Login

russian armor

The UKF solution

4 Dec 2019, 21:44 PM
#61
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 21:34 PMLatch
Firefly designed to kill hedges I see.

The Firefly is designed to help your army kill tanks, not solo them. The fact that it has 8 seconds reload and can be killed even by a Panzer IV at close range, let alone a Tiger, should tell you enough about the design. It's meant to pick away at tanks from long range, while these enemy tanks are deterred from closing in by supporting units (threats of snares, mines, ATGs). It's not meant to pick a 1v1 fight with any enemy tank under any circumstances and win.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 21:34 PMLatch
So, as its all about costs, 2 volks should be able to frontally assault a vickers and win right? With all squads being out in the open of course because I have run that test countless times and guess what happens. Vickers wins 100% of the time.

Units have roles. The Tiger is a brute strength tank. That's its main role. Obersoldaten are brute strength elite anti-infantry. That's their only role. The Tiger wins against all cheaper tanks, even if they are dedicated tank destroyers. Obersoldaten win against all cheaper infantry, even dedicated anti-infantry units. These expensive and elite units are meant to be countered by either combined arms (the core of the game), overwhelming force, or other counters (snipers, vehicles, mines or rocket artillery in the case of Obersoldaten), and not by a single, cheaper unit. Even though most can trade effectively when used right, as I've shown you in the above example.

This is not comparable to mainline infantry, even though yes, two Volksgrenadiers could win against an HMG if positioned correctly. Disproportionally expensive units that have one dedicated role win against lower tier units, even if these units normally counter a certain (also lower tier) unit type. I'm not sure why you fail to (or don't want to) understand these core game design concepts.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 21:34 PMLatch
Look me up, feel free, it of course will or wont validate everything I say! Its the same as my name here.

No it doesn't, it just puts what you've said into perspective.
To put what I've said into perspective: I'm top 10 with most factions (UKF rank 5 with 82% wr) and I help Relic design the current balance and content patches.
4 Dec 2019, 21:47 PM
#62
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773


Please format your replies better


1.60 range high pen TD - You have Elephant (14CP super heavy TD, might as well throw in 17 pdr)
A.As long as we throw in the pak 43

2.Sturmtiger, but actually good - OST have a sturmtiger? You've a Brumbar (yes, aavre and brummbar are comparable lmao)
B. I know, one is doctrinal and has a huge reload the other is non doc and can be upgraded with even more armor! (Psssssst! The AVRE isnt as good as you think, a Tiger is more effective than an AVRE)

3.Satchels on infantry with hammer - Bundle nades > Heavy gammon bombs (gammons are better than nukenades, also don’t forget the commandos with nukenades you abused last time we played)
C. Dont move the goal posts you said hammer gammon bombs not light gammon bombs. But no, heavy gammon bombs are not better than bundle nades at all, not in the slightest. Against static units, of course but thats like saying the Railway arty is better than AT strafe. Abuse? I used them you mean, its not my fault you cant dodge them :)

4.Heavy engineers with anvil - You dont mean for combat efficiency surely, if you mean repairs then ok thats 1 (no that’s 4)
D. Still 1

5.Light AT vehicle to contain LV play - Erm, teller mines? Or Puma you know, as we can throw in doctrines when it helps (Puma needs BP2 so you’re shooting yourself in the foot as Ostheer if you build it. Getting a stugg is way better for a bit more fuel)
E. This is about what units the factions have not how you unlock them but you forgot about tellers

6.Command vehicle to boost DPS of everything around it - Command panzer says hi (dps, learn to read, also the command P4 itself is useless vs armour and 10% dr in a smalla ura isn’t worth it.)
F.Aura? Its the whole area of the map it is in, I read, it said DPS but fun fact, did you know the command vehicle becomes highly useless as a combat unit once it gets the upgrade? The command panzer in itself is still great vs infantry.

