[Winter Balance Update] UKF Feedback

Make your bets, will "Hold the ground" be:

A) The new allied Close the pocket cheese
B) New CHAD pre nerf "Perimeter Overwatch".
C) Virgin "Sector Artillery"

D) All of the above?

Just to discuss the role of Sappers as a combat unit some more to take some of the combat weight of the IS. A few quick thoughts:

5-man Sappers with Stens in T1 with adjusted manpower costs (because of fifth man) without negative modifiers in the open. Not able to bolster of course. Constructing Mortar gets activated with T2. In addition you get an T2 upgrade for Sappers at T2 with two Thompsons and a smoke or WP grenade (taking both slots).
IS Heal upgrade moved from IS to Airlanding officer (gets one medic model) who looses some of his offensive stats along with cost and population to be more in a support officer role.
At Hammer/Anvil Sappers get two different Heavy Engineer Upgrades which fit the style of Hammer/Anvil.

Maybe move Vickers to T2?

Only real downside is that Assault IS at Land Lease Regiment with Thompsons get redundant and have to be replaced with another ability. Commandos on the other side are still distinct enough to justify their existence.

After this changes there would be some more space to balance IS without breaking UKF early game performance. In addition you would have more versatile game openers.

Thanks for taking the time of reading and responding to my post.

Of course, you are reading mine too.

QF 17pd
I am not sure the suggestions was clear to you. The idea is that the two version of the weapon similar to mortar one is cheaper but has limited range but can be upgraded to its current power.

Yeah, I overread that one. That way it would make sense.

Centaur
Centaur has 180/80 armor and 18 target size while ostwind has 110/55 armor and 22 target...

Sure? Can you look this up again? At the stats I look it has 160 frontal armor which is the same as the penetration of Shrek at long range... and Speed is even better than target size, because it means you desn't get hit at all when retreating/kiting (not even speaking about smoke cover of Panzertactican).

Churchill
Churchill has absolutely no problem killing a PzIV even the PzIV is parked in rear.

I think you missread me here. I suggested - like you - to lower penetration and damage so that it has a problem vs PZIV inspite of big health/armor. On the other side I would raise AOE slightly and MG damage output more than slightly, to turn it more into an AI unit. But I would keep the thick smoke.

M3
The commander is far from dead, try hold the line in 4vs4 and see what happens.

Never used it in the last year. What happens?

Heavy sapper
The heavy sapper are simply badly designed and need redesign. Feel free to make you own suggestion.

Normal Sappers in itself are bad designed already, too late timing, no real combat value. So IS has to get the job done. I still think Heavy Sappers are no real option for late game because you have multiple vet 3 IS squads running around, while your single Sapper squad you used for construction/mines/repairing is at Vet 0. It is much more economic to stick to the IS squads that you upgraded already with heal/recon and two brens.

This not nerf but easier access to a version of the unit with lower power level.

You have a promising career in politics ahead of you.

Sure? Can you look this up again? At the stats I look it has 160 frontal armor which is the same as the penetration of Shrek at long range... and Speed is even better than target size, because it means you desn't get hit at all when retreating/kiting (not even speaking about smoke cover of Panzertactican).

Typo error you correct armor is 160 but with buff to speed the small target size and high DPS I do no think that shcrek is a serous threat.

Never used it in the last year. What happens?

The ability is being "buffed" in preview, currently it live it work only in sectors that UKF player has captured. In the preview it work for all front-line sectors. The unit get smaller target size and after a few second separate planes arrive and attack every single enemy target in those sectors.

You have a promising career in politics ahead of you.

Again the suggestion is:
Two version for the 17p one cheaper/lower pop with range of 60 being able to upgrade to current performance.

I have tested them some time ago and they still lose by a decent margin because of the lack of any offensive vet (vet 1 is just for Stens).

That does not seem to be the case. From the little testing I did vet 3 Ro.E in cover with 3 lmgs will beat vet 3 IS with 2 lgms in cover.

Maybe it has also do to with buff to Veickers K reload.

The easy way to go with this upgrade would just be removing the Vickers LMG and reducing the cost, giving Vickers to Sappers doesn't make much sense anyway. That's better than nerfing it by letting it take a weapon slot, so Sappers still have the option to upgrade 2 PIATs.

Think the important thing is that they should not be able to get 3 weapons and I agree that removing the vicker is a better option.

Again I would rather see two different version of the upgrade one for hammer one for anvil. Hammer get the armor and heavy gammon which is a weapon better suited for engineers and Anvil get the repair bonus maybe able to build sandbags/trenches/cashes

Again the suggestion is:
Two version for the 17p one cheaper/lower pop with range of 60 being able to upgrade to current performance.

I.e., a nerf. A lot of your suggestions indicate to me a complete lack of familiarity with UKF units. You take issue with some absolutely bizarre things. When has the 17 pounder being "early" ever been an issue? Remember last patch, where according to you we needed to remove the Heavy Gammon Bomb or the Flak HQ would never be built outside the base again (hint: this was never an issue)?

The Centaur's armour is only an issue if you're trying to fight it with a 222 or a Luchs. Everything else will reliably penetrate it and there's a reason why it's considered generally an underperforming unit currently. The Ostwind has a lot more going for it than straight armour value (speed, infantry killing power, etc.).

I.e., a nerf. A lot of your suggestions indicate to me a complete lack of familiarity with UKF units. You take issue with some absolutely bizarre things. When has the 17 pounder being "early" ever been an issue? Remember last patch, where according to you we needed to remove the Heavy Gammon Bomb or the Flak HQ would never be built outside the base again (hint: this was never an issue)?

The Centaur's armour is only an issue if you're trying to fight it with a 222 or a Luchs. Everything else will reliably penetrate it and there's a reason why it's considered generally an underperforming unit currently. The Ostwind has a lot more going for it than straight armour value (speed, infantry killing power, etc.).

I will skip personal staff since they are non constrictive.

Centaur has the same armor as Cromwell and smaller size while Ostwind has around 60% of the armor of the PzIV and bigger target size.

Centaur is getting a buffs in mobility this patch which where it weakness.

See the stats sound good when you make those false equivalencies, but the reality is the Cromwell has bad armour too, it just has the advantage of speed and smoke to avoid taking hits.

As another example of how your suggestions are coming from a position of little experience, what do you propose replacing the Comet's Vet 3 bonus with if you go through with your changes? Do you even know what its vet 3 is offhand or do you just want to straight-up nerf the unit by couching it in equivocation?

See the stats sound good when you make those false equivalencies, but the reality is the Cromwell has bad armour too, it just has the advantage of speed and smoke to avoid taking hits.

Now you are simply getting hostile, there is nothing "false" in the stats I have provided.

As another example of how your suggestions are coming from a position of little experience, what do you propose replacing the Comet's Vet 3 bonus with if you go through with your changes? Do you even know what its vet 3 is offhand or do you just want to straight-up nerf the unit by couching it in equivocation?

And now you plain wrong. I did not suggest to replace the Comet vet 3 bonus, I have suggested to swamp FF accuracy bonus with penetration bonus.

This debate has taken a wrong turn and is counter productive so I no longer take part in it.

The stats aren't false but the equivalency you are making with them is. Figure it out.

You did actually suggest changing the Comet's vet 3 if you're removing the grenade.

The stats aren't false but the equivalency you are making with them is. Figure it out.

Use equivalency you think is relevant the fact would remain that Ostwind vs Centaur:
Frontal armor 110/160
Rear armor 55/80
Target size 18/22

You did actually suggest changing the Comet's vet 3 if you're removing the grenade.

Comet get 2 grenade 1 ability vet 0 and one auto attack. The suggestions was to remove the ability. The auto attack could also be replaced by something different but that was not my suggestion.

I you have every right not to like my suggestions, if you want you can even explain why. Having that said this is simply not the place to debate weather I am familiar with UKF units or not.

If the grenade was as big of an issue as you make it out to be I don't see why you'd remove the ability (telegraphed by the tank moving right beside the ATG) and not the auto-attack, but I suppose you work in mysterious ways.

I hate pretty much all the suggestions you make (coincidentally these are mostly aimed at nerfing non-Wehrmacht units) not in spite of but rather because I know you don't use these units from the ways in which you make your arguments. Hard numbers mean nothing when you're twisting them and using misleading comparisons in order to justify some objectively bad suggestions.

nerfing AEC timing is a step in a wrong direction. (especially double nerf considering section's capture bonus removal) Some people considered its timing unfair relative to 222. This is because people want to use the 222 vs brits exactly like they do vs USF and Soviets, meaning as a unit that immediately dominates the field for a certain time window. Obviously that's not doable vs the old AEC timing but rightfully so because Brits lack snares on their mainline and rely on the bren carrier (which requires protection vs 222) vs sniper starts.

Why did Infantry Sections have a capture bonus over other infantry in the first place?

Why did Infantry Sections have a capture bonus over other infantry in the first place?

Because brits couldn't field as many squads as other factions, they were balanced around less numerous, but stronger post upgrades infantry.

If the grenade was as big of an issue as you make it out to be I don't see why you'd remove the ability (telegraphed by the tank moving right beside the ATG) and not the auto-attack, but I suppose you work in mysterious ways.

I hate pretty much all the suggestions you make (coincidentally these are mostly aimed at nerfing non-Wehrmacht units) not in spite of but rather because I know you don't use these units from the ways in which you make your arguments. Hard numbers mean nothing when you're twisting them and using misleading comparisons in order to justify some objectively bad suggestions.

The only response I can offer to you is, feel free to join the the preview games I set up and help test these things together.

Commets can lose their grenades and WP rounds when UKF gets nondoc rocket arty. It's easy to see the commet as beeing too well rounded but it's also easy to forget that the brits have a roster that is not equiped for basic tasks such as softening up AT walls before an attack.

Commets can lose their grenades and WP rounds when UKF gets nondoc rocket arty.

The suggestions is not to for the faction to lose them but to move them in to Churchill

It's easy to see the commet as beeing too well rounded but it's also easy to forget that the brits have a roster that is not equiped for basic tasks such as softening up AT walls before an attack.

Although UKF have have issues the argument that "a faction needs rocket artillery stock" simply does not hold water. USF do not have stock artillery and their are fine.

UKF already have smoke and HE barrage on their infatry and smoke round in their tanks that can help vs ATG walls plus a plethora of doctrinal stuff.

The point is that a premium main battle tank has now no reason to have 2 tools that hard counter ATGs, this is simply bad design. The solution of making the Comet more expensive does not really solve anything simply pusses the problem under the rag.

It pack wall become a problem for UKF other solutions can be tested.