Company of Heroes: Eastern Front

Eastern Front Mod => General Discussion => Topic started by: Versedhorison on March 12, 2010, 01:15:48 PM

Title: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Versedhorison on March 12, 2010, 01:15:48 PM
I'm starting this petition because I'm sick of people wishlisting or making idea's or delusions that they are gonna get German 'wonder weapons' that either were never used or never existed as weapons. These 'weapons' include:

*all chemical weapons
*the Maus
*the Ratte
*the monster
*the dora gun

this also includes any other stupid ideas like solar death rays or sound cannons and you can forget about trolling me cause it won't work, trust me. If people are in support of this I'd like to see the mods at least shutting down dedicated threads or warning people or failing that just having as many people flame noobs for posting such garbage again. I'm sorry if this is rather extreme I'm just personally sick of seeing people going on about those five, I know its a game but lets keep it at least a bit realistic. Also I may update this list if more crap comes to light.

Cheers.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Saavedra on March 12, 2010, 01:52:02 PM
I agree with shutting down fetishist threads.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Paciat on March 12, 2010, 02:10:02 PM
I think all bad ideas should be included on the list. Not just really stupid.

I would also like to add this to the list:

T-26 that was inferior in every way to T-70,
T-35 heavy tank that could be destroyed by 3,7cm AT guns (door knockers),
dog bombs(difficult to animate),
ME-262 (becouse Ju-87 is a better idea - devs also think this way),
Ability that lets you control an enemy unit for a short time (OP - no counter to it).
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G. on March 12, 2010, 02:27:53 PM
Hey guys ;) I can tell u that i had already delete some
spam threads with "superunits" like P-1000 or other stupid
ideas.
So i have a look - i think it is my duty to overlook this
suggestions board and and "protect" it against spam
threads.
And as the german historian at the EF team i dont like
this senseless threads, too.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 12, 2010, 06:21:16 PM
Suggestions for T-26 and T-35 tanks are not ridiculous. They were not great designs, but they did see combat and in gameplay terms....are awesome ideas. The Geshutzwagon, Hotchkiss H-35, Ostwind, T-90, and KV-2 are all just as "ridiculous and inappropriate" if we are going to go by the historical account, yet no one complains, because they serve the game.

Now I understand that there are people who have nothing better to do than complain about other people making suggestions, as ridiculous as they may seem. Whats it to you if someone makes a suggestion in the suggestion threads? If they are ridiculous, like the Maus or P.1000 & P.1500, ofcourse they won't be added, so why get your panties in a knot?

As for the Dora gun, and other railguns, making a model would be silly, but perhaps using it as flavour for off-map artillery? Also maybe in the Russian campaign/Ostheer campaign, you could make the model but only as an objective to destroy/protect respectively.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Paciat on March 12, 2010, 08:51:41 PM
Suggestions for T-26 and T-35 tanks are not ridiculous. They were not great designs, but they did see combat and in gameplay terms....are awesome ideas. The Geshutzwagon, Hotchkiss H-35, Ostwind, T-90, and KV-2 are all just as "ridiculous and inappropriate" if we are going to go by the historical account, yet no one complains, because they serve the game.
Youre wrong. H-35 is in the game only to give PE mobile artillery thats better(but more expensive) than a mortar halftrack. Ostwind and T-90 are anti aircraft and anti infantry vechicles (every fraction has an AA gun). KV-2 is a bunker killer just like stugIV.
But I cant find a reason to replace T-70 with a tank thats worst in every way. Also who needs a T-35 heavy tank with light tank armor. Russian tanks are all build in the tank hull so theres no possibility for a very early russian tank.(If you want to give the T-26 a bren carriers armor).

There are also more interesting concepts like T-28(I dont like it but at least its worth talking about), KV-1, KV-8 flame tank (it could replace KV-2 in urban doctrine or even SU-85/100) and BT-7 fast tank (much better idea than T-26). Theres also SU-76 cheap SP AT gun and SU-122 mobile arti.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 12, 2010, 09:19:37 PM
The T-35 can surpress, and engage infantry and light vehicles from all directions. You are exaggerating its armour, it was not that thin. Place it in the middle of an infantry formation and it will wreck havoc on infantry. It is not supposed to fight armour, just as the T-90, but at the very least it has attack capabilities in that field too. Also, it can have a tank shock ability like the Churchhill while raining MG fire. How is that not useful?

And you misunderstood my first paragraph. I was saying KV-2s and H-35s, T-90s were rare but still in game so usng that arguement against the T-35 is pointless.

None of the tanks in this game operate like their real counterparts anyway, and the BT-7 had more or less the same armour as the T-26, so... anyway.

 
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Alguien on March 12, 2010, 10:45:09 PM
I dont understand the ratte and monster, i mean, they imagen of a super tank crushing at everything in its path is awesome, but i cant see that in COH, it feel more small battles than wont let something like that work

and the maus is horrible, i mean you have better looking heavy tanks like the Sturm Tiger and the Elephant, not to mention they are kinda more viable for the scale of the game
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 12, 2010, 11:16:41 PM
I think all bad ideas should be included on the list. Not just really stupid.

I would also like to add this to the list:

T-26 that was inferior in every way to T-70,
T-35 heavy tank that could be destroyed by 3,7cm AT guns (door knockers),
dog bombs(difficult to animate),
ME-262 (becouse Ju-87 is a better idea - devs also think this way),
Ability that lets you control an enemy unit for a short time (OP - no counter to it).

Bwahaha 2/4 of those were my Ideas (or close to)hah

Question-Do Flamethrowers count as "chemical" in your view ?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ghost on March 13, 2010, 12:31:53 AM
*all chemical weapons
what?! no way!!!

*the Maus
to slow - to big - to heavy - and UNCOMMON, so NO

*the Ratte and the monster
way to big, how do you want to use them? on any bridge-based may all you can do is park it in you base (if there is enough free space to spawn it)  ;D

*the dora gun
as a call in? are you serious?! where are the railroads it needs to move on the map  ::)

@rommel: close it pls  ;)
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 13, 2010, 03:13:01 AM
Question- what about the Lion ?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Daiwiz on March 13, 2010, 03:22:46 AM
I don't think they should be killed or anything, but telling people, without n00b and swearing etc, that units such as the Maus or Ratte are far too inconcievable and impracticle to appear in such a game. Yes, they are absolutely awsome, but they wouldn't really work well.

The offmap Dora sounds nice, but it would have to fire 1 round only and have a limit on where you can fire it. Basically, it can't hit anywheres near a base. If it is even thought of, it should also make a huge blast and noise (more than a V2) so as to let everybody know to hit the dirt. A long time for the shell to land (Like the V2) would be important as well. It's a static defense buster. But meh.

Hey, I like the solar deathrays! They should be made an emplacement or placed on the back of a truck! Burn baby burn!
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 13, 2010, 03:26:28 AM
Fact-Lion was only the size of a king Tiger!!
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 13, 2010, 03:38:42 AM
I don't think they should be killed or anything, but telling people, without n00b and swearing etc, that units such as the Maus or Ratte are far too inconcievable and impracticle to appear in such a game. Yes, they are absolutely awsome, but they wouldn't really work well.

The offmap Dora sounds nice, but it would have to fire 1 round only and have a limit on where you can fire it. Basically, it can't hit anywheres near a base. If it is even thought of, it should also make a huge blast and noise (more than a V2) so as to let everybody know to hit the dirt. A long time for the shell to land (Like the V2) would be important as well. It's a static defense buster. But meh.

Hey, I like the solar deathrays! They should be made an emplacement or placed on the back of a truck! Burn baby burn!

I was thinking the same about the railgun.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G. on March 13, 2010, 12:36:36 PM
Just as a small information;
CoH used vehicles and weapons which where USED druing the war! So weapons like the Löwe-Panzer or the E-Series or MAUS or Ratte or all the other "prototypes" and "propaganda vehicles" are NO OPTION for CoH.

