Login

russian armor

Fixing the Brits

14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AM
#1
avatar of Svanh

Posts: 181

While the UKF are generally well-designed as a faction, they suffer from massive balance problems and poorly thought-out and inconsistent development. While I would not call myself a competent player, I think most of these changes speak for themselves.

If you don't understand quite what I mean please don't hesitate to ask. I tend to think of changes as a modder and some of my terminology is a bit odd. :)

Please quote every suggestion you disagree with and argue your point with reference to current stats so we can keep the discussion clear.

This is a thread about fixing the UKF, not a thread about how OP another faction's units are. While you should make comparisons with other units, I'd appreciate it if there were no "Free Squads" or "OP Free Tech" style arguments.

Field Headquarters

Infantry Section

As a result of the cover bonus being implemented as an out-of-cover penalty, Infantry Sections are less effective with both looted enemy weapons and British weapons compared to infantry of other factions and Royal Engineers. Changing the cover bonus to an actual bonus while reducing the power of some of the weapons in question would solve this. In addition, the proposed damage nerf from two patches ago has not been reverted from the Tommy's vet 3 Scoped Lee Enfields. Relic should probably get around to that.

- Bren gun cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Bren gun reload time multiplied by 1.4
- PIAT reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Vickers K cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Vickers K reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Lee Enfield cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Lee Enfield reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Scoped Lee Enfield cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Scoped Lee Enfield reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Scoped Lee Enfield damage increased from 14 to 16
- Infantry Section cover bonus changed to the following:

StatusIn CoverOut of Cover
Cooldown Multiplier0.83 (1/1.2)1
Reload Multiplier0.71 (1/1.4)1


Universal Carrier

The Universal Carrier suffers from poor pathfinding and has too little health to justify the relatively expensive weapon upgrades. Reducing the cost of the upgrades slightly and adding small health increases will probably make it slightly more useful, pending further balance changes if these changes are too much.

- Vickers K Mounted Variant upgrade now increases the Universal Carrier's health by 60
- Wasp Flamethrower Variant upgrade cost from 90 to 60
- Wasp Flamethrower Variant upgrade now increases the Universal Carrier's health by 60


Platoon Command Post

Royal Engineer

Royal Engineers are currently better than Infantry Sections as a weapon platform due to their lack of an out-of-cover penalty. The changes to the Infantry Section help with this but Royal Engineers have their own version of the Bren with minor differences. Changing this so they use the same version as the Infantry Sections would fix this issue.

- Royal Engineers now use the same Bren gun as Infantry Sections

3-Inch Mortar Emplacement

The mortar pit is currently an all-in proposition. The high performance means that a well-protected mortar pit is OP but the high cost makes building one a risky proposition. Reducing the cost and health as well as increasing the reload time will make the mortar pit less punishing for both sides.

- Health reduced from 700 (5 AT shots) to 480 (3 AT shots)
- Cost reduced from 400 manpower to 300 manpower
- Reload time increased from 6 seconds to 8 seconds

Anvil/Hammer Choice 1

Let's look at teching costs:




FactionFuel Cost to T2Fuel Cost to Light TankFuel Cost to T3
UKF3045145
OKH70N/A185
SOV95/105105195
USF50/6050/60170/180


Clearly, UKF has a significant advantage both when rushing light vehicles and teching to medium armour. Despite this, UKF has some of the best armoured units in the game. Increasing the fuel cost of this choice and requiring it to upgrade to T3 adjusts the timing on both the AEC and the Cromwell while still allowing players to use AECs and Bofors.

- Anvil/Hammer upgrade costs increased from 100/15 to 100/40
- Anvil/Hammer upgrade now necessary for the Company Command Post upgrade

AEC Armoured Car

The buff to the AEC's AOE, timing and its performance against light vehicles make it extremely powerful but with the timing change due to the change in tech costs only its slightly over-buffed AOE is an issue. In addition, reducing the delay and increasing the firing cone of Tread Shot will make it useful enough to start to balance it.

- AOE radius reduced from 2.5 to 1.5
- Tread Shot post-firing aim time reduced from 4 seconds to 2 (Total delay from ~6.625 seconds to ~4.625)
- Tread Shot fire cone angle to 10 to match standard AEC gun

Bofors Emplacement

The Bofors is currently the most durable emplacement with 1000 health (effectively 4000 under brace). It is also a unit that locks down a large area to anything but a significant combined-arms attack or medium tanks and can be built before most light vehicles. Interestingly, it only costs 280/30 to build. Reducing its health to 480 (1920 under brace) makes it easier to counter and closer to a reasonable price/efficacy level.

- Health reduced from 1000 to 480

Company Command Post

Sherman Firefly

The Sherman Firefly is an odd unit. It has extremely poor DPS when first built but can be upgraded to be able to destroy medium tanks before they can react and, at vet 3, is ridiculously powerful due to receiving both reload and damage buffs. Evening out the performance of the Firefly to make it more fun both to use and fight will make it better balanced.

- Tulip Rocket damage reduced from 240 (total: 480) to 160 (total: 320)
- Tulip Rocket recharge time reduced from 120 seconds to 90
- Tulip Rocket firing cost reduced from 100 munitions to 75
- Firefly damage increased from 200 to 240
- Firefly vet 3 damage bonus reduced from +80 to 0
- Firefly vet 3 penetration bonus increased from 0 to +15%

17 Pounder Anti-Tank Emplacement

The 17 Pounder is roughly equivalent to the Pak43 but takes up 20 pop compared to the Pak43's 15. Changing this might help the 17 Pounder get used outside of large team games.

- Pop cost reduced from 20 to 15


Anvil Choice 2

Churchill Infantry Tank

The Churchill's grenade ability currently does 120 damage across its entire radius and the Churchill does not have the Target Armour ability like almost every other tank.

- Target Armour ability added
- Churchill hardpoint 4 changed from churchill_crew_grenades to comet_crew_grenades

25 Pounder Artillery Guns

Given the current scatter values, its use as a fancy satchel charge and its inability to move closer to its target these guns are useless on all but the smallest maps. In addition, the guns are strictly worse than all other heavy artillery and their rotation rate makes certain overwatch abilities ineffectual.

- Penetration and AOE penetration increased from 120 to 1000 (Brings them in line with other heavy artillery)
- AOE increased from 6 to 8 (Brings them in line with other heavy artillery)
- distance_scatter_max reduced from 18.5 to 12 (makes it more accurate on large maps)
- angle_scatter reduced from 9.25 to 5.6 (makes it more accurate at long range)
- speed_horizontal increased from 25 to 50 (makes it quicker to rotate to a target)
- speed_vertical increased from 25 to 50 (makes it quicker to rotate to a target)


Commanders

Commando Regiment

Commando Glider Insertion

This ability is currently overpriced compared to Vanguard Regiment's Logistics Glider. Reducing the price and allowing you to spawn more commandos from the glider would make it more useful.

- Commando Glider Insertion price reduced from 500 to 400
- Commando glider can be repaired and Commandos can be built when it is in friendly territory

Royal Artillery Regiment

Valentine Tank

In the first or second patch after release, the Valentine had its damage reduced by 50%. Reverting that nerf would make it a good competitor to the AEC.

- Damage increased from 80 to 160

Sexton

The Sexton is a significantly worse version of the Priest for a slightly cheaper price. Increasing its effectiveness to match its price will give the Royal Artillery Regiment some actual artillery.

- Sexton AOE increased from 6 to 8
- Sexton AOE distance (N/M/F) increased from 1.5/3/4.5 to 2/4/6

Perimeter Overwatch

Problems addressed with the buff to the 25 Pounder rotation rates


Royal Engineer Regiment

Anti-Building Flame Mortar Support

This ability currently checks for a building in the target area and calls in flame mortar rounds on it at 15 second intervals. The ability costs 150 munitions and is made oddly (which is probably why it's a bit unpredictable). For ease of use I suggest it be reworked to an overwatch ability lasting 30 seconds for 75 munitions. In addition, anti-garrison abilities are most potent the earlier in the game they arrive so it should arrive earlier than 8 cp to be most useful.

(An overwatch ability fires at certain targets in the ability's area of effect that you can see. In this case, it would fire at enemy emplacements and occupied buildings but, due to a specific exemption, not OKW trucks.)

- Cost reduced from 150 munitions to 75 munitions
- Command point requirement reduced from 8 to 6
- Ability reworked to use an overwatch action instead of a target action


Special Weapons Regiment

Tank Hunter Infantry Sections


Their HEAT Grenade costs the same amount as every other vehicle snare but does half the damage.

- HEAT Grenade damage increased from 50 to 100

Hold The Line

It currently takes 30 seconds (35 seconds) for the anti-infantry (anti-tank) aircraft overwatch to begin which is plenty of time for an enemy to neutralise the frontline sectors they overwatch, cancelling half the ability. Reducing this slightly will mean the planes are more likely to appear.

- Anti-infantry overwatch delay reduced from 30 seconds to 20 seconds
- Anti-tank overwatch delay reduced from 35 seconds to 25 seconds

Concentrated Artillery Operation

This ability can easily one-shot an OKW truck. Reducing the number of shots and the cost would make this less frustrating to deal with.

- Number of salvos reduced from 5 to 3
- Cost reduced from 250 to 175

Churchill Crocodile

This tank is a mess. It treats the hull-mounted flamethrower as its main gun, costs as much as a Tiger but has essentially no anti-tank ability while taking the equivalent of two more hits and is not massively better versus infantry. Some adjustment is needed.

- Main gun moved to hardpoint 1
- Flamethrower moved to hardpoint 2
- Veterancy bonuses adjusted to refer to the new flamethrower hardpoint
- Target Armour ability added
- Main gun damage increased from 80 to 160

Vanguard Operations

Forward Logistics Glider

Having unrepairable units that are limited to one is a little silly.

- The logistics glider can now be repaired

Air-Landing Officer

The Air-Landing Officer's Officer Charge is more than a little ridiculous. It reduces received accuracy by 75%, increases weapon accuracy by 40%, increases speed and reduces weapon cooldown by 20% for ten seconds. In addition it only costs 15 munitions and can be used every 90 seconds.

- Received accuracy multiplier increased from 0.25 to 0.8
- Weapon Accuracy multiplier reduced from 1.4 to 1.2
- Cost increased to 30 munitions


Tactical Support Regiment

Designate Command Vehicle

The recon plane ability of the command vehicle should have some cost.

- Cost of the recon ability increased from 0 to 30 munitions

Field Recovery Operation

Rarely will you need more than one Royal Recovery Engineer and their inability to build anything or receive the Heavy Engineer upgrade strictly limits their usefulness.

