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 Feedback3 Dec 2020, 09:12 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 09:02 AMVipper A unit that is available at the early stage of the game and then adapt to all stages of the game becomes spam-able and leave little use for other units to bring something to the table. Like.... panzergrenadiers? Or... Panzerfusiliers? The solution does lay in making Penal able to do everything but to have different units do different things so the army composition is diverse. Guards PTRS for penals it is then. Why in you opinion adding a separate anti vehicle infatry in T1 is a worse solution? Because it fixes problem that isn't there, creates more unit clutter, impacts manpower vs muni balance, requires additional work on vet and whatever would be invented here, you still wouldn't be happy, unless it was some shitsquad to the letter by how you imagine it. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The Excessive Amount Of Micro Required For Brummbar3 Dec 2020, 08:51 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 08:49 AMVipper Simply ask elchino7 what he means by: I think more people (USF players) would be happier if the 105mm Sherman was made equally strong and micro demanding as the Brummbear. I see you're still struggling with it, so I'll help you by underlining the part that you keep ignoring. You're welcome. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback3 Dec 2020, 08:40 AM nvm In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] General Discussion3 Dec 2020, 08:39 AM Jump back to quoted post3 Dec 2020, 07:53 AMmrgame2 a 60 range elefant needs a rof boost then, make it shoot as fast as su85. A 60 range ISU needs one too. Make it shoot as fast as Brummbar. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] OKW Feedback2 Dec 2020, 22:55 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2020, 22:52 PMmstcrstn it must be taken into consideration the high risk in this strategies. I cannot think of another unit that will f-ck your early-mid game as much as losing a fully upgraded sturmpio. They are very hard to replace in current live game.... Have you ever drove a T-70 over a teller before it took a first shot? Anyway, shreck pio should be used as supplemental stop gap AT in early game and protection of puppchens later. Don't count on being able to make doom shreck blobs with them. And every squad above 240mp is quite noticable to replace, so this is hardly spio only problem, thing is, you always want to have 1 around. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When are Panzerfusiliers getting nerfed?2 Dec 2020, 22:14 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2020, 20:31 PMDerKuhlmann Elite infantry, even normal guards smokes fussiliers. It would be a problem if elite infantry couldn't "smoke" generalist, versatile mainline inf. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback2 Dec 2020, 19:09 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2020, 18:49 PMblvckdream All the ULVs should instantly die to mines and the M3 is no exception. M3 -IS- the exception, it is the ONLY ultra light that DOES die to mines. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When are Panzerfusiliers getting nerfed?2 Dec 2020, 18:47 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2020, 18:43 PMblvckdream I am confused as to why it has to survive a mine? No ultra light vehicle should survive a s-mine IMO. You could have just added capping as a vet 2 bonus and keep it as it is otherwise. Lowering its eHP against small arms fire seems weird. Kubel and WC51 have no troubles survivng mines. This is why. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When are Panzerfusiliers getting nerfed?2 Dec 2020, 17:24 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2020, 17:11 PMJibberJabberJobber Live: 200(5.4/1) = 1080 eHP again small arms Preview patch: 240/(1/3.8) = 912 eHP again small arms Which translates to about 15.5% less survivability against small arms. But Sander said overall durability vs small arms will remain the same! In: COH2 Balance
Thread: [Winter Balance Update] SOV Feedback2 Dec 2020, 16:13 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Dec 2020, 16:09 PMGiaA As mentioned above Tank Hunter PTRS would maintain at least some kind of (theoretical) relevance because you'd be able to get them without T1. Imo decreased relevance of an already irrelevant doctrine is a small sacrifice for a change that would vastly increase the amount of possible soviet openings and finally serve as a solution for the penal identity crisis. Edit: Plus a doctrine patch has already been hinted at. So tankhunter may very well get a rework either way. You still could put "specialist training" or sth instead for dank hunters, so PTRS cons with the doc would have 5 more range or sth on top of what it already provides. However, it all depends on how PTRS will be improved to have a relevant place in late game as AT weapon. No one ever said a thing about Guards exclusively because of its AI usefulness, but cons/penals one are never worth it for the weapon and you pick them exclusively to zone out armor through abilities. In: COH2 Balance