Login

russian armor

Unofficial Revamp mod (EFA & WFA & Brits)

PAGES (30)down
8 Jul 2017, 00:07 AM
#221
avatar of frostbite

Posts: 593

from 30 to 5 secs of brace and no armor buff? i dont understand this at all. wassup with mega nerfs to things. if it was just 30 to 20 ok thats a 33% nerfs cool but nerfs are getting a little bit out of hand. try using very small nerfs or buffs. 5-10% at a time
8 Jul 2017, 00:19 AM
#222
avatar of frostbite

Posts: 593

imo emplacements arent even that good in alot of situations. they are static, a big target, can be ignored if the enemy goes to a different side of map and it will be a mp drain. they cost pop-mp-fuel-and a tech choice. if a emplacment gets destroyed it put u in a bad position where u most like wont want to even buy another one. easily counterable if u got good times and indirect early. brace is wat it is for a reason. the relic balancers knew that emplacements need brace. without brace emplacements are shit. its hard to fix emplacements when axis is barrage spamming it. ur going to be losing sappers and engineers the whole time draining ur mp. since your fixing u can engage in combat or cap or destroy obsticles or lay mines. if brace is going to take a nerf like that are other things going to be changed like how much indirect arty does to the building? or rpgs or flames? or small arms? i wont see a reason to buy them anymore really
8 Jul 2017, 01:06 AM
#223
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808

PIATs

- Range increased to 35

man really? already USF is an annoying faction cuz of bazooka blobs (granted ther more reliant on their versatile inf) but the brits too? no man
8 Jul 2017, 01:23 AM
#224
avatar of nigo
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15

Smith,

Make a separate thread for brits, like wfa.
8 Jul 2017, 01:24 AM
#225
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

It would seem that the Royal Engineer Regiment's Anti-Building Incendiary Mortar targets Sandbags and Bridges too. Hahahaha! :P

Note to self: Using Sandbags for my defensive line as the Royal Engineers will do more harm to me than good. lol.
8 Jul 2017, 01:43 AM
#226
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2017, 01:23 AMnigo
Smith,

Make a separate thread for brits, like wfa.


How come? The reason we made a separate thread for WFA mostly was because EFA front post couldn't take it anymore (too long) :P
8 Jul 2017, 04:23 AM
#227
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

Why did you make brit trenches get a RA penalty after being abandoned instead of normalizing target size?
8 Jul 2017, 04:32 AM
#228
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1

I get that Emplacements can make for some pretty frustrating gameplay but I don't know how you can realistically keep them alive with 5 second Brace. A flank with two Volks and two spaced out flame nades and goodbye emplacement - just eyeballing it this Brace nerf seems to over reward flanks even if emplacements are more affordable now.
8 Jul 2017, 04:49 AM
#229
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

I get that Emplacements can make for some pretty frustrating gameplay but I don't know how you can realistically keep them alive with 5 second Brace. A flank with two Volks and two spaced out flame nades and goodbye emplacement - just eyeballing it this Brace nerf seems to over reward flanks even if emplacements are more affordable now.


Sounds like a simple enough solution, remove lava grenades, Kappa.
8 Jul 2017, 05:03 AM
#230
avatar of frostbite

Posts: 593



Sounds like a simple enough solution, remove lava grenades, Kappa.

its not even just the nades. its sall arms, rpgs tanks, indirect... basically anything will shredd. i had someone with 2 mortors basically obliterated my mortor emplacement so fast and i could even land shots on the target mortar.. its just sad to see things get ultra nerfed to ground.
8 Jul 2017, 05:20 AM
#231
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

My feelings on the Brit changes:

I feel like the aec still misses a ludicrous amount of shots on the move and accelerates kinda slow for a unit that's supposed to be the flanker or close quarters version of the puma, and it (rightly so) can't fight infantry anymore. I also feel like light gammon bombs are still a little cheesy considering commandos get the best version of infantry camo. I feel pretty dirty just chucking one at an mg or mortar in cover from camo for a pretty much guaranteed wipe. I had an idea off the top of my head that maybe giving it wider aoe (like a lot wider) but reducing the damage 40 (half of a model's health right?) or even less and having little damage fall-off at range so that it's an effective way to open an ambush even on a larger force, but can't be the ambush by itself. I think that the tulip changes might be a little much seeing that the brits have no non-doctrinal way to immobilize a tank except for the aec, which can't really hold long enough in the lategame (especially stationary) to snare bigger tanks. Also, is there a reason that Brit gliders can't be repaired? It really sucks to call in a vanguard glider and have it too damaged to make commandos because rng decided it should get shot up by okw base aa (not a problem anymore I guess) or if it's later game, pintle 42s or the flak base and hit a bush on landing.

Also, for laymen like me, how impactful are the bren changes and tommy and commando RA changes?
8 Jul 2017, 05:55 AM
#232
avatar of frostbite

Posts: 593

just played a bunch of games with brits. tbh i really dont like most of these changes. to many nerfs and changes makes them not fun anymore, i really feel like only a few things should have been changes and not so drastically. i feel like these nerfs were brain stormed and so many things werent taken into account, things overlooked. nerfed maybe becuz fanboys complained so much.
8 Jul 2017, 07:01 AM
#233
avatar of Tanker

Posts: 53

Too many brits nerf, and they have nothing to compensate it. Come on now they already nerfed like 3-4 times without a buff...
8 Jul 2017, 08:52 AM
#234
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

just played a bunch of games with brits. tbh i really dont like most of these changes. to many nerfs and changes makes them not fun anymore, i really feel like only a few things should have been changes and not so drastically. i feel like these nerfs were brain stormed and so many things werent taken into account, things overlooked. nerfed maybe becuz fanboys complained so much.


