Profile of GachiGasm

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: HM-38 120mm Mortar Squad is OP15 Nov 2021, 02:21 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Nov 2021, 02:05 AMskemshead Seriously, your argument is other stuff is cancer so 120 can be cancer too. Ridiculous. Thats pretty much the backbone of 99% of aurguments on this forum. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Sturmovik Attacks14 Nov 2021, 04:05 AM Well OKW one have more planes, aswell as provide you with both AI and AT planes, IL-2 is purely AI one and mainly for suppresion. Also if enemy is spamming them just get AA HT as OKW, they IL-2s are incredibly easy to shotdown if you have AA on the field. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: USF Pathfinders need to be balanced6 Nov 2021, 16:49 PM Jump back to quoted post6 Nov 2021, 01:12 AMNorthWeapon Pathfinders are good early game cuz it makes sense for them as scout units to make beacons for paradrops. What doesnt make sence why early game scouting unit is allowing you to skip your mainline, why scouting unit has capabilities of 1v1ing anything but STs\Kubels at range early on and why on top of that it vets up like crazy. And as long as you stay in cover and at range, they wont drop models like crazy, not at all. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun5 Nov 2021, 12:03 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2021, 23:14 PMVipper There are plenty of solution and accuracy can be a part of them. Increasing the target size of super heavies by lets say 20% and decreasing the far accuracy of "heavy" TD by the same can contribute in keeping the performance the same vs super heavies but reduce vs all other vehicles. Removing the accuracy bonuses from "heavy" TDs and fixing thing like firefly having mid range of 45 can also help. And there are number of other solution like using switchable rounds for certain TDs so that one is designed vs Super heavies and the other mediums. Thing is, it might or might not solve the problem of TD overperforming. But I was talking about different problem. What I was talking about is that in CoH2, even with nerfed TDs, people would still play meta with multiple TDs\AT guns, because the only thing that matters is penetration, since non-penetrating shots can be equally considered as misses. Game has no middle ground in this aspect. This essentially handicaps the balance options and makes armor balance an litteral equivalent of the most basic rock-paper-scissors, where paper cant do anything to rock just because its a rock. CoH3 now has side-armor, which indeed might help sure. But at the same time we dont know how the game plays, because back in the day Jackson was also made as a "flanking TD", but in reality of CoH2 this concept didnt work, because flanking isnt always easy to do especially in 2v2+. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun4 Nov 2021, 21:31 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2021, 19:26 PMVipper In order for a shot to do damage it must both hit and penetrate. Thus increasing penetration does not mean that a unit would be good vs everything. TDs have simply been over buffed and can now score hits very reliably and penetrate even at max range firing to small vehicles and big vehicles. One can solve current issues even without adding deflection damage. Imo the current issues and deflection damage are separate issues. If you are speaking about accuracy it cant solve this problem. I have no idea what mambo jambo should have been done with target sized and modifiers to ajust TD perfomance against. I can imagine what could have been done to LVs in order to make them less vulnerable, but I dont think that accuracy and target sizes alone can even slightly fix the issue of how TDs are effective against any other armored units in the game. Because to stay resonable, TDs chances to hit medium shouldn't be lover then 70% imo and considering that pretty much all scored hits will be penetrating one it would hardly make a difference, at best it will increase chances of medium escaping. Not to mention that even if TDs were nerfed and some perfect formula would have been found, people would have still used TDs just because you dont really have other options. Its either AT guns and TDs against anything heavier then medium. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun4 Nov 2021, 19:18 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2021, 19:11 PMVipper Reason why people spam TD like Panther/Su-85/M36/FF is not because they can take Super heavies but because they can take most vehicles from car to a Super heavy. And as I was saying, they can take everything, because their stats\penetration were balanced around the fact that they have to be effective in fighting and penetrating heavy tanks, since other then raw penetration there is litteraly nothing else. I mean people suggested like increasing damage, lowering rof and so on. But it doesnt really change the core idea, that in terms of CoH2, unit either have reliable penetration against heavy tanks and in return becomes super effective against every other armored target or it is balanced around mediums but in return becomes useless against heavy tanks. And same situation happening with AT guns. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun4 Nov 2021, 18:31 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2021, 16:47 PMSander93 Which is exactly the point? Losing vetted units should be a tough loss, and the enemy should be rewarded for killing them. All factions have late game options to deal with heavies. No its not, at least not completly? I mean one thing is having tough loss. Lets say if you have vet 5 obests and you lose them, then sure its a very tough loss, but objectively even getting new ober or even say any new elite inf it fine, because they are strong out of the bat anyway. And loosing vet 5 volks who are just impossible to vet up again or vet 3 rifles who can stand the chance in late game only via vet is completly different thing. But its more true for inf, rather then tanks thats true. Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2021, 16:47 PMSander93 Yeah, because what on earth would be the point of heavies if even generalist mediums could take them on frontally? It's exactly the purpose of a heavy tank to be durable enough against generalist medium tanks and other mid tier AT options to force the opponent into specific heavy AT counters if they want to directly counter it. Its not about the point of the heavies, its about the fact that heavies still can possibly suck ass because everyone is spamming TDs, for exactly this reason alone. Because if you allow youself to actually think about having more mediums them TDs, then the second enemy brings something that cant be penetrated by mediums, your mediums will have no usage against them. No-one forces anyone, because everyone just getting TDs, since there is objectively no reason not to against enemy armor, every one is getting double AT because again there is objectively no reason not to do it. And again, why when you speak about deflection you think that mediums should ALWAYS do deflection damage and it should be 50%? I mean, deflection damage could have had like 25%-30% to happen aswell as maybe deal not 50% of the damage by 25-35%. It still wouldnt be even close to enouth to deal with heavies, especially considering that mediums have to stay in range of the heavy tank and recieve damage in return. There is no way even 4 mediums will be able to deal with heavy tank frontally, if deflection arent 100%. I just cant see the connection here, how say 2 T34\76 dealing 160 damage in total via deflection which is not happening 100% of the time, going to somehow render heavy tanks useless. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun4 Nov 2021, 14:17 PM Jump back to quoted post4 Nov 2021, 13:48 PMSander93 Most units scale by either getting good veterancy bonuses (like Puma) or gaining utility (like T-70/222 scouting). Likewise a vet 3 StuG for example still has a decent chance to deal damage to an IS-2 due to the various combat bonuses that it gets through veterancy. That's different from being able to just spam cheap units and avoid teching up to counter an enemy's high tech/unit cost late game unit just by sheer frontal DPM, which would become possible if deflection damage were to be introduced on a large scale. Scalability of units should come from either vet 3(/5) combat performance or (veteran) utility. Not from stock performance. Yeah and this is why some factions can litteraly flat fall on their asses if at some point they lose vetted unit. What about Mediums? Why one call-in unit (which for soviets is awaible just by teching, since you will get T4 no matter what) should be immunte to two mediums? Why Churchills and KV-2 should be almost immune to mediums, dispite costing almost the same. Why PIVJ should be almost immune to mediums. If you get 2 medium tanks, you've pretty much spend as much res as the guy getting this 1 heavy tank, yet you cant do anything. And even more on this topic, dont you think that getting IS-2 if enemy is spamming StuGs (in a world with defection damage) is just a bad play? Its like saying, well KT is the most espensive super-heavy in the game, why it can be countered by doulble TD units. Or pretty much any heavy tank can be forced away or significantly damaged even by 1 TD unit, dispite it costing more. I mean, you for some reason only forcus on the cheapest units dealing damage to the most expensive ones, but at the same time completly skipping the midle ground, where not so much cheaper units cant deal with slitghly more expensive ones, just because they are out of their league. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun3 Nov 2021, 22:15 PM I still dont unredstand why concept being claimed bad judging by the failed balance decisions within the concept? I mean, aside aurguments "well cheap units spamm killing expensive units" there is pretty much no other aurguments against it. Ffs its known that LV in vCoH with deflection were bad chose, but it was problem of the LV balance, not the deflection system in general, because in proper tank to tank\at combat it worked perfectly fine. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: When Relic call that an anti-tank gun2 Nov 2021, 20:03 PM Jump back to quoted post2 Nov 2021, 19:11 PMVipper Now if in you agree with Porygon that all shots fired by vehicle should hit and damage other vehicles pls explain why. He clearly speaks about bouncing shots (i.e deflection shots) and then he states that misses and bounces are frustrating. Where it came from that all shots fired should deal damage? Not to mention that "luchs damaging IS2" wont happen, since not all the guns are capable to deal deflection damage and its based on unit penetration and targer armor. It didnt work like PTRS in CoH2, which just deals deflection damage. Jump back to quoted post2 Nov 2021, 12:18 PMdonofsandiego It all depends on the balance philosophy. You could easily argue for it both ways. I mean, in reality, how much better would it be if massed AT can still do damage regardless of penetration? I don't see how it mitigates the problem of AT saturation. If anything I feel like it would exacerbate it. Though it would certainly make heavy tanks less effective, it also means that heavy tanks have to have extra health added to them if every AT weapon in the game has the ability to deal damage to it. Otherwise why would you buy a big moving target that gets damaged by everything, period? Quite simply, because right now AT guns are made in the way that they are supposed to fight heavy tanks. In other words, they are almost always garantee to give you penetrations against pretty much every single armored unit, with an exeption of P4J (which can have RNG Jesus immortality) and units like Comet\Panther. If AT guns were able to still deal damage (not the full one) to heavy tanks via deflection, that pottentually would have allowed them to be balanced vs mediums aswell. Hell, best example is the whole TD philosophy we have right now in CoH2 and the sole reason of which was the existance of heavy tanks and the fact non-penetrating shots are pretty much equal to misses. In: COH2 Balance