Profile of Katitof

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

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


Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback8 Dec 2020, 11:32 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 11:30 AMVipper Glad to see we agree. And that was my point all along. I suspect you mean 3vs3, 4vs4 I you opinion is it less cost efficient in those mods then the Cromwell, Sherman, PzIV? In 2s, outside of initial one, you might just as well stick to katys and SU-85s exclusively if you don't have 85 or KV-1, because 76 isn't going to cut it at all, with most engagements being frontal. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: mainline infantry8 Dec 2020, 11:26 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 11:24 AMTheGentlemenTroll I think that really only VG are underperforming significantly in their role, and that is mostly because OKW relies pretty hard on the VGs for their early to mid game. Only early game and they do perform fine there. By mid game you should already have LVs or obers on field. In: Lobby
Thread: mainline infantry8 Dec 2020, 11:14 AM Yeah, the problem lies in expectations that cheap infantry should stand up to incomparably more expensive infantry, especially post upgrades. But we don't talk noobs as a balance problem. Also, feel free to cross conscripts out of that list of yours, new changes fix everything for them now that they get an upgrade in actually reasonable time frame for reasonable price. In: Lobby
Thread: Penals, the Elephant in the room8 Dec 2020, 11:11 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 11:04 AMVipper What you are suggesting is to buff conscripts because Penal do not cut it. That does not make sense. He is saying that combined arms are stronger then single unit spam you unpeeled orange. Grenadier do not cut and they are simply replaced by osstruppen/assault grenadier not supplemented. when spammed with no support at all VG do not cut so people simply play Ostheer. in late game with no support at all Once more if 3 out 5 mainlines infatry do not "cut it" the problem lies elsewhere and they should not be buffed, but this a debate for another thread. Yeah, specifically in the part where these 3 factions with weak and cheap infantry try to play like the 2 other faction that are balanced around self sufficient, expensive strong mainlines. But that is not balance problem. That's a potato for a brain Timmy thinking he can use grens like they were rifles despite access to multiple supporting units very early into the game. Even penals, despite you being so wrongly and stubbornly convinced otherwise, do NOT work when spammed with no support now that they are balanced and people know how to deal with them. In: Lobby
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] General Discussion8 Dec 2020, 10:54 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 10:29 AMelchino7 As it should be. Or when they are not fully repaired. Or hit by other soft units/abilities outside of 160dmg tank/AT guns. I do see the point or reasoning. But I can't say I agree with it. Each of these things removed makes the game less unique and more boring. If I wanted to mash raw stats vs stats, I would play AoE, RA or gulp iron harvest. These crits are for CoH2 what Synch kills were for DoW2. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Penals, the Elephant in the room8 Dec 2020, 10:50 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 10:49 AMelchino7 It's not that cheese is bad, but most of the COH playerbase are lactose intolerant. The cheese was removed and now you have a tier which lacks the punch but has all the risks still attached to them. That's very well put. We basically have small scale "brits post nerfs" case, where gimmicks were nerfed or removed and we're left with core in need of proper buffs to make up for lack of crutches. In: Lobby
Thread: Penals, the Elephant in the room8 Dec 2020, 10:47 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 10:40 AMVipper Great then stop disagreeing with my every post and start making suggestions. I am disagreeing exclusively with the ones that make no sense what so ever. I will always agree with a good idea and spot on problem. But that's not the case for 99 out of 100 suggestions you make. Regardless of what you claim AT riflemen are not popular. And regardless of what you claim, penal spam is not popular nor strong. If PF designed is the correct one then it should be implement to Penal also because PF are UP when they are build. I have never said its correctly designed. I have said AT upgrade is not problematic there. You are the one arguing semantics here not me I am simply pointing out that PG and Penal are used differently. Penal building include 3-4 Penal available from 1 while PG come later and only 1-2 are usually build. Yes, they are used differently. Does not change the fact that both are AI specialist units with AT ugprade. No, penal builds do not include 3-4 penals from get go, because penal meta is dead for a long time, people learned to survive early game against them and they are roflstomped in mid and late game. Currently you will see 1 penal for AT, 2 at best with cons being backbone infantry. In: Lobby
Thread: Penals, the Elephant in the room8 Dec 2020, 10:37 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 10:29 AMVipper If one unit is only good out of 3 then that is simply bad design. Fully agree. Lets come up with ideas how to buff sniper and M3 in soviet thread together. Only it does not, neither riflemen or IS or VG work well with AT weapons. As of PG their are not mainline infatry and only 1-2 is usually build. Rifles work very well actually, having AT nade and all and vet making them very durable, allowing them to stay longer in combat under small arms fire. RETs are simply cheaper and that's all, but it does not mean rifles are not viable for the role. VGs have no AT, PFs do, but I don't see anyone complaining about them despite initial(including mine) concerns. I have no idea why you would ever mention IS at all, knowing how they function other then "for the sake of an argument. It does not matter how you want to label PGs, they are, just like Penals, an AI specialist with AT upgrade. You can't pretend they don't count just because of different weapon profile and other semantics, I have never said "rifle infantry", I said "strong AI infantry". And spamming penals isn't exactly a viable move at all either, you will have 2-3 penals maximum with 3 already being a stretch. In: Lobby
Thread: Penals, the Elephant in the room8 Dec 2020, 10:25 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 10:17 AMVipper T1 is also an issue and I do mention it my OP but the part of the problem is that Penal are used as solution to all T1 problem. Neither snipers nor M3 will hold the line or provide anti tank support for the tier and no amount of "redesigning" these will change that. Penals are workhorse of the tier and always will be as long as the utility, self sufficiency and combat potential of remaining units will keep getting nerfed over and over. If T1 needs and anti vehicle infatry and the doctrinal solution are not enough than simply make Penal a dedicated anti vehicle infatry or add a "new" anti vehicle infatry instead of trying to create a single unit that is supposed to do everything from providing superior AI, to Anti light to Antitank. Why? Why it works for any other strong AI unit with AT upgrade, but not for them? In: Lobby
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] General Discussion8 Dec 2020, 09:49 AM Jump back to quoted post8 Dec 2020, 09:11 AMelchino7 Chance of lowering down the vehicle crit threshold to 20% ? That would mean meds would be completely exempt from them unless faced specifically infantry AT. In: COH2 Balance