Think in the Ostheer you wont never see this units ;)

Small Edit: before u come up with the M26 Pershing - Okay. just 20 vehicles served at Europa during the last days of 2 ww....but they were in service and that is the point!
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: bastex on March 13, 2010, 01:33:00 PM
the maus would never be in skirmitch or mp maybe a campain mission like huntdown the maus

(btw Versedhorison i think making polls like this is also a stupid idea so put it in ur list aswell =] )
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 13, 2010, 06:06:36 PM
Just as a small information;
CoH used vehicles and weapons which where USED druing the war! So weapons like the Löwe-Panzer or the E-Series or MAUS or Ratte or all the other "prototypes" and "propaganda vehicles" are NO OPTION for CoH.

Think in the Ostheer you wont never see this units ;)

Thank you.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 14, 2010, 03:51:49 PM
But still do Flamethrowers count as "chemical" ? some used Napalm and napalm is technically a chemical sooo?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Versedhorison on March 15, 2010, 04:23:07 AM
But still do Flamethrowers count as "chemical" ? some used Napalm and napalm is technically a chemical sooo?

Flame throwers are fine I'm referring to chemical weapons like gas as it was NEVER used in WW2.

Also with the dora gun I don't like the idea of it being used as a call in and its still ridiculous as it was only used in a single battle of WW2 and to what role it played in affecting the whole war was actually negative to the Germans. In game it would be impracticable and usless. K5's I don't have a problem with however I wouldn't want them in the game cause all you'd get is pretty much the exact same thing as a V1 rocket (single big explosion with super long cool down time). I want to see something new in this mod, not something already done.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 15, 2010, 04:58:41 AM
But still do Flamethrowers count as "chemical" ? some used Napalm and napalm is technically a chemical sooo?

Flame throwers are fine I'm referring to chemical weapons like gas as it was NEVER used in WW2.

Also with the dora gun I don't like the idea of it being used as a call in and its still ridiculous as it was only used in a single battle of WW2 and to what role it played in affecting the whole war was actually negative to the Germans. In game it would be impracticable and usless. K5's I don't have a problem with however I wouldn't want them in the game cause all you'd get is pretty much the exact same thing as a V1 rocket (single big explosion with super long cool down time). I want to see something new in this mod, not something already done.

Wrong, the Germans used chemical weapons during the siege of Sevastapol. While, in the larger question, chemical weapons were not used to the extent that they were in other conflict such as the First World War or the Iran-Iraq War, but when you indicate that they were never used(in capitals), I must point out that it is incorrect.

Further more, it does not have to be the Dora specifically, it could be the K5, since it was more common(or, less rare). It could just be a railway gun in general. The V1 is far more ridiculous in comparison.

You need to face the fact that Relic has already created two faction's worth of German tactics, weapons, etc. To expect something completely new is naive and suggests a lack of knowledge of appreciation(or both) for the history behind the game. There is no need to be unreasonable, there is plently of room in 3 doctrines for a railway gun off-map artillery.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Shadowmetroid on March 15, 2010, 08:31:05 AM
Agreed with Soldat.  Considering what else has been done in Company of Heroes already, a railway gun is not out of the question. Nor any of the other ideas you refer to as stupid.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Paciat on March 15, 2010, 11:14:05 AM
Agreed with Soldat.  Considering what else has been done in Company of Heroes already, a railway gun is not out of the question. Nor any of the other ideas you refer to as stupid.
Devs said that a railway gun would be another V1 rocket and thats why ist not needed. Theres also a Ju-87 with a divebombing sound that everyone (soldiers and civilians) feared.
The T-35 can surpress, and engage infantry and light vehicles from all directions. You are exaggerating its armour, it was not that thin. Place it in the middle of an infantry formation and it will wreck havoc on infantry. It is not supposed to fight armour, just as the T-90, but at the very least it has attack capabilities in that field too. Also, it can have a tank shock ability like the Churchhill while raining MG fire. How is that not useful?
T-90s is in the game so Soviets can have an AA vechicle. AA trucks would be too easy to destroy

KV-2 was usefull to the Soviets (unlike T-35). In 1941 KV-2 could stop a whole panzer division and destroy any AT gun setting up with its massive gun. Also late (heavier) T-35 same armor (but not sloper) as T-70 so im not exaggerating when saing it had a light tank armor.

Ill also add that there should be a pettiton on out of question ideas, not pettiton on stupid ideas.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 15, 2010, 11:38:26 AM
Paciat, I don't know how many time I have to explain this to you.

Units like the H-35, Panzer IV F1, Ostwind, T17, Pershing, and Geshutzwagon has already been implemented. Vehicles which either didn't see combat, saw very little combat, were obsolete by the time of Normandy or did not appear until the final days of the war. The T-90 of yours does not have a very remarkable service history either, but it was deemed a good concept for a game unit. That is what I suggested for the T-35, it is a good concept for an infantry support tank, so stop pulling out combat records, because I can just as easily nail your beloved tanks for the same crime.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: hgghg4 on March 15, 2010, 03:52:38 PM
problem is though, is that the T35 ans T28 are both a bear to code with multiple turrets. Now while they may be good at a certain role, they are just not worth the effort to be a large part of the game.
Title: Re: petiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G. on March 15, 2010, 03:56:06 PM
Is this now a thread about red reward units ???
Think we are at the Ostheer suggestion board and
this "petition" is against stuoide ideas for the Ostheer.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: hgghg4 on March 15, 2010, 04:18:12 PM
Rommel can we get a lock on this thread? It has gone far enough and doesn't do anything to support the Ostheer concept idea's or the forum in any way...
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G. on March 15, 2010, 04:23:01 PM
Well. Close? You are the second person who askes for a close here but i think the thread starter had to say the "final word". I will close here when something unacceptable
will happen  ;)

When Versedhorison say i should close here i will close it.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: TheReaper on March 15, 2010, 05:14:04 PM
Put this unit:
http://www.surfsedge.com/NewYorkBomber/The%20Bomber%202.jpg (http://www.surfsedge.com/NewYorkBomber/The%20Bomber%202.jpg)
With NUCLEAR BOMB!!!!We know, evil Nazis were close to build it, now it's time to put in the game!!!! The ultimate superweapon, I suggest, call it The Red Button ability. Destroys the whole map!!!

Sorry guys I'm a bit tired today. :)
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ghost on March 15, 2010, 06:36:58 PM
Destroys the whole map!!!
::)  ;D
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Shadowmetroid on March 15, 2010, 08:31:11 PM
...With NUCLEAR BOMB!!!!...

No.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 15, 2010, 08:43:26 PM
one more to the list of stupid ideas haha
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Paciat on March 16, 2010, 08:57:45 AM
Paciat, I don't know how many time I have to explain this to you.

Units like the H-35, Panzer IV F1, Ostwind, T17, Pershing, and Geshutzwagon has already been implemented. Vehicles which either didn't see combat, saw very little combat, were obsolete by the time of Normandy or did not appear until the final days of the war. The T-90 of yours does not have a very remarkable service history either, but it was deemed a good concept for a game unit. That is what I suggested for the T-35, it is a good concept for an infantry support tank, so stop pulling out combat records, because I can just as easily nail your beloved tanks for the same crime.
Come on. T-35 is a 10 year old tank. Germans even used Renault FT-17 in 1944 but ist a bad idea to use them in the game.

Nobody likes H-35, Panzer IV F1 is an old tank(not as old as T-35) that hapened to be in Holland in 1944, Ostwind represents all mobile 3,7cm Flaks.

Pershing, Sherman rocket launcher and flame thrower are in the game to give US more choice than just Shermans and M10s.

T-35 cant apear before Marders, later it will be useless (comparing to T-34 that also comes quite early) even with tank shock.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: wordsmith on March 16, 2010, 09:37:35 AM
Nobody likes H-35....
As zeal PE player I would say this to Hotchkiss: It could be good add to PE weaponry if it wouldn't replace the PzIV. As PE PzIV is your only option to fight blobs of Rangers or other elite Inf. (as PE doesn't have ANY non-doctr.suppress weapons). If H35 replaces ATHT f.e. it would be very interesting choice.

