Why Brits aren't op (and their design isn't bad)

Churchill ain't broken. In 1v1 and 2v2 it's a risky investment at 19 popcap. It's less agile than a grandma with a broken hip. 1400 HP and "above average" armour of 240 pretty much make it a tanky tank that tanks, nothing else. You'll never see a decent player use Churchill on it's own. However, being effective in combined arms is not a proof of "broken". Broken units are those that can be spammed and close the game.

Its a prove that it shouldnt be blantly buffed, because all it can do make ppl switch from hammer meta to anvil one.

Right now its just not cost effective and comet is just a better option like always. This is pretty much the only two things keeping them at bay. They are not su76 or M20 bad, and they are not out of place like Pershing.

Imagine if Ost have had an stock chose between OKW P4 and standart P4 as an single unlock. Everyone would have gone for OKW P4, just because its a better overall option, but it doesnt mean that stock P4 is any bad of a unit.

Comet is good in any gamemode, not 1v1 and 2v2, its good everywhere. The only difference that in 3v3 and 4v4 you need to mass it a bit and the use it with somesort of an arty support and you can completly obliterate whole frontline.

the churchill mostly scales with teamgames... imagine 4 churchills by 1 guy fielded in a 4v4... each one capable of cleaning infantry and does decently enough against panthers and AT.... starts to become a problem imo...

Yes, 4 Churchills are amazing at getting an Elefant to vet 3 in a hurry. Not to mention double vet 3 pak40s.

Yes, 4 Churchills are amazing at getting an Elefant to vet 3 in a hurry. Not to mention double vet 3 pak40s.

Yeah pretty much Elephant\Jaghtiger will be must have in team games. Thx, we already have brummbar spam, arty spam and camping with TDs, 5 men gren blobs and so on. Lets make it even more cancerous.

All this sexy 1v1 bandages and ideas and fixes, fucking up game even more outside 1v1.

I can't really agree with this. I think the Comet is the most broken armoured unit in the game right now. Even the KV1 and KV2 pale in comparison. Not only is it too cheap at 175 fuel, not only does it have 2 different smoke shells and crew grenades, not only does it have war speed, not only does it have amazing (290!!!) armour and mobility, but its main gun anti infantry effectively makes it a medium generalist/tank destroyer. This is way too much. It should either lose its utilities, get more expensive, or lose some anti infantry. In its current state the Cromwell is a meme since you have a far stronger stock option for the same role as well as an additional role (anti tank).

On the opposite side, the Churchill is absolutely shit at 19 pop. It should definitely lose some pop cap, 1 or 2, and get some repair speed back in the form of damage reduction and less HP, like the KV1 got. Cromwell should also be made cheaper, 110 fuel is far too much for what it brings to the table.

BRENs I don't disagree, but some touches on sections are needed imo, buffs and nerfs.

The Churchill should be given the utilities to fulfill itself as an infantry support tank.

The reason Brits vary in strength so wildly is because of relics stupid design decision about tech choices and varying unit strength depending on tech choices and commander making them impossible to balance. I would hope, if we get a CoH3 after relic inevitably can't live up to the hype of AoE4 they completely strip all of this out of the game.

The 5 man upgrade for Tommies means to balance them you either have to make them tolerable at 4 man but OP at 5 or awful at 4 man but decent at 5.

To balance the Command vehicle upgrade means you have to make all of their tanks either terrible without the command vehicle or decent but OP with it.

The same with assault infantry, commandos and assault sections are some of the most effective and useful assault infantry in the game but they're tied to commanders so you have to choose to either have Amazing assault infantry or none at all! The same is true for their indirect fire in that you either play Royal Artillery and have it, or don't have not.

The entire design is an impossible to balance mess. At the moment the faction is decent with glaring flaws. Which decent players know how to exploit. I fear any changes will just make them unusable again.

I say this all the time but you MUST balance a game to reflect the skills of the BEST players at a competitive level and let the hoi polloi work it out otherwise it kills the game.

I personally would revamp the faction to remove all of these decisions and then rebalance accordingly. Brits still have the smallest roster of any faction anyway, allowing them to just use everything would just put them on par with the others. Make sections 5 men by default and allow the AEC to always upgrade with the Command vehicle upgrade (or remove it entirely and buff the tanks accordingly) and give the effected commanders something else. Remove this stupid idea of a limited but flexible roster and suddenly you have a faction you can actually balance that people don't hate.

All this sexy 1v1 bandages and ideas and fixes, fucking up game even more outside 1v1.

this... factions should be balanced for all gamemodes not just 1v1...

Yeah, bolster is a pretty shitty design choice. Its been a problem for balance since release and as HoverBacon states makes either 4 man suck or 5 man OP, and considering how reliant UKF is on Tommies in the meta it seems like how UKF sits in the meta is purely reliant on how strong Tommies are + some faction cheese.

I've always been supportive of removing bolster entirely, however that will never happen so the balance team is stuck in limbo trying to balance two squad types for 1 unit.

Sees thread

I thought I had seen the last of these things...

Firefly in 1v1? probably not worth it 90% of games. Firefly in any other gamemode? As good as the other allied TDs when you know how it works.

For me the only op stuff is, that Tommies get their full bonus also in yellow cover. That should be removed, they can build cover and get double LMG upgrade, so why they benefit from that brain-dead mechanism lead to blobbing?

So, give them access to the reload cover-bonus only in green and garrison.

I don't think the tanks are an issue, I think they are all good within their context. Beyond some small tweaks I wouldn't touch them.

The Cromwell is good for its timing (if you can manage to skip Bolster/AEC/racks then Brit tank teching is very cheap), and with the Comet/Churchill being available stock to transition into it isn't really meant or doesn't need to be a workhorse like some of the other medium tanks. I don't think it needs anything. It's a good unit to keep up the pressure in the mid game to bridge the gap to Hammer/Anvil.

The Firefly is pretty much as good as the other TDs when it can operate in a relatively confined space, so 2v2-4v4 maps, and it becomes great with veterancy and/or a Command Vehicle. I can see how its slow responsiveness (low mobility and stock turret traverse) can be a problem in 1v1 though. Not sure if I'd change anything. 1-2 vet 3 Firefly/flies with an AEC Command Vehicle is easily the best AT in the game, although it's very expensive to set up. Perhaps switching around the vet 1 (+15% acc/dec) and the vet 2 (+35% turret rotation) bonuses might be an option that would help it in 1v1 without having too much impact on the larger modes.

The Centaur is great for its timing too, although a bit of a risk (no AT obviously). Its vet 1 ability is very powerful because it can instantly wipe out ATGs (if it doesn't bug out). One adjustment could be giving it higher mobility and nerfing its moving accuracy, so it would be able to get out of tricky situations more easily without becoming too good at wiping on retreat.

The Comet is a bit too good now, I think a small nerf to its cost or to the WP (like higher aim time) would be fine.

The Churchill could probably lose a population point, but not much else I think. The Comet is simply the better option in most cases because it is more versatile, but the Churchill itself isn't bad at all.

Yeah, bolster is a pretty shitty design choice. Its been a problem for balance since release and as HoverBacon states makes either 4 man suck or 5 man OP, and considering how reliant UKF is on Tommies in the meta it seems like how UKF sits in the meta is purely reliant on how strong Tommies are + some faction cheese.

I've always been supportive of removing bolster entirely, however that will never happen so the balance team is stuck in limbo trying to balance two squad types for 1 unit.

Main design fail with bolster is that it has zero disadvantages what so ever. I mean, cons 7 men grade, which is awaible pretty much close to late game, while bolster just gives you plain permament one time unlocked boost.

snip

Cromwell argument makes no sense whatsoever. Ostheer has T4 with Brummbar and Panther, OKW has Panther in the same tier and KT stock. Both factions have workhorse Panzer IVs, yet the Cromwell is the issue? It should absolutely be a workhorse tank, but right now its value is not good enough for its cost at all, which is why AEC into Comet is the best UKF strat at the moment. It should either be better or cheaper. Leaving it untouched is the same as leaving the Maxim untouched, 0 sense to it.

The Churchill going to 18 pop would be okay, but the Comet should be 195 fuel for what it does, not 175. It has replaced the Cromwell as the faction's generalist tank due to its overpowered anti infantry capabilities.

Main design fail with bolster is that it has zero disadvantages what so ever. I mean, cons 7 men grade, which is awaible pretty much close to late game, while bolster just gives you plain permament one time unlocked boost.

Plus bolster doesn't lock anything out. You can still double arm AND get Pyro or med kits. For cons 7 man is that or something else. No both.

Bolster design I believe is the crux of Brit design as was mentioned before. As a result of its conless nature tommies are either good then OP or bad then good as 4 and 5 man respectively. It's either a massive power spike that makes em too strong or an unnecessary gate for tommies to be worth their price.

Keeping in mind that design is subjective, I disagree strongly. The original British design in CoH2 is one of the worst in the series, after CoH1 British.
The last 4 years of changes have made the faction more normal, but it's built from scraps and hotfixes. Considering where the faction started, it's turned out alright.

I think that the real lessons from the series' expansions are that factions need all tools (anti-building, snare, suppression) to feel well-rounded, and if they're going to try something other than the combined arms system that the game is built for, the alternative needs to be compelling.