Login

russian armor

First Review British Forces

24 Aug 2015, 16:26 PM
#1
avatar of capiqua
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 985 | Subs: 2

24 Aug 2015, 16:45 PM
#2
avatar of nigo
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15

24 Aug 2015, 16:45 PM
#3
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

lets
24 Aug 2015, 16:49 PM
#4
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

Comet heavy tank...
24 Aug 2015, 17:02 PM
#5
avatar of kamk
Donator 11

Posts: 764

as I wait for their glacial paced advance like I'm playing The Settlers (attacking with buildings...).
... As adversaries they make me feel like I'm taking up the slack of an AI in a tower defence game, slamming waves of units into the wall of their buildings...

The comments are pure gold :D

Thanks for sharing Capiqua.
24 Aug 2015, 17:26 PM
#6
avatar of Toxrockz

Posts: 34

Nice read! Thanks for sharing.
24 Aug 2015, 17:29 PM
#7
avatar of Jackiebrown

Posts: 657

"British infantry are rugged and difficult to rout once they're dug in, but lack the versatility of Russian, American and German troops." More versatility than Russian infantry. :lolol:
24 Aug 2015, 18:40 PM
#8
24 Aug 2015, 20:11 PM
#9
avatar of SwonVIP
Donator 11

Posts: 640

When you set up your 17-pounder emplacement in a contested zone, and watch advancing enemy tanks pop like overripe melons. - See more at: http://www.gamewatcher.com/reviews/company-of-heroes-2-the-british-forces-review/12298#sthash.Q9eFWVxa.dpuf


not op at all lol :facepalm:
24 Aug 2015, 20:22 PM
#10
avatar of Maschinengewehr

Posts: 334

"The Churchill Crocodile flamethrower tank spews liquid fire at surprising range"

Yeah no shit...
24 Aug 2015, 20:37 PM
#11
avatar of Mortar
Donator 22

Posts: 559

"The Churchill Crocodile flamethrower tank spews liquid fire at surprising range"

Yeah no shit...


So does the OP bren with that upgrade. I predict the 1st whine post on August 31st about OP brits will be this.
24 Aug 2015, 20:40 PM
#12
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2015, 20:37 PMMortar


So does the OP bren with that upgrade. I predict the 1st whine post on August 31st about OP brits will be this.


Lets ignore the fact that croc is 12cp, pure AI tank(it have a pea shooter to scare off that assaulting 222s!) and wasp requires tech, which means it will have short window of opportunity because of lights.
24 Aug 2015, 20:48 PM
#13
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?

I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.
24 Aug 2015, 20:56 PM
#14
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2015, 20:48 PMButcher
Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?

I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.


AT guns, piats, fireflies, cromwell
24 Aug 2015, 21:01 PM
#15
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217



AT guns, piats, fireflies, cromwell
Talking about the gun including the vehicles armed with it.The firefly is armed with a 17pounder. So is the Comet. Late game you are probably facing 17ps only. At least it looked like that to me.
24 Aug 2015, 21:02 PM
#16
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2015, 20:48 PMButcher
Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?

I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.


The 17 Pounder is certainly not essential for the British.

EDIT: Ohh, you mean in that sense. Then yeah, I guess.
24 Aug 2015, 21:35 PM
#17
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2015, 20:48 PMButcher
Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?

I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.


Late game could consist of any of the three churchills as well. Im not sure what there is to be annoyed about, Brits have 3 stock 17 pounder wielding units while USF sobs in shame with its single Jackson.
24 Aug 2015, 22:05 PM
#18
avatar of ClassyDavid

Posts: 424 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Aug 2015, 20:11 PMSwonVIP


not op at all lol :facepalm:


Compared to the Pak 43, 17pdr costs fuel 75(!) for a immobile emplacement and 400 MP. Another thing is that is has pay through Sabot Rounds to shot through shot blockers unlike the Pak 43. Pak 43 also has super turbo stun everything round. At least it does have flares to reveal the area. I remember so many OST and OKW players raging that my 17 pdr emplacement was penetrating and destroying their Tigers and Panthers. I guess only Axis can have the best anti-tank weapons :foreveralone:

I think USF players will be crying over Firefly more than the 17pdr emplacement considering it does 240 damage, more armor (for what its worth with Allies), as mobile, increased damage at Vet 3, and HP compared to the Jackson. Same range too for only 30 more fuel. Has a 9 second reload it seems however. So it looks like Jackson will be better against medium tanks than heavy tanks but can still use HVAP rounds for increased damage and penetration.
24 Aug 2015, 22:14 PM
#19
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053



Compared to the Pak 43, 17pdr costs fuel 75(!) for a immobile emplacement and 400 MP. Another thing is that is has pay through Sabot Rounds to shot through shot blockers unlike the Pak 43. Pak 43 also has super turbo stun everything round. At least it does have flares to reveal the area. I remember so many OST and OKW players raging that my 17 pdr emplacement was penetrating and destroying their Tigers and Panthers. I guess only Axis can have the best anti-tank weapons :foreveralone:

I think USF players will be crying over Firefly more than the 17pdr emplacement considering it does 240 damage, more armor (for what its worth with Allies), as mobile, increased damage at Vet 3, and HP compared to the Jackson. Same range too for only 30 more fuel. Has a 9 second reload it seems however. So it looks like Jackson will be better against medium tanks than heavy tanks but can still use HVAP rounds for increased damage and penetration.


And dont forget tulip rockets. Its 50 muni to equip and 100 muni to use, but it is pretty darn potent...
24 Aug 2015, 22:16 PM
#20
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

I think USF players will be crying over Firefly more than the 17pdr emplacement considering it does 240 damage, more armor (for what its worth with Allies), as mobile, increased damage at Vet 3, and HP compared to the Jackson. Same range too for only 30 more fuel. Has a 9 second reload it seems however. So it looks like Jackson will be better against medium tanks than heavy tanks but can still use HVAP rounds for increased damage and penetration.
I predicted the special snowflake. Not even surprised. 60 range and 240 damage on a turreted tank destroyer. Now even with more durability. Why would I even remotely consider building a Panther? The outrageous thing is that while also being an anti tank unit, the Panther is still stuck at 50 range with the excuse of having a turret. - While also having a shit rof.

Bonuses only for the 17 pounder, because reasons.

Give the Panther a normal reload or more HP.
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

unknown 10
United States 40
United States 14

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

780 users are online: 780 guests
0 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49124
Welcome our newest member, hello88tube
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM