Firefly and the tulip

Tulips need a nerf, and when this happens firefly cost should be reduced. No tank should be one shotted by another, that is just bad gameplay. This is made worse by the tulips piercing, which is also stupid. When you are using heavy tanks vs. Fireflies you are basically constantly fighting with 50% health since you know he can, and will, launch the tulips as you get low on health. Since heavies cannot maneuver away you have to assume as you reach half health the tactical nuke is inbound. This is both boring and counter to how heavies are supposed to be flanked not approached head on.

I drew a picture for you.

It's really simple, reduce the Tulip damage + cost and increase the rate of fire on the Firefly, adjust cost of Firefly to finetune.

If you agree the Tulip is doing to much damage you should be agreeing the Firefly main gun isn't doing enough. 10s reload is a travesty.

Actually, it doesn't survive against P4 at all.
It needs 30 seconds to kill P4(counting from the first shot) assuming all shots hit, while P4 needs only ~15-16, range advantage isn't as meaningful, because brits have no AT snare and FF isn't exactly a speed demon.

Ah yes the ol 1v1 in an open field situation

Ah yes the ol 1v1 in an open field situation

I doubt the firefly will fare better in a 1v1 urban city situation.

I drew a picture for you.

So shield and lead your attacks with stugs? What.....

I've never hit anything with a tulip, and am disappointed every, single, time I decide to spend a kings ransom in munitions for them, never mind on the Firefly in the first place. I really don't understand the fuss. I suppose, that they're gimmicky and absurd, when a lot of the playerbase want a more measured and "controllable" environment, and experience.

So shield and lead your attacks with stugs? What.....

Basically, yeah.

Put cheap vehicles in front of your bigger vehicles. The tulip will hit the vehicle in front.

Basically, yeah.

Put cheap vehicles in front of your bigger vehicles. The tulip will hit the vehicle in front.

The ennemy have multiples tanks ( and heavies ) and you just have 1 tulip to fight them ?

if we play your game: One shot the "stug/shield", then wait tulip to reload, he lost fuel and manpower, you lost 100 ammo, fair trade

I can't imagine why anyone would defend the firefly's current state. It's both bad for the controlling player and frustrating for the opposite player. It's like making an ability that costs 1000 muni and wins the game immediately. Sure, it's shit, but it will be extremely frustrating to lose to that.

increase reload speed, nerf tulip damage, reduce tulip cost. Can't see what the arguement is about.

Imo the problem with FF & Tulip is that they don't really fit the vehicle gameplay mid-late game.

Tanks are supposed to be durable beasts, the whole point of them costing so much (compared to infantry) is that you can repair the damage as opposed to, say, paying extra mp for maintenance (as is the case with infantry). To really kill an enemy tank you either trap it with AT/Mines in your own territory or commit your own AT into a hunt into the enemy's territory.

And all vehicles obey this mechanic, to a greater or lesser extent. Except the Firefly + Tulip combo. Especially in numbers.

IIRC To prevent exploits, the devs nerfed the FF reload (it was OP as hell when it had a normal reload, in the alpha) so much that now, its crap when its alone.

Its sort of like soviet sniper spam in that respect. Even moreso with vet (increased dmg I believe)

I agree with the general consensus: FF needs to have nerfed dmg, higher RoF, and Tulips need nerfing.

Why not make it like an inferior, allied panther? (high pen, low RoF, normal dmg; tradeoff for low health/armor is lower cost; it has 10 more range so it can outrange other panthers)

After playing probably 8 matches with the British yesterday I have to say I have revised my opinion about the Firefly. I tried using it without the Tulips and well... its pretty lackluster.

-The turret rotation is indeed way too slow when combined with the sluggish nature of the tank.
-The ROF is fine when you have it sitting nicely behind another tank, but on its own it fails to actually scare anything away. Instead people just drive at the tank and its basically helpless.
-Way too expensive for what it does, better off just investing in another Churchhill.

So I would agree about ditching the tulips, making them cheaper, or just buffing the tank and making the Tulips a doctrinal thing.

Not to be a jerk but this is precisely why you don't use them on their own. Relic actually made them pretty historical as far as an RTS can be, they were used to support other armor vs heavy enemy armor. They didn't try to go off and destroy tanks independently because they lacked the heavy armor and anti infantry capabilities to do so. I love using 2 fireflies just behind my front line AT guns, Centaur and infantry to advance on the enemy. My infantry and centaur can deal with their PAK and infantry and my at Guns + massive range FF's will drive off any tank.

Not to be a jerk but this is precisely why you don't use them on their own. Relic actually made them pretty historical as far as an RTS can be, they were used to support other armor vs heavy enemy armor. They didn't try to go off and destroy tanks independently because they lacked the heavy armor and anti infantry capabilities to do so. I love using 2 fireflies just behind my front line AT guns, Centaur and infantry to advance on the enemy. My infantry and centaur can deal with their PAK and infantry and my at Guns + massive range FF's will drive off any tank.

the problem is that you can't make the assumption that a player will have multiple tanks in coh2 because fuel is so limited. if you could assume each player had 3 tanks it would be a problem for some vehicles to require support to work.

My opinion may not be wanted, but I use the fireflys and don't think they are bad. Only issue is no snares for tanks rushing your fireflys.

My opinion may not be wanted, but I use the fireflys and don't think they are bad. Only issue is no snares for tanks rushing your fireflys.

You have to agree though design of the unit is pretty shitty. Tulips are annoying as hell to use and play against

You have to agree though design of the unit is pretty shitty. Tulips are annoying as hell to use and play against

Yes I agree with that, they cost a lot and go through walls, kinda stupid. I for one think fireflys are scary.

My opinion may not be wanted, but I use the fireflys and don't think they are bad. Only issue is no snares for tanks rushing your fireflys.

Mines with insane chance of heavy crit

Basically, yeah.

Put cheap vehicles in front of your bigger vehicles. The tulip will hit the vehicle in front.

OK...Your diagram and response make little sense. Basically you are saying use low health cheap tanks to absorb punishment for high health high armor tanks with limited maneuverability (the exact opposite role these tanks are supposed to have).

Also not sure how an AT gun in this case does not cause you to lose your Stug 100% of the time you engage an enemy tank, probably without it even firing back.

To top that all off you are showing this only for Wehr, whereas OKW has no cheap tank. All of their tanks are expensive, and I fail to see how always needing a wall, in the form of another tank, in front of my heavy tank is good game play.

Your post does not address the larger issues I brought up, and is at best a niche situation in which he has no AT so you can absorb the rockets he chose to waste on your Stug (which you now lose).

OK...Your diagram and response make little sense. Basically you are saying use low health cheap tanks to absorb punishment for high health high armor tanks with limited maneuverability (the exact opposite role these tanks are supposed to have).

Also not sure how an AT gun in this case does not cause you to lose your Stug 100% of the time you engage an enemy tank, probably without it even firing back.

To top that all off you are showing this only for Wehr, whereas OKW has no cheap tank. All of their tanks are expensive, and I fail to see how always needing a wall, in the form of another tank, in front of my heavy tank is good game play.

Your post does not address the larger issues I brought up, and is at best a niche situation in which he has no AT so you can absorb the rockets he chose to waste on your Stug (which you now lose).

I'm just refuting that there's no counterplay. I can't be bothered to teach people how to play anymore. The point is to kill the firefly cost effectively. If he uses his tulip on the drug or panzer IV, he may kill it but he will die too. If he doesn't the drug or pzIV have a good chance of killing him. I'm not saying drive into a wall of AT guns with a stug. (Such a thing does not really exist in 1v1) and if he has such a thing there are ways of countering that too.

What I'm saying is that the firefly is very expensive, the tulip is very expensive. Don't drive your more expensive tanks at him when your less expensive tanks can kill him, ja?

I think they do need to change -
- Slight decrease (-10%) to reload time
- Slight increase to turret rotation speed (+10%)
- 25% damage reduction for tulips
- 25% cost reduction for tulips.

I can't imagine why anyone would defend the firefly's current state. It's both bad for the controlling player and frustrating for the opposite player. It's like making an ability that costs 1000 muni and wins the game immediately. Sure, it's shit, but it will be extremely frustrating to lose to that.

increase reload speed, nerf tulip damage, reduce tulip cost. Can't see what the arguement is about.

+1
this