Profile of Junaid

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 509

General Information
Register Time: 4 Mar 2014, 04:14 AM
Last Visit Time: 3 May 2017, 19:33 PM


Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 12:00 PM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2015, 11:31 AMFiresparks what it used to be, was that the lmg42 dealt 19 dps at close range. The precise problem was that the lmg42 was far too strong of a weapon at close range, but there was a lot of room for nerf. just change the lmg42 to deal ~9.0N-~6.0F dps instead of the instead of the ~6.0N-~9.0F we have now. It would still be the weakest short range upgrade but the strongest long range upgrade. (this is assuming the rifleman and british veterancy got a nerf as well) I get what you mean now. That could work too. But all lmgs would need looking at. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 11:26 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2015, 10:55 AMFiresparks not removing the lmg, redesign them. The dps profile on the LMG needs to be revised back into a regular dps profile, not the reverse slope we have now. It just make the infantry too strong. A lmg blob will easily out dps a hmg and be significantly more mobile and durable as well. It's a complete nightmare fighting lmg42, m1919a6, and bren blob. One of the biggest reason why the rifleman got their terminator buff is to counter the lmg42. The lmg problem is just cascading into other problems. the maxims, .50cal, and the mg42 are all fine as long as the enemy doesn't get a lmg blob up and running. Unfortunately the wehr and british both basically run on lmg. It used to be like that but it made closing in by shocks etc. Too costly. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 11:22 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2015, 10:23 AMMuxsus Suppression reduces dps to 6.25% of the original. Already extremely punishing, you just need to spot for the MGs so that the enemy is suppressed before they even see the MG. it's not enough in the late game. Late game in dmg output is just so high that a group of lmgs will wipe out an MG before getting pinned. And it's worse when fresh hmgs face vet upgraded squads. Essentially the infantry-hmg dynamic changes to favourite infantry too much. You have to remember hmg squads don't get survivability buffs with vet like core infantry do. I'm not suggesting that they become more durable as flanking will get less rewarding. I want frontal rushes into lmgs to get less rewarding and not by buffing hmg dmg output but by making suppression stronger. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 11:14 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2015, 07:27 AMElSlayer What about units that don't use LMGs and don't shred fresh MG's gunner in late game? Should they be punished harder by suppression too? No that's not the intent. I foresee events as follows: Smg infantry: largely unaffected because their long range dmg is pitifully small anyway. No way you can Yolo rush an MG frontally with these guys anyway. Lmg infantry: get a bigger dmg reduction which makes Yolo frontal rushes less profitable. Cons, penals, bar rifles an panzer grens will suffer a bit but then again, nobody profitably rushes them headlong into an MG and wins anyway. I do share your concerns but right now I think the tradeoff should be worth it In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 11:08 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2015, 10:55 AMFiresparks not removing the lmg, redesign them. The dps profile on the LMG needs to be revised back into a regular dps profile, not the reverse slope we have now. It just make the infantry too strong. A lmg blob will easily out dps a hmg and be significantly more mobile and durable as well. It's a complete nightmare fighting lmg42, m1919a6, and bren blob. One of the biggest reason why the rifleman got their terminator buff is to counter the lmg42. The lmg problem is just cascading into other problems. the maxims, .50cal, and the mg42 are all fine as long as the enemy doesn't get a lmg blob up and running. Unfortunately the wehr and british both basically run on lmg. I know. Which is why I say suppression should reduce dmg a bit more In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 04:24 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Nov 2015, 04:15 AMCarlos Danger Wouldn't mind seeing pinning become easier to do, thing as it prevents squads from crawling up to an MG and throwing a grenade, which I don't particularly like. But then we'd see complaints of instapin etc. Elchino is on the money there about reducing nade range while suppressed. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 04:22 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Nov 2015, 21:49 PMDiva1013 maybe for the mg team. have the gun being operated like a team, by 2 soldiers so if one dies theres another to take his place immediately. that way the mg doesnt get slaughtered straight away and always has somebody firing it. or/and give the mg a shield like at guns so it has some cover? maybe have suppressed infantry automatically move away from the mg, or whatever is suppressing them? or at least lose direct control of the squad or squads movements, temporarily? that way u can only throw a grenade from the squad is and not be able to crawl closer to throw it. That double gunner idea I like. By preventing a gunner-snipe it'd make pinning a bigger risk for the attacker. It has an added bonus of being realistic /historic (ammo feeder anyone?) Otoh itd also make nades more powerful, especially riflenades. Uncertain about that aspect. Loss of control though, no I don't think the majority will want that. Though it makes some sense to have a temporary loss of control, maybe for 1s or so. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Does suppression need a buff11 Nov 2015, 04:03 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Nov 2015, 21:52 PMelchino7 Suppression cuts down DPS roughly to 25-20%. I'll say thats pretty huge. What i would change is decreasing ability range by 33% to 66%. It's pretty simple; i can throw a grenade way further when i'm standing up rather than crawling trying to not get hit by bullets. This should also account for veterancy buffs. +1 I'd rather have that in any case and I know we have requested it in the past too, let's hope relic listens. The nading isn't my primary concern (though I fully support your proposal), it's that, late game, suppression doesn't reduce dmg output enough vis a vis vet, upgraded infantry especially lmg infantry. They're able to finish off an hmg even while suppressed. You don't even need a full on blob. 2 vet 3 rifles with 4 lmgs will do it frontally. I know cause ive killed full health maxims with 2xlmg grens frontally. Which, in turn, makes blobbing better than tactical, well thought assaults in nearly all cases except the pro players. (Keep in mind that hmg veterancy includes no received accuracy bonuses) I don't want hmg crews to become more durable though cause that will make flanking difficult, and iirc the bonus accuracy against hmg and mortar crews was made exactly to dicourage replacement of core infantry with hmgs. Which is all fine by me. Hence my proposition to buff the effect of suppression, make it reduce dmg output more. It doesn't have to be a very strong buff, I bet even a slight change would be an improvement. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Mortar smoke increasing utility 10 Nov 2015, 21:21 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Nov 2015, 10:23 AMMyself During the last patches EFA armies had their mortars nerfed, while WFA had their mortars types howies buffed and getting more utility via suppression. Further more, more units with access to smoke become available. Imo Mortar smoke is currently under-performing since it takes too long to deploy and become effective. My suggestion would be to make mortars to start firing smoke faster. Agreed. Ask a mod to add a poll so we can vote and back it up with numbers In: COH2 Balance
Thread: mg/mortar retreats10 Nov 2015, 21:18 PM Agreed +1 banillo In: COH2 Gameplay