Login

russian armor

1v1 / 2v2 - Anyone using Churchills?

15 Mar 2016, 14:15 PM
#1
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Sup,

Everything is in the title.
I haven't come across someone using Churchills instead of Comets. Myself, I always use Crom's or wait for Comet's if the situation allows it.

Is there a reason to go for Churchills apart from damage soaking unit?
For the people that go Churchill in 1v1 or 2v2's, why do you chose for the unit instead of the Comet?

Thanks!

15 Mar 2016, 14:22 PM
#2
avatar of tenid

Posts: 232

I use them for the same reason I use Sextons - messing about in games that I'm confident I've already won anyway.

There was quite an argument over why they're useless in this thread:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/50337/anvil-churchill-could-use-a-slight-buff

Personally I find they're too expensive and can't keep pace with the end game because of it. The gun isn't powerful, and the health bonus is easily mitigated.
15 Mar 2016, 14:23 PM
#3
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

History lesson:

-Churchill costs 180 fuel and has 1600hp/300 armor.
No one is using it, because comet is better for the cost and can take on panthers and above.

-Relic nerfs slightly comet, keeps the cost.
-Relic nerfs churchill to 1400hp/280 armor and reduces cost.

People use churchills as much as comets as one is damage sponge and can screen cost effectively for FF without costing and arm and a leg and another one does what it did before.

-Relic nerfs anvil/hammer upgrade cost and increases the price of churchill in the process back to how it was when it had greater stats and no one was using it, because it was too expensive and inefficient compared to comet.

-This thread appears, questioning if anyone is using nerfed churchills which cost as much as the first super durable incarnation (which wasn't used because it wasn't cost efficient enough), but all it does is feed exp to ATGs and deters meds at best.
15 Mar 2016, 14:34 PM
#4
avatar of Nemesis10192

Posts: 54

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Mar 2016, 14:23 PMKatitof
History lesson:

-Churchill costs 180 fuel and has 1600hp/300 armor.
No one is using it, because comet is better for the cost and can take on panthers and above.

-Relic nerfs slightly comet, keeps the cost.
-Relic nerfs churchill to 1400hp/280 armor and reduces cost.

People use churchills as much as comets as one is damage sponge and can screen cost effectively for FF without costing and arm and a leg and another one does what it did before.

-Relic nerfs anvil/hammer upgrade cost and increases the price of churchill in the process back to how it was when it had greater stats and no one was using it, because it was too expensive and inefficient compared to comet.

-This thread appears, questioning if anyone is using nerfed churchills which cost as much as the first super durable incarnation (which wasn't used because it wasn't cost efficient enough), but all it does is feed exp to ATGs and deters meds at best.


The Churchill doesn't even have 280 armour, its 240 frontal 180 rear lol.

Also why would you ever use a churchill in a 1v1 when for the cost of one+unlock you can have a croc instead? The churchill is slow as fuck and doesn't kill anything. The croc is also slow as fuck but at least it rapes the living daylight out of AT guns and infantry.
15 Mar 2016, 14:40 PM
#5
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

I do in 2s.
It saved my life as often as killed me :foreveralone:

I go for Churchill if I have complex army behind. I mean, double vetted 6 pounders, double vetted Tommies, 2 Pits or something, then all I need is a damage sponge to keep vision, bait, protect vunerable crew etc.

If I have 17pounder and 6 pounder or double/triple 6 pounder and resources let me, I go for Croc+Churchill. Just move 3 pounders behind to stop any vehicles, while Croc+Church will melt any infantry/crew weapons.
15 Mar 2016, 14:46 PM
#6
avatar of Nemesis10192

Posts: 54

I do in 2s.
It saved my life as often as killed me :foreveralone:

I go for Churchill if I have complex army behind. I mean, double vetted 6 pounders, double vetted Tommies, 2 Pits or something, then all I need is a damage sponge to keep vision, bait, protect vunerable crew etc.

If I have 17pounder and 6 pounder or double/triple 6 pounder and resources let me, I go for Croc+Churchill. Just move 3 pounders behind to stop any vehicles, while Croc+Church will melt any infantry/crew weapons.


Sounds like something that would get melted by rocket arty+heavy tanks. Gonna struggle v tanks once your AT guns get decrewed and lose vet!
15 Mar 2016, 14:50 PM
#7
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

If I want a damage sponge I go for one of the actually useful variants, like the AVRE or Croc. Comets are durable enough, and you can use cromwell speed to get away from shit. Why would I want a damage sponge that can't hurt anything?
15 Mar 2016, 14:50 PM
#8
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



Sounds like something that would get melted by rocket arty+heavy tanks. Gonna struggle v tanks once your AT guns get decrewed and lose vet!


That's why I have faith in my micro to not let them wipe my AT Guns.

Still, as Brits I have plenty of ammo so I plant mines everywhere to protect from flanking once I lose AT Guns.
15 Mar 2016, 14:51 PM
#9
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



The Churchill doesn't even have 280 armour, its 240 frontal 180 rear lol.

I thought they've reverted that.
Well, only one more solid reason why NOT to use it then.

There are pretty much only 3 units in game where it makes actual sense to use churchill.

Its ele, JT and KT.
And comet will deal with each of them incomparably better.
15 Mar 2016, 14:53 PM
#10
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1

If I go Anvil its usually for other reasons than Churchills - usually because I ended up with several Sappers and its more efficient to double down with Heavy Engineers OR I ended up emplacement heavy and need the faster repairs.

Usually at that point I have a Firefly and I'll just get a Church to screen everything. I never think "Okay Cromwell, Anvil, and THEN the coup de grace Churchill!" Churchill is almost always a reactionary buy that I use to supplement what I have. (Even then I probably go Comet 90% of the time lol)
15 Mar 2016, 14:56 PM
#11
avatar of Pablonano

Posts: 297

I like churchills because they are that kind of tank that can enter in FoW and get out of any kind of trouble
15 Mar 2016, 15:05 PM
#12
avatar of Doggo

Posts: 148

Why use stock churchill when I can go Hammer, get Comet and pick Vanguard for Crocodile?
15 Mar 2016, 15:17 PM
#13
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I like churchills because they are that kind of tank that can enter in FoW and get out of any kind of trouble


So can the Comet with emergency war speed. :romeoPro:
15 Mar 2016, 15:22 PM
#14
avatar of Wygrif

Posts: 278

I use churchills from time to time. I use them to screen for fireflies when I'm not confident that I can manage a successful flank. Usually on narrow corridor map, especially against elephants, J-tigers, and King Tigers. I don't usually use AVREs or Crocs in that situation, because my partner and I try to knock out forward bases with a combined Calliope and Air Superiority.

Comet is almost always the superior choice, but the Churchill does have a viable niche IMO.
15 Mar 2016, 15:22 PM
#15
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Thanks for the feedback guys.
Seems like indeed, there is not actual reason to go for stock churchills when you can go AVRE / Croc.
15 Mar 2016, 15:22 PM
#16
avatar of Pablonano

Posts: 297

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Mar 2016, 15:17 PMKatitof


So can the Comet with emergency war speed. :romeoPro:
you can give churchill warspeed if you have a teammate that jolly cooperates
15 Mar 2016, 15:52 PM
#17
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

i enjoy using it actually. it is a good damage sponge and distraction.
15 Mar 2016, 15:56 PM
#18
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5

You're asking the wrong question.

The tanks are a large part of teching choice sure, but anvil and hammer have other useful things in them that dictate why you would choose one or the other.

Heavy engineers being one of the most attractive reasons to go anvil naturally leads to building a churchill or two. The high hp isn't a liability when engineers ca repair faster.

Though war speed and the target tracking thing in hammer are arguably better in a lot of situations.
15 Mar 2016, 16:01 PM
#19
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

You're asking the wrong question.


This question is not wrong son, as I was curious for the answer on the following questions;

"Anyone using Churchills"?
"Is there a reason to go for Churchills apart from damage soaking unit? "

Thanks m8.
15 Mar 2016, 16:19 PM
#20
avatar of Crumbum

Posts: 213

Churchill are pretty good if you got a firefly or AT guns to back them up. My biggest gripe with the Churchill is that it costs too much especially when you compare to a comet which is a much better all round tank.

After it got its significant nerf a while back the cost should have been reduced slightly maybe to 160 fuel? As is, comet is often the better choice, and if you want a stronger Churchill then you can often get a croc.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

837 users are online: 837 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM