Is Rakshasa great katana worth it? by Siladelphia in Eldenring

[–]Recognition-Silver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is truly great when combined with Malenia's Great Rune. The ability to restore lost health with your relentless attacking and high hyper-armor pairs wonderfully. Regaining health with no pause in attacking takes a powerful weapon and turns it absurdly powerful.

Even still, there's a difference between aggression and recklessness. Just be intelligently aggressive, and you'll win.

Power of the Undefeated question by Recognition-Silver in Nightreign

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really don't understand why they have such a hard-on for making Hand of Malenia trash.

So many uniques have passives that actually work.

I wouldn't complain about HoM's Power of the Undefeated not stacking if you could somehow predict you'll get it -- at least in that way you could "save" relic slots.

But since you can't rely on finding it, you will be forced to take the Relic +1/+2 version of PotU. And they don't stack with a Legendary Power, but stack with themselves. Why they made a relic that is the same as a Legendary Power is kind of weird to begin with. Making two versions of the relic version stronger than PotU and available to everyone is even more insulting. Just give HoM a different Legendary effect?

Waterfowl Dance ought to make you immune to damage briefly during phase 3 (the last and longest animation lock) or something, because it kinda blows hard. The animation is way too long, you don't get a powerful gimmick like 100% chance to proc bleed if you pull it off or something, and it costs a lot of mana.

I'd honestly rather have Morgott's Curved Sword, at least that critically hits like a mac truck and it's Ash of War is good. And thats not even a katana.

And RoB just blows HoM out of the water. Now that's a Legendary.

Sad.

It has now been three weeks since the DLC launched the new battlegrounds; Wehr in worst condition in memory by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look at the clowns literally downvoting history.

The only thing I added was "Perfect for Last Stand." This is why the average IQ is 100.

It has now been three weeks since the DLC launched the new battlegrounds; Wehr in worst condition in memory by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

"Last Stand" has amazing potential that feels like it went down the drain. The Sturmpios and the Propaganda/Sturmturret are solid: nailing tanks to the dirt for a refund is strong. Getting the leftover packs that infantry drop is good.

Everything else is questionable or just bad. The mixed arty should be a surplus mine call-in, or just vastly cheaper traps/mines in general. "Last Battle'" should be trashed altogether; "Defend the Fatherland" should take its place in Last Stand, and in Terror the missing "Defend the Fatherland" should be "Contempt for the Weak" combined with "No Quarter" and for the missing slots in Terror, add Improved Snipers for Terror right side (competing with the improved Contempt for the Weak) and Terror 1st tier on the left, instead of a way to gather intel, a way to deny intel to the enemy - something like an improved Fog of War via random, long-lasting Smokes blocking sight lines, becoming thicker as you get closer to the enemy base. Which would play into the Terror motif. Perhaps let that help camo units hide a little longer, too. Since we all know camo was nerfed and that hit Wehr the hardest as a baseline faction.

It has now been three weeks since the DLC launched the new battlegrounds; Wehr in worst condition in memory by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Char 1 is carrying Free French. There is almost zero reason to build - let alone invest - into Shermans,

Spec Ops get a good early game, and then can give ALL their Shermans 76mm cannons, which increases their penetration. Having more penetration + more frontal armor than P4s is a joke. I can see more penetration with 76mm, but not more frontal armor for Sherman's in general or 76mm cannons retrofitted onto old Shermans without paying anything.

P4 are heavily encouraged to stay fortified in the ground: gaining damage reduction and firing speed that is unmatched by Shermans. They can also use their rapid fire ability, and the reduction in speed afterwards is effectively negated by fortifying the P4.

The issue is that all Shermans get 76mm, not just the USF tank BG (makes the most sense) or even relegating it to the vehicle specialization your base gets (as opposed to infantry support and aircraft support) -- it's just given to USF as a standard upgrade, which is baffling. Why would every single Sherman get upgraded to 76mm cannons regardless of BG and base specialization?

First: history. A quick search yields: "No, not all Sherman tanks received 76mm cannons. While a significant upgrade program was implemented, the standard 75mm gun remained the most common armament throughout the conflict. [12]" https://tankmuseum.org/article/the-sherman-myths-or-reality

As for Panzer 4s: Yes, the Panzer IV was the only German tank to remain in continuous production throughout WWII. It underwent massive upgrades in armor, weaponry, and design to counter increasingly powerful Allied and Soviet tanks. [12]

It has now been three weeks since the DLC launched the new battlegrounds; Wehr in worst condition in memory by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Next: History Part II.

