Login

russian armor

Churchill in next patch

15 Apr 2017, 10:31 AM
#21
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2

people really underestimates churchill, but that's because their AT capabilities aren't that great as comets, it's a typical "tank" role, to hold out enemy, take damage and so on, churchill is really hard to get destroyed


It's not really smart to use that tank as damage sponge though, especially against OKW. It's free exp.
15 Apr 2017, 10:41 AM
#22
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Apr 2017, 07:41 AMVipper
I would rather have the Churchill have more utility:

1) Move Smoke/WP shot to Churchill

2) Make "infantry support smoke" activate the offensive cover bonuses to UKF infantry

3) Make command tank upgrade lower the speed of Churchill to 4

Then Churchill can work as in its theoretical role of "infantry support tank"


I'm 50-50 on giving Churchill smoke shell. If Churchill ever gets a smoke shell, the shell needs to have a high cooldown, otherwise it will be pure cancer to kill the Churchill. On the other hand, giving Smoke shell to the Churchill will allow it to protect the rest of UKF assets, while being difficult to kill.

I'm 100% behind infantry support smoke (yellow cover + reduced incoming suppression). However, we first have to evaluate just how powerful Tommies are, given the rest of the nerfs in the Brit faction.
15 Apr 2017, 11:36 AM
#23
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I'm 50-50 on giving Churchill smoke shell. If Churchill ever gets a smoke shell, the shell needs to have a high cooldown, otherwise it will be pure cancer to kill the Churchill. On the other hand, giving Smoke shell to the Churchill will allow it to protect the rest of UKF assets, while being difficult to kill.

I'm 100% behind infantry support smoke (yellow cover + reduced incoming suppression). However, we first have to evaluate just how powerful Tommies are, given the rest of the nerfs in the Brit faction.

The CD on smoke shell should go down anyway.

Infantry support smoke does not have to provide light cover, just activated the cover bonuses of UKF infantry that are in the smoke. Those bonuses are allot both defensively and offensively.

Churchill should also have access to the commander upgrade as all UKF Tanks should.

A player choices on units should reflect game style preference and not simply better stats.

A player want to use fast tanks aggressively he would go hammer. A player want to use heavy tanks combined with infantry he would ho anvil.

(As faction designed it would be allot easier to balance UKF in the Hammer/anvil choices had more impact on UKF units/emplacements. For instance UKF units could be toned down but have hammer engineer increase speed reduce size and anvil engineers increase armor/HP)
15 Apr 2017, 12:06 PM
#24
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

What about giving it a small aura for infantry? Something minor like + 10% accuracy to all nearby infantry. It´s an infantry support tank after all.
15 Apr 2017, 12:49 PM
#25
avatar of DarkDanie

Posts: 12

I am completly fine with buffing the Churchill for better inf support, if it gets the heavy status as well. The main issue with the Chruchill (seen by a primary achsis player) is its numbers. The 'vet feed' might be an indirect advantage for the achsis, however the churchill gets vet as well due to damage and vet 3 stugs are completly useless if you are not able to finish your target before the stugs get wiped by your oponents superior airstrikes etc + a sniping firefly (or Su85/jackson in team games). My suggestion would be an increase in armor with a slightly HP decrease + buff its main gun (stats still worse than OH tiger but no price increase),so that the churchill performs as a good inf support platform in a (literal) Tank-role, while being limited to one model at the same time and so not overdominating due to its mere mass.
15 Apr 2017, 15:00 PM
#26
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Apr 2017, 11:36 AMVipper

A player choices on units should reflect game style preference and not simply better stats.

A player want to use fast tanks aggressively he would go hammer. A player want to use heavy tanks combined with infantry he would ho anvil.