7.5 man mainline inf with double LMGs - With no snares, but 5 men grens say hi with the LMG and a bren gun they picked up from a tommy squad(everyone aside from okw deops weapons, what about MG42s dropped by Grens?)
G.What about them, what point are you trying to counter here?
4 Dec 2019, 21:52 PM
#63
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 21:47 PMLatch
perfect format


1. Basically you’re wrong
2. You’re wrong and your opinion is invalid because if you diss the avre you’re an idiot.
3. I just played Ostheer to kick your ass, not my problem you could ‘t beat them :) Also satchels works wonders vs MGs and players who tac map a lot, you’ll find.
4. Still 4, gets better.
5. Tellers are good, Pumas as Ostheer are bad due to timing, AEC is even better.
6. Fun fact, AEC still has vehicle stun and smoke, plus makes every unit around it better. Guess that’s worse than a Pz IV F1 that can’t pen a T70.
7. 5man sections with single or double Brens are very strong, nothing you state can change that.

Okay, hope we’re done here. I can only explain the obvious so much.
4 Dec 2019, 22:08 PM
#64
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773


The Firefly is designed to help your army kill tanks, not solo them. The fact that it has 8 seconds reload and can be killed by a Panzer IV at close range, let alone a Tiger, should tell you enough about the design.

Units have roles. The Tiger is a brute strength tank. That's its role. Obersoldaten are brute strength anti-infantry. That's their only role. This is not comparable to mainline infantry, even though yes, two Volksgrenadiers would win against an HMG if positions correctly. Disproportionally expensive units that have one dedicated role can counter general purpose units. I'm not sure why you fail to (or don't want to) understand these core game design concepts.

No it doesn't, it just really puts what you've said into perspective.
To put what I've said into perspective: I'm top 10 with most factions and I help Relic design the current balance and content patches.


But obers are designed to solo MG's not help your army do it? It indeed does but what else does it have? Greater range, you've made a mistake if you've let a P4 get right next to you which the same can be said about an MG being wiped by a squad that get right next to them, but at a distance, the FF wins due to greater range, all MG's should win Vs a squad that enters it from the front regardless of the cover of MG when the attacking squad is in the same cover. End of, you wont change my mind because I'm right, I wont change your mind because you're wrong.

Yes its fucking ideal to have an MG positioned perfectly behind green cover facing the perfect angle for that squad to walk into, but it doesnt always happen that way in game, sometimes you need to face the MG the other way because youve just spotted a flank and only have enough time to set up, the MG should then be able to to its job and suppress the infantry that is walking towards it, not get beaten by it for the love of Jesus.

I "Fail to understand" because obers are infantry you just said their role is anti infantry, well what the hell is an MG's role if it isn't to suppress infantry and be the best at it when said infantry is walking into it head on from max range. Commandos are also "brute strength anti-infantry", they can't do what happened in the video they get suppressed and pinned as they should, Obers to far too much damage with 1 burst of their LMG causing HMG death loops and incredible damage.

Again we are not talking about being positioned correctly, we are talking about how Obers or any unit, shouldn't solo an HMG from the front, if anything was positioned correctly it would counter an MG even an AT gun FFS.

By the way, I wouldn't use the fact that you have helped relic with the current balance patch to boast, in a thread about how a faction has been broken due to the recent content patch :crazy:

Patch notes leaked curtsy of Sander93:

Sniper bullets now ricochet off of obers and kill the sniper that fired so obers can continue their role as "a brute strength anti-infantry squad".
4 Dec 2019, 22:16 PM
#65
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773



1. Basically you’re wrong
2. You’re wrong and your opinion is invalid because if you diss the avre you’re an idiot.
3. I just played Ostheer to kick your ass, not my problem you could ‘t beat them :) Also satchels works wonders vs MGs and players who tac map a lot, you’ll find.
4. Still 4, gets better.
5. Tellers are good, Pumas as Ostheer are bad due to timing, AEC is even better.
6. Fun fact, AEC still has vehicle stun and smoke, plus makes every unit around it better. Guess that’s worse than a Pz IV F1 that can’t pen a T70.
7. 5man sections with single or double Brens are very strong, nothing you state can change that.

Okay, hope we’re done here. I can only explain the obvious so much.


1. Elephant+Pak 43 > Firefly+17Pounder. Prove me wrong
2. Try using it, if it was that good, it would be in 90% of the games, like the Tiger commander for OKW
3.Oh did you win? I dont remember (Or care) but whats your point? Bundles do the same job and for much less vs tac map and MGs so ...
4. Still 1
5. Did you just say an AEC is better than a puma?
6. Fun fact p4 command tank has smoke, access to a puma/ATG that can stun shot and isn't gimped by RoF nerfs so it can still be brutal against infantry.
7. 5 man bren IS are fairly strong, yup, but G43 grens are too so lets scrap this one off your list as its been disproven (Like the rest but you clearly gave in on this one)
4 Dec 2019, 22:35 PM
#66
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 22:08 PMLatch
End of, you wont change my mind because I'm right, I wont change your mind because you're wrong.

That's remarkably self confident for someone who is rank 200s (in UKF's skeleton leaderboards) with a win rate barely over 50%. One might even say borderline delusional. But who am I to judge.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 22:08 PMLatch
I "Fail to understand" because obers are infantry you just said their role is anti infantry, well what the hell is an MG's role if it isn't to suppress infantry and be the best at it when said infantry is walking into it head on from max range.

The role of an HMG is to help your army win engagements, and stop most infantry assaults. They are literally called support weapons. They are not meant to solo every single engagement.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 22:08 PMLatch
Commandos are also "brute strength anti-infantry", they can't do what happened in the video they get suppressed and pinned as they should, Obers to far too much damage with 1 burst of their LMG causing HMG death loops and incredible damage.

Commandos are not brute strength infantry at all, they are close range ambush units. They can be equipped with double elite Brens to resemble something of a brute strength AI unit, but their DPS is still nowhere near that of other elite long range infantry such as LMG Obers or M1919 Paratroopers. Commandos can use their camouflage to sneak up on, or throw smoke grenades with vet 1, to respectively avoid or charge right through an HMG's field of fire, but I guess we'll just ignore that.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 22:08 PMLatch
Again we are not talking about being positioned correctly, we are talking about how Obers or any unit, shouldn't solo an HMG from the front, if anything was positioned correctly it would counter an MG even an AT gun FFS.

The game is about positioning in its very core. It's what the cover system was designed for. Why you're so eager to completely ignore this is beyond me. If you put your HMG in cover, Obers lose 50% or 75% of their DPS, and they will have a much harder time (if not impossible) to snipe the gunner model before they get pinned.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 22:08 PMLatch
By the way, I wouldn't use the fact that you have helped relic with the current balance patch to boast, in a thread about how a faction has been broken due to the recent content patch :crazy:

The faction went from blatantly overpowered at release to slightly underperforming now. Which was exactly what we'd expect after (necessarily) nerfing some overperforming clutch units (and buffing other things, such as adding snares) over the last year or so. Balancing isn't done in a single day, especially not on a complex faction ecosystem level, it's done in baby steps. There's no way to fully predict the outcome of certain big changes, and sometimes it's necessary to just see where things land (for example the recent Infantry Section changes) before making other adjustments in compensation (next patch).

I will add that I think the majority of the community will agree that the current balance is in the best state it's ever been since the release of WFA, backed up by high and steady player numbers (for how old the game is), very positive recent Steam reviews, a relatively low amount of balance discussions and a good amount of praise for most changes in the latest patches. You are of course absolutely free to disagree.


Here's a tip for you: ask or look for advice, watch replays and casts to try to form a neutral view on the game and get yourself an inquisitive mindset, instead of immediately blaming balance and fight whoever proves you wrong, and you'll have a much better game experience with better results.
4 Dec 2019, 23:07 PM
#67
avatar of Vermillion_Hawk

Posts: 224

While we're talking about adjusting UKF I'm just going to once more throw it out there that Hammer Gammon Bombs should act like Penal AT Satchels.
4 Dec 2019, 23:08 PM
#68
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

While we're talking about adjusting UKF I'm just going to once more throw it out there that Hammer Gammon Bombs should act like Penal AT Satchels.


lmao no
4 Dec 2019, 23:11 PM
#69
avatar of Musti

Posts: 203

I guess what we've learned is that infantry killing MGs frontally head on is fine, and UKF is balanced an in no need of buffs at all.
Carry on lads.
4 Dec 2019, 23:29 PM
#70
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773


That's remarkably self confident for someone who is rank 200s (in UKF's skeleton leaderboards) with a win rate barely over 50%. One might even say borderline delusional. But who am I to judge.