- Royal Recovery Engineers can now build all structures that a Royal Engineer can
- The ability only calls in a single engineer
- Ability cost reduced from 450 manpower to 300 manpower

Artillery Cover

This ability is clearly intended to give the UKF a way to break heavy defenses without being a one-click counter by disabling enemies in an area if they do not move. Unfortunately, it can cripple and destroy vehicles before they can retreat and effectively locks the enemy out of an area for a full minute.

- Anti-vehicle shells no longer cause engine damage. All anti-vehicle shells only cause disable gun crits
- Initial delay increased from 4 seconds to 10 seconds
- Ability duration reduced from 70 seconds to 40 seconds

Forward Observation Post

Paying 300 manpower and 60 fuel for the ability to spend large amounts of munitions in a 100 unit radius is a little steep, especially since this is a late-game ability.

- FOP cost reduced from 300/60 to 100/20



What do you think?

EDIT: I've almost certainly made several mistakes when writing all this. Please point out any poor spelling or grammar and suggestions that just don't make sense so I can fix them.
14 Feb 2016, 11:32 AM
#2
avatar of Raven

Posts: 19

The stats suggest they're balanced
14 Feb 2016, 11:46 AM
#3
avatar of Wehrwietse

Posts: 23

Excellent post! I agree with most of it
14 Feb 2016, 12:00 PM
#4
avatar of NEVEC

Posts: 708 | Subs: 1

A lot of work, no result, most of changes are so horrible. Only thing that i see broken in brits is double aec abuse, useless 25 pounder and no rocket artillery (but new commander coming).
14 Feb 2016, 12:15 PM
#5
avatar of ashxu

Posts: 124

lol why nerf their tank game? The Cromwell requires good micro to beat out a Pz4, it's cheaper and comes out faster but isn't as good as the Pz4. It's an all rounder tank but it's fine as it is.

Also one thing I'd like to see is the 17 pounder being able to shoot through obstacles, the pak40 can
14 Feb 2016, 12:22 PM
#6
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 12:15 PMashxu
Also one thing I'd like to see is the 17 pounder being able to shoot through obstacles, the pak40 can


You're mistaking it with the Pak43, the Pak 40 is the standard AT-gun. Also you can't have this together with brace.
14 Feb 2016, 12:22 PM
#7
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

The bofors is already useless against OKW. Giving it a 52%HP nerf will also make it useless against Wehr. Might as well remove it from the game at that point; especially considering that it locks you out of getting the AEC: the only reliable mobile AT unit you will have until you get medium tanks.

Likewise, the mortar pit is also garbage against OKW, and just useful enough against Wehr as it is.

I'd also be hesitant to just straight up compare teching costs to medium tanks. It leaves out important factors such as getting grenades, vehicle snares and weapon upgrades.

Other than that the changes look decent. You could try to make a mod to see how it works in practice.
14 Feb 2016, 12:34 PM
#8
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

btw, does the flame mortar barrage work on okw trucks too?
14 Feb 2016, 12:39 PM
#9
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

The bofors is already useless against OKW. Giving it a 52%HP nerf will also make it useless against Wehr. Might as well remove it from the game at that point; especially considering that it locks you out of getting the AEC: the only reliable mobile AT unit you will have until you get medium tanks.

Likewise, the mortar pit is also garbage against OKW, and just useful enough against Wehr as it is.


Woah, I have to disagree there. With all respect to your skill, Bofors wipes left and right and has barrage, is nigh unkillable and a Mortar pit will kill any Leig, while Stuka doesn't counter neither of those.
14 Feb 2016, 12:39 PM
#10
avatar of Nabarxos

Posts: 392

The emplacement changes you proposed don't fix the British problem to field them or even place them BUT rather reduce their durability dramatically by excusing it cause of brace (which you nerf even harder).

This basically allows the enemy to destroy emplacements with ease even in brace mode but you didn't make them cheaper or hell smaller in size(the mortar emplacement price reduction is nothing compared to the nerfs you proposed)

Also the Pak 43 is 10pop not 15 and the 17 is VERY BIG you can hardly place it anywhere so your proposed change to it doesn't help it either.

The bofors nerf is stupid (more on that below)

Emplacements need time to be build and 2 of them need to operate closer on the front lines when ever possible (bofors,17P),the durability nerf you proposed doesn't take into account the extra damage those emplacements receive but also discourage the British player from using them duo to their performance(bad durability,static,late arrival,pricy)




14 Feb 2016, 13:10 PM
#11
avatar of ashxu

Posts: 124

btw, does the flame mortar barrage work on okw trucks too?

don't think so, no. I think it's only ambient buildings. I had the same idea but I guess that'd be pretty silly.
14 Feb 2016, 13:35 PM
#12
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

That's a well-thought out post. Some of the things you recommend I completely agree with, while, for some others, I am am against.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Infantry Section

As a result of the cover bonus being implemented as an out-of-cover penalty, Infantry Sections are less effective with both looted enemy weapons and British weapons compared to infantry of other factions and Royal Engineers. Changing the cover bonus to an actual bonus while reducing the power of some of the weapons in question would solve this. In addition, the proposed damage nerf from two patches ago has not been reverted from the Tommy's vet 3 Scoped Lee Enfields. Relic should probably get around to that.

- Bren gun cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Bren gun reload time multiplied by 1.4
- PIAT reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Vickers K cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Vickers K reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Lee Enfield cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Lee Enfield reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Scoped Lee Enfield cooldown multiplied by 1.2
- Scoped Lee Enfield reload time multiplied by 1.4
- Scoped Lee Enfield damage increased from 14 to 16
- Infantry Section cover bonus changed to the following:

StatusIn CoverOut of Cover
Cooldown Multiplier0.83 (1/1.2)1
Reload Multiplier0.71 (1/1.4)1




Implementing the cover "bonus" as a cover penalty was actually one of the smartest things that Relic did when introducing the Brits.

