This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Kinkas
Pages: [1]
1
« on: August 07, 2010, 05:51:00 AM »
When I said post my stats, I did not say post a version of my stats so that you can play the idiot while blatantly lying, for no valid reason. Next time, - as with this thread, post the full story. I'm not bothering with every stat, but here:
Won 991 Games.
Lost 881 Games.
Shall we add your inability to count to your other failings, or would that be too harsh? I think you'll find people who have played the game closing in on 2000 times knowledgeable enough to express opinions.
LOL, you actually think 991 for 881 ~ KD of 1.12 is good. Dennis did you a favor and only listed you games played. Not your extremely average game score. Just because you play a lot doesn't mean you are any good. For instance I would take choose a partner 10 for 2 in auto matches over you. Fair be it, it might be a testing account, but still nothing to go posting on a forum to show off about. If you think you are so wonderful and are the epitome of experience come vs. me (add me KinkastheRed).... But no of course you will not. Dennis has challenged me already; maybe we could make this interesting and get Paciat in as well? In reality your spurting theory about a game, we have the ability to play the game, so lets put these theories into action. Win or lose it will be fun. So AdmV0rl0n this is your chance to play axis and show us that you obtain a wealth of experience from all factions. If you choose not to play I really can't see how anyone here can actually take you seriously again.... If they ever did.... You dug yourself a grave here buddy, by a year 1 level maths analysis Dennis still flogs your hide in experience and overall equality of game time between each faction. So stand by your inferior stats or prove to us your better than people think.
2
« on: August 07, 2010, 04:08:25 AM »
I'm also pretty sure an up-gunned puma beats a T90, although it takes a HEAVY beating. If you use cover the puma wins as the T90's weapon is affected by it a lot more than the puma's also a puma can effectively skirmish with a T90 as well. I do feel for T3 though, I miss the old Gwagon, its like it had a stroke, its a bit Gimp and occasionally wets its pants.... 
3
« on: August 07, 2010, 04:00:36 AM »
Lol chancellor, I traveled your path a few posts back hahah, its a no through road basically.
But on the point of the Maurder I agree with you 100% about the rotation speed, but as to how fast you unlock it I am not so sure. It takes a lot more fuel for the Russians to get a stock standard tank and the summon in Sherman leaves much to be desired. Also if you decrease its time to be deployed into a match, it could have great consequences on both American and Brit balance with their lighter vehicles.
I suggest however the increase in rotation and a decrease in build time possibly to help match the rapid deployment of allied tanks.
Thoughts?
4
« on: August 06, 2010, 08:23:49 AM »
300MP Vet 2 shreck squad beats a 450MP Tommy squad.
You are dumb if you dont understand that Wehrmacht is the strongest of all late game fractions.
PE MP44 dont care if they kill infantry or Soldiers armor and Commando Stens are weak vs anything but infantry armor.
If the Grens get a shrek the tommies get bren guns and if the grens get vet, the tommies get a lieutenant. It’s illogical to compare two different things that have different costs. As I said earlier and repeat for the third time, you are posting bias information just to support your belief. And once again repeating for you benefit, I said a general statement using a general work “good” not “the best’ or “excellent” or “the worst” or “crap”. Your picking at straws. As Ive said before, Tommies have dmg than Volks. Understand now?
You cant expect that a Tommy squad with an LT - 730MP! - will die to a Volks squad. Thats why they have armor that is allmost as good as german elite type armor.
Just build youre blob or drop arti on them or place mines.
Wehrmacht has the most choices of all fractions while PE is the ultimate blob forming fraction.
You didnt list nothing.
How about backing youre dumb comments with any stats.
Can you that?
Wow man, I left this huge disclaimer at the end of that saying that it was a pure example to avoid this exact situation, it was the first idea that came to mind from a topic I had recently read. And please read that part of my post again, the purpose of that was to NOT list something but bring light to making an argument relevant and to the point. Seriously read what I said, before the flaming me. I admit the previous post was just an outburst, but it was something that needs to be said. Read someone’s post twice if it seems outrageous and try to find a sensible meaning to it. It annoys me so much, how people just take stats and comments out of context to prove a point which is strategy problem not a balance issue. Good damage against what? The only good damage the first squad do is in first contact. Period. And usually only if the sniper shot is used. This takes place in one contact area on the map. This equates to one capping point that is contested. In the mean time, All the PIO or Ketten ground being swallowed up continues.
The bren squad might do good damage, but guess what, wait 450 for that, and try to find the ammo for the bren, then walk it across enemy territory - which this supposed heavy squad do more slowly than any other squad in game.
You have no idea what you are talking about, and you posted your idiotic posting as part of some pathetic joke.
Actually I personally find it quite easy to find the munitions for a bren squad I am assuming we are talking (early-midgame), for many upgraded squads I must say. I also use the lieutenant to help them move around the map as well as moving my trucks a fair way up to provide less of a distance traveled. I believe your problem is related to your game style more than a balance issue. Try watching some replays of the really high end Brit players and watch out specifically how they solve your predicament. And dude, from what I read of yourself, I think the same thing. Thus the outburst, you seem to ignore valuable comments from the more experienced players. Constructively I really do suggest you look at a different strategy. @Kinkas beg me pardon, but your abusing behaviour dont belong to "an intellectual forum" as your own words are. Be constructive and when someone doesnt share your beliefs it doesnt mean he needs to "put his hand under an iron"! If im right this is a discussion and in this type of conversation every man can post freely what he has on his mind without being abused!
Actually in self defense, the post was aimed at a how you construct a post not on a personal opinion on a post. I used an example of a post, on how he used it for bias. It’s actually impossible to critise anyone on a forum without out them bursting out. So why stop at constructive criticism? Yes it was crude, but it’s nothing short of what needs to be said. If for one second he just stands back reads his post and go, “ok this is why they call me a Brit-Fanboy”. “This is why they call me stupid.” It’s because he is omitting relevant information. And seriously I added a huge obnoxious in your face way of saying something was not my opinion and someone still commented on it. So yes they need to be told, they need to stop taking things out of context, and my previous post proves they do. Everything I say in this post particular post is constructive. But I assure you, not one of them will take it in their stride, they will defend themselves by attacking me. Because to them this is not a discussion, it is a defense of themselves. I do apoligise for the iron comment as it is uncalled for, though I stand by my point that they keep using bias information and wonder why people call them stupid or a fan-boy. I actually would like to see Paciat and AdmV0rl0n in a lot of discussions, but not when you just pull things out of context for the sake of having to be right. I also understand this post was not all on topic of balance. But his was needed to clear the air as to the point of my comments and to provide it in a less defamatory way to the people I originally critisied. And yes my throwing down of the gauntlet still applies if you wish to show me ingame the errors of my logic 
5
« on: August 05, 2010, 02:05:06 PM »
Witty Paciat, you have devolved into schoolyard comebacks.... But I am flattered you see my comment fit to use against me.
The good damage comment was general and you made it specific to starting forces, if you had a brain you would understand late game British infantry are very strong. Maybe it was my fault for assuming we were all on beginner level intelligence and higher. Also British can't cap very fast but that doesn't mean that they won't have map control.
And once again you argue a bias one sided point to make it seem as if you are correct. Jesus Christ, if there is a problem explain it in its exact specific entirety. i.e I think that British infantry that have been vet stacked are to hard to kill for the amount of damage they output**. See how I didn't list every disadvantage and narrowed it down to an actual point of information. Its a basic way to explain and debate a point, which many people on this forum are incapable of doing.
As Dennis said this thread is basically over, say what you will, but I think this a issue best settled on the battlefield. If you feel up to it add Kinkasthered, its my EF testing account. I will be up for a game XD.
**THIS IS AN EXAMPLE, DO NOT TRY AND ARGUE THIS POINT AS IT IS AN EXAMPLE. IN NO WAY OR FORM DOES IT REPRESENT A VIEW OR OPINION, OR GIVE ENTITLEMENT TO DISCUSSION ON THE AM-MENTIONED POINT WHICH IS AN EXAMPLE.
6
« on: August 05, 2010, 11:52:04 AM »
No, you don't want to discuss the infantry, which costs the brit faction a fortune, and will be lesser in number than other factions and have a crippled capping ability. That's obvious from the start.
Just wow, I can't be bothered quoting everything ignorant you have said, but this will do to convey my message. Your statement is just stupendously ignorant and bias. You talk about all the cons and leave out the fact that Brit infantry have Soldier Armour and on top of that do good damage as well. SO GUESS WAT!!!!!  , they don't need to be super cheap and super fast cappers. Its called balance. SHOCK HORROR!!!! AdmV0rl0n your just a winger, you point out all the negatives that hinder your linear play style and ignore the opinion of experienced players. I seriously suggest you step back for a second, read peoples posts twice, think about where they are coming from with their points, and take it in. Lastly I suggest before you post you re-read it, think about what you are about to post, then highlight it, delete it, log off the forum and go put your hand under an iron to punish yourself for ever thinking you could contribute to an intellectual forum. Peace
7
« on: June 25, 2010, 06:06:15 AM »
KinkasTheRed - All factions, all game-types.
8
« on: June 25, 2010, 05:57:55 AM »
I think the Brits are fine...
Its just that you don't like them? You are bad against them? You don't understand them? That is no reason you should complain like little babies about how "op" they with with they commad trucks.Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you can get 5 paragraph post about crap that ruins this post!(I didn't most of them.)
You should all be ashamed of yourselves, think before you post. That's my number one rule when I post. This is the ef community, not the average coh one. When I first came, I was impressed. This is just stupid. So just be quit about the Brits people.
You should be ashamed you arrogant hypocrite. You are the reason for a lack of intelligence in these forums. Notice that the people who discuss this topic have experience (Most not all) and they place FACTUAL evidence behind arguments. Then you come in, and because you state it, it must be truth. What you have posted is shameful. You belittle people who are trying to get to the bottom of an issue just because you disagree or lack any factual information. You place your opinions on Brits and then you talk down on others who do not share it. When you post a criticism of someone you better have proof or a hypothesis to support. You broke your own number one rule; you posted a subjective opinion and not objective arguments. And those five paragraphs of 'crap' you refer is factual proof, evidence and an explanation of a situation. Take GodlikeDennis's most recent post, I count 2-3 FACTS in the first paragraphs. I think if you wish to counter his argument you should disprove his hypothesis with fact not an opinion or moral superiority that you uphold yourself with. The dev said get back on topic so get back on the dam topic (Yes the irony is astounding that what I said is not infact the topic, but I claim relevance on the fact he is attacking posters not a point of information and he needs to be told). My OPINION is one that aligns with the side that giving mobile bases at current versions of COH is too much of a Pro with very little Cons. It’s far too easy to replace the Headquarters Truck which in most games is the only truck in danger of attack. And without making the truck cheap to replace the mechanic doesn’t work, so I think the whole idea was good but not feasible in practice. Although I have played Brits, I do not enjoy the play style and are subsequently an American, Wher player, so my view is somewhat limited. Though I do extensively play against them and my teammates play as Brits so I am familiar with every aspect of them.
9
« on: June 24, 2010, 05:53:31 AM »
It also seems that we disagree becouse youre more of a a 2v2 player while Im a 1v1 skirmish fan. This discredits your arguments completely. These changes are for balances in player vs player not player vs Com. I seriously suggest before you contribute more to this argument you get some relevant experience in the competitive side of the game (That is not an insult). As Godlikedennis has just kindly posted the appropriate and correct rebuttal, I won't repeat what he has said.
10
« on: June 22, 2010, 07:59:56 AM »
@Nomad52
All units have a counter and mortars happen to be particularly good against heavy weapons. But beyond that point, as I said, the AT gun has immense range so it should be fine and even if the mortar crew kills it instantaneously auto-reinforce can't save it. My point holds that used properly you can maximise its ability. Though it is not invincible, it does its job well, some argue to well. Giving it auto-reinforce would make it make no difference to instant kill situations and make the unit to overpowered/Kang-Like against small arms (Assuming unlimited resources).
I think if you feel there is a problem with the AT gun, yourself, Godlikedennis and I should have a game for testing sake to get to the bottom of it, as I think Auto-Reinforce is not a solution to your problem. And maybe a few games after just for fun =D, as there are so little ppl on these days.
11
« on: June 19, 2010, 04:06:16 AM »
Another thing that I think has been neglected from this discussion is the relevant point of backing up or properly placing your AT gun? The gun itself has a massive range and reinforces as fast Kangs squish a Gren blob. My point is, it should be way back with support and even if it does get attacked, it reinforces faster than it gets killed. There is no reason it should be easy to take down and on that, if it does get taken down I applaud you opponent. The weakness of the Russians is not being able to re-man heavy weapons, so its meant to be a struggle to balance your micro on them and your forces.
I Agree with Dennis on this that it takes away from the skill based aspect of the game and can potentially backfire with the drain on your economy. The gun is meant to be a target and meant to be weak, the solution I think here is a different game play style in-game not in-coding.
Pages: [1]
|
Show Posts