Login

russian armor

Commander Update Beta 2021 - British Feedback

PAGES (26)down
28 Apr 2021, 02:01 AM
#381
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

wut land mattress is great rocket arty just a little immobile...

28 Apr 2021, 02:38 AM
#382
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486



British Tanks have been nerfed into the ground which is why British have the lowest win rate because they under perform at all stages of the game. Mortar Pit is a failed experiment that simply doesn't work well.

Whermact/Okw will have some form of reinforce near Mortars/Leig and can keep pressure on the Mortar Pit until its destroyed. If they take damage from the Mortar Pit they simply just need to hit R to reinforce and keep the pressure up forever where the British have to reinforce and watch as the Royal Engineers get 1 shot trying to reinforce simply cannot compare.

British need

Universal Carrier able to capture territory like the Kubelwagon

Vickers Benefiting from Bolster - It may be the best at killing Models but sucks for suppression, the one thing you actually need it for.

Mortar Pit replaced with a normal Mortar. Mortar Pit can be doctrinal or added as into Hammer/Anvil and made to function like late game artillery alternative

OR

Tank Nerfs Reverted So that the faction can actually be good at one stage of the game and maybe they will be equal with other factions win Rate.


Vickers needs a higher Suppression/dps ratio, hopefully more Suppression. My criteria: it should suppress charging Pgrens or Obers without getting naded in the face if it starts shooting at max visual range. Should be a mild number change.

Ro.E need to be more combat capable, so the AO has someone to buff. Or the AO needs to be able to buff himself. Increase far damage of Sten and make their Vet 1 bonus not require cover. Heavy Ro. E may become viable IS replacements.

Give AO a Vickers upgrade. Double bren dilutes him.

Mortar Pit needs faster tear down and for IS to tear them down too. And for pop to change with upgrade, 5->8. Modders have worked out how to do that with Bunkers. Having your CQC do that... means when you lose an engagement there isnt any back line troops to rip it apart. Losing 150 MP is pretty dang rough. Also, stop spamming the upgrade on your Mortar Pit. A 1 mortar Pit placed pretty far back is a super strong smoke dispenser. A 2 mortar pit is friggen expensive. Incentivize 1 mortar Pits.
28 Apr 2021, 02:52 AM
#383
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

why do i keep reading allies mg always get nade in the face, ie poor suppression.

i don't believe mg42 and other mg have that big a difference in suppression that you can get nade in the face.

mg42 does have slightly wider cone to make it tougher to flank. but iirc, mg42 tracking is also a bit slower in the pack

but imo exaggeration to say axis can walk up to allies firing mg and bundle nade them through the cone of fire..

one thing i believe you need to do is manually switching to other squad once you suppress the first one
28 Apr 2021, 03:02 AM
#384
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2021, 02:52 AMmrgame2
why do i keep reading allies mg always get nade in the face, ie poor suppression.

i don't believe mg42 and other mg have that big a difference in suppression that you can get nade in the face.

mg42 does have slightly wider cone to make it tougher to flank. but iirc, mg42 tracking is also a bit slower in the pack

but imo exaggeration to say axis can walk up to allies firing mg and bundle nade them through the cone of fire..

one thing i believe you need to do is manually switching to other squad once you suppress the first one


Its an RNG problem for the Vickers. If it gets a model kill, it loses shooting time due to re-targeting timing. That's not instant, generally .125 seconds or longer, during which the unit recovers some suppression. I've had Pgrens consistently just run straight at Vickers and nade due to that. Its a Suppression/DPS ratio problem. Put all 3 bulletins on MG42 accuracy and watch it suppress less consistently.

Play some UKF and open Vickers. Give it a go.
28 Apr 2021, 03:12 AM
#385
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794



Its an RNG problem for the Vickers. If it gets a model kill, it loses shooting time due to re-targeting timing. That's not instant, generally .125 seconds or longer, during which the unit recovers some suppression. I've had Pgrens consistently just run straight at Vickers and nade due to that. Its a Suppression/DPS ratio problem. Put all 3 bulletins on MG42 accuracy and watch it suppress less consistently.

Play some UKF and open Vickers. Give it a go.


i played ukf and also come up against ukf.
i do not think the vickers are bad in suppression.

i thought all weapon teams will have delay when the gunner is killed. also the new formation now should help.

i don't see any reason for changes to all mg suppression values today. at least unless there's trade offs elsewhere
28 Apr 2021, 03:16 AM
#386
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2021, 03:12 AMmrgame2


i played ukf and also come up against ukf.
i do not think the vickers are bad in suppression.

i thought all weapon teams will have delay when the gunner is killed. also the new formation now should help.

i don't see any reason for changes to all mg suppression values today. at least unless there's trade offs elsewhere


Not the gunner, the TARGET MODEL dying stops the burst, or triggers some kind of stutter.
28 Apr 2021, 03:18 AM
#387
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794



Not the gunner, the TARGET dying stops the burst.


if it's a bug then we should try fix it rather than buff suppression
28 Apr 2021, 03:23 AM
#388
avatar of IntoTheRain

Posts: 179

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2021, 00:40 AMGrumpy


The Land Mattress is really bad in it's current state. Both it and the Sexton need buffs so I'd rather not see them anywhere else until they are improved.


I'd be happy with a manpower cost reduction.

The complaints about the barrage itself are far less relevant if two of them don't cost you 700 manpower.
28 Apr 2021, 03:24 AM
#389
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2021, 03:18 AMmrgame2


if it's a bug then we should try fix it rather than buff suppression



uh, yes. But I've not seen any solution for it. Its been that way since launch. Normally, its not a problem because the unit suppresses before anyone dies, the Vickers just has a low Supression/DPS ratio.
28 Apr 2021, 04:20 AM
#390
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

Recovery sapper being put in royal engineer is very good, but what are they doing in mobile assault ? I see that the flamethrower want to stay but otherwise recovery sapper isn't fit mobile assault very much. They can be replace by a ht for example.
28 Apr 2021, 04:43 AM
#391
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

Now that raid section has truly turned into a rifleman clone - a proper mainline replacement, i think they should be built at base rather than call in, like pzfusi. Also, the sprint and camo can be removed as they nolonger fit the unit role (camo is planned to be removed already) In exchange, they can get other mainline perks like a proper nade, or snare. They can keep the molov, but can also be tried out to have mills bombs or snare after grenade tech.

They will also need a difference icon, as current using of recon section 's icon doesn't fit the unit role, event better if they can be given a difference icon, symbol and name that better reflect the new role. If anything, The "Icon_symbol_assault_tommy" (i dont remember exactly) that look like two tommy symbol stack together may be a good candidate.
28 Apr 2021, 04:57 AM
#392
avatar of IntoTheRain

Posts: 179

Recovery sapper being put in royal engineer is very good, but what are they doing in mobile assault ? I see that the flamethrower want to stay but otherwise recovery sapper isn't fit mobile assault very much. They can be replace by a ht for example.


I just see it as a straight upgrade from the Flamethrower upgrade. (which I think is the idea)

More Smoke and Salvage aren't bad things to have.
28 Apr 2021, 06:01 AM
#393
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1



I just see it as a straight upgrade from the Flamethrower upgrade. (which I think is the idea)

More Smoke and Salvage aren't bad things to have.


Not like im saying it is bad, smoke and flamethrower is nice but i think salvage dont fit the theme,
28 Apr 2021, 07:37 AM
#394
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

Altho more mortars are nice there already is an doctrinal indirect fire unit in Mobile Assault so it doesn't make sense with the overlap there, same thing with the Ost and Soviet commanders that have the Mortar HT/HM-38 and their respective artillery piece and I've almost never seen people use both.

So just an idea but maybe throw in some sort of vehicle in there like a Halftrack or a tank, something like a Valentine/Sherman or AVRE Churchill?

A tank with an infantry support role basically is my thought, there was even a "Close Support" version of the Churchill armed with a 95mm howitzer that somewhat looks very similar to the AVRE but would act more like a Stupa/StuG III E/105 more than a point and click barrage ability.

Pic for reference:



It was called the Churchill Mark V I believe.
28 Apr 2021, 08:46 AM
#395
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

Altho more mortars are nice there already is an doctrinal indirect fire unit in Mobile Assault so it doesn't make sense with the overlap there, same thing with the Ost and Soviet commanders that have the Mortar HT/HM-38 and their respective artillery piece and I've almost never seen people use both.

So just an idea but maybe throw in some sort of vehicle in there like a Halftrack or a tank, something like a Valentine/Sherman or AVRE Churchill?

A tank with an infantry support role basically is my thought, there was even a "Close Support" version of the Churchill armed with a 95mm howitzer that somewhat looks very similar to the AVRE but would act more like a Stupa/StuG III E/105 more than a point and click barrage ability.

Pic for reference:



It was called the Churchill Mark V I believe.


If it were a support vehicle for mobile assault, then instead of the Churchill, i think the Centaur iv close support will be better fit. As mobile assault regiment have commando and centaur cs were use by royal marine armour support group and will be more mobile, it is basically a cromwell with the same 95mm howitzer.

On the other hand, such new vehicle is less likely to make it into the game, to be practical i will create a Supplies universal carrier which able to reinforce and heal, like an ambulance clone but a bit morr durable to work close to the front line, pretty fit mobile assault theme.
28 Apr 2021, 14:11 PM
#396
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954



I'd be happy with a manpower cost reduction.

The complaints about the barrage itself are far less relevant if two of them don't cost you 700 manpower.


They've been reworked so that they are an area-denial tool. They can blunt attacks but don't wipe units, unlike every other faction's rocket arty. To get them to hit anything, they have to be so close that even average players will dive it and kill it. With a PanzerWerfer, you can drive up to just outside of the enemy's visual range, launch an attack that will wipe even full health squads, and usually retreat before being at risk. Same for Katy or Calliope, and the Walking Stuka is in a class of its own. It is one of the bigger factors in the Soviet's poor win rates in 4v4. A land mattress is only dangerous if it is shooting relatively close and you decide to ignore it.
28 Apr 2021, 14:14 PM
#397
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954

To the balance team - thank you for these changes. They feel like they put UKF infantry into a more competitive position. Please consider lowering the Commandoes CP requirements to two like every other faction's elite infantry.
28 Apr 2021, 14:17 PM
#398
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2021, 14:14 PMGrumpy
To the balance team - thank you for these changes. They feel like they put UKF infantry into a more competitive position. Please consider lowering the Commandoes CP requirements to two like every other faction's elite infantry.


USF Paras/Ranger CP is 3.
28 Apr 2021, 14:20 PM
#399
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Raid infantry seem to be based on Riflemen.
Same cost/same DPS/similar vet bonuses.
28 Apr 2021, 16:34 PM
#400
avatar of JPA32

Posts: 178

I'm not a particularly big fan of Raid Sections right now in practice. At 33(!?) to reinforce they are completely unviable as a mainline infantry since you bleed manpower at an exceptionally high rate. I'm assuming a 33 Reinforce cost is a bug or an oversight because I see no reason Raid Sections couldn't be 28.

As for their toolkit, it's all over the place and I don't understand what you're supposed to want out of them. They have no sandbags, molotovs, camo, faster decap/cap rate, and sprint. These things don't really do anything together, it just feels like a mishmash of abilities thrown onto a Rifleman squad in an ultimately kinda bad doctrine.

When I look at Raid Sections I don't see a unit that I would want over any of the other starting Brit units. Regular Tommies are monsters in cover and these don't have the ability to plant cover so I immediately dislike combining them with normal Sections while not bringing anything I couldn't get out of Sections already, as an aggressive unit I would much rather have Ass.Toms who carry a similar toolkit but do their job significantly better in a much better doctrine. ReCo Sappers are cheaper and carry significantly more utility while being a better anti-garrison/cover unit.

The things they do make no sense, why are they so prohibitively expensive to reinforce? Why do the Brits have a Rifleman clone without faster reinforce times to help the unit actually be on the field? Why does the unit have Sprint without having a way to capitalize on damage or gain some utility (Raid Section Snares maybe? The ability to throw Mills Bombs with tech?) Why does this unit have Camo without first strike or the ability to move? What's even the point?

The way I see it, there are 2 different routes this unit could take to have it's own defined role and make people want them. Riflemen Section or Infiltration Section.

Rifleman Section would be similar to the existing version. 0 CP 280/28 but it would gain +Faster Reinforce Time +AT Grenade Snare, +/-Activatable Sprint @ Vet1 -Camo -Only having 10% Faster Capture/Decapture Time. This unit would be a Brit Mainline that could snare and provide a faster map presence and degarrisoning tool in the molly at the cost of Green Cover and higher bleed.

Infiltration Section would be a replacement for Infiltration Commandos because they're just jankily designed. Infiltration Sections would be a 3 CP 4 Man (5 With Bolster for consistency) Infiltration Unit using the new Carbine style Enfield damage model with 2 mutual Upgrades. Ambush Package 1x 45Muni Thompson that provides Gammon Bombs, or the Assault Package 1x 60Muni Vickers K that provides Molotovs. Unit would get +33% Capture/Decapture Rate +First Strike on their Camo and ability to move in camo +/-Vet 1 Sprint
PAGES (26)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

598 users are online: 598 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