Commander Update Beta 2021 - British Feedback

Mainly Balance reasons. We discuss it and we couldn't agree of how would it work and it was a big concern that this unit will turn into overpower unit. It would require a lot of time and more than 1 patch to balance it proparely. For example as british emplacement it sohuld have brace for consistency. Brace in emplacement that can fire from half of the map would make it almost impossible to counter. It was consider as an alternative unit in advantance emplacement regiment. I guess we end with conclusion that it's bigger risk than reward.

As for the future we will have to see, but sadly i doubt that we gonna see a new unit.

I may not replay a lot on this forum but i can assure you that we do read most of those posts and yes, we discuss many of those topics in the meetings.

Thank you very much!

Yes, I agree that brace would be questionable on this unit. If it does get brace, then it would need to have a shorter range than other howitzers (but still longer than heavy mortar barrage), so the builder would be forced to put it close to the frontline.

I don't think it needs Brace.

Personally I would like to see Brace removed so we can work on making emplacements actually useful for British especially since they suck away your manpower like crazy.

I don't think it needs Brace.

Personally I would like to see Brace removed so we can work on making emplacements actually useful for British especially since they suck away your manpower like crazy.

emplacements need to become manned defenses instead of either tower defense or hot garbage. gut performance offensively and defensively when not garrisoned, gut the pop cap, lower the costs. stop having them all or nothing. garrisoning them HSOULD have been the way to gate performance and instead we have seen garrisoning them made basically pointless...

I don't think it needs Brace.

Personally I would like to see Brace removed so we can work on making emplacements actually useful for British especially since they suck away your manpower like crazy.

Agreed.

Something like the mortar emplacement basically just becoming a big ass trench that gives garrisoned mortars inside some buff or something would be nice.

Not sure on what to do with the 17 pounder and Bofors. Since the 17 pounder for example is too big to be useful in urban combat and cannot fire through shotblockers like the Pak 43, which is infinitely more useful to me at least rather than being able to take a sturmtiger shot while being relatively useless throughout a match.

While the bofors just feels like a bigger flak emplacement so I have no idea on what to suggest about it.

Agreed.

Something like the mortar emplacement basically just becoming a big ass trench that gives garrisoned mortars inside some buff or something would be nice.

Not sure on what to do with the 17 pounder and Bofors. Since the 17 pounder for example is too big to be useful in urban combat and cannot fire through shotblockers like the Pak 43, which is infinitely more useful to me at least rather than being able to take a sturmtiger shot while being relatively useless throughout a match.

While the bofors just feels like a bigger flak emplacement so I have no idea on what to suggest about it.

This would be MUCH easier to balance/design around if the 17-pounder and Bofors had "moving" animations. Being able to pack up and move them around would mean they wouldnt need to be balanced around their complete immobility, and instead be balanced around having to "dig in" before being able to attack.

The Mortar Pit could already just pack up into a squad holding two mortars, but unless there's some models of infantrymen carrying around bits of bofors/17 pounders, or either can be made to be pushed around by infantrymen, this will somewhat hamper potential design.

Show Spoiler

...

6/7 years too late.

Emplacements should had just been "trenches/garrisons" that unlocks new abilities, leaving the possibility to move the weapons around and it been possible to actually bleed/kill models for mp drain rather than been either destroyed or nothing.

The 17 pounder should just be equal as it is now. In regards to Bofors, it could be cheap AA only unit and only when deployed for X resources it is able to attack ground targets or use it's barrage. Moving it from place recovers a % of the resources expended letting it be deployed somewhere else if needed.

This would be MUCH easier to balance/design around if the 17-pounder and Bofors had "moving" animations. Being able to pack up and move them around would mean they wouldnt need to be balanced around their complete immobility, and instead be balanced around having to "dig in" before being able to attack.

The Mortar Pit could already just pack up into a squad holding two mortars, but unless there's some models of infantrymen carrying around bits of bofors/17 pounders, or either can be made to be pushed around by infantrymen, this will somewhat hamper potential design.

Show Spoiler

It's my own personal opinion that emplacements should have been locked behind Anvil, which in turn should have been a choice available to the player to make at T0 which is not exclusive with Hammer.

So if you wanna go heavily defensive/static you can go Anvil which would unlock the emplacements along with other defensive options and abilities like trenches, sandbags, maybe even the 25 pounder like in the original game, burst shells and so on and so forth.

Hammer would be the AEC and the more offensive tanks like the Comet and Firefly, bolster, gammon bombs and so on.

Basically you would be provided with a choice, you have a basic tool set which might be sufficient for you but doesn't excel at anything but it doesn't lack anything either, so a jack of all trades approach somewhat.

Then you could either go Hammer or Anvil depending on your situation and what you choose to do at a cost of course but if you change your mind you can unlock the other specialization a bit later, but again, at a cost.

It's something similar of the Ostheer system in the Eastern Front mod for CoH from where I believe Relic took the idea about the Hammer/Anvil specializations in the first place since they seem very similar.

It's my own personal opinion that emplacements should have been locked behind Anvil, which in turn should have been a choice available to the player to make at T0 which is not exclusive with Hammer.

So if you wanna go heavily defensive/static you can go Anvil which would unlock the emplacements along with other defensive options and abilities like trenches, sandbags, maybe even the 25 pounder like in the original game, burst shells and so on and so forth.

Hammer would be the AEC and the more offensive tanks like the Comet and Firefly, bolster, gammon bombs and so on.

Basically you would be provided with a choice, you have a basic tool set which might be sufficient for you but doesn't excel at anything but it doesn't lack anything either, so a jack of all trades approach somewhat.

Then you could either go Hammer or Anvil depending on your situation and what you choose to do at a cost of course but if you change your mind you can unlock the other specialization a bit later, but again, at a cost.

It's something similar of the Ostheer system in the Eastern Front mod for CoH from where I believe Relic took the idea about the Hammer/Anvil specializations in the first place since they seem very similar.

Yes hammer/anvil is a good idea that is implemented bad.

One could even remove the mutually exclusively part, add a choice for each tier and make UKF much more interesting as factions.

Yes hammer/anvil is a good idea that is implemented bad.

One could even remove the mutually exclusively part, add a choice for each tier and make UKF much more interesting as factions.

My thoughts exactly as I already said.

If it's not too late to fix things for the patch/add things for the inevitable hot fix.

Tactical Support's Observation Post has two things that need fixed. 1. Suppression Strafe still targets vehicles - should be infantry only. 2. The Smoke Artillery's casting range appears to be broken - it's the same as the Base Howitzer's range when it used to be much longer.

If it's not too late to fix things for the patch/add things for the inevitable hot fix.

Tactical Support's Observation Post has two things that need fixed. 1. Suppression Strafe still targets vehicles - should be infantry only. 2. The Smoke Artillery's casting range appears to be broken - it's the same as the Base Howitzer's range when it used to be much longer.

Too late for this patch, but we'll have a look at this for a next one. Thanks for the heads up.

If it's not too late to fix things for the patch/add things for the inevitable hot fix.

Tactical Support's Observation Post has two things that need fixed. 1. Suppression Strafe still targets vehicles - should be infantry only. 2. The Smoke Artillery's casting range appears to be broken - it's the same as the Base Howitzer's range when it used to be much longer.

I'll try to help owo