Login

russian armor

USF teching system revamp, aftermath.

12 Mar 2020, 14:17 PM
#21
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 214

So ? Only OKW can be in same time turtle and agressive faction with strong lights and heavy armor and of course with non doc late game arty? Meantime defensive tactics should be banned for usf because what? You read that in game instruction ?

If u want Scott to be doctrinal then pls can we make stuka zu fuss doctrinal too?


yes of course. scott is like 1000tims better than stuka.

Stuka is only good against braindead monkeys and buildings. And need like 1000+ kills for vet.
12 Mar 2020, 16:10 PM
#22
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Overall a no.

HMG AP to vet 1: possible

M20: yes to skirt upgrade locked down. No to everything else

AAHT: yes. Wonder if changing what is considered rear and front, only for pathfinding commands, would do any good.

LT/Cpt: no

Removing units: no

Reworking Pack Howie: yes

Shuffling fuel cost: not convinced. See many possible issues.



12 Mar 2020, 16:21 PM
#23
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Removing units: no


I am not sure why you are against moving unit into doctrines especially since "new" units have been move to stock.

The USF tech changes have made the Pack and mortar overlap too much and have practically similar timing and that creates a number of issues.

Currently USF has been move from having limited access to support weapons to have more stock access than they actually need.

Mortar, Pack howitzer, Scott, Sherman HE, Major barrage create a situation where these unit overlap and will either be OP or forgotten.

The problem of the Pack howitzer will not go away even if it is redesigned because of it's timing. It available to soon to the mortar, has a tech cost, so it will either be OP or UP.
Even if one compares it to 120mm mortar it is superior while being stock and available earlier.
12 Mar 2020, 18:20 PM
#24
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Mar 2020, 16:21 PMVipper

I am not sure why you are against moving unit into doctrines especially since "new" units have been move to stock.

The USF tech changes have made the Pack and mortar overlap too much and have practically similar timing and that creates a number of issues.

Currently USF has been move from having limited access to support weapons to have more stock access than they actually need.

Mortar, Pack howitzer, Scott, Sherman HE, Major barrage create a situation where these unit overlap and will either be OP or forgotten.

The problem of the Pack howitzer will not go away even if it is redesigned because of it's timing. It available to soon to the mortar, has a tech cost, so it will either be OP or UP.
Even if one compares it to 120mm mortar it is superior while being stock and available earlier.

Because i prefer giving factions more tools, not less.

A whole "NEW" unit which remove the capability of Rifles to use smoke.

Mortars no longer overlap with Pack Howie as much since the moment they had all (mortars) become less lethal. Complaining about Mortar/Pack Howie overlapping with Scott/He sherman is like saying that AT guns and TD overlap too much. The barrage on the major will only overlap the moment it's free.

The timing on the Pack Howie is not the issue. No more than a Land Mattress or a Stuka arriving early atm. Would it be much better as a different type of unit sure.


12 Mar 2020, 18:45 PM
#25
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Because i prefer giving factions more tools, not less.

Giving them more tools yes giving them the same tool in different version no.
Making the Pack or the Scott doctrinal will not actually deprive the USF on any tool.


A whole "NEW" unit which remove the capability of Rifles to use smoke.

Mortars no longer overlap with Pack Howie as much since the moment they had all (mortars) become less lethal. Complaining about Mortar/Pack Howie overlapping with Scott/He sherman is like saying that AT guns and TD overlap too much. The barrage on the major will only overlap the moment it's free.

It is unclear to me why in your opinion the Mortar and Pack howitzer do not overlap. Both provide indirect fire support, both can be used vs static units or structures.

Trying to balance and keep both units relevant is pretty difficult.


The timing on the Pack Howie is not the issue. No more than a Land Mattress or a Stuka arriving early atm. Would it be much better as a different type of unit sure.

Yes it is. Ostheer have nothing to counter it at that time frame. The unit is superior to the 120mm mortar while being stock.

It has become pretty common in 2 vs 2 games and above for players to produce two of them and harass everything.

12 Mar 2020, 19:11 PM
#26
avatar of CreativeName

Posts: 281

USF doesnt need a rework like this imo, just nerf the broken stuff: pak howi/scott/Wc51/recon support air drop.

I would like to see the free officer locked behind their mech upgrade but thats about it.
MMX
13 Mar 2020, 02:30 AM
#27
avatar of MMX

Posts: 999 | Subs: 1

IMO the usf tech structure after the overhaul is fine as it is currently and i'd stay away from any major revamps. the split of soft and hard suppression and AT platforms between lt and cpt tiers provides some strategical depth (at least in theory) and already limits the access to teamweapons to some degree. i'd also say mortar and pack howi are distinct enough in both timing and purpose, since the former is mostly limited to serve as a smoke dispenser anyway.
all that's needed at this point is probably to bring the pack howi and scott in line with other indirect fire options
13 Mar 2020, 09:36 AM
#28
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Overall a no.
LT/Cpt: no

I think at at least some of the suggestion should go thru


LT/Captain Bazooka moved back to captain bar to LT


LT has access to Stuart and to HMG AP rounds so it seem a bit strange that in addition it has access to a "free" bazooka. Even if major need and builds an AT it might be circle strafed with support and that even strange.

Weapons now require mechanized unlock before becoming available


This change simply reduces the power spike and it is necessary imo if some of fuel is move to mechanized

Captain now has access to grenade grenade now share CD (Major looses access to smoke grenade)


I see little reason why Captain does not get a frag grenade and having CD with smoke grenades is a standard. Major already has a tonne of utility while the is little reason for a smoke grenade and barrage in the same unit.

Remove shared veterancy from LT/Cap.

There is very little for unit with good combat stat to have shared veterancy and this change should apply to all officer that have it (accept Major)
13 Mar 2020, 10:15 AM
#29
avatar of JulianSnow

Posts: 321

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Mar 2020, 09:03 AMVipper
(edited.)


I, for one, like this proposal. I find it really hard to beat USF in 2v2 games, especially when they are supported by another USF.

Moving the scott to a doctrine would somewhat make it bareable that this unit is so redicously strong.
13 Mar 2020, 11:00 AM
#30
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 214



I, for one, like this proposal. I find it really hard to beat USF in 2v2 games, especially when they are supported by another USF.

Moving the scott to a doctrine would somewhat make it bareable that this unit is so redicously strong.


The problem is not alone the Scott but the combination of the strongest inf in the lategame and the M36 field presence.

Scotts hammering ur support weapons and if u try to rush and get them there jacksons to cover it up.
USF player has stupidly strong range advantege with low micro input.

The only "good" solution is getting a JT or Ele... especially in 2v2 with a SU partner that picks an anti arty commander its super strong.

The whole USF lategame M36 combinations are very annoying to play against... but what i am talking about we have 10+ Threads about this over the last months.:(
13 Mar 2020, 12:01 PM
#31
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220



USF player has stupidly strong range advantege with low micro input.

The only "good" solution is getting a JT or Ele... especially in 2v2(

Ah good old Axis logic because ele and brumbar/werfer combo is very micro intensive.
I can understand that people dont like usf units but people seems to forget that axis always have the last word (Jackson2<ele) finnal solution for evrything. Meantime good luck with teamweapon spam as brit.
13 Mar 2020, 12:45 PM
#32
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 214


Ah good old Axis logic because ele and brumbar/werfer combo is very micro intensive.
I can understand that people dont like usf units but people seems to forget that axis always have the last word (Jackson2<ele) finnal solution for evrything. Meantime good luck with teamweapon spam as brit.


u mean the slowest tank in the game ... which can be destroyed by a t34 if outmanuverd.
And the brum the tank which is the most micro intesiv tank after the Sturmtiger.

so the scott is much better than the werfer... u get constant presure an the field... and not like ... one salvo and than 1hour nothing.

And to if ure not able to beat the slowest tank with the top TD in the game there is something wrong.
(if u play USF style and sitting in the back... yes maybe u lose against an ele but u can easy kite the ele. BUT this is micro intesiv and took some skill)

Another think is that Jackson/Scott is stock... and ele NOT.

As USF u have also the best repair in game... not like ost which need 2 upgraded pios to do this in normal speed.

Last word:

like moblie lategame arty ?
best moble TD ?
6 Men Units?
AI lategame tanks?
better commanders ?
13 Mar 2020, 13:10 PM
#33
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1




Last word:

like moblie lategame arty ?
best moble TD ?
6 Men Units?
AI lategame tanks?
better commanders ?


Stock rocket arty ?
Superior static howitzer compare to allies stacic one, with auto counter battery ?
Best standard and premium med ?
Stock elite infantry ?
Stock super heavy tank ?
Cheap, uncountable recon ? Etc


13 Mar 2020, 13:11 PM
#34
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

PLS do not turn this is into a balance debate and focus more on the suggested changes.

One can start with the ones he likes and the one he does not like and some justification might be helpful.
13 Mar 2020, 13:30 PM
#35
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Revamps of faction IS a balance debate, because it would flip balance upside down.

Don't try to fix what isn't broken. USF is fine as is and doesn't need any further revamp nor it would get any right after it got one that clearly improved the faction.
13 Mar 2020, 14:49 PM
#36
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

As the tittle clearly says these suggestion are not another revamp, they are fixes to problems creates by the USF tech revamp. And this is a process that should be followed and majority of changes. After the change the result should be evaluated and the change should be fine tuned. There both balance and design issues.

The current USF vs Ostheer much up is is simply unbalanced and either USF tech changes need to fine tuned or Ostheer need to buffed.

A number of problem was crated by the USF tech revamp thus is logic and easier to fix USF than buff the Ostheer.
13 Mar 2020, 15:10 PM
#37
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

The officer cost maths in the OP is wrong. Officers were increased to 250/35 afaik

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Mar 2020, 09:23 AMVipper

If the Pack howizter remain in captain and the mortar in T0, I do not really a solution, it will either be OP or not cost efficient compared to mortar.

The timing is simply wrong.

In addition as long as USF have access to a better indirect fire weapon they will be able to bully Ostheer.

The problem with USF mortar is that even if you use manual barrage and even if the enemy MG doesn't move, mortar will still miss majority of shots maybe just grazing a model. Meanwhile Pak howie hits the target when you order a barrage. I tried countless times to use USF mortar in 2v2 early to counter MG or static play, but it's just more effective to wait for pak howie because USF mortar only hits when the enemy is in a garrison and not behind green cover. I don't care if other mortars are similar, USF mortar just doesn't fulfill its intended role no matter how much attention you apply to it. Pak howie rewards barraging actively and is therefore more desired.

I would remove autofire from all mortars and either make barrages more responsive, more accurate or increase the ROF.

Sorry for mortar offtopic, but the talk about indirect fire in case of USF comes quite often and the underuse of USF mortar comes simply from a fact that it underperforms in its role. It's only good when the opponent occupies a building.
13 Mar 2020, 15:39 PM
#38
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The officer cost maths in the OP is wrong. Officers were increased to 250/35 afaik

Thanks for the correction :).


The problem with USF mortar is that even if you use manual barrage and even if the enemy MG doesn't move, mortar will still miss majority of shots maybe just grazing a model. Meanwhile Pak howie hits the target when you order a barrage. I tried countless times to use USF mortar in 2v2 early to counter MG or static play, but it's just more effective to wait for pak howie because USF mortar only hits when the enemy is in a garrison and not behind green cover. I don't care if other mortars are similar, USF mortar just doesn't fulfill its intended role no matter how much attention you apply to it. Pak howie rewards barraging actively and is therefore more desired.

I would remove autofire from all mortars and either make barrages more responsive, more accurate or increase the ROF.

Sorry for mortar offtopic, but the talk about indirect fire in case of USF comes quite often and the underuse of USF mortar comes simply from a fact that it underperforms in its role. It's only good when the opponent occupies a building.

I doubt that the Ostheer mortar is allot better but that is not an issue here. If the mortar replaces the Pack Howitzer in Captain and it need a buff it should receive one.

The point here is that the Pack howitzer (PH) is simply too powerful for is time frame and leave ostheer with nothing to counter it. To make things even worse Ostheer early stock ability to attack early is notoriously bad.

The PH simply needs to be moved. The suggestion aim at exactly that. If one move to T4 and make Scott doctrinal it will have solve to major USF issues. The early power and the Scott/M36 combo.
13 Mar 2020, 16:27 PM
#39
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Mar 2020, 15:39 PMVipper

If one move to T4 and make Scott doctrinal it will have solve to major USF issues. The early power and the Scott/M36 combo.
U are right scott should be replaced by caliope, it could work
13 Mar 2020, 16:30 PM
#40
avatar of BrickTop

Posts: 88

i think nerfed pack howi with cheaper mg and stuart can fix this
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

776 users are online: 776 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM