Opinion & suggestions: UKF balancing is overthought.

...

Because we have been running in circles with the performance of IS. Double weapon was a late late game issue and we have already nerf brens for it. The potential is there but munition is not something that magically appears available.

Bolster is to UKF what the T70 is for soviets in 1v1. With the difference is that you can abuse SU early on before they are able to pump out mp after mp on tech to get their light tank out.

Observe 1v1 games or if that's not for your taste 2v2. Most games skip getting weapons and the raw performance of normal bolt action rifle IS is what are triggering most people.
If you don't nerf somehow medic/pyro to be less combat effective at 5 man, there will never be a reason to not get them at all.
Now that the faction has base medics and pyro got more utility out of it, there's room to to play around not been a brain dead upgrade. Adding a weak combat wise model means that you have to opt between utility or raw performance on squads on a case by case scenario. The added model on this utility upgrades is there for survivability.

If they need any perf boost, it should arrive late game with hammer/anvil.

Royal engineers would just upgrade automatically to 5 man after bolster.

...

I think putting muni to bolster would kill the faction again, more so in 1v1.

The problem with UKF is the discrepancy between 1v1 and teamgames. The thin line you thread between them been obsolete for 1v1 and their current state.

Which it all boils down to, IMO, their early game transition and performance with bolster.


I would try on keeping their current 4 model performance and instead nerf the scaling they have through medic/pyro/bolster.

...

I know this thread is a couple days old, but just wanted to say that it's good to hear someone thinking about this clearly, this could be a great solution.

I've posted a lot before on how to balance Tommies, keeping in mind context, overall faction design, and trying to keep the faction unique, so I won't write it all out again.

I was thinking that could also be a solution to simply lock bolster behind the Company CP, to make it a late-game thing, and even increase the price a bit. Then it becomes possible to actually balance Tommies and Sappers. At the moment we're just going randomly back-and-forth and not really respecting anything in the original design.

Because we have been running in circles with the performance of IS. Double weapon was a late late game issue and we have already nerf brens for it. The potential is there but munition is not something that magically appears available.

Bolster is to UKF what the T70 is for soviets in 1v1. With the difference is that you can abuse SU early on before they are able to pump out mp after mp on tech to get their light tank out.

Observe 1v1 games or if that's not for your taste 2v2. Most games skip getting weapons and the raw performance of normal bolt action rifle IS is what are triggering most people.
If you don't nerf somehow medic/pyro to be less combat effective at 5 man, there will never be a reason to not get them at all.
Now that the faction has base medics and pyro got more utility out of it, there's room to to play around not been a brain dead upgrade. Adding a weak combat wise model means that you have to opt between utility or raw performance on squads on a case by case scenario. The added model on this utility upgrades is there for survivability.

If they need any perf boost, it should arrive late game with hammer/anvil.

Royal engineers would just upgrade automatically to 5 man after bolster.



I think putting muni to bolster would kill the faction again, more so in 1v1.

Sorry to be so late replying.

Chosing between bolster and pyro seems a bit harsh to me? Pyro is the only mobile indirect fire the faction gets, especially against OKW where mortar pits are pressured heavily.

Going back to what I wrote before, if you combined bolster with pyro and medic to "attaching an arty observer model" (which could also cost some manpower) UKF could still have these abilities reasonably accessible without having weaker late game. But giving up a weapon slot as a penalty for the utility