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: Croc not nerfed properly?1 Nov 2015, 11:04 AM If I may intervene with the hammer of common sense and rationality: First: Bring Forth the evidence! Replays? Screenshots? Second, contingent on if first is true: Maybe its a bug? Wouldn't be the first time that intended changes don't actually make it into the patch. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Current state of ostheer.30 Oct 2015, 21:24 PM I have done some numbers on this (am writing up a post for the gameplay section right now as well which is more complete) But I think ostheer has three main problems: 1) Misaligned fuel tech costs vis-a-vis USF and ESPECIALLY UKF. This is primarily because USF and UKF (to a greater extent) can skip on a lot of their 'intended' teching by skipping upgrades. Particularly UKF which only really needs the weapon rack upgrade due to its long-range orientation n terms of infantry and superior defensive bonuses = better at stalling. Just as one example: The minimum total resource cost (teching + unit cost - starting resources) for Ost to get a StuG out is 615 mp, 265 fu. The same cost for UKF to build a centaur varies from 510 mp 230 fu to 910 285 fu (all upgrades, not counting AEC/Bofors because teching for them without building is just stupid, and thats a unit before centaur) i.e. all else equal, the UKF player can get a Centaur out upto 2 mins before the first Ost StuG by neglecting upgrades. Or 5 mins in the case of Centaur-P4 comparison (P4 costs 135-90 = 45 extra fuel) Against USF there is a similar issue on a lesser scale fuel wise. Also, vs USF, ost has much steeper mp costs. E.g. total mp cost for stuG - 615 mp. mp costs for sherman vary from 380 (min) to 680 (max). Obviously the real difference is lesser but its still enough for an extra squad in most cases. Factor in the 'free' officer squad (which is basically an extra rifle squad) and the mp disparity gets skewed more. 2) Poor infantry scaling late game. Especially in light of UKF and USF infantry late game which have superior veterancy (both UKF/USF) and superior weaponry (UKF only). 3) Some over-priced/underperforming units in terms of resource expenditure. PzIV comes to mind (compared to cromwell) In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Team games gameplay in worst state since launch29 Oct 2015, 19:11 PM Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2015, 16:51 PMSpaceHamster Welp, with the churchill nerfed. I better get to abusing some comet broken WP shells that have the range of a jagdtiger to be fired from. They also vet up fast too, nasty bunch they are with a command tank which is giving them additional accuracy bonuses to their main guns against infantry as well. I wonder if instead of rushing centaur, rushing comet will be the new meta? They pretty much counter ost t3 by themselves and anything less than a panther won't be able to stand up to them. StuGs 4 life! In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Team games gameplay in worst state since launch29 Oct 2015, 16:40 PM Jump back to quoted post28 Oct 2015, 15:52 PMJadame! Bad brits sure do. Good brits can do heavy infantry with at gun walls into croc or anvil sappers and churchill spam, best builds when they behind. Also yay necroposting and incoming tomorrow patch, still some problems remain. One day... True. I should have amended my post with the qualifier 'most'. Will do that now. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Win as UKF no centaur, no FF27 Oct 2015, 14:06 PM Yes, I have won as UKF without Centaur, FF or Churchill. I wouldn't have used air superiority either, but I think he could have gotten out of it easy. In: Replays
Thread: Ost/Sov Halftrack Veterancy27 Oct 2015, 08:58 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Oct 2015, 08:22 AMPlaguer I haven't really had a problem with the veterancys, of course it's hard to get them to high vet without weapon upgrades but imo this is justified Without upgrades they're ment to be completely supportive, advance behind your troops reinforcing and dealing some dmg to troops that are closer, but with weapon upgrades they're offensive supporting tools instead of completely supportive If they got the veterancy easier this would mean that they get vet 3 with the weapon upgrades in no time which would cause a problem in itself because of the huge veterancy boosts that the HTs get Imo the solution should be reducing the vet requirements of the HTs, but make the upgraded HT have higher requirements (compared to this patch) and have their veterancy reset, or make the veterancy be flat so when they're upgraded and the requirements get higher, they would go from (for example) vet 2 to vet 1 Just my stupid idea but might be useful I know that. Thats exactly why I suggested that upgrade should convert it into different unit with different vet bonuses and exp requirements. Though now i feel it would be easier to just have two different units with different vet bonuses and exp reqs. Probably easier coding wise, and the assets already exist. And i know the HT are for support. If you look at their vet bonuses, those reflect that too (increased reinforce radius, faster movement, more sight) which makes it a shame that the bloody bonuses are impossible to achieve! In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Team games gameplay in worst state since launch27 Oct 2015, 08:51 AM Jump back to quoted post9 Oct 2015, 13:02 PMHighfiveeeee Probably I just suck at the game but me and my mate we can't win anymore. We hold both fuel points the whole time and push the enemies (double brit) of the map. Then churchills/centaur arrive, gg. With all the buildings say bye to paks because they can maybe fire a single shot before being wiped. The pathing is IMO the most frustrating thing about the game atm. I have to say fuck this game atm. It's no fun anymore. I know I am no good player but even in our casual rank (> 2.000) we simply get STOMPED every game. We play with tactics and stuff but the enemy mostly camps out the VP and then gg. If you guys hold both fuels, and they can pull out centaurs then you aren't teching up fast enough and/or not building caches fast enough. Most Brits basically only have one strategy: rush centaur. There's simply no way they can rush it out before you guys can build pz4/stuG/JPIV if you hold both fuels. Keep an eye on your resource and tech up when you can and you have enough units for map presence. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ost/Sov Halftrack Veterancy27 Oct 2015, 08:06 AM Yes, I know its a low priority issue, but it can be fixed easily, and I wanted to raise awareness of it. We can only hope the devs will see and decide to act on it someday. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Ostheer Panther/T4 is Overpriced/Underwhelming27 Oct 2015, 07:45 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Oct 2015, 07:09 AMatouba The problem is relic said they gave players the chance to skip Battlephases.But as ostheer,you can hardly skip T3.You simply need that Stug or Ostwind to counter the Allies in mid games. If you skip the T3, you sucks due to the bad map control.Even though you get one panther which is only good at anti-tank,what can you do then?You still lose. Compared to the new faction,they can easily tech to the heavier tier after they've got a Centaur or a Cromwell.Costing less to tech,then a Comet or a Churchill hits the ground...Also the brits can skip the medium tier to directly tech up.The cost is nealy equal to the cost which OH spend skiping to T4. This. This is exactly what I meant. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Ost/Sov Halftrack Veterancy27 Oct 2015, 05:51 AM I'm not saying that ostheer is a weaker faction, nor saying that this is an imbalance. The whole point of the thread is HT veterancy. I only mentioned the upgraded variants to show that we can't just decrease the exp reqs as that will indirectly buff the upgraded HTs, nor directly add in reinforce to upgraded HTs. elchino's idea is a good solution too. In: COH2 Gameplay