Profile of spectre645

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 90

General Information


Thread: Does the T-34/76 need love?15 Oct 2015, 14:57 PM to fix the t34/76 whilst keeping it different from other mediums, you either need to bring back the old ram or jack up the penetration value at extremely close range (turret touching enemy tank hull) to make it viable. As it stands, it has passable AI and awful AT. if i pull off a flank with a t34 then i should be rewarded with 90% penetration on all tanks. sure it has a dirt cheap price but what's the point if you need 2 to even consider making a difference. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Homogenization13 Oct 2015, 01:14 AM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 23:07 PMMr. Someguy People were complaining "remove ___" way before that happened, and they do it for anything, because they're whiners. On official forums there was more support for removing the M-45 than there was for buffing it, disgusting. That said, I have yet to see anyone ask for the Firefly to be removed? It wasnt the firefly people wanted removed. It was the tulip upgrade. Either removal or a nerf so that it would basically be worthless along with a rof buff to basically turn the thing into a slower Jackson. As op mentioned. Relic's nerfs always affect a units effectiveness in its intended role as opposed to accentuating its flaws/ weakness. This leads to us having once useful units becoming garbage in their role. T34 ram nerf and fuel increase. Maxim setup time nerf. 120 mm mortars accuracy nerfs. Ml20 damage nerf. Panzerwerfer rocket nerf. aa ht accuracy nerf.us non doc Sherman accuracy nerf. Greyhound canister nerf.... i could go on. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Homogenization12 Oct 2015, 22:55 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Oct 2015, 20:31 PMHorasu Re: the t34-76, I feel like it's in a bad place NOT because it is cheap and easy to produce. In fact, I think it's a very, very good thing. The problem is, I feel like Relic did not go all the way in their philosophy. A half-cooked idea is worse than an idea that's not cooked at all. They should have gone ALL THE WAY with the productability of the unit. Reduce its manpower to 240. Reduce pop cap to 8. Problem solved. EDIT: Oh, and fix its scatter vs. infantry because it's nonexistant until vet 2. Remove or reduce vet 2 scatter bonus if needed. There is "playing to weaknesses" but there should also be SOME strength. This also helps with the tank's spammable nature because then it will allow 2 vet 0 tanks to be useful, instead of waiting and intensely micromanaging the tanks until vet 2. EDIT 2: You're also talking to your quoted post like he was the one that made the thread, but it was me. I like you and i like the way you think. it seems like since relic removed the rifleman ability that lets m1919s suppress then everybody is hopping on the "remove x unit/item/ability" as a balance move. Case in point... the sherman firefly. half of the stuff this community requests regarding balance is downright stupid. Like when budwise complained that conscript sandbags are op and they got nerfed. that was a pretty sad day in my mind. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: KV8 and KV1 excluded from 1-on the field heavy limit?7 Oct 2015, 03:49 AM so you're crying to nerf one particular build order? the kv8 comes at like 9 cp. if you fail to prepare with at guns/mines by then well it's gg for you bubba. Edit; with an inventive automatch name like "timetoswallowsomecock" you deserve all the fire. In: Lobby
Thread: Firefly and the tulip5 Oct 2015, 16:15 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Oct 2015, 20:47 PMFiresparks a unit costing 440mp 155 fuel shouldn't be dependent on a upgrade that cost 50 munition using an ability that cost 100 munition. Unless you're floating in munition it's simply impractical. just nerf the tulip and slash the price on the firefly. Why not? The upgrade is something that works as intended every time, unlike a lot of abilities in this game like zis3 barrage. The firefly performs its job admirably at the very apparent hindrance of it being slow and cumbersome in the mobility department. Couple this with the fact that you need vet for it really shine and tulips upgrade should be enopugh time for the axis player to figure out a way to kill it. panzerschrecks, paks, rakets and a tank on the flank kill this thing easily as it does not output enough dps to kill most vehicles when they get close. coupled with the fact that the turret moves like it's in tar, this tank has apparent weaknesses. Most people here keep fighting this tank on its own terms and wonder why they lose so brutally. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Firefly and the tulip1 Oct 2015, 19:10 PM Jump back to quoted post1 Oct 2015, 18:11 PMmiragefla They're not that hard to land though due to their incredible speed once fired and the Firefly also has long-range with both the Tulips and the main gun so you could snipe an enemy vehicle from the FOW without them knowing until they hear "We've lost a panzer." They're too gimmicky. They take forever to reload and cost a ton to buy and use, but also allow the Firefly to instant nuke medium tanks. With people hating instant squad-wipes, imagine instant tank-wipes. What the Firefly needs is more reliability and less reliance on being a one-shot tank removal button that isn't that effective outside of that role. long aim and wind-up time make up to balance the fast travel speed. as do the munitions costs. I have no problem with something that works and people here are trying to nerf it so all allied tanks are homogenous. Isn't it enough that the tank handles like a brick on wheels and has terrible turret turn speed? Not to mention a long ass reload. I find it's pretty cool as a fragile burst cannon. I really don't want another jackson. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Firefly and the tulip1 Oct 2015, 17:58 PM What's the big deal with the tulips? it's a bloody skill shot. if your tank is moving it's very hard to land the rockets... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: The Sexton sucks25 Sep 2015, 13:37 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Sep 2015, 12:05 PMFiresparks the 100 munition off map is laughably bad. Not only does it take forever to actually start shooting the shell is also laughably bad. I would rather have it require sight in exchange for a buff. As it is now it's just a way to throw away 100 munition. the valentine takes up the same 12 pop as the other medium tank. The sexton barrage on the valentine is useless as you're unlike to have more than one sexton anyway. the sexton is bad. Having easy sight doesn't really make up for it as it's a huge warning to your enemy and it cost munition. Vs okw its a pretty good doc. it forces those leigs to reposition . that seems to be the only solution to staying alive. calling in commmandos to decrew them is a close second option but a lot of okw players rush to get the flak base up for passive leig defense. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Any reason to get the MG over flame on Universal Carrier?24 Sep 2015, 03:46 AM vickers would be my go to if you didn't vet up so slowly with the upgrade. wasp vets up so fast and that's one of the reasons i go for it but it really is a map dependent upgrade. The surpression mechanic seems a little buggy. sometimes it won't fire off the volley and other times the UC will drive right into the enemy blob. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: The Sexton sucks23 Sep 2015, 16:43 PM i think a lot of people expect results similar to the other factions when it comes to arty for the ukf. arty with the uk is not designed kill but to harrass and stymie your opponent. it's meant to be your tool for buying time so you can get out churchills/comets/centaurs. That's why the base guns have huge scatter, small kill radius and long barrage time. it's also why you can basically attack during your own barrage and suffer no damge/casualties even if you get hit point blank In: COH2 Balance