(As faction designed it would be allot easier to balance UKF in the Hammer/anvil choices had more impact on UKF units/emplacements. For instance UKF units could be toned down but have hammer engineer increase speed reduce size and anvil engineers increase armor/HP)


I like these ideas, but making UKF early game any more fragile could have major issues. The 4 man squads against snipers is still an issue.
15 Apr 2017, 15:52 PM
#27
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276

Hmmm. I seem to have worded my firs post badly, sorry for that. The purpose of my post was simply pointing out a possible change to it in order to remove its vet feeder trait. It was not my intention to buff or nerf it somehow.

Although, the utility and main gun buffs would be nice for the long underrated tank. I mean, not that I never see it in play, but... I never see it in play... at least, not in high ranking games (includes the streams and tourneys that I regularly watch on Twitch).
15 Apr 2017, 18:28 PM
#28
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post15 Apr 2017, 07:41 AMVipper
I would rather have the Churchill have more utility:

1) Move Smoke/WP shot to Churchill

2) Make "infantry support smoke" activate the offensive cover bonuses to UKF infantry

3) Make command tank upgrade lower the speed of Churchill to 4

Then Churchill can work as in its theoretical role of "infantry support tank"


That looks intresting.
15 Apr 2017, 21:10 PM
#29
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

If you buff the churchill you'll put OKW lategame into a risky position. Churchill tech rush without side teching will cost 145 + 210 = 355 while OKW tech into T4 is 30 + 25 + 120 and then given you go P4 because it's the jack of all trades tank you have 175 + 150 = 325 and then +15 if you want to have medics, which you do. Meaning that as long as the rakatten is bugged, and the p4 is more or less useless against heavies you either roll over OKW around the 12-17 minute mark for about 5 minutes, OR OKW are forced to save for panther or go JP4 out of fear of churchill rush. Obviously this is an issue because of the lackluster rakatten, p4 and brit teching issues but this is what I think needs to be considered before ever buffing the churchill. Oh and I didn't factor in the fact brits start with 10 more fuel because reasons Kappa

EDIT: Also keep in mind that because the panther has horrible RoF it cannot take on a churchill alone in a reasonable amount of time. It can pen easily, but the only real answer is the JP4.


why would you want medics when volks self heal and sturms can heal themselves for 10 munitions? I don't even know why people buy okw medics anymore, unless you go for obers
16 Apr 2017, 01:48 AM
#30
avatar of LimaOscarMike

Posts: 440

If you think about the types of units and abilities that make Churchill useless (e.g., Stugs, TWP), trading HP for armour will make the Churchill even more useless.


does churchill had sherman or cromwell main gun stats ? should replace it with cromwell make them more useful ? and let them suffer with stunt round as any other tank seem fine to me
16 Apr 2017, 04:53 AM
#31
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

It's not really smart to use that tank as damage sponge though, especially against OKW. It's free exp.


This could be rectified by lowering the health and making it take less damage. For example, lower the health by 50%, but lower all received damage by 50% as well, enemy units would receive 50% less veterancy.
16 Apr 2017, 06:08 AM
#32
avatar of karskimies

Posts: 67



This could be rectified by lowering the health and making it take less damage. For example, lower the health by 50%, but lower all received damage by 50% as well, enemy units would receive 50% less veterancy.

This has been discussed and it does not work like that. It stills gives same exp that way.
16 Apr 2017, 06:39 AM
#33
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

people really underestimates churchill, but that's because their AT capabilities aren't that great as comets, it's a typical "tank" role, to hold out enemy, take damage and so on, churchill is really hard to get destroyed


Unless oponent is OST. Has vet 1 pak with TWP and 2 stugs nearby
16 Apr 2017, 07:17 AM
#34
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063



I'm 50-50 on giving Churchill smoke shell. If Churchill ever gets a smoke shell, the shell needs to have a high cooldown, otherwise it will be pure cancer to kill the Churchill. On the other hand, giving Smoke shell to the Churchill will allow it to protect the rest of UKF assets, while being difficult to kill.

I'm 100% behind infantry support smoke (yellow cover + reduced incoming suppression). However, we first have to evaluate just how powerful Tommies are, given the rest of the nerfs in the Brit faction.

Uh Brit smoke shells do not disable AT weapon so ground attack still works well against Churchill, with its huge size ATG have no troubles hitting it barring BS RNG.
16 Apr 2017, 10:17 AM
#35
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978



Unless oponent is OST. Has vet 1 pak with TWP and 2 stugs nearby
So you think the Churchill should survife running into a trap of three dedicated anti tank units?
16 Apr 2017, 10:31 AM
#36
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808



Unless oponent is OST. Has vet 1 pak with TWP and 2 stugs nearby


lol thats like saying, why did i lose my tiger to 2 Jackson's and an at gun
16 Apr 2017, 10:35 AM
#37
avatar of Doggo

Posts: 148

The Churchill tank has no purpose in game except to feed the opponent XP. Even if you nerf the Comet into the ground, its still going to picked over the Churchill every time.

The Churchill tank needs a purpose and I don't think some utility stuff will make it worth using. It isn't even properly armoured.
16 Apr 2017, 10:42 AM
#38
avatar of tenid

Posts: 232

"Pure Cancer"? Guess that's any hope of objectivity out the window then.

A tank should be viable on its merit as a tank, not through whatever abilities it provides. Even if it had smoke shells and viable infantry smoke, it would still be underwhelming and pointless as a tank.

As it stands the Churchill represents an offensive downgrade from the Cromwell, never mind the Comet. It has the same gun stats as the Cromwell but a longer reload. Aside from the reload, nothing should change there - it was historically the same gun, can't change that. It's also why arguments like "it's called heavy, it should be limited to one!" are just another way of saying that allies having something is only ok if axis have a strictly superior equivalent.

Without offensive firepower, the Churchill has to rely on two things to make it in any way viable. The first is survivability enough to have it stand up to AT options for long enough to pose a threat, especially given its low speed. That can be argued either way.

The second is being able to produce enough of them to collectively pose a threat, which again the Churchill fails miserably at. One on one, the Churchill will only pose a threat to an unsupported P4 or stug. Given that the thing costs almost as much as a panther and takes up more pop cap any form of numbers advantage is impossible.
16 Apr 2017, 13:01 PM
#39
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2017, 10:31 AMAlphrum


lol thats like saying, why did i lose my tiger to 2 Jackson's and an at gun


So you think the Churchill should survife running into a trap of three dedicated anti tank units?



I was saying he cannot escape. Tiger can always back up behind AT guns and the Jacsons can go and f*ck themselves.

On the other hand, once is something shot by Ostheer TWP pak ability, it has little to no chance escaping "thanks" to 3 second stun. Pak stun should be changed to main gun jam. It´s not like ostheer didn´t have fausts.

Also stugs are dirty cheap at doing their job. The cost 160 fuel (2x) whereas 2 jacsons cost 250 fuel...

And 2 stugs keep allied armor at bay as well as 2 jacksons keep axis armor at bay
16 Apr 2017, 13:16 PM
#40
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808






I was saying he cannot escape. Tiger can always back up behind AT guns and the Jacsons can go and f*ck themselves.

On the other hand, once is something shot by Ostheer TWP pak ability, it has little to no chance escaping "thanks" to 3 second stun. Pak stun should be changed to main gun jam. It´s not like ostheer didn´t have fausts.

Also stugs are dirty cheap at doing their job. The cost 160 fuel (2x) whereas 2 jacsons cost 250 fuel...

And 2 stugs keep allied armor at bay as well as 2 jacksons keep axis armor at bay


Jackson has, turret, speed , sight which is why it costs more etc, but im not guna go off topic. yes Churchill may need slight buffs, TWP may need to be reworked to but STUGS? you wna nerf stugs? go ahead nerf em and make them useless like they wer in the past when no one used them. if your getting kept at bay by 2 stugs you need to L2P mate
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

unknown 71
United States 4

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

788 users are online: 1 member and 787 guests
aerafield
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49141
Welcome our newest member, igryskoj24
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM