Profile of Katitof

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

General Information
Broadcast: https://www.twitch.tv/katitof


Thread: State of Balance - August - ID23 Aug 2014, 17:46 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 17:40 PMausterlitz Nope..is-2 are scarier than tiger these days as a vehicle due to armor. IS-2 armor doesn't kill. Tigers 88mm does both vehicles and infantry alike. IS-2 is effective only against vehicles currently(inb4 spasms of denial-play with it and see how awesome AI it currently have without DSHK upgrade). I will allow Cruzzi to replay for other stuff as I personally am tired of reasoning with brick walls who always know better even if reality slaps something entirely different right into their faces. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of Balance - August - ID23 Aug 2014, 15:50 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 15:38 PMICoH That coming from Katitof... Oh the irony! Oh the irony indeed. Dane is a good caster and I enjoy his streams from time to time, but his balance opinions are no better then mine and no, providing opinion in form of a movie instead of a post doesn't clear it out of heavy bias. We're talking here a player that believed old Tiger Ace was perfectly fine and balanced unit "because you knew it will come". Still going to zealously defend him because he supports your only faction of choice?(because apparently for most coh2 players picking a faction equals to picking a wife for good and for the bad and you need to devote rest of your sad life to it) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: State of Balance - August - ID23 Aug 2014, 15:00 PM Let me guess, its ImperialDane, renowned for his "objectiveness" and "total lack of heavy axis bias" complaining about how spammable are equally or more costly infantry units of allies and how ineffective are Tigers, how conscripts beat grenadiers and volks and so on yet again? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Are there any new commanders in the works right now?23 Aug 2014, 14:29 PM Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 14:16 PMThe Soldier Considering the Soviet SP commanders are in MP right now, I wouldn't be so hasty in saying that. You are talking about ToW. I'm talking about campaign. And if you want to go by that argument, even in ToW you have predefined "commanders" that are ToW exclusive. For one, the partisan bridge defense that allows you to call-in partisan HMGs and other heavy weapons which obviously do not exist outside of the mission. Even relic themselves have said that company choice at the beginning of the Ardene assault is there to increase re-playability value, so you can start the SP campaign over again and have a different feel to it. ToW commanders whoever were always normal commanders, just locked for "early war" scene where they were actually valid. The have no place in mp except wehr mechanized doctrine. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Too many Heavy Tanks23 Aug 2014, 12:17 PM You have really seen there any ad hominem?? Well, I gave my idea with including explanations and possible implications. I have also pointed out the cost shift, which you completely either misunderstood or just ignored by your constant TA comparisons. I will say it again and again, if you want to know how my change would affect heavy tanks call-ins play frigging Soviet Industry doctrine for a few games, call-in KV-2 and see how that feels, there is no need for theory-crafting here, you can see it first hand yourself. Tying heavies to tier buildings will change nothing, nada, nichts. Same for increasing CPs. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Are there any new commanders in the works right now?23 Aug 2014, 10:26 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 01:13 AMtheblitz6794 Ardennes Assault will have 3 new American companies Designed specifically for single player campaign. Exactly like it was with soviet campaign, except you'll be able to pick one option first instead of having it enforced from get go. Why people expect multiplayer stuff on exclusively single player stand alone DLC is beyond me. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Jagdtiger - The Gamebreaker23 Aug 2014, 09:17 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 08:26 AMAustralian Magic Infantry should be natural counter for big and heavy vehicles whitout AI power but it seems that allies are lack of such inf. big and heavy vehicles whitout AI power Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 08:36 AMxsi so infantry must be counter to isu152 aswell. R U SRS? You're being this silly on purpose or its a natural gift? None of the big long range direct fire guns are fine, none will be removed. In JT case, I was using it twice and was fighting against in 3 times so far. Only once I have seen it go down after coordinated assault of infantry, 3 T34/85, 2 shermans and 2 jacksons. From the attacking tanks only 1 sherman and 1 T34/85 survived. In 4 other games I was either obliterated by JT which forced infantry on OKW infantry+supporting armor battle(which is certain loss) or I forced opponents into that, which was always a GG. With JT armor, even direct artillery hits are no counter unless we talk USF off maps. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson a discussion and compariosn23 Aug 2014, 07:57 AM Jump back to quoted post23 Aug 2014, 01:10 AMMr. Someguy It's not actually that much RNG, the M36 has a 47% chance to bounce off a Tiger Tank with a frontal hit at long range. 3 bounces are nearly as likely as 3 penetrations. The Jackson needs to use the HVAP ability if it wants to penetrate anything bigger than a Panzer IV reliably, and it can only get those with Veterancy. Which means its a coin toss, which means its RNG duuh. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panzergrenadier rework22 Aug 2014, 22:13 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Aug 2014, 21:43 PM__deleted__ PGrens are too squishy to flank themselves, and don't hit anything on the move anyways. An LMG gren works almost as well to discourage enemy flanks for less mp/popcap. No point in Pgrens really. 0.8 moving accuracy modifier is "don't hit anything on the move" now? In: Lobby
Thread: IS-2 Frontal Armor 22 Aug 2014, 19:55 PM Jump back to quoted post22 Aug 2014, 19:41 PMausterlitz is-2 also was a tank that if realism be taken into account loses head on vs the panther because its gun can't penetrate panther's frontal armor while panther can.And it lacks speed to flank panther.So short of an ambush it usually lost to panther..but thats not how its portrayed ingame is it? Yea... except you are wrong and it could reliably penetrate panther front armor depending on amunition used. Panthers 110mm against its BR-471B munitions guaranteed a penetrating hit at 60 degree sloped armor up to 1500meters, which is the range where panther had problems penetrating IS-2 frontal armor. So you might want to rethink who needed to ambush who. I'd say the in game relations between panthers and IS-2 tanks are rather accurate. In: COH2 Balance