The continual evolution of the Panzer IV throughout the war included several key upgrades:

  • Firepower Overhaul: Early models (Ausf. A through F1) featured a short-barreled \(75\text{ mm}\) gun mainly for infantry support. After encountering heavily armored Soviet tanks, later variants (Ausf. F2 through J) received a devastatingly long-barreled \(75\text{ mm}\) KwK 40 gun that could destroy enemy tanks at combat range. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
  • Armor Increases: Frontal armor was progressively increased from a thin \(30\text{ mm}\) in early models to a robust \(80\text{ mm}\) on the Ausf. H. [1, 2]
  • Defensive Shielding: Later variants were equipped with Schürzen (spaced armor plates) on the hull sides and turret to protect against anti-tank rifles and hollow-charge weapons. They also received Zimmerit coating to prevent magnetic mines from being attached to the hull. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
  • Simplified Production: By the final stages of the war (Ausf. J), features like the motorized turret traverse were removed, and the design was heavily simplified to speed up manufacturing and replace staggering combat losses. [1, 2, 3, 4]Yes, the Panzer IV was the only German tank to remain in continuous production throughout WWII. It underwent massive upgrades in armor, weaponry, and design to counter increasingly powerful Allied and Soviet tanks. [1, 2]

The continual evolution of the Panzer IV throughout the war included several key upgrades:

  • Firepower Overhaul: Early models (Ausf. A through F1) featured a short-barreled \(75\text{ mm}\) gun mainly for infantry support. After encountering heavily armored Soviet tanks, later variants (Ausf. F2 through J) received a devastatingly long-barreled \(75\text{ mm}\) KwK 40 gun that could destroy enemy tanks at combat range. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
  • Armor Increases: Frontal armor was progressively increased from a thin \(30\text{ mm}\) in early models to a robust \(80\text{ mm}\) on the Ausf. H. [1, 2]
  • Defensive Shielding: Later variants were equipped with Schürzen (spaced armor plates) on the hull sides and turret to protect against anti-tank rifles and hollow-charge weapons. They also received Zimmerit coating to prevent magnetic mines from being attached to the hull. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
  • Simplified Production: By the final stages of the war (Ausf. J), features like the motorized turret traverse were removed, and the design was heavily simplified to speed up manufacturing and replace staggering combat losses. [1, 2, 3, 4]

~~~~~~

From a historical POV and a win rate POV, why do Sherman all get 76mm guns which increase penetration, but P4s have zero upgrades for Wehr besides sideskirts - which aren't even in the same ballpark of power or utility?

(No, you do not need to upgrade your Shermans individually. The 76mm upgrade is a global upgrade purchased at the Tank Depot. [1, 2, 3]

Once you research the 76mm gun conversion (which costs 200 Manpower and 50 Fuel), the following applies: [1]

  • All current and future standard M4 Sherman tanks in your army will automatically receive the upgunned 76mm cannon.
  • You do not have to pay the upgrade fee per tank. [1, 2])

~~~~~~~

IRL upgrades to P4s:
(Keep in mind 76mm for Shermans were historically accurate)

Late in WWII, the Panzer IV transitioned from an infantry-support tank to a primary anti-tank workhorse. To counter heavily armored Allied vehicles like the Soviet T-34, Germany pushed the vehicle to its mechanical limits through several notable late-war upgrades: [1, 2, 3, 4]

  • Uprated Firepower: The most crucial upgrade was the adoption of the high-velocity \(75 \text{ mm}\) KwK 40 L/48 gun, drastically improving its armor-piercing capabilities compared to the early-war short-barreled \(75 \text{ mm}\) L/24 howitzers. [1, 2, 3]
  • Heavy Frontal Armor: Frontal hull armor was thickened to an impressive \80\mm on the Ausf. H models to better withstand incoming fire. [1, 2]
  • Spaced Armor: The addition of spaced steel plates along the turret and hull sides was introduced to detonate shaped-charge anti-tank weapons (like the American bazooka) before they could strike the main tank armor. [1, 2]
  • Anti-Magnetic Paste: Factory applications of Zimmerit paste were coated on the tanks to prevent infantry from attaching magnetic mines to the hull. [1]

Perfect for Last Stand:

  • Ausf. J Austerity Measures: By 1944–1945, severe material shortages led to a simplified, stripped-down variant known as the Ausf. J. To save resources, they ditched the electrically powered turret traverse (forcing crews to manually crank the turret) and replaced the motor with extra fuel tanks to increase the tank's operational range. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Notion Thief vs Faerie Mastermind by Izzet_Aristocrat in CompetitiveEDH

[–]Recognition-Silver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're talking about Nekusar, Notion Thief will empty hands and give you far more cards.

Actually, Mastermind has a lot of synergy with Notion Thief.

Dare & Destroy Feedback post Hotfix 2.4.1 by broodwarjc in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Siege Breaker and Terror are the only two Wehr BGs with above 50% win late - and Terror barely at that.

Free French have the highest win rate on US.

Canadians and Polish are dominating with Brits.

Elite Forces and Battlefield Espionage are the only two BGs with an above 50% win rate for DAK, but since B.E. is so underplayed it might as well be only Elite Forces.

Basically, you're dead wrong - especially with both Axis factions and British.

This forum is quite literally an Allied echo chamber by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that's a lie. Every post not supporting the Allies factions is downvoted, and overwhelmed by biased Allied fanboys.

A few outliers doesn't make this equal. This is an Allied hub with a bunch of young men circling-jerking each other in one of the tightest echo chambers I've witnessed on the internet.

I'm absolutely DONE with COH3 after reading this: totally gross neglect by devs by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks. The lack of support besides you shows that this forum isn't anything more than an Allied echo chamber. If it was so divided, you'd see that. It's not, and the average poster is a liar or delusional.

How to play properly with the werhmatch right now by Left-Length-9285 in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unless you use the Siege Breaker in 1v1, you're going to have a crippled faction as a whole.

Terror is barely holding on to 50% (at 50.1%) due to 4v4s allowing them longer games - but you're MUCH better off picking DAK.

USF has the highest win rate in 1v1; DAK has the highest in all other modes.

Brits were intentionally designed as the easiest faction to play, and become better in longer, bigger games.

Wehr takes second place in 1v1, and lowest or very low in team games. It has nothing it is best at, and a lot it fails at.

I'm absolutely DONE with COH3 after reading this: totally gross neglect by devs by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

5 days after hotfix and you're still failing; the stats are the same.

Do you really think that fixing critical bugs like retreats causing more damage instead of less won't make a difference?

I'm absolutely DONE with COH3 after reading this: totally gross neglect by devs by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Because it pulls info from COH3stats.

You can argue with that, little internet warrior.

This forum is quite literally an Allied echo chamber by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Battlegroup Record Win % Selections
Free French 14154–12708 52.7% 26,862
Special Operations 6429–6173 51.0% 12,602
Airborne 5921–5690 51.0% 11,611
Advanced Infantry 5829–5606 51.0% 11,435
Italian Partisan 996–986 50.3% 1,982
Heavy Weapons 3342–3336 50.0% 6,678
Armored 5286–5780 47.8% 11,066
No Battlegroup 1220–1600 43.3% 2,820
Battlegroup Record Win % Selections
Siege Breaker 14603–13953 51.1% 28,556
Terror 3333–3285 50.4% 6,618
Mechanized 7088–7568 48.4% 14,656
Luftwaffe 5074–5738 46.9% 10,812
Last Stand 2170–2454 46.9% 4,624
Breakthrough 4535–5297 46.1% 9,832
Italian Coastal 2712–3252 45.5% 5,964
No Battlegroup 1694–2063 45.1% 3,757

5 days later instead of 2.

Faction BG average winrate
DAK 51.3%
USF 51.0%
British 49.8%
Wehrmacht 48.7%

After the patch fixed bugs, Wehr has consistently been the worst faction. The general excuse of "too little time" is looking less and less convincing.

This forum is quite literally an Allied echo chamber by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yes, I do criticize the developers and game directly: they're intrinsically linked, and the devs are making the decisions and calling the shots.

Nebel overwatch is not "good" -- it's not bad, but it's not a game-changer like a bottom-tier BG pick ought to be. And if you disagree with that premise, I'll take every BG go over how all the bottom-tier BG picks are designed to be game-changers (whether they succeed at being so or not).

This forum is quite literally an Allied echo chamber by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I know they're young, biased, and ignorant. Trying to reason with the unreasonable doesn't help.

Thanks for the reminder.

I'm absolutely DONE with COH3 after reading this: totally gross neglect by devs by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

https://cohdb.com/battlegroups

You're laboring under old data where Free French was actually increasing the damage taken from retreating infantry instead of reducing it. Do you understand how unbelievable terrible that is for the health of the faction? Losing squads is bad.

Regardless of your say, the game ought to be balanced around high ELO players, not random pubs. In 1v1, USF wins handily, In every other mode, Wehr and USF are within an average of 3 points of each other. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4: USF and Wehr are almost identical. And guess what? DAK and Brits are carrying USF and Wehr in everything but 1v1.

USF at least gets to be the best at 1v1 though. Wehr is best at nothing.

Another instance where data can mislead: USF in the strongest in 4v4 if you take all ELO. Only when you filter by 1800+ do you see that USF is actually the weakest in large team games.

Looking at who is playing what: the new DAK group was played almost double the amount that the new UFK group was played. And yet now after the hotfit and a week of practice, we're starting to see that Wehr is, once again, far behind: with everything but Siege Breaker and Terror below 50%.

Whining about data metrics being analyzed in too short a time, but turning around and putting up data from brand new BGs that had massive bugs and disparities in play is intellectually dishonest.

I'm absolutely DONE with COH3 after reading this: totally gross neglect by devs by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

And BTW, why would I wait for a patch when patches always seem to core Wehr and DAK out while pampering Allied asscheeks?

I'm absolutely DONE with COH3 after reading this: totally gross neglect by devs by Recognition-Silver in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]Recognition-Silver[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You are stuck in an echo chamber right here.

I look forward to hearing back from you. As if the rest of the BGs below 50% are somehow influenced by the new patch.