T-35 cant apear before Marders, later it will be useless (comparing to T-34 that also comes quite early) even with tank shock.
I thought that Red Army concept is already finished. ??? I don't understand guys why are you discussing T35.
Btw. I don't think that T35 would be useless even after Marders because it still could be used to fight infantry (or ruin buildings) and as for AT role standard AT gun can be used. It would be only a matter of player preference and tactic approach. Or it could be used to combat Axis schreck units for which T90 is not very capable since it will die in 2 shots.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Paciat on March 16, 2010, 09:57:42 AM
I thought that Red Army concept is already finished. ??? I don't understand guys why are you discussing T35.
Btw. I don't think that T35 would be useless even after Marders because it still could be used to fight infantry (or ruin buildings) and as for AT role standard AT gun can be used. It would be only a matter of player preference and tactic approach. Or it could be used to combat Axis schreck units for which T90 is not very capable since it will die in 2 shots.
Were talking about reward units so Red Army concept is not finished.
T-35 had weak armor (comparing to medium armor). Thats why it wont be good in fighting anything more than non AT infantry. And even T-90 does that well.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: wordsmith on March 16, 2010, 11:13:12 AM
Were talking about reward units so Red Army concept is not finished.
T-35 had weak armor (comparing to medium armor). Thats why it wont be good in fighting anything more than non AT infantry. And even T-90 does that well.
Didn't know that :) you're right, T35 has similar or even weaker armor than T90 but has about 4x more weight thus it would have about 4x more health (thinking about size it will be also larger and easier to hit then...). It could be good fighting inf. if it would create enough suppress, which it eventually should.

Anyways I'm not expert but I feel that T35 would be a nightmare to model, not only 3d model but also AI model to shoot from several guns/MGs.

As for reward unit, for Red Army I would appreciate for example GAZ truck (infantry carrier) which could replace the Medic truck.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 16, 2010, 02:46:02 PM
There already is a model of it, just waiting for them, to decide to put it in and code it(Which will be a nightmare) .
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 16, 2010, 03:51:13 PM
CoH has v1s which could not hit the broadside of London (much less a barn) and yet again the all mighty controller of physics and history know as Relic put it in there and you want to know something kinda funny? The Schwerer Gustav's HE shell contained LESS explosives than a V1 and the V1 used more powerful explosives on account of the fact it did not have to withstand being fired supersonic out of a cannon. Only fired 60 something 80cm shells were fired in combat while tens of thousands of v1s were launched.

Also to say the Maus was "uncommon" is a HUGE freaking understatement as there was never a complete model until the Soviets showed up and put the completed turret of #2 on the dummy turreted #1.

Then... good god the Ratte and the Monster?? are you super serial? Like Al gore serial? Those things never got finished on the goddamn drawing board much less even built. On top of that no one (or at least me) is really saying the other ideas (i.e t35) are unrealistic just completely useless tactically and would not benefit the game in any way shape or form...

P.S. Chemical weapons uses were theoretical at best and both sides did not want to use them in fear of retaliation in kind. The only confirmed exposures to chemical weapons were in the death camps and a American store of Mustard gas (for use if Germany used any) that was accidentally released when the storage ship was bombed. Another note is the fact that Hitler never wanted to use chemical weapons (even once the "1000 year Reich" was obviously doomed) because he did not want anyone, especially his own troops in retaliation, to suffer in the ways he witnessed during his service in WWI.

Please excuse any language you may find offensive, it is only used to convey frustration.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 16, 2010, 04:23:33 PM
Only 1 objection, Your criticism of the T-35 was as useless as you say it is, The T-35 would be extremely useful tactically but apparently you fail to recognise that.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 16, 2010, 05:05:43 PM
Yes, if it survives more than a few seconds. Anything CoH labels as "anti tank" could kill the t35 with utter ease and I would not be surprised to see one get split stem to stern by a FlaK 36.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Venoxxis on March 16, 2010, 05:13:53 PM
Yes, if it survives more than a few seconds. Anything CoH labels as "anti tank" could kill the t35 with utter ease and I would not be surprised to see one get split stem to stern by a FlaK 36.

again, i can just point out that this is a balance issue. It isnt a argument for or against a unit suggestion at all. Since we are talking about gameplay not the reality.

What was/n't usefull in the reality does/n't has be usefull ingame - talking about gameplay. Just think about the stug IV.

Since this topic is too generally named, i would suggested to put it in the general suggestions thread to have some sensefull discussion also about russian tanks not just about panzers. Because this is what we are doing already.
Thanks.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 16, 2010, 05:32:40 PM
Yeah your right..............so what do you think about the T-35?
Kidding :)
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Shadowmetroid on March 17, 2010, 07:16:49 AM
....so what do you think about the T-35?

LOL!  ;D
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 17, 2010, 08:18:33 AM
Yes, if it survives more than a few seconds. Anything CoH labels as "anti tank" could kill the t35 with utter ease and I would not be surprised to see one get split stem to stern by a FlaK 36.

again, i can just point out that this is a balance issue. It isnt a argument for or against a unit suggestion at all. Since we are talking about gameplay not the reality.

What was/n't usefull in the reality does/n't has be usefull ingame - talking about gameplay. Just think about the stug IV.

Since this topic is too generally named, i would suggested to put it in the general suggestions thread to have some sensefull discussion also about russian tanks not just about panzers. Because this is what we are doing already.
Thanks.

Good to see some sense in others too. I'll second your post.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 17, 2010, 01:21:13 PM
I guess you are right about the balance issue but there are plenty of units that were far more common than anything in the "silly idea" category that have even been modeled already. Like the Ferdinand/Elefant or even a KT that can be used in a similar manner as a Maus. Lol for such things as super artillery the Karl morsers were far more common with 10(?) being built and in Men of war you can actually control one but even that would have to be a off map for CoH to damn big and still really rare. Panzerwerfers would be cool and were essentially way cooler Kats with bigger rockets and operated in units just as large as Kats. I think the Maus could be used in a campaign though..
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Alguien on March 17, 2010, 01:30:26 PM
Just as a small information;
CoH used vehicles and weapons which where USED druing the war!

what about the Panzer Elite bergetiger?

and since you are a developer, whats the team opinion about the Sturmtiger? i like the tank and i think a "super" assault gun as a "final" doctrine unit will fit with the general theme of Germans sides to have a "super" unit while being diferent of another king tiger or the elephant that could end being to similar to the jadgpanther

dont take this a suggestion, i am new and i want to know the opinion of the team about it, so i can shut up about it  :-X
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 17, 2010, 01:42:25 PM
Ya.. if anyone has noticed Relic is the all powerful wizard of history and physics which is a problem because people like me want realism AND balance which may not be as "cool" as Relics way about it and I still do not get why they did not just use a goddamn Bergepanther there were hundreds of those and they could actually do recoveries unlike the weak arm of the Bergetiger.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 17, 2010, 03:48:08 PM
I HATE that thing haha Pz IV's teamed up with a couple of those and they can take out all of my defensesbetween the constant repairing, Tiger chassis and MG's hah so I think Bergepanther would not be as OP
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Killar on March 19, 2010, 03:09:00 AM
Agreed with Soldat.  Considering what else has been done in Company of Heroes already, a railway gun is not out of the question. Nor any of the other ideas you refer to as stupid.

railway gun was a good idea for a wehrmacht sub-doctrine in normandie 44 mod. Just a call in artillery strike from off map. shoots slowly but very powerful. Don´t know if there where any railway guns at eastern front except Dora...
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: irik on March 20, 2010, 03:54:56 PM
Is Hunting Tiger and Storm Tiger stupid ideas?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 20, 2010, 04:05:50 PM
not as much as gustav and maus, sturm tiger would make sense there was an ok amount of them but there was only 80 or so jagdtigers and only half made it to combat in the last few months
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 21, 2010, 07:10:25 PM
Heres some stuff to add to the list
-Tanks over 10 years old (i.e.T-35, R-35)
-Medival weaponry(as fun as it would be)
-Nukes
-ANY expierimental craft from any nation
-Robots
-Anything Non-human(i.e. dogs)
.......Any objections?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Shadowmetroid on March 21, 2010, 07:12:19 PM
Were dogs even used extensively in WWII?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: thebomb on March 21, 2010, 10:18:55 PM
Were dogs even used extensively in WWII?

About as much as incendiary bats....almost not at all.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: hgghg4 on March 21, 2010, 11:59:31 PM
Were dogs even used extensively in WWII?

About as much as incendiary bats....almost not at all.

Actually Dogs have been in large use since WW1, namely as Early Detection and Guard Duty. Saying they where not widely used is wrong, they where rarely used for combat operations IE:  The Russian Tank Hounds, which was a complete failure because the Dogs went for the russian tanks and not the german ones because that is what they trained on :?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on March 22, 2010, 01:09:05 AM
I put dogs on ther because as the developers have said, they are a pain to animate
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Versedhorison on March 23, 2010, 01:44:56 AM
Were dogs even used extensively in WWII?

About as much as incendiary bats....almost not at all.

Actually Dogs have been in large use since WW1, namely as Early Detection and Guard Duty. Saying they where not widely used is wrong, they where rarely used for combat operations IE:  The Russian Tank Hounds, which was a complete failure because the Dogs went for the russian tanks and not the german ones because that is what they trained on :?

they were reffering to the exploding bomb dogs which are sick and stupid.

Heres some stuff to add to the list
-Tanks over 10 years old (i.e.T-35, R-35)
-Medival weaponry(as fun as it would be)
-Nukes
-ANY expierimental craft from any nation
-Robots
-Anything Non-human(i.e. dogs)
.......Any objections?

Apart from your first point the others won't need to be added because they exist on their own level of stupidity that they don't require any mentioning.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 24, 2010, 01:11:57 PM
I think "rare" should be classified along the lines of one existed for every division, with 20 or so the Sturmtiger etc. counts but not things such as the Maus.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on March 24, 2010, 09:22:45 PM
not as much as gustav and maus, sturm tiger would make sense there was an ok amount of them but there was only 80 or so jagdtigers and only half made it to combat in the last few months

You call 18 an "ok" amount, there were more K5 railway guns than these things, and the Sturmtiger was mainly used in the west so this is a far more stupid idea than an off-map railway gun call-in.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Versedhorison on March 25, 2010, 10:32:49 AM
18 Is aceptable if 20 pershings saw action  ::)
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: SauerKRAUT on March 25, 2010, 12:33:25 PM
in relics view yes but sturmtigers were around for much longer than a few months but that is not the point it is a comparison.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Ost_Front_Soldat on April 01, 2010, 08:49:13 PM
18 Is aceptable if 20 pershings saw action  ::)

Pershings in vCoH is NOT acceptable, thats why we play mods. And Sturmtigers only deserve to be in BotB, other than that, other equipment has priority over it. Besides, it was mainly a western front unit.

And my statement and there being more railguns(I only used the K5 series as an example, there were many more guns of different models mounted on rail cars. And thank you sauerKRAUT.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: comrade2012 on April 15, 2010, 03:23:25 AM
The Maus was the ultimate Lulz tank
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Seeme on April 15, 2010, 12:50:33 PM
You caught this topic right befor it would go to page 2, great.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Akalonor on April 15, 2010, 04:14:06 PM
Here we go again , comrade try not to mention RATTE , MAUS , LOWE, DORA, OR GUSTAV people get cranky when they are recommended. The rule is if its smaller than a KT and made more than 50 times its not considered outrageous.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: DrCashpor on April 15, 2010, 04:59:37 PM
the large amount off noob feedback and demands slowly starts to brainwash the developers.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: comrade2012 on April 18, 2010, 12:13:05 AM
Im not saying that they should make it. The "Lulz" was ment to reinforce the amount of stupidity involved in the Maus.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Fementedbeancurd on June 02, 2010, 09:13:16 AM
That jeep and retreat idea is also stupid.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: GodlikeDennis on June 02, 2010, 03:41:30 PM
For what reason?

The jeep can benefit the Soviet union early by providing a more diverse force and retreat is one of the MAIN mechanics of what makes CoH great. Both these ideas were voted upon and the majority favoured them, so just because you personally don't like it doesn't make it stupid. Get over yourself.

I'm in total agreement against stupid ideas but can we just let this thread die please?
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Sonders on June 02, 2010, 06:00:27 PM
I had to vote no because one of the thing I like about this forum is that it doesn’t seem to be a lock-fest like others I’ve seen. Stupid posts are stupid, especially if the guy is serious. Stop reading if you feel its stupid. Now I realize some have to go, vulgar ones, racial stuff, but I don’t like to vote on something designed to take away any of our liberties. Besides, what’s stupid to you may be important to someone else. And what stupid and what isn’t?

Now is this a stupid idea?
Give the Americans a nuke. Once fired I takes out a area of about 4 sectors. Any inf wondering into that area for the next 10000 years starts dying of radiation sickness. The Germans can buy radiation suites at 12CP for 1000mp 500 fuel. Allies pay 5 munitions since it was their nuke.
What ya think guys? Am I on to a good one here? Lol
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Versedhorison on June 03, 2010, 06:35:56 AM
That jeep and retreat idea is also stupid.

explain your reasoning. otherwise stop trolling.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Fementedbeancurd on June 03, 2010, 07:43:25 AM
explain your reasoning. otherwise stop trolling.
[/quote]

Well this mod is great because it added a team unique in its own way , putting in a jeep and retreat is just making it more like the other teams , because people are used to playing as them .
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: GodlikeDennis on June 03, 2010, 08:16:38 AM
Retreat is one of the fundamental concepts that made CoH great in the first place. It puts an added emphasis on getting whole squads out alive and preserving your units because it costs less to reinforce a squad than build a new one (unlike the original DoW). This system rewards good play, something that competitive players find very important. Sure, it's cool and all that Soviets can't retreat. But people find it very n00b that you have to blob up your conscripts and if you get suppressed, you can't retreat so you have to pop your "OH SHIT" ability from the command squad. Conscripts can't be used to flank because failure will lead to the whole squad being wiped due to lack of retreat.

If retreat were added, heroic charge should be removed/made available very late and another option would have to be added to harass and flank mgs. Thus, a jeep-like light vehicle.

Uniqueness between the factions is a great thing, another of the core concepts that makes CoH great. To stray too far from the other concepts though is what makes the difference between a US vs Wehr game (awesome) and a Brit vs Wehr game (terrible). Soviets are still unique but they shouldn't take all the original concepts that made the game the best of it's genre and say "fuck you, we'll do it our own way".
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Versedhorison on June 04, 2010, 06:05:33 AM
well I for one would like to see more early game units other than a conscript horde, although I do like mass conscripts it has gotten old.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: ShannonDimuzio on February 13, 2014, 06:36:24 AM
I'm starting this petition because I'm sick of people wishlisting or making idea's or delusions that they are gonna get German 'wonder weapons' that either were never used or never existed as weapons. These 'weapons' include:

*all chemical weapons
*the Maus
*the Ratte
*the monster
*the dora gun

this also includes any other stupid ideas like solar death rays or sound cannons and you can forget about trolling me cause it won't work, trust me. If people are in support of this I'd like to see the mods at least shutting down dedicated threads or warning people or failing that just having as many people flame noobs for posting such garbage again. I'm sorry if this is rather extreme I'm just personally sick of seeing people going on about those five, I know its a game but lets keep it at least a bit realistic. Also I may update this list if more crap comes to light.

Cheers.

Ich denke, es ist immer noch kein Halten mehr, solche Themen nutzlos .. Ich habe viele von ihnen in der letzten Zeit gesehen.
Title: Re: pettiton on stupid ideas.
Post by: Codename "Tiger" on March 04, 2014, 11:22:57 AM
Some people spam their ideas on who the game can get better.
Sometimes i wish there is a kind of "silly ideas filter" in this forum...