Maybe tier 2 needs something similar to Anvil/Hammer?
So 1 unlocks mortar pit and bofors, while 2 upgrade unlocks normal mortar and somekind of light tank?
But this won't solve emplacement problem at all.
Relic FYI, UKF's emplacements are useless due to ISG's
2 Oct 2015, 07:18 AM
#61
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
2 Oct 2015, 07:40 AM
#62
Posts: 271
And how many times he built any emplacements?!!!
The point is how useless and waste of resource emplacements are at the moment
I was replying to someone one else, who actually had what I felt, a good arguement on brits's performance.
But if it has to be about you.
The mortar pit is too expensive and easily countered by over performing incen nades and ISG's.
I think the bofors fine.
The 17 pounders 20 pop cap is ridiculous.
-Insert thousands of theory crafting suggestions here-
Theres my opinion on that, happy?
 | Playercard of Raider_Judo | |||||||||||||||||||
|
2 Oct 2015, 08:12 AM
#63
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Incorrect. Mortar pit has 115 range. Vet 0 ISG has 100 range.
Got some data to back it up?
Old light shells could have that, but current doesn't feel like more then 100 at all, you can barely counterbarrage ISG at vet0.
I like all these "Brits unplayable early-mid game posts"
Tell Aimstrong that ^^. I'm sure he has something to say about it in OCF.
But yeah, UKF emplacements are best used in holding the line, aggressive placements won't cut it.
How good that Aimstrong presents the skill level of your average player instead of the very best beyond capabilities of 95% of playerbase, right?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
2 Oct 2015, 08:56 AM
#64
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Got some data to back it up?
Old light shells could have that, but current doesn't feel like more then 100 at all, you can barely counterbarrage ISG at vet0.
How good that Aimstrong presents the skill level of your average player instead of the very best beyond capabilities of 95% of playerbase, right?
Or it just show that people should stop whining and start playing, they will not improve bitching in the forum.
Coh2 chart show us that Brit have more winrate than OKW and OST in 1v1 and 2v2, so its not all about "Aimstrong", 149 others players can make it, everyone can make it.
2 Oct 2015, 09:13 AM
#65
Posts: 271
Win rate is good because 2 units imo but ill shutup 
| Playercard of Raider_Judo | |||||||||||||||||||
|
2 Oct 2015, 09:13 AM
#66
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Or it just show that people should stop whining and start playing, they will not improve bitching in the forum.
Coh2 chart show us that Brit have more winrate than OKW and OST in 1v1 and 2v2, so its not all about "Aimstrong", 149 others players can make it, everyone can make it.
I have best 1v1 ratio as Brits, .7 but do I think Brits are best 1v1? Not at all.
And you are right, it's not about the Aimstrong. It's about Centaur rush.
When you design faction without useful indirect fire, or without anything which can carry you through mid game or clear builings, all you do is cheesing into OP centaur.
Fix Centaur and suddenly win rate will go down as hell.
If a faction has only 1 good strat (rushing Centaur and then survive till Croc) it's really bad designed.
2 Oct 2015, 09:25 AM
#67
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
Got some data to back it up?
Old light shells could have that, but current doesn't feel like more then 100 at all, you can barely counterbarrage ISG at vet0.
How good that Aimstrong presents the skill level of your average player instead of the very best beyond capabilities of 95% of playerbase, right?
if you want a competitive game u need to balance for the top 5%, they are the only ones who can utilize every aspect of a faction and therefore get the most out of it. if you balance for the average joe u dont need to host another tournament or going esl etc because it will be a COMPLETE mess.
2 Oct 2015, 09:35 AM
#68
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
if you want a competitive game u need to balance for the top 5%, they are the only ones who can utilize every aspect of a faction and therefore get the most out of it. if you balance for the average joe u dont need to host another tournament or going esl etc because it will be a COMPLETE mess.
Oh?
In this case, Centaur is perfectly fine then as its the only unit that allows brits to stay in game at that level and ISG is still batshit OP.
I'm all for balance on high level, but our high level is about 20-30 players repeated in top ranks in different order depending on army.
CoH2 isn't exactly SC2 where top skill leagues are more populated then coh2 multiplayer in all modes.
I'm just saying that even if top 150 brits are doing well, I'd be surprised if brits overall in 1v1 have above 0.5 w/l ratio, but thats just guestimates until relic provides data on their own.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
2 Oct 2015, 09:57 AM
#69
Posts: 271
In this case, Centaur is perfectly fine then as its the only unit that allows brits to stay in game at that level
Well said
| Playercard of Raider_Judo | |||||||||||||||||||
|
2 Oct 2015, 10:01 AM
#70
Posts: 959
All my point is the game design/balance has now affected the UKF to be not right!
Why? because UKF is a faction without combined arms.
Why? because UKF does not have indirect fire for early game. Simple as that
Just giving you an example:
How as Brits are you supposed to counter mg positions, beside from flanking?
The answer to this according to the correct faction design/game balance/combined arms should be indirect fire
But the at the moment your best bet is sniper, because you do not have indirect fire like all other 4 factions.
Seriously, be a little bit fair.
Why? because UKF is a faction without combined arms.
Why? because UKF does not have indirect fire for early game. Simple as that
Just giving you an example:
How as Brits are you supposed to counter mg positions, beside from flanking?
The answer to this according to the correct faction design/game balance/combined arms should be indirect fire
But the at the moment your best bet is sniper, because you do not have indirect fire like all other 4 factions.
Seriously, be a little bit fair.
2 Oct 2015, 10:19 AM
#71
Posts: 959
I love the rage when something counter alllied stuff, and they cannot just chill and camp on VPs to win, so funny every time
Easy mode with brits is ending, face that, Lelic took Your money at first, now they will balance it
You are very wrong man! that's exactly how axis is.
Just check this replay I just played:
http://www.coh2.org/replay/42137/game-design-is-wrong
All they are doing is to camp on vps with many bunkers/mgs/ATs/mortars/mortar hts/ISGs and it is working.
Do you know why? because as brits Do do not have indirect fire option to counter their campy positions. while the axis indirect fire including the ISGs keep hitting/wiping your unit across the map
2 Oct 2015, 10:39 AM
#72
Posts: 928
1st of all, Aimstrong is pretty much a fucking legend.
2nd. You should realize that Aimstrong has developed a style of play - @ legendary skill level - practising it against all the known, normal styles, while his opponents face off against his for the 1st time
and 3rdly. Brits rely on key units, considered borderline, or just plain OP, as they only option. One single style of play, centered on a over performing unit, was the save and grace of a single brave soul, who lost anyway. Well ok, that was OCF, we can use the croc cant we?
Anyway, thats my opinion about brits. I like your way of thinking but I really feel brits are in a very bad place in 1v1.
Thanks for your reply
But yeah, I know Aimstrong played a lot in the CoH1 days, he looks uber because he's played against the likes of DevM, Symbiosis and Fireball, all great players of VCoH, which is arguably harder than CoH2. He's worked on CoH2 longer than the games been out ^^
Usually it comes down to these kind of tourneys to flesh out what tactics to use, what tactics are strong and so on, and the shock value of starts decreases as the tourney continues. Yet people found it hard to deal with DevM M20ss, Aimstrongs Centaur but the thing that won it for them was their very solid, strong infantry play to push Axis into their base.
Brits feels like one of those factions where things go really well or horribly. Could be better as a 1v1 faction.
Oh and Kaitof, I actually agree, Centaur shouldn't be nerfed
I didn't see it as OP, its
Had fun doing this earlier
2 Oct 2015, 12:54 PM
#73
Posts: 392
COH 2 Brits have major problems,one of them is that they arent a viable faction for defencive play(ironic) and second their troops die like flys early game when not in green cover(and you pay alot for that unlike other factions)
also they cant clear garrisoned units,their only true counter to snipers is counter snipe
no wonder people are rushing a centaur
also they cant clear garrisoned units,their only true counter to snipers is counter snipe
no wonder people are rushing a centaur
2 Oct 2015, 12:57 PM
#74
Posts: 1653
All my point is the game design/balance has now affected the UKF to be not right!
Why? because UKF is a faction without combined arms.
Why? because UKF does not have indirect fire for early game. Simple as that
Just giving you an example:
How as Brits are you supposed to counter mg positions, beside from flanking?
The answer to this according to the correct faction design/game balance/combined arms should be indirect fire
But the at the moment your best bet is sniper, because you do not have indirect fire like all other 4 factions.
Seriously, be a little bit fair.
How come that OKW don't have any non-doctrinal MG's Kappa... Also Useless. It's just relic commen sense ...
Relic 
2 Oct 2015, 13:16 PM
#75
Posts: 959
How come that OKW don't have any non-doctrinal MG's Kappa... Also Useless. It's just relic commen sense ...
They have the best early suppressing unit in the game. It is called "Kubelwagon"
But would have probably been nice if they could get mg through teching maybe, like USF
2 Oct 2015, 13:20 PM
#76
Posts: 1653
I dislike the kubel because it's so fragile. A bren carrier can take way more hits
2 Oct 2015, 13:49 PM
#77
Posts: 959
I dislike the kubel because it's so fragile. A bren carrier can take way more hits
Bren carrier is actually very squishy despite costing 15 fuel, compared to the Kubel's fuel cost
2 Oct 2015, 15:32 PM
#79
1 
Posts: 2885
Current state of emplacements is terrible.
Before brace nerf it was hard to kill, yes, but it was easy to counter.
You did not need to kill it, to counter it.
One ISG/Mortar shooting at it was perfect counter.
Your mortar did not get any kills (shooting at emplacement) but on the other hand you forced emplacement to be on brace mode all the time so no kill for them.
It was simple and very good solution in my opinion.
1 unit shuting down another it perfect way.
Currently it's terrible.
No one will spend 400MP for immobile mortars which die fairly quickly once brace is down.
Bofors? Again, 1 mortar is enough to put it in brace mode.
It's like taking 3 units from Brits (that 17 pounder pop cap) which leaves them without mortars, mid game unit to hold the ground and without famous 17p.
Current early-mid game is dying.
No flamers to clear buildings (WASP will help until 222), no SMGs, no assaut rifles, no mortars, no smoke, no nades, no mid game unit to hold the ground (222, flamenwerfer, Stug E; 251/17, Puma, Luchs; Stuart, AA truck; Quad, T70).
This hole should be filled by Bofors or Armored Car but both are useless in current state, which leads us to desperate rush for Centaur because there is no other way to hold in front of HMGs and LMGs.
What's more, it's not like you can afford 400MP mortar pit
I'm still amazed how 2 mortars covered by sandbags, which cannot retreat are losing to 2 mortars on the open field, without any special cover
They should be hard to deal when using tanks or mortars, fairly easy when using late game arty like railway and very easy to infantry as a reward for getting so close.
The best solution to the situation would be keeping brace as is but changing how manned emplacements work. If you put IS in there you should get current buffs but if you put sappers they should slowly but surely repair the emplacement without the risk of dying to ISG fire. That way you would not be able to counter with constant barrage by attack ground but you will have to force a serious concentrated attack on brit position.
2 Oct 2015, 15:34 PM
#80
Posts: 392
The best solution to the situation would be keeping brace as is but changing how manned emplacements work. If you put IS in there you should get current buffs but if you put sappers they should slowly but surely repair the emplacement without the risk of dying to ISG fire. That way you would not be able to counter with constant barrage by attack ground but you will have to force a serious concentrated attack on brit position.
thats a nice idea,it will make emplacements viable and powerful
2 users are browsing this thread:
2 guests
Livestreams
 |
|
|
788 | ||
 |
|
|
100 | ||
 |
|
|
7 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1001
Board Info
387 users are online:
387 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48730
Welcome our newest member, johnsmith008
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, johnsmith008
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM