UKF absent from tourney play again

There were similar arguments for "retaining uniqueness" by keeping OKW's resource penalty, thankfully those never won out. Bad design doesn't warrant workarounds to keep it viable.

Opinion of the month.

There were similar arguments for "retaining uniqueness" by keeping OKW's resource penalty, thankfully those never won out. Bad design doesn't warrant workarounds to keep it viable.

People whining can put so much pressure that the whole CoH game could disappear, if that it the case the game didnt got better, it just got playable at the expense of design and skil required to play. It's good to repeat those mistakes in a already not funded game by its own corporation. Think of it

How about apart from techable aec AND bofor, we give aec capture point toggle? That will make emplacement less a drag on field presence.

Maybe put back kangaroo carrier in a form of buffed brencarrier.

Emplacement are fine and faction uniqueness is also needed

Im sure top players can show a ukf meta. Helping hans used to play brits.

As others stated, ukf call in are not as fun and lacks a AI+AT heavy. Shocks rangers > commandoes. So perhaps we help commandoes with slight changes

emplacments are too cheap and too effective....350mp for 2 mortars with no bleed?

emplacments are too cheap and too effective....350mp for 2 mortars with no bleed?

Stop building only exmplacements in your games as ukf and you will see they are not too cheap.
Stop being afk with all infantry blobbed and you'll see they are as effective as single mortar of any other faction, except completely immobile and the moment you lose ground, instead of losing 20-60mp, you're losing 350.

Stop building only exmplacements in your games as ukf and you will see they are not too cheap.
Stop being afk with all infantry blobbed and you'll see they are as effective as single mortar of any other faction, except completely immobile and the moment you lose ground, instead of losing 20-60mp, you're losing 350.

it most games you build in smart possiton and use it as smoke and barrage platform and wipe on the vps at front and it oesnt even bleed 1 manpower.

isnt this hard when you dont build it at the 1. line. dont use it at arty for enemy base...use it at support to the front..means 70 range from it

Some on the fly ideas from me personally to help make UKF better (even though I think they're not that bad, especially not in teamgames), to fill up some holes and weakness in their early and mid game:

- Perhaps a very small (5-10%) cooldown bonus when in cover, so 4 men Infantry Sections in the early game feel just a bit better, without having much of an influence on performance when they are Bolstered and/or with veterancy and weapon upgrades;

That would help early game but it would have much bigger inpact when they reach 5th men so later stage of a game. I would go for buffs that help more early game but doesn't progress with strength in time.

- Smoke barrage added to Pyro Infantry Sections, to substitute the lack of easily accessible indirect fire. Would help to fight HMGs, but by being a barrage and having a delay and shared global cooldown, would prevent it from being spammed like back when Riflemen all had smoke grenades;

I would say - a must add ability. Global cooldown is a great idea as well.

- Veteran Squad Leader upgraded added as third option for Infantry Sections; replaces one Lee Enfield with a Thompson, gives the squad a small DPS bonus, and removes the out of cover and movement penalties. Basically a way to make some squads more mobile and less vulnerable to indirect fire, with an STG44 Volksgrenadier-like DPS profile;

I would more focus on royal engineers as a more CQC. If anyone i would add them upgrade. Another way is to simply add a artillery officer which is in a game files. Making his performance similar to pgrens would help brits even as exlusive to 1 unit to fight axis more elite CQC infantry squads. Anycase, veteran squad leader for Tommies could work as well, just it would make UKF build almost always into 4 tommies (when with diffrent upgrade they still gonna be IS).

- An affordable medic upgrade for the HQ that adds two medics to help heal up support weapons and engineers, because even though Infantry Sections heal is great for frontline healing, it's usually quite hard to keep all other troops healed up;

Well, brits already has a HQ with medic upgrade. In his form it can work same as ostheer med bunker. Diffrence is that it's more expensive 200 mp 60 ammo upgrade if i remember correctly. Change the cost of it and people can use it like it's axis equivalent.

- Removing grenades tech and making grenades available stock after researching T1, as I don't feel the upgrade is cost effective anymore now that IS spam is no longer a viable strategy. It'd help IS fight elite and CQC infantry without having to invest extra resources;

But lock it behind vet 1. I think it's the least safe solution.

- Assault Sections changed to 0CP call-in infantry, to give UKF more diverse and surprising opening strats, and help them start on certain CQC orientated maps, even if only in one commander.

Yes, as it should be from the begging. Plus add snare ability - that would finally diverse the UKF strat. It's not a strong commander becouse it doesn't have a late game ability so i would afraid of it being overpowered. USF armor commander has powerfull arty with assualt enginners, ostheer with assualt grens has a Tiger. If someone could think about adding a mortar to brits it could be replace by a pakhowi which would make a commander even more interesting.

Ideally Bolstered would be overhauled so it'd become something that's an interesting and strategic choice, rather than being a mandatory upgrade, but I think that would be a very extensive and risky thing to do, so I'm not sure if that'd be possible or desirable at this point.

Although, implementing even 1 of those ideas should bring with it 1 locked weapon slot for pyro IS or a med upgrade (or a boolster upgrade) to not end up with 2x bren 5 men Tommy universal terminator squad that cannot be stopped.

Dose it cost nearly double the price of a normal mortar and cant move? Yes.

2 mortars is 480 manpower so no.

2 mortars is 480 manpower so no.

2 mortars also beat it without much of a sweat so...

2 mortars also beat it without much of a sweat so...

So nothing..., a mortar pit simply does not have a cost that is "nearly" double of a single mortar.

I am simply pointing out that the claim in false.

I see little reason why a mortar pit should be able to beat 2 mortar on it own.

So nothing..., a mortar pit simply does not have a cost that is "nearly" double of a single mortar.

I am simply pointing out that the claim in false.

I see little reason why a mortar pit should be able to beat 2 mortar on it own.

You forgot the "it cant move" part in my reply and i not event say that the mortar pit can beat 2 other mortars, i say it can beat ONE.

You forgot the "it cant move" part in my reply ...

Read post 108:
This is what you wrote and it simply false:
"Dose it cost nearly double the price of a normal mortar and cant move? Yes."
It about x146% the cost and that is not nearly 200% (actually is less than one and half) and yes it can not move. So it the answer to the questions is either a "No" and "Yes" or a single "NO" since not both criteria are met.

and i not event say that the mortar pit can beat 2 other mortars, i say it can beat ONE.

The post you replied to does not quote you so I can not see how you come to the conclusion that I have posted that "according to Heavy Sapper a mortar pit can counter 2 mortars". I never attributed such a claim to you.

We can argue about the exact pricing of the mortar pit all day, but that doesn't change the fact it is an awful unit that continues to hobble the UKF as a faction by it's terrible design and inability to retreat.

It's bad. High level play does not make use of it for good reason.

So nothing..., a mortar pit simply does not have a cost that is "nearly" double of a single mortar.

I am simply pointing out that the claim in false.

I see little reason why a mortar pit should be able to beat 2 mortar on it own.

It doesn't, it doesn't also have performance to beat 2 mortars/be as efficient as 2 mortars, which was also a claim.

If you make assault sections stock a lot of problems would be fixed.

It doesn't, it doesn't also have performance to beat 2 mortars/be as efficient as 2 mortars, which was also a claim.

If that is the point you want to make quote and respond to the person who made it and not me. I have not claimed that mortar pit can beat or be as efficient as 2 mortars.

It doesn't, it doesn't also have performance to beat 2 mortars/be as efficient as 2 mortars, which was also a claim.

well yes it beats 2 mortar, just use the extra range

well yes it beats 2 mortar, just use the extra range

How is that going to work again? You're going to kite them with pit?
Have you already forgot that the pit is the immobile one and mortar and isg have all the freedom to move around, choose when and how to engage and don't need to stand right next to each other?

Extra range is meaningless if you can't pick engagements to use it.

Infantry is too expensive. A fully upgraded section costs 50 fuel ( 5 men squad + bren upg) + 90 munition and they can't shoot on the move. LEIGs and mortars having a field day. I play complete noob with 2 LEIGs and it takes forever to win. He is not even micro-ing them. I have no counter since they shoot from base. For the first 20 minute UC is the best unit on the field literally. The MG can't suppress nothing on time. They die as easy as grens, their performance is not reflected in the cost. The only practical tanks are churchill and FF but they come very late..if you survive to that point you adversary is a noob anyway. They are just a meh faction. When i play them it's like i try to run with my feet tied up.
With WM i rarely lose to rank 500 if ever. With brits i almost always lose to rank 500 and even worse. I know i suck but so are my opponents
Oh and also they don't have a light vehicle that can properly handle infantry. have to do with AEC until T3. but AEC costs tons of fuel for what it can do. I think T70 has almost the same price but T70 is a beast.
also until the section are fully upgraded you can't really handle blobs, WM and OKW. complete noobs just attack moves and i can't stop them.
very frustrating faction to play.

A) who the fuck only buys one section and then buys both bolster and weapon racks? I usually get 3 IS, so divide that cost by 3 and it’s like 16 fuel each.
B) AEC is super cheap. 30 + 15 + 60fuel = 105 fuel. one 222 costs 40+20+30 = 100 fuel.
C) Churchills are just you being stupid. The reason everyone thinks Cromwells suck is because Churchills and Shermans are batshit powerful. You could get a Cromwell and use it well to win, or you could risk it and get a brain AFK Churchill.

I hate the USF versus Ost infantry play because they both get an MG and long range only infantry. Whoever has the best DPS just wins, as unlike rifles vs grenadiers you can’t play to your strengths and ambush grens at close range or catch rifles at long range. You just sit at long range and slug it out or camp with your MGs just outside each other’s range. It’s a fucking joke and an example of how symmetrical balance doesn’t work in CoH

I’d like to point out that the Cromwell needs to be bad because AEC + Cromwell will win 100% of the time versus a 222 + P4 if the P4 and Cromwell were the same power level.


This is why I only play vanguard as UKF so I can get on the move, close range Commando brens, an anti infantry tank that doesn’t die in 2 seconds to counter Shrek blobs and an Air strike to stop panthers from bum rushing me

2 mortars also beat it without much of a sweat so...

Because mr ukf player cant possibly push to displace and kill those pesky mortars. Note how convenient mortars pit can be. They spot their own counters and still don't bleed not a single mp.

If the opponent invested in 2 mortars it has left open a big door for the ukf player to exploit