Centaur

Its simple:

Brits are completely unpopular in 1v1s, together with them being new and all means people are not used to playing against them yet, their strength is also not fully developed as people still L2P with them.

Aimstrong simply exploits inexperience of other people against UKF and exploits axis players playing accordingly to old meta, you can't do old meta vs brits, because they couldn't be further from it.

I also never said its easily counterable, I said you can counter it if you anticipate it, I've written in this very thread that centaur is too strong.

Also, you can't report for biase, hell you can't even report for stupidity, otherwise johhnyb or alex would not be here with us.

Honestly Katitof, between the two of you I think Alex is the less biased.

Centaur needs a nerf. No doubt about that.

But on the other hand it must come alongside with mid-game buff becasue there is huge hole between early - mid game.

Sov can get T70, Quad or SU76.
Wehr has 222, Stug E, Puma
OKW has plenty of options as well. Puma, 251/17, Luchs.
USF? M20, AA, Stuart.

These are units which can go in front of HMG or garrisoned building and push them back easily.
They don't bleed while can inflict heavy bleed on the enemy.

UKF? Mighty armored car

Armored car is definetly not that type of unit. How many times it was seen during OCF?

That's why rushing Centaur is best idea, because it can keep you in game, which can be done also by less powerful units which can roll on the field earlier.

It's like old Sherman 10min rush (tho Centaur rush is much stronger). Sherman was rushed because there was no point of getting Stuart or even AA when you could rely on Lt + M20 into Sherman.

Right now UKF cannot rely on anything during mid game.

Even clearing buildings is insanely hard because of no early game SMGs/Assault Rifles, nades or flamer infantry. Unit similar to Stuart or T70 would solve many issues.

Having used and abused the Centaur in automatch a little, there are two problems I can see with its current implementation.

1. DPS. DPS is extreme and garrison clear is broken, which leads to it being extremely lethal against its own counters such as the Pak40 and Raketen, moreso than any other unit of its type (Ostwind, T70). Lowering lethality and increasing speed in exchange would fix this issue, but everyone already knows that.

2. British tech design. Tank tech was dropped to 280MP / 115F in the last major patch. This cost is lower than any other faction's ability to get comparable units (Ostheer T3, Soviet T4, Major), and is perfectly fine in its own right. This was to be counteracted by the fact that the British player would need to obtain fuel upgrades and dead-end tech units to maintain map presence- the trade offs being the core of any strategy game. These are- Universal Carrier, 5-man squads, Weapon racks, Grenades, Hammer + AEC, and Anvil + Bofors.

This is similar to how T2 works for Ostheer- the 222 slows down T3 speed through unit cost + T2 cost. However, the 222 is invaluable to keeping map control and pays off more than a straight T3 rush through constant counterharrass, as an anti-sniper soft counter, etc.

However, in my experience with the Brits, the solid core of Sections, Snipers, Vickers, Royal Engineers, the 6pdr, and the very effective Vanguard Glider / Commandos are more than enough to hold sufficient ground for fast tech to be by far the superior alternative.

This is particularly due to the linear tech structure of the Brits- Ostheer T1-T3 can be punished by a fast light vehicle, for example, which goes uncountered without investment in T2 for a Pak. However, the Brits will never lack access to their core units due to their straight T1-T2-T3 progression. Of special note is that they will never not have access to very effective antitank, which due to extremely high accuracy and low cost is much stronger versus light vehicles than any other AT gun. The 6pdr is enough antitank to carry a Brit to the Centaur and well beyond, into the lategame, so much so that the 17pdr, Piats, Bofors, and AEC are totally unnecessary.

On top of the sufficient strength of the British core, the dead end tech + units and upgrades often do not have enough impact to justify their purchase. The UC is underwhelming with the Wasp nerf, the AEC does not punish overinvestment into infantry in a meaningful way unlike the Quad, T70, M20, AAHT, and Stuart. Bofors is not necessary, Bren LMGs, and 5-man squads are useful but not necessary, and the Mills bomb is just bad, especially since Sections are bad flankers and are never spammed in the first place.

I believe that a readjusting the strengths of these mid-tier upgrades, making them more viable alternatives OR making these upgrades necessary for the survival of the Brit player against certain builds will go a long way towards making the Brits more multidimensional and interesting to play, and to play against.

Postscript- I do not deny that the Brits crutch on the Centaur vs competent opponents quite heavily. Other unit adjustments should probably be considered (Section ROF out of cover, reinforce value adjustment, Universal Carrier performance). These changes, in conjunction with the above suggestion, would be, imo, ideal.

Allot of words

Well said, I agree with all of it.

wall of text

+1

infinite wisdom

+1

Awesome post

This was something I was thinking about the other day. The arrival time of the centaur is so early because Brits are assumed to have to spend fuel on emplacements or the AEC/Bren but as it stands those units are lackluster and emplacements are too easily killed to justify their fuel cost. I would add infantry upgrade tech to the list but USF and soviets don't take into account infantry tech when calculating teching costs so it seems likely that infantry tech is considered non-essential.

I see the solution to this issue being threefold.

1. The AEC/Bofors need to provide a stronger mid-game advantage. In short there needs to be incentive to get either a bofors or AEC instead of entirely skipping over both to fast tech a tank. These should be bonus tech used to gain a mid game advantage the same way a T70 or Luchs is.

2. The fuel cost of emplacements needs to be reduced and/or removed. The change to brace was necessary but has left emplacements hardly worth the large fuel investment. The mortar pit probably doesn't need a fuel cost since it is the only form of indirect fire a British player has access to that doesn't cost muni while the Bofors and 17 pounder just need to cost less fuel. Despite the cheaper price the large popcap of emplacements will ensure they are not spammed.

3. Increase the price of T3. British tank tech needs to be scaled so that if no fuel is spent it arrives around the same time as every other faction. This should be ~170FU for the first tank assuming no additional FU is spent. Building a mortar pit won't affect tank arrival time while going for the AEC or Bofors would be considered a timing attack meant to secure mid game advantage at the cost fuel and therefore would slow medium armor arrival time.

Put those three changes together and you probably fix the centaur arrival time as well as making emplacements and the AEC desirable again.

This was something I was thinking about the other day. The arrival time of the centaur is so early because Brits are assumed to have to spend fuel on emplacements or the AEC/Bren but as it stands those units are lackluster and emplacements are too easily killed to justify their fuel cost. I would add infantry upgrade tech to the list but USF and soviets don't take into account infantry tech when calculating teching costs so it seems likely that infantry tech is considered non-essential.

I see the solution to this issue being threefold.

1. The AEC/Bofors need to provide a stronger mid-game advantage. In short there needs to be incentive to get either a bofors or AEC instead of entirely skipping over both to fast tech a tank. These should be bonus tech used to gain a mid game advantage the same way a T70 or Luchs is.

2. The fuel cost of emplacements needs to be reduced and/or removed. The change to brace was necessary but has left emplacements hardly worth the large fuel investment. The mortar pit probably doesn't need a fuel cost since it is the only form of indirect fire a British player has access to that doesn't cost muni while the Bofors and 17 pounder just need to cost less fuel. Despite the cheaper price the large popcap of emplacements will ensure they are not spammed.

3. Increase the price of T3. British tank tech needs to be scaled so that if no fuel is spent it arrives around the same time as every other faction. This should be ~170FU for the first tank assuming no additional FU is spent. Building a mortar pit won't affect tank arrival time while going for the AEC or Bofors would be considered a timing attack meant to secure mid game advantage at the cost fuel and therefore would slow medium armor arrival time.

Put those three changes together and you probably fix the centaur arrival time as well as making emplacements and the AEC desirable again.

If you reduce or remove fuel from emplacements, the situation won't change, since there will be either no fuel spend on them or just a little, which will still result in a fast centaur, since they cost a little or no fuel at all.


Won't change a thing.

Edit: didn't see point three on my phone, so sorry, forget what I said, I now see what you are aiming for and I totally agree with you!!!

Having used and abused the Centaur in automatch a little, there are two problems I can see with its current implementation.

1. DPS. DPS is extreme and garrison clear is broken, which leads to it being extremely lethal against its own counters such as the Pak40 and Raketen, moreso than any other unit of its type (Ostwind, T70). Lowering lethality and increasing speed in exchange would fix this issue, but everyone already knows that.

2. British tech design. Tank tech was dropped to 280MP / 115F in the last major patch. This cost is lower than any other faction's ability to get comparable units (Ostheer T3, Soviet T4, Major), and is perfectly fine in its own right. This was to be counteracted by the fact that the British player would need to obtain fuel upgrades and dead-end tech units to maintain map presence- the trade offs being the core of any strategy game. These are- Universal Carrier, 5-man squads, Weapon racks, Grenades, Hammer + AEC, and Anvil + Bofors.

This is similar to how T2 works for Ostheer- the 222 slows down T3 speed through unit cost + T2 cost. However, the 222 is invaluable to keeping map control and pays off more than a straight T3 rush through constant counterharrass, as an anti-sniper soft counter, etc.

However, in my experience with the Brits, the solid core of Sections, Snipers, Vickers, Royal Engineers, the 6pdr, and the very effective Vanguard Glider / Commandos are more than enough to hold sufficient ground for fast tech to be by far the superior alternative.

This is particularly due to the linear tech structure of the Brits- Ostheer T1-T3 can be punished by a fast light vehicle, for example, which goes uncountered without investment in T2 for a Pak. However, the Brits will never lack access to their core units due to their straight T1-T2-T3 progression. Of special note is that they will never not have access to very effective antitank, which due to extremely high accuracy and low cost is much stronger versus light vehicles than any other AT gun. The 6pdr is enough antitank to carry a Brit to the Centaur and well beyond, into the lategame, so much so that the 17pdr, Piats, Bofors, and AEC are totally unnecessary.

On top of the sufficient strength of the British core, the dead end tech + units and upgrades often do not have enough impact to justify their purchase. The UC is underwhelming with the Wasp nerf, the AEC does not punish overinvestment into infantry in a meaningful way unlike the Quad, T70, M20, AAHT, and Stuart. Bofors is not necessary, Bren LMGs, and 5-man squads are useful but not necessary, and the Mills bomb is just bad, especially since Sections are bad flankers and are never spammed in the first place.

I believe that a readjusting the strengths of these mid-tier upgrades, making them more viable alternatives OR making these upgrades necessary for the survival of the Brit player against certain builds will go a long way towards making the Brits more multidimensional and interesting to play, and to play against.

Postscript- I do not deny that the Brits crutch on the Centaur vs competent opponents quite heavily. Other unit adjustments should probably be considered (Section ROF out of cover, reinforce value adjustment, Universal Carrier performance). These changes, in conjunction with the above suggestion, would be, imo, ideal.

This should be the end of the thread. It only took 9 pages to get to a well thought out explanation of problem and solution too

Excellent, articulate post

+1, That exactly echoes my own thoughts as well.

I also had an idea today regarding centaur. Some want to keep its current performance for asymmetrical balance flavour, ya? So how's this sound like:

• Nerf moving accuracy by 90%. Add a small setup time (1s) possibly [Last bit just to prevent pak-sniping by moving into range then stopping]
  
• Keep current base accuracy as is (right now it has infantry accuracy, which completely breaks it as an AI platform)
  
• Nerf anti-building damage and/or accuracy (Only cause of raks)
  
• Nerf acceleration
  
  

The end result I'm aiming for is something like a cross between a flak-track and ostwind. And this way it retains its unique flavour.

All this, of-course, assumes that the rest of british faction remains untouched.

+1, That exactly echoes my own thoughts as well.

I also had an idea today regarding centaur. Some want to keep its current performance for asymmetrical balance flavour, ya? So how's this sound like:

• Nerf moving accuracy by 90%
  
• Keep current base accuracy as is (right now it has infantry accuracy, which completely breaks it as an AI platform)
  
• Nerf anti-building damage and/or accuracy (Only cause of raks)
  
• Nerf acceleration
  
  

The end result I'm aiming for is something like a cross between a flak-track and ostwind. And this way it retains its unique flavour.

All this, of-course, assumes that the rest of british faction remains untouched.

The nerf on the moving accuracy is far too much, and don't touch his mobility it's completely garbage, this tank is slow AF

The nerf on the moving accuracy is far too much, and don't touch his mobility it's completely garbage, this tank is slow AF

It seems a lot but you have to remember that base accuracy of this unit is already extremely high. It has infantry accuracy which is 15-20 times larger than other tanks/vehicles.

Its not the 90% which really matters its the concept of small accuracy on the move.

Also, I want a small nerf to the acceleration. Not a overall nerf to mobility

Mind you, i only presented that flak/ostwind hybrid as an alternative for those who can't abide it losing its DPS, which imo is the better route for balance.

I see where you want to bring the centaur, i didn't know about the accuracy on vehicule

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwPMPnl88cs
Please watch

Decrease it's rate of fire or increase the interval between it's bursts.

Decrease it's rate of fire or increase the interval between it's bursts.

Increase spread at max range and mid range would be good solution too.

...

Not much to add, as it seems it's the general consensus here.

Pretty sure there will be no reason to defend the centaur if the brits had a proper early AI weapon which can be used offensively.

Unlike the Ostwind, the Centaur does a rather bad job in chasing down retreating units. Just keep distance and you won't suffer any more wipes.

Why does it need to chase down units when it can wipe them in one burst?

Mr Strummingbird nails it, +1.