Ask yourself this: what will happen if an Infantry section ever picks up an LMG34/LMG42? They will immediately turn into death-gods.

My personal beefs against Infantry Sections are (in order of disdain):
- Their Vet3 penalty (the one where they don't use their guns when they drop to 2 models)
- Their atrocious moving accuracy (-75%)
- Their static nature (both boring to play as, and easy to counter with indirect fire)
- Their complete lack of utility (even if you upgrade nades, you need to get close in order to use them; that's suicide)


jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Universal Carrier

The Universal Carrier suffers from poor pathfinding and has too little health to justify the relatively expensive weapon upgrades. Reducing the cost of the upgrades slightly and adding small health increases will probably make it slightly more useful, pending further balance changes if these changes are too much.

- Vickers K Mounted Variant upgrade now increases the Universal Carrier's health by 60
- Wasp Flamethrower Variant upgrade cost from 90 to 60
- Wasp Flamethrower Variant upgrade now increases the Universal Carrier's health by 60



I have seen something like that in Miragefla's balance mod, and it makes perfect sense.

Btw, for those of you that don't know, the standard LMG deals DOUBLE the DPS that the Vickers K does; there is currently no reason to ever upgrade to Vickers K.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Royal Engineer

Royal Engineers are currently better than Infantry Sections as a weapon platform due to their lack of an out-of-cover penalty. The changes to the Infantry Section help with this but Royal Engineers have their own version of the Bren with minor differences. Changing this so they use the same version as the Infantry Sections would fix this issue.

- Royal Engineers now use the same Bren gun as Infantry Sections


It's not difficult to be a better weapon platform than the Infantry Sections, when IS suffers from such a complete lack of utility.

Even with the suggested fix, I would never ever give guns to Tommies:
- At vet3, they will refuse to use their weapons (sometimes they will even drop them)
- Sappers receive better received accuracy bonuses
- Sappers have a comically-low (read: OP) reinforcement cost of 13 MP at vet3.

The only thing Tommies have going for them is their accuracy bonus at vet3 (currently at 20%, which is low). This is completely nullified by the penalty they receive at Vet3.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Cromwell Cruiser Tank

The Cromwell and Panzer IV are on roughly the same level as medium tanks. The Panzer IV has superior armour, fire rate and multiple useful upgrades while the Cromwell has superior penetration, speed and a smaller target size. Oddly, the Cromwell costs 15 less fuel.

- Cromwell price increased from 340/110 to 340/125


(I am writing this assuming that the AEC will eventually be rebalanced).

Individually, Cromwells are OP for their price. You have to consider, though, that the Brits completely lack any offensive capability (apart from the AEC, which will probably be retouched).

Brits NEED a good trading unit.
- By making the Cromwell more expensive, what's the point in making any, instead of just spamming Comets?

(if necessary) I'd rather go with a performance decrease; not a price increase. I can't recommend any stats though.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Sherman Firefly

The Sherman Firefly is an odd unit. It has extremely poor DPS when first built but can be upgraded to be able to destroy medium tanks before they can react and, at vet 3, is ridiculously powerful due to receiving both reload and damage buffs. Evening out the performance of the Firefly to make it more fun both to use and fight will make it better balanced.

- Tulip Rocket damage reduced from 240 (total: 480) to 160 (total: 320)
- Tulip Rocket recharge time reduced from 120 seconds to 90
- Tulip Rocket firing cost reduced from 100 munitions to 75
- Firefly damage increased from 200 to 240
- Firefly vet 3 damage bonus reduced from +80 to 0
- Firefly vet 3 penetration bonus increased from 0 to +15%


No. You are killing the Firefly here.

The Firefly is one of the few units in the Brits arsenal that's 1) well designed, 2) balanced for its price and 3) doesn't look like anything than existing units (variety).

The Allies NEED some sort of Alpha strike vs vehicles. The Firefly the ONLY tank destroyer than has ANY utility vs the Jagtiger, the Elephant and JP4. Any other tank destroyer the allies have will instantly go up in flames before dealing any damage.

(I am not saying that the Firefly is the counter to JT/Elephants. I'm just saying that it can deal damage and not die).

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

25 Pounder Artillery Guns

Given the current scatter values, its use as a fancy satchel charge and its inability to move closer to its target these guns are useless on all but the smallest maps. In addition, the guns are strictly worse than all other heavy artillery and their rotation rate makes certain overwatch abilities ineffectual.

- Penetration and AOE penetration increased from 120 to 1000 (Brings them in line with other heavy artillery)
- AOE increased from 6 to 8 (Brings them in line with other heavy artillery)
- distance_scatter_max reduced from 18.5 to 12 (makes it more accurate on large maps)
- angle_scatter reduced from 9.25 to 5.6 (makes it more accurate at long range)
- speed_horizontal increased from 25 to 50 (makes it quicker to rotate to a target)
- speed_vertical increased from 25 to 50 (makes it quicker to rotate to a target)


/Completely agree.

Also, something needs to be done with the Anvil airburst shells:
- Currently they deal EXACTLY the same damage/aoe as howlitzer shells (read: useless)
- They all come down on the same spot (easy to avoid)
- And they all come down very fast from one another (no area denial utility)

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Commando Glider Insertion

This ability is currently overpriced compared to Vanguard Regiment's Logistics Glider. Reducing the price and allowing you to spawn more commandos from the glider would make it more useful.

- Commando Glider Insertion price reduced from 500 to 400
- Commando glider can be repaired and Commandos can be built when it is in friendly territory


Commandos w/ glider are already very cost-efficient at 500MP. It's the Vanguard commandos that need nerfing.

The only issue with commandos is that their ambush is doubly-bugged:
- Infinite duration
- But only affects some squad members

I agree with glider repairing capability.

Also, is there a reason why Infiltration commandos/Vanguard commandos come at 3CP, while glider commandos come at 4cp? If anything, Infiltration commandos should come LATER than glider commandos.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Valentine Tank

In the first or second patch after release, the Valentine had its damage reduced by 50%. Reverting that nerf would make it a good competitor to the AEC.

- Damage increased from 80 to 160


You might also want to reduce the Popcap requirement. At 12CP (same as the Cromwell), there is no reason to ever field Valentine tanks. Brits are already a popcap-handicapped faction (repair-unit popcap + unmovable emplacements popcap)

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Churchill Crocodile

This tank is a mess. It treats the hull-mounted flamethrower as its main gun, costs as much as a Tiger but has essentially no anti-tank ability while taking the equivalent of two more hits and is not massively better versus infantry. Some adjustment is needed.

- Main gun moved to hardpoint 1
- Flamethrower moved to hardpoint 2
- Veterancy bonuses adjusted to refer to the new flamethrower hardpoint
- Target Armour ability added
- Main gun damage increased from 80 to 160


The inability to target with the turret is silly.

However, if I had to choose between the turret and the flamethrower, I would always choose the flamethrower. That way you can attack ground over obstacles/where you expect the enemy blob to move. (that's the current behaviour)

Instead, they could perhaps introduce a toggle button (like the KV8) that, instead, swaps the hardpoints so that you can aim both the flamethrower and the turret.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Air-Landing Officer

The Air-Landing Officer's Officer Charge is more than a little ridiculous. It reduces received accuracy by 75%, increases weapon accuracy by 40%, increases speed and reduces weapon cooldown by 20% for ten seconds. In addition it only costs 15 munitions and can be used every 90 seconds.

- Received accuracy multiplier increased from 0.25 to 0.8
- Weapon Accuracy multiplier reduced from 1.4 to 1.2
- Cost increased to 30 munitions


The Air-landing officer buff is, currently, completely insane. Give him double Brens, activate the buff and watch him melt everything.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Designate Command Vehicle

The recon plane ability of the command vehicle should have some cost.

- Cost of the recon ability increased from 0 to 30 munitions


Bear in mind that you are losing a vehicle AND 75 MU in order to acquire recon. 30 munitions is a bit too steep (considering you can get recon -- and all the insane bonuses -- for the same price at Vanguard).

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Field Recovery Operation

Rarely will you need more than one Royal Recovery Engineer and their inability to build anything or receive the Heavy Engineer upgrade strictly limits their usefulness.

- Royal Recovery Engineers can now build all structures that a Royal Engineer can
- The ability only calls in a single engineer
- Ability cost reduced from 450 manpower to 300 manpower


Relic mentioned that the inability to build things was a conscious design decision. Being able to call only one engineer though, feels like a better idea though (Sappers cost 7/8 popcap, you don't want 2 useless sappers)

Tactical Support definitely needs some redesign help. Apart from its batshit OP ability, everything else feels like a click-maybe-once-per-game ability. None of the abilities promote any sort of interaction with the user. It's easily the most boring commander to play as in the game.

PS: Emplacements will not be missed.
14 Feb 2016, 14:25 PM
#13
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 13:10 PMashxu

don't think so, no. I think it's only ambient buildings. I had the same idea but I guess that'd be pretty silly.


its completely useless then, your opponent will hop his two units out of the buildings and there you go, 100+ mun wasted for nothing
14 Feb 2016, 16:40 PM
#14
avatar of Spinflight

Posts: 680

"I have seen something like that in Miragefla's balance mod, and it makes perfect sense.

Btw, for those of you that don't know, the standard LMG deals DOUBLE the DPS that the Vickers K does; there is currently no reason to ever upgrade to Vickers K."

I've politely asked Relic in another thread whether they may have accidentally given the MMG carrier the wrong machinegun ( a LMG).. Historically ( and one of the few bits of realism in the game is weapon loadouts) it should be the Vickers, not the Vickers K.

Frankly too many of the smaller vehicles have strange sizes in game. Four blokes standing shoulder to shoulder would be a significantly easier target to hit than a UC head on, yet in game the difference is 4 to 15...
14 Feb 2016, 17:12 PM
#15
avatar of ashxu

Posts: 124

(I am writing this assuming that the AEC will eventually be rebalanced).

Individually, Cromwells are OP for their price. You have to consider, though, that the Brits completely lack any offensive capability (apart from the AEC, which will probably be retouched).

Brits NEED a good trading unit.
- By making the Cromwell more expensive, what's the point in making any, instead of just spamming Comets?

(if necessary) I'd rather go with a performance decrease; not a price increase. I can't recommend any stats though.

Why do Cromwells need to be balanced? Why can't they be good/OP? Does it make UKF broken? No.

Making things streamlined is boring as fuck and not a game that is fun to play. The Cromwell is perfectly fine and UKF are lacking in other areas to make up for whatever good stuff they have. It will already lose to the Pz4 in a slugfest and UKF have no other medium tanks until you tech up to Comet which costs more than a Panther.
14 Feb 2016, 17:21 PM
#16
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 17:12 PMashxu

Why do Cromwells need to be balanced? Why can't they be good/OP? Does it make UKF broken? No.

Making things streamlined is boring as fuck and not a game that is fun to play. The Cromwell is perfectly fine and UKF are lacking in other areas to make up for whatever good stuff they have. It will already lose to the Pz4 in a slugfest and UKF have no other medium tanks until you tech up to Comet which costs more than a Panther.


I'm not saying that Cromwells need to be rebalanced. (I should have made this more explicit; it's my mistake)

I'm just making a suggestion that if they do need to be rebalanced, it would be a mistake to touch the price (otherwise the Comets and the Cromwells will become too similar). Instead they could touch the performance (and adjust the popcap).

Every faction has their own ultra-cost-efficient stuff (pak40, raketens, JP4, Stugs, Stuarts, Maxims, Stuka loiter).
14 Feb 2016, 18:41 PM
#17
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269

They should've discarded the design of Brits from the first game which was that the Brits were suppose to sim city. Static games are so boring, and emplacements are so incredibly hard to balance properly and create awful, non-interactive games anyways.

I think all these changes are smart and would create more fun gameplay.

Emplacements from a game design standpoint is a dead-end and irritating for players.
14 Feb 2016, 18:53 PM
#18
avatar of UnanimatedFelix

Posts: 17 | Subs: 1

A lot of really smart changes overall. I'm not sure about the Bofors health nerf though.
14 Feb 2016, 20:25 PM
#19
avatar of Grim

Posts: 1096

standard churchill needs a serious buff too. In its current state it just isn't worth it. Hence why no one uses them anymore unless the surrender function has glitched.
15 Feb 2016, 08:22 AM
#20
avatar of Svanh

Posts: 181

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 12:00 PMNEVEC
A lot of work, no result, most of changes are so horrible. Only thing that i see broken in brits is double aec abuse, useless 25 pounder and no rocket artillery (but new commander coming).


I'd appreciate it if you could tell me exactly which changes are horrible and why, so I can update the suggestions. There's no point having a hundred different threads about finding solutions to the same problems.

The bofors is already useless against OKW. Giving it a 52%HP nerf will also make it useless against Wehr. Might as well remove it from the game at that point; especially considering that it locks you out of getting the AEC: the only reliable mobile AT unit you will have until you get medium tanks.

Likewise, the mortar pit is also garbage against OKW, and just useful enough against Wehr as it is.

I'd also be hesitant to just straight up compare teching costs to medium tanks. It leaves out important factors such as getting grenades, vehicle snares and weapon upgrades.

Other than that the changes look decent. You could try to make a mod to see how it works in practice.


Fair enough. My problem with the Bofors was that it can lock down an entire area of the map to everything at the point you unlock it and has more health than a late-game AT emplacement. I think it should have less health than it currently does but probably not 52% less. What would you suggest?

On the mortar pit, I wanted to reduce its price by 25% and simply reduced its durability and ROF by the same percentage. I want to make it easier for a Brit player to get out and reducing its effectiveness seemed like the simplest way to balance it.

I'll leave the teching cost changes as they are for now, pending further discussion. You make a good point given the number of side upgrades the UKF has.

Please suggest any changes you think of so we can discuss them. :)

btw, does the flame mortar barrage work on okw trucks too?


The flame mortar barrage specifically exempts OKW trucks. It works on enemy-occupied ambient building and any defensive structures though.

The emplacement changes you proposed don't fix the British problem to field them or even place them BUT rather reduce their durability dramatically by excusing it cause of brace (which you nerf even harder).

This basically allows the enemy to destroy emplacements with ease even in brace mode but you didn't make them cheaper or hell smaller in size(the mortar emplacement price reduction is nothing compared to the nerfs you proposed)

Also the Pak 43 is 10pop not 15 and the 17 is VERY BIG you can hardly place it anywhere so your proposed change to it doesn't help it either.

The bofors nerf is stupid (more on that below)

Emplacements need time to be build and 2 of them need to operate closer on the front lines when ever possible (bofors,17P),the durability nerf you proposed doesn't take into account the extra damage those emplacements receive but also discourage the British player from using them duo to their performance(bad durability,static,late arrival,pricy)


I haven't actually touched Brace. The reason the Bofors and Mortar Pit have less health in Brace after my changes is because Brace's main effect is to reduce incoming damage by 25%, not give the emplacements more health. I'm sorry if you already knew this, just making sure we're on the same page. :)

The Bofors costs only 10 manpower more than an M5 Halftrack and is significantly more durable and dangerous. I think some reduction in health is justified given that it is the smallest emplacement and has the most health.

I reduced both the Mortar Pit's DPS and health by 25% to justify the 25% reduction in price to this forum. I agree that two 25% nerfs are a bit much.

Thank you for the correction on the Pak43's pop cost. I still think 15 pop is better for heavy AT guns like the 17 Pounder/Pak43 but that's an issue for a "Fixing the OKW" thread. What do you think of increasing the 17 Pounder's health from 900 to 1000? It's less problematic than a 1000 health Bofors due to its limited target selection and would let it take one more AT gun shot (two more under brace).

Please suggest some changes to my emplacement suggestions. I don't have as much experience with the 17 Pounder and Bofors as I'd like.

That's a well-thought out post. Some of the things you recommend I completely agree with, while, for some others, I am am against.