The role of an HMG is to help your army win engagements, and stop most infantry assaults. They are literally called support weapons. They are not meant to solo every single engagement.



Commandos are not brute strength infantry at all, they are close range ambush units. They can be equipped with double elite Brens to resemble something of a brute strength AI unit, but their DPS is still nowhere near that of other elite long range infantry such as LMG Obers or M1919 Paratroopers. Commandos can use their camouflage to sneak up on, or throw smoke grenades with vet 1, to respectively avoid or charge right through an HMG's field of fire, but I guess we'll just ignore that.



The game is about positioning in its very core. It's what the cover system was designed for. Why you're so eager to completely ignore this is beyond me. If you put your HMG in cover, Obers lose 50% or 75% of their DPS, and they will have a much harder time to snipe the gunner model before they get pinned.



The faction went from blatantly overpowered at release to slightly underperforming now. Which was exactly what we'd expect after (necessarily) nerfing some overperforming clutch units (and buffing other things, such as adding snares) over the last year. Balancing isn't done in a single day, especially not on a complex faction ecosystem level, it's done in baby steps. There's no way to fully predict the outcome of certain big changes, and sometimes it's necessary to see where things land before making other adjustments in compensation. I will add that I think the majority of the community will agree that the current balance is in the best state it's ever been since the release of WFA, backed up by high and steady player numbers (for how old the game is), very positive recent Steam reviews, a relatively low amount of balance discussions and a good amount of praise for most changes in the latest patches.


Here's a tip for you: ask or look for advice, watch replays and casts to try to form a neutral view on the game and get yourself an inquisitive mindset, instead of immediately blaming balance and fight whoever proves you wrong, and you'll have a much better game experience with better results.


I was rank 40-80, the patch hit and I'm losing to players sometimes in the rank 800+ with many of my loses coming from this patch, often 8+ streaks as I try to figure different strats and losing many games when I streamed due to meme ghetto tanks but thats beside the point, I mean, at least I play 1v1's, right!

Nope, they dont have to solo every engagement but here is what they should do as it is their main role, beat 1 infantry squad that isn't in cover, not get beaten by the thing it counters in a favorable situation HEAD ON :)

No we wont ignore it, lets bring the searchlight or infared STG's into play shall we! You know the things that counter a specific mechanic without any issues. So is brute strength relative to DPS or how range dependent on a unit because stand next to a commando and I think its DPS is kind of good, wouldn't you say? With a side by side commando squad and an ober, who will be the "Brute strength elite unit" then?

I think you meant obers are "Long/mid ranged units".

I am ignoring it because it is irrelevant to the video you just saw, if you honestly believe that obers should win that engagement that you saw in the video and you have absolutely no issues with it then please, just say so and prove bias over mechanics which is incredibly ironic seen as though you constantly state that obers are designed to do a job and they are fine but an MG that is designed to do its job that can get countered by the thing it is countering, is also fine because it should be supported... It was 1v1 it was a machine gun, they were head on. No infantry unit, no matter the MP cost should be able to do that, its bade enough squads can crawl up to the vickers and flame grenade it, its an MG it should Pin, it already has many counters flanking, indirect and vehicles it doesnt need to add obers walking directly in front of it to the mix and if you cant see that, and think its fine then I hardly see how I am the delusional one.

Please don't try justify breaking a faction which is what this entire thread is about, with a game having good reviews from the free weekend players and for people that play SP or vs AI as demonstrated by the recent reviews on steam, and currently the in the forums section is:

State of the soviets
The UKF solution
How to make Airbourne Guards better
More bugsplats since the last patch

and on steam is:

How the hell is relic balancing this game
is OSt OP

So where you get the "Less balance discussions" from? Because for as long as I have been here its never slowed down or stopped (and I have been here a fair while). Yes I need help, I need to watch casts and I need strats I will start with these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yua0XfUAYeI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2yIlT3GSlU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97M38P7h9pk

"But they are years old!" (Just showing I have my stripes) I cast too, yet to upload them So I am fairly confident in what should work and how especially in 1v1's where I care about unlike 3v3s + where you can just forget about balance.

Are you a fan of Dane? Hope so! He did a video not long ago about how MG's dont suppress fast enough. I'm sure you'll isten to him more than little ol me though right!

Oh erm aswell, I wont mention that with "being on the balance team" and all that you said obers have no combat bonuses after vet 3 :thumb:
4 Dec 2019, 23:35 PM
#71
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 23:11 PMMusti
I guess what we've learned is that infantry killing MGs frontally head on is fine, and UKF is balanced an in no need of buffs at all.
Carry on lads.


Well now now you put it like that I look silly! Ok carrying on :sealed:
5 Dec 2019, 00:00 AM
#72
avatar of Vermillion_Hawk

Posts: 224



lmao no


Why not? Last time I suggested it you weren't so vehement. Not to mention I've yet to see someone present an argument as to why it shouldn't be so.
5 Dec 2019, 00:09 AM
#73
avatar of YeltsinDeathBrigades

Posts: 110

Throwing out some personal thoughts:
1)UKF opening
Problem of UKF opening in 1v1/2v2 is very long build time of IS and UC.
Only unit which has no problems in timing now is VickersHMG. UKF is the only faction which has no even doctrinal choice to cap map instead of early combat contact like any other faction do.
Another problem is that UKF starts with quiet strong long-range unit which benefits from cover and garrisons, so it is sometimes frustrating to play against and before map reworkings and removings led sometimes to early game closings. This is just not cool to play against, even when started against UKF as OKW.
Solution: rework RE as starting 5-model rifle unit with stats of cons mosin with the same price of 210. Make more REs avalaible to build from the start. Lock AT-nades and object-removal tool in CCP. When CCP is finished, make possible to choose between staying as cheap long-range squad or going into cheap close combat squad. Buff their stens by 30%, remove cover bonus. Make close-combat upgrade free, but lock one weapon slot, because buffed stens can do better damage against weapon teams even they are equiped with 3 stens, and 210 is not a price for Pgren kind of gameplay (2ble PIAT+ATnade+sweeper cheap unit still be possible without stens) It will make RE's more tactical choice without giving UKF anything OP.
With this change UKF will have choice to have a bit worse "osttruppen" build with cheap infantry supported by UC and HMG and early capping or old build with tommies only, slightly different, or something mixed. This change also will give posibility to decrease building time of tommies since they are no longer starting unit.
2)CCPs effectivity and IS upgrades.
UKF, despite all reworks, still have an AEC crutch, which is a very cost-effective vehicle with too early timing of arrival. Howewer, IS is struggling without bolster/weapon rack and are doing slightly too well if invested into both upgrades after purchasing AEC and before researching PCP. Bofors was toned down too much since last nerf, and dies to early to cheap counters like PAK40 and raketen, so it is not a competitive choice
Solution: increase AECs research timing and price, so 222 and 251 can have more "breathing room". Include bolster upgrade into AEC, so it is will not be just a vehicle research, but tactics pick for early-mid game.
Make bofors slightly more durable by adding some HP or giving back possibility to repair normally it while braced (better first so indirect fire units could be more useful). Increase bofors researchs price by the price of weapon rack unlock and add it respectively into research, leave timing the same or add slight increase, not sure at this one, but point the same: more choosing and slightly less worrying about IS upgrades.
When PCP is finished, open other locked upgrade (bolster or rack).
Leave late game the same, since it is fine.

(and yeah, for all possible Gods sake, nerf or replace "Early warning" and "Perimeter overwatch" in Royal Artillery Doc and buff Vanguard officer, he needs some sweet love).
5 Dec 2019, 00:20 AM
#74
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Why not? Last time I suggested it you weren't so vehement. Not to mention I've yet to see someone present an argument as to why it shouldn't be so.


Because it’s a garbage ability that should be removed, not spread to other units. Nobody should have supersnares unless it’s AT nade assault from tank hunter which cancels when you reverse or pop smoke.
5 Dec 2019, 00:41 AM
#75
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

It seems this is more a L2P thread than an actual balance one. I am disappointed.
5 Dec 2019, 05:07 AM
#76
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833



Any suggestions as from experience their unit roster feels at times underwhelming?


One infantry unit and one engineer, both which are rather lackluster and on certain maps you just get bullied vs axis infantry in cqb. It doesn't help brens are basically a downgrade in cqb DPS (point blank they do less than rifles, and two lmg models spinning around to target has an extra effect on that too) yet you need them to trade at medium or long range vs axis inf.

Yet vanilla riflemen can hold their own vs sturms and charging stg volks and even recently got a buff to help in these exact engagements.

Meanwhile Brits have two perfectly good units with unique character models and unique voice lines (airlanding officer and commandos) locked away in doctrines.

Reworking sections, five man and creating a new unit non doc (using existing Air landing or commando assets) that fills the pgren role would give the faction some much needed flavor. And you could make the faction something different then buffing sections into rifleman clones

5 Dec 2019, 06:16 AM
#77
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



Because it’s a garbage ability that should be removed, not spread to other units. Nobody should have supersnares unless it’s AT nade assault from tank hunter which cancels when you reverse or pop smoke.

Its a perfectly acceptable design but its there to offset the weakness of the PTRS. Paired with a piat it would be far too strong. It's balanced on penals, anything else and it may not be. THAT SAID a weaker, version (not full snare) might be OK. Something like a blind crit or wounded gunner as the gammon is incredibly underpowerd/over priced atm.
5 Dec 2019, 06:57 AM
#78
avatar of KiwiBirb

Posts: 789

People are complaining about UKF lacking a mortar. I have never seen a pro player build a mortar in a 1v1, rarely in 2v2 where mortar pits are less vulnerable so compete better with normal mortars and in 3v3 4v4 mortar pits are better than mortars
5 Dec 2019, 10:11 AM
#79
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 23:29 PMLatch
not get beaten by the thing it counters in a favorable situation HEAD ON

An HMG caught out of cover by an elite long range anti-infantry squad, with nothing spotting for it so it can't use its range advantage, is not a favourable situation.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 23:29 PMLatch
So is brute strength relative to DPS or how range dependent on a unit because stand next to a commando and I think its DPS is kind of good,

Brute strength refers to the unit's only or main utility being raw killing power. This is true for Obers, and for units such as Rangers, but not so much for Commandos. Commandos' main utility is their camouflage, which gives them an ambush role. Their raw DPS at range 0-10 is actually not that special at 14.133 per weapon. For comparison, Thompsons have 18.412 and Assault Engineer M3 Grease Guns have 13.441.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 23:29 PMLatch
State of the soviets
The UKF solution
How to make Airbourne Guards better
More bugsplats since the last patch

So where you get the "Less balance discussions" from? Because for as long as I have been here its never slowed down or stopped (and I have been here a fair while).

Only a handful of active threads in the last week(s). One of those you listed isn't even a balance thread at all. Barely 50-80 comments per thread. I would call that a relatively low amount of balance discussions, compared to how the balance forums have generally seen a lot more activity in the past.


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 23:29 PMLatch
Oh erm aswell, I wont mention that with "being on the balance team" and all that you said obers have no combat bonuses after vet 3 :thumb:

They get a suppressing fire ability at vet 4 that literally can not target HMGs, and they get a passive sprint when out of combat at vet 5. Those are not combat bonuses (the definition of combat bonuses being modifiers that affect stock combat performance, like accuracy, anyway) in the context of helping them fight an HMG in any way.
But I guess you wouldn't know if you don't even play OKW.
5 Dec 2019, 10:45 AM
#80
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Dec 2019, 23:29 PMLatch


I was rank 40-80, the patch hit and I'm losing to players sometimes in the rank 800+ with many of my loses coming from this patch, often 8+ streaks as I try to figure different strats and losing many games when I streamed due to meme ghetto tanks but thats beside the point, I mean, at least I play 1v1's, right!



LOL, losing to rank 800+ players when you were formerly ranked 40 just shows how broken IS were in earlier iterations. While most other Brit players agree that Brits are weaker now, you're literally the only one dropping off by such insane amounts, probably because you got too used to abusing high armour UC + IS with early bolster -> ggez win. Brits have been a ridiculous faction for ages, with a combination of glaring roster holes and overly-powerful units cobbled together into a makeshift faction.

I'd rather they be slightly underpowered than go back to the days of rampant Brit cheese. This is literally the first patch in so many years that the Brits have been the weakest faction. Cheers to it staying that way for as long as possible.
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

637 users are online: 637 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM