Profile of Iron Emperor

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1653

General Information


Thread: Tiger II (H) bulletins20 Jul 2015, 12:17 PM KT is good, only IS-2 needs to be nerfed a bit in armour rest is finerino In: Lobby
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 12:14 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Jul 2015, 11:19 AMaaa Now 240 MP grens are trading equaly with 330 MP guards. They have significant advantage in the opening, dont you think that some compensation for that is normal thing. Uuuhm no they don't, but have to find out how the 27 dmg PTRS are doing later on In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 10:52 AM Jump back to quoted post20 Jul 2015, 10:44 AMpugzii Then don't build 2x 222's if you would prefer to wait for T3, but then you need to live with the fact the AAHT is going to have a free roam on areas that aren't defended by your PaKs... similarly to how an OKW HT/Puma has free roam to areas where I don't have a ZiS... You can't argue that P4's and Stug's should be arriving at the same time as light vehicles because of this because your to stubborn and want to wait for yolo p4's I'm not stubborn and want yolo Pz4's I want to have some fair time between the units, not to see already hard counters, before I get my 1st Pz4 on the field In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 09:47 AM 2x 222 = 40 fuel that you should invest to beat down a AAHT Kappa. 40 fuel more away from a viable T3. Even more counters at that point... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 09:25 AM ML-20 is a pain in the butt for OKW, but yea not the right forumpost for that In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 08:55 AM Choccy I know what you mean, but some maps (unfortunatly map balance) completely shut that down. PzGrens with Schreks on it is not closing the deal, since you have to come from way too far. Flanking could do it, but is hard to pull off. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 08:26 AM Jump back to quoted post20 Jul 2015, 08:02 AMKatitof You mean... like rifles vs MG42? Like the need for soviet elite infantry because stock ones can't do shit vs LMG grens? Like T34 and sherman that always needed ATG while P4 can YOLO allied meds? Like B4 vs supported ele? I could go like this for a whole day... Its nothing new. Its why soviets are having tech change in the first place-they always MUST chose one unit to counter another while ost could pick their units freely. But you can't make something extremely cheaper then other techs. It's fair to let your opponents to get some counters against it. It doesn't have to completely obliterate it, but like I told you multiple times. By the time the first stuff rolls out it's 7 minutes. (Early game is not about light verhicles but about infantry gameplay) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 07:55 AM Jump back to quoted post20 Jul 2015, 07:41 AMatouba Absolutely yes. The usless Brummbar costs 480MP+165 fuel while T3485 cost only 380MP+130 fuel... It really maks me lol... It seems that the GREAT Brummbar can do alot of works than the best medium tank of the whole game... Also, the panzerwerfer is just shit compared to the Katyusha which can be seen in every single game. It is just a joke that you must push an artillery unit on the enemy's face to make it accurate,while the Katrushas can do their works very well at great distance. Yes the only decent unit in ost T4 is the panther...The other 2 never worth it. I haven't built them for a long long time. Even the panther cost too much, and you can hardly skip to the T4 because of bad map control. Im really disappointed about this new tech change. It looks like relic removes ost T4 forever and makes ost a faction which lacks a whole light-armor tech. Have to agree with the most of it. But I've seen games where my teammate used a panzerwerfer and it can completely destroy everything, but yes it need to be close ranged for that. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 07:30 AM Jump back to quoted post20 Jul 2015, 07:24 AMKatitof Because ost players are stuck with some weird mentality that soviet T3=ost T3 and don't want or can not acknowledge that soviet one brings light armor, not medium one. Pretty much the same case with all the "ost T4 too expensive in comparison to sov T4" whiners. And as it was said and tested, 2x222 will deal with quad and PaK will deal with T70 like it always did, all you have to do now is get it 2 minutes faster. Currently SU-76's with it's penetration is surely no light tank (in my opinion), since it just beats down everything from range. It's no problem that it was buffed, but I think they overdone it, while the Stug-III is now just an ordinary tank destroyer, with simular stats as other TD's. Now Soviets have next to their ZiS and SU-85 also SU-76 (with Barrage) as 1 unit with barrages is not enough they just gave it 2 units to obliterate your AT and MG's. To play defensive mostly of the time you have to make a static frontline. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Soviet T3 need cost increase or Ost T3 cost reduction!20 Jul 2015, 07:16 AM Mostly where I'm talking about is 2v2s, since I'm in top 100 as axis and currently 300s as Allies (Was also top 100s). I do think if we will do games in the current phase that our opponents are abusing the hell out of it. In: COH2 Balance