Thank you. I'm sorry to break your post up like this but there's a lot to discuss. :)

Implementing the cover "bonus" as a cover penalty was actually one of the smartest things that Relic did when introducing the Brits.

Ask yourself this: what will happen if an Infantry section ever picks up an LMG34/LMG42? They will immediately turn into death-gods.


I disagree. While I would agree with you for an accuracy multiplier, cooldown and reload are significantly less important to the DPS of automatic weapons than they are to semi-auto/bolt-action rifles and anti-tank weapons.

Take the on release reload multiplier of 1.5. The PIAT, equipped on an Infantry Section, had a reload time of 7.75 seconds out of cover, equivalent to a Panzershreck (last time I checked). Given it trades the latter's penetration and accurate direct fire for greater range and extremely high deflection damage, this seems well balanced (PIAT accuracy issues aside).

For Royal Engineers and any other infantry, the PIAT reloads in 4.5 seconds. While this could be considered intentional design for the Royal Engineers given CoH1, having literally every other infantry unit be better with British weapons than the UKF's main-line infantry is more than a bit silly, especially given that PIATs are actually good against several UKF tanks.

This creates another problem with Tank Hunter Infantry Sections. The Boys AT Rifle they use is a direct copy, stats-wise, of the Soviet PTRS (to the extent that its release stats were from the PTRS before several balance patches). Given that the PTRS is already not a great AT weapon, a version with 40% longer reload and 20% longer cooldown is hardly something to get excited about. This is, incidentally, why I left the Boys rifle off the list of weapons to change.

My personal beefs against Infantry Sections are (in order of disdain):
- Their Vet3 penalty (the one where they don't use their guns when they drop to 2 models)
- Their atrocious moving accuracy (-75%)
- Their static nature (both boring to play as, and easy to counter with indirect fire)
- Their complete lack of utility (even if you upgrade nades, you need to get close in order to use them; that's suicide)


- I believe Relic considers that a feature

- I agree. Infantry Sections already have significantly lower close-range accuracy than most other infantry, reducing the penalty would make them less static

- While they may not be quite as mobile as USF Riflemen, it's a part of the faction's design and I don't think it will change just yet

- With the buffs to the 25 Pounders they can be medics, heavy AT, anti-building/emplacement units, long-range anti-infantry etc. I would prefer HEAT grenades getting unlocked as part of the Mills Bomb upgrade though.

It's not difficult to be a better weapon platform than the Infantry Sections, when IS suffers from such a complete lack of utility.

Even with the suggested fix, I would never ever give guns to Tommies:
- At vet3, they will refuse to use their weapons (sometimes they will even drop them)
- Sappers receive better received accuracy bonuses
- Sappers have a comically-low (read: OP) reinforcement cost of 13 MP at vet3.

The only thing Tommies have going for them is their accuracy bonus at vet3 (currently at 20%, which is low). This is completely nullified by the penalty they receive at Vet3.


The problem with Royal Engineers is that they're trying to fill too many roles as once. They are:

- Primary builder/repairer, cheap with weak weapons
- Primary assault unit, good durability
- Heavy defense unit (with Anvil)
- Relatively cheap combat unit to tank for Infantry Sections

They do well at the builder/repairer role but their high durability and very good veterancy bonuses make them far better than the unit they are supposed to support.

What do you think of removing the vet 3 reinforcement cost reduction and returning the Infantry Section's vet 3 accuracy bonus to 40%? Royal Engineers would still have the vet 3 received accuracy bonus for their assault role but Infantry Sections would be better weapon carriers (especially if my change to their cover bonus is implemented).

(I am writing this assuming that the AEC will eventually be rebalanced).

Individually, Cromwells are OP for their price. You have to consider, though, that the Brits completely lack any offensive capability (apart from the AEC, which will probably be retouched).

Brits NEED a good trading unit.
- By making the Cromwell more expensive, what's the point in making any, instead of just spamming Comets?

(if necessary) I'd rather go with a performance decrease; not a price increase. I can't recommend any stats though.


The problem with changes to fuel cost is that different factions have varying advantages in map control. OKW and USF, for example, have an easier time getting map control than OKH and UKF. I'll remove that suggestion from the main post for now, unless it comes up again.

Nerfing the Cromwell is going to be an issue if it's done. It loses to a Panzer IV in a straight 1v1 but can leverage a few small advantages (greater maneuverability, smaller target size, better penetration) to win. I couldn't point to any one thing you could reduce its effectiveness with, outside of making it more expensive.

No. You are killing the Firefly here.

The Firefly is one of the few units in the Brits arsenal that's 1) well designed, 2) balanced for its price and 3) doesn't look like anything than existing units (variety).

The Allies NEED some sort of Alpha strike vs vehicles. The Firefly the ONLY tank destroyer than has ANY utility vs the Jagtiger, the Elephant and JP4. Any other tank destroyer the allies have will instantly go up in flames before dealing any damage.

(I am not saying that the Firefly is the counter to JT/Elephants. I'm just saying that it can deal damage and not die).


I'd argue that it's neither well-designed nor balanced for its price.

It has, as far as I'm aware, the lowest DPS of any tank destroyer while being the most expensive (obviously, barring super-heavies). In addition, it does the same damage as the Jackson with a longer reload and less maneuverability, making it one on the worst tank destroyers to counter any of the three units you mentioned. It gets much better with veterancy but its ability to gain experience is conditional on it being effective.

My suggested changes to the Firefly itself increase its initial damage by 20% instead of simply increasing the fire rate to preserve its "sniper tank" design and make the stock Firefly worth its price. I removed its vet 3 damage bonus on the reasoning that a penetration bonus would be worth more but increasing its damage to 280 or 320 at vet 3 is certainly something to consider. What would you suggest about the changes to the Firefly itself?

When you refer to alpha-strike damage, you mean the Tulip Rockets. It takes roughly a minute to save up enough for the upgrade (assuming 50% control of a standard map: 1/2 VP, 1 Muni , 1 Fuel, 5 Standard ) and two minutes to recharge (and of munitions) each time you use it.

In return, you can three-shot a medium tank within seconds. I think this ability is unnecessarily punishing for both the person using the Firefly and their enemy. By reducing the cost and recharge time of the ability by 25% and reducing its damage by 33% it becomes easier to use and not quite as frustrating for the person on the other end.

I understand that reducing the damage of the Tulip Rockets makes it harder to deal with the Jagdtiger and Elefant but preventing the Firefly from simply vaporising the Jagdpanzer IV should not be an issue. Increasing the second Tulip Rocket to have 900 penetration like the first would make the ability far more reliable against super-heavy tank destroyers and should compensate for the damage reduction.

I think the issue with the Jagdtiger and Elefant is more due to their design. Their armour and health make them effectively invincible from the front and the amount of good AT their factions have can easily prevent flanking maneuvers.

As a side-note, PIATs were made to deal with super-heavy tank destroyers. Royal Engineers with dual PIATs are far more effective than the Firefly simply because super-heavy tank destroyers can't reliably target them and PIATs don't care about armour.


Commandos w/ glider are already very cost-efficient at 500MP. It's the Vanguard commandos that need nerfing.

The only issue with commandos is that their ambush is doubly-bugged:
- Infinite duration
- But only affects some squad members

I agree with glider repairing capability.

Also, is there a reason why Infiltration commandos/Vanguard commandos come at 3CP, while glider commandos come at 4cp? If anything, Infiltration commandos should come LATER than glider commandos.


Fair enough. I didn't think Commandos were quite Obersoldaten level at 400 mp but maybe 380 mp with the reinforcement cost percentage changed from 50% to 46% to keep the reinforcement cost the same? I'd still only price the glider at 430 manpower though.

I'm not knowledgeable enough with the tools to know how to fix the bug and I couldn't guess at Relic's design process.

You might also want to reduce the Popcap requirement. At 12CP (same as the Cromwell), there is no reason to ever field Valentine tanks. Brits are already a popcap-handicapped faction (repair-unit popcap + unmovable emplacements popcap)


What do you think of 10 pop? That would give it the same pop as the roughly equivalent T-34/76

The inability to target with the turret is silly.

However, if I had to choose between the turret and the flamethrower, I would always choose the flamethrower. That way you can attack ground over obstacles/where you expect the enemy blob to move. (that's the current behaviour)

Instead, they could perhaps introduce a toggle button (like the KV8) that, instead, swaps the hardpoints so that you can aim both the flamethrower and the turret.


Great idea!

The Air-landing officer buff is, currently, completely insane. Give him double Brens, activate the buff and watch him melt everything.


What do you think of the changes? Should I reduce the bonuses further?

Bear in mind that you are losing a vehicle AND 75 MU in order to acquire recon. 30 munitions is a bit too steep (considering you can get recon -- and all the insane bonuses -- for the same price at Vanguard).


Would 15 munitions be better? I think that's about the lowest it could be priced at.

Relic mentioned that the inability to build things was a conscious design decision. Being able to call only one engineer though, feels like a better idea though (Sappers cost 7/8 popcap, you don't want 2 useless sappers)

Tactical Support definitely needs some redesign help. Apart from its batshit OP ability, everything else feels like a click-maybe-once-per-game ability. None of the abilities promote any sort of interaction with the user. It's easily the most boring commander to play as in the game.

PS: Emplacements will not be missed.


I was aware but I'm hoping they'll change it. They did remove OKW's resource penalty after all.

Tactical Support's abilities are all very useful but the game's design prevents them from seeing much use.

- You can only have a single command tank at a time
- You'll rarely destroy enough vehicles/team weapons to require more than one Recovery Engineer (If they allowed them to build everything Royal Engineers can, there'd be more reason to use them)
- HMGs fall out of use in late game and there are plenty of lategame armour abilities to use the munitions on
- Artillery Cover is the exception, but also fairly expensive
- Forward Observation Post is very munitions-hungry and requires an intact building and fuel


jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 20:25 PMGrim
standard churchill needs a serious buff too. In its current state it just isn't worth it. Hence why no one uses them anymore unless the surrender function has glitched.


Would a fuel price reduction of 10-15 be enough? I'd like to see the movement penalty of its smoke ability removed as well. There isn't enough armour-infantry coordination in this game.



jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 11:12 AMSvanh

Special Weapons Regiment

Tank Hunter Infantry Sections

Their HEAT Grenade costs the same amount as every other vehicle snare but does half the damage.

- HEAT Grenade damage increased from 50 to 100


I forgot to put this change in earlier. I'll also remove the Cromwell change and add any of your suggestions we can get some agreement on to the main post. I have a mod with most of these changes if anyone's interested but I'd have to adjust a few of the numbers.

Thank you for all your feedback. :)
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

Germany 31
France 6
unknown 23
unknown 18
unknown 8
Canada 3

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

789 users are online: 789 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49081
Welcome our newest member, kavyashide
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM