a common discussion post on the forum don't push your own entitled opinion on others. Regards!
|
So because he played an abusive unit according to you and went afk after that panther push.
How is that a reportable offense? Its not.
Its good that they dont respond to such non issues.
No swearing, no slurs, no threats of any kind by that player? If not then you cant report some1 based on a rage moment of yourself.
He could have had to help with stuff in the house, its possible that he has a familily of his own. God i know how it goes. Almost every time i play coh2 online my wife or childeren have a fit or some mess that demand my immidiate attention according to them.
Good of you to think in the right way for the offender and I agree this would be the case. I also forgot to mention that he did come on later and moved two of his unit I guess he brought in a new calliope after he came back from the Afk stint and hence my reaction.
Also I do have a good sense of perception and can differentiate between good players and bad players within the first minute of the game adding to this I consider myself to be an average player and not good. He was spamming Calliope while the guy on his side had 2-3 panthers which we both knew, the panthers pushed and killed his calliopes he had 1 At gun and no other AT units. Just as all his calliope died he went AFK.
But thanks for justifying that wasting a players time, effort and dedication, streak(if you had some, I lost +6 of mine  ) is not an offense and will never be considered for a ban. I can now freely go and have a coffee upon losing my first tank knowing that winning will be hard with a bad teammate and waste all the player's time on the server be it 3,5,7 players.
|
Idk man, jackson having a 94% pen rate at 60 range against a vet2/okw panzer 4 sound pretty good.
True, the 94% is a penetration most of the time so it's pretty good. It's not 100% but pretty pretty close. Don't think that should be the issue here.
That's a 94% chance to penetrate at max range up to a 100% chance at about range 40-45 (where it still outranges the P4). The RNG involved there is basically negligible and the Jackson certainly doesn't depend on it. The only noticeable RNG involved is accuracy, but that's still in favour of the Jackson with its higher moving accuracy.
Okay so after analysis I found out that there is a penetration chance and you can calculate it by dividing the Pentration of the source with the armor value of the victim and that will give you the penetration chance! Thanks for bringing this into the light for me!
Whaat I believed was that pz4's frontal armor is more than M36's pen so M36 will have to depend on RNG to pen but now with 94% it seems good.
|
|
Well if you ask me reporting is pretty useless it does not do shit. I also had reported a player who abused calliope went afk when a panther pushed. I had sent a report to enforcement, sturmpanther, nothing happened I got no response back and hence I decided I would do the same to others since being a good guy doesn't mean much if the bad guys aren't reprimanded for their actions. |
|
Jackson and USF have fell out of favor very hard due to the recent nerfs. T2 is heavily unreliable and if the player has opted for T3, he would have to spend 30 fuel just for getting Mgs.
Jackson should have its priced reduced in the wake of comparison made by OP. Jackson vs OST pz 4 is no match, which is explained by their fuel cost differences. But it gets interesting when Okw pz4 is considered:
1. Jackson is only 5 fuel costlier than pz4, I don't remember the MP difference, Pz costs 380-140 but I dont remember jackson 390-145 I guess.
2. Jackson has a far pen value of 220 which is at 60 range, Pz 4 has frontal armor of 234 at vet 0. So at max range Jackson depends on RNG for a frontal armor hit. This should not be the case since Jackson is a dedicated TD and pz4 is a medium so a TD should demolish a medium tank and not bet on rng to function.
3. With veterancy Jackson does its job EOD, however in case of pz4 you have an option to blitz at vet 1 so if the max range shots of Jackson do bounce because of RNG it is very much possible that pz4 can kill the jackson.
Also OST pz4 gets the same frontal armor at vet 2 hence it can also bounce shots from a unit 35 fuel costlier than itself.OST pz usually hits the field at around 13 min mark whereas the Jackson hits the field at max 18-19 min mark. Both the tanks have almost the same speed with pz having a blitz and panzer tactician option to dodge or rush jackson.
So yeah 145 fuel is too much for a unit which can find it difficult to counter a vet 110 fuel unit which is a medium. Even vet puma can kill a jackson now it is a paper ball. |
Originally the mechanized company had the arty barrage as a unic ability and Mr.smith couldn't remove it because the commander has been sold with the feature.
Would you agree to see the TA remove from its commander after buying it? nop, so same for the arty barrage. Fortunately or unfornately, the ability can't be removed from the doctrine unless you give in exchange something better.
About the WC51 raw performance, the unit is carrying the doctrine at the moment. You're only buying the Sherman 76 because you had a good start with the jeep, Cav Riflemen are only interesting because the WC51 is there to open the path.
Is it too cheap? Well it's difficult to make it more expensive than a Kubel since it lacks of combat capability before upgrade.
Remove the crew? Difficult to understand the reason why, we're not talking about the pershing which is unic or Calliope/Priest where the player could abuse it to spam them.
Disable its loading function once upgraded? that's not a nerf for it but for the Cav Riflemen
Reduce its raw dps performing stats? I don't see them overperforming, the .50 cost 45 munitions which delay CaptBAR or LtZook, that's a clear trade off.
The WC51 is still vulnerable to anything having a gun and usually disapear once a 222, a luch or HTAA hit the field. You most likely have to build a new one to use the barrage ability so adding a 200mp cost to the barrage.
Exactly! This added to the fact that Axis infantry have the most snares and available from the start while allied infantry lack snares to counter early vehicles. If wc51 was sturdy same could be applied for M20 yet it dies with smoke and over the top speed and barely survives after the 10 min mark. People here have an agenda and they don't wanna see any early game advantage for allies coz they wanna have them all. |
It's in the loadout of virtually every match in top 100. No idea what you're smoking.
Yes, the WC51 is the main reason to get the commander. Because it's pretty damn fking OP. It's insanely fast and can outrun a 222, has 45 range, high dps, and is great for cheesey chase-wipes in the first 5 mins of the game, which allows you to build that USF snowball.
The whole commander (the way VonIvan popularised it) was built on WC51 abuse into quick Sherman and snowballing/bleeding your opponent super hard. Go big or go home style of play.
It's actually the easiest ultra light to keep alive into the midgame since it has muni-free step on it, high sight range, and insane speed/acceleration values. Most players lose it to mines or unexpected rak/pak hitting from afar rather than the 222 or Luchs.
Are you sure you are specifically not talking about 1v1 top 100s and also accommodating the remainder of the 3 modes 2v2,3v3 and 4v4? Additionally, I would appreciate any replays where the WC51 survived past the 10 minute mark. You guys are literally over rating this, it is not that sturdy of a unit to be alive when a OST pz4 or OKW pz 4 hits the map which is usually around 13 min for using the Mark target ability. Comparing to it even the M20 seems to have a bad time with good speed and smoke ability and it has the almost the same weapon profile.
Also it would be hard to defend that it does have a few too many abilities which are useless in the early game like MT, Barrage and it barely survives for them to be used in the late game but still they can prove useful if the unit does survive post 10 min mark like Marking a target tank and then speed it up out of its range after taking 1 shot same with the barrage. I have played against it and it did cause some problem early game but then would die to a faust and small arms.
|
Let me try to explain this to you once more.
M4 HE has the best AI round than any medium tank. 76mm Sherman having inferior AI gun than M4 HE does not mean much.
Jackson is a TD and has better AT than all medium tank. 76mm Sherman have inferior AT gun than
Jackson does not mean much.
Valid points except your comparison scale. M4 HE has an AOE of 4 as compared to 2 of 76mm and that is a big ,a very big difference. Now since you mention that 76mm has better at it has a far pen of 165 with HVAP rounds so it is not supposed to penetrate(RNG Stuff) pz4 at max range (40) because the frontal armor of pz4 is 180. So here you have a 76mm which can barely go toe to toe with a 0 vet pz4(vet 2 increased armor) hence concluding it is not that great in AT department and lies in almost the same category as M4A3.
Jackons has 60 range 220 pen while the 76 mm has 40 range 165 pen again massive difference without adding the AP rounds of the Jackson. Jackson is a pure AT unit while the 76mm is an average AI unit.
This explains that 76mm does not even fill the shoes of any of these units and hence it is not used much. |
The 76mm also has great AT compared to M4 and great AI compared to Jackson.
It does not "fails to do anything".
WC51 was buffed through the roof in December patch to "justify" taking up a commander slot and then it was bundled with m3.
The commander gives access to 5 doctrinal vehicles, 1 doctrinal infantry, combined arms, mark target, 155mm barrage which is allot more than most commanders provide.
Claiming tha a nef to WC51 will make the commander "totally useless" is simply false.
Are you trolling again? Comparing 76mm's AI with Jackson when Jackson has no AI and AT with M4 when M4's AT finds it tough to go toe-to-toe against pz4? While comparing dolphins with humans would you consider swimming or running?
I don't remember the 5 vehicles do list them out will help me. The last 3 things are found in the WC 51 which a lot but it barely is able to survive past the 5 min mark or when the early axis light vehicles hit the field.
And you are correct WC51 nerf will not make the commander totally useless since it is already totally useless with the WC51 in it and also if this commander provides a lot of doc vehicles or abilities why does it fails to even make the top3 for USF commanders? You won't even find this commander in the loadout of <250 rank matches. |
India
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