You mean you now have to actually play and think before you get your win? If so, mission accomplished.
8 Jul 2017, 08:58 AM
#235
avatar of karskimies

Posts: 67

Keep up good work. Changes seems to give a lot more viable gameplay options.
8 Jul 2017, 09:19 AM
#236
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2017, 04:23 AMTobis
Why did you make brit trenches get a RA penalty after being abandoned instead of normalizing target size?


High native RA would turn them into deathtraps vs AT guns, and there would be no reason to ever build trenches anymore (i.e., everybody would go for the sandbag-behind-flag thing).

If you want a trench removed, you have to clear its occupants out first. Then, with the change you can use an AT gun to quickly remove it from the landscape.

I get that Emplacements can make for some pretty frustrating gameplay but I don't know how you can realistically keep them alive with 5 second Brace. A flank with two Volks and two spaced out flame nades and goodbye emplacement - just eyeballing it this Brace nerf seems to over reward flanks even if emplacements are more affordable now.


We didn't have the time to evaluate every single attack type vs emplacements. However, if there are special types of attacks that completely negate emplacements (e.g., lava nades), we'll just nerf lava nade damage vs emplacements.

However, realistically, a flank with Grenadiers should be as rewarded as a flank with Volksgrenadiers. This means bringing small arms efficiency vs emplacements up and bringing lava nade efficiency vs emplacements down.
8 Jul 2017, 10:09 AM
#237
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

I had an idea off the top of my head that maybe giving it wider aoe (like a lot wider) but reducing the damage 40 (half of a model's health right?) or even less and having little damage fall-off at range so that it's an effective way to open an ambush even on a larger force, but can't be the ambush by itself.

Before you start calling for that, try using Light Gammons on weapon teams in Heavy Cover. They will not be wiped.

As for the armour decrease on the 17 Pounder... Not a big fan of it or rather of how big the decrease is. This is a Sandbag fortified structure after all and yet all small arms will penetrate it now. Can't we meet in the middle and give it an armour rating of 2, stopping 50 % of the damage? Just look at AT Guns that have passive Heavy Cover like the Ostheer Pak38 or the Soviet Zis-3. An Armour increase to 2 will bring it closer to that kind of durability.

Emplacement Pack-Up
The goal of pack up is to allow British players to potentially relocate parts of their assets elsewhere, or when it is no longer possible to maintain static presence on the field.

- Sappers can now pack-up emplacements for a 75% return in resources invested in them
- The duration of pack-up time is 20 seconds
- During pack-up the emplacement cannot attack, and takes increased damage (3x)
- Attack restriction penalties persist for 6 seconds if pack-up is cancelled
- The resource yield also counts the 2-mortar upgrade, but doesn’t count Advanced Emplacement Regiment upgrades (i.e., no munitions refund)


Now this does please me a lot. With this change being made, I will no longer feel the need to fight for longer range mortars. Thank you!

Regarding Infiltration Commandos. Would you guys be able to add a "Greyed Out" button for the Demo Charges to explain how to unlock them eventually? I understand I may have... forced you to officially release the mod earlier than planned. Heh... ^^'
8 Jul 2017, 10:31 AM
#238
avatar of MarioSilver

Posts: 62


Cost reduced from 250MP to 150
FRP cost reduced from 200 to 100


Way to encourage further piats/bren blobbing.


Motar Pit
1-Mortar
- Costs 200MP/6 popcap
- Target size from 40 to 1.5


Great. Cheaper, mobile and situational versatility. "nerf" they said?

Bofors
- Target size from 40 to 15



Good luck Pak40/R43


T3 building
- MP cost increased from 280MP to 350MP


And no fuel cost increase?


Tommies
Cover Bonus
- RA from Vet0 removed


How about ROF/Reload bonus nerfs, which is the main offending bonus?


Universal carrier
- Now benefits from shared veterancy
- Veterancy requirements reduced from 720/1440/2160 to 540/1080/2160
- Popcap reduced from 4 to 2
- Hitpoints from 200 to 240
- Can now carry the sniper (cannot fire from the hold)


Why should a free vehicle which can already win the game in 5 minutes need so many funny buffs?
8 Jul 2017, 10:34 AM
#239
avatar of capiqua
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 985 | Subs: 2

- Glider will self-destruct if crash-landed

-I think it should be able to repair gliders, this change does not unbalance the game. And is a solution to avoid call-in another glider.




- Building time increased from 90 seconds to 120 seconds

This is excessive, in 2 minutes offers plenty of time to do other things while the sapper is busy for 2 minutes (plant mines, repair, attack, etc)

8 Jul 2017, 10:41 AM
#240
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17


As for the armour decrease on the 17 Pounder... Not a big fan of it or rather of how big the decrease is. This is a Sandbag fortified structure after all and yet all small arms with penetrate it now. Can't meet in the middle and give it an armour rating of 2, stopping 50 % of the damage? Just look at AT Guns that have passive Heavy Cover like the Ostheer Pak38 or the Soviet Zis-3. An Armour increase to 2 will bring it closer to that kind of durability.


Ideally, the 17 pounder should have been a Pak43 clone.

The Pak43 has an amazing design. You can flank it with infantry to decrew it and steal it. There's the ambush-behind building component. Then, there's also the vulnerability to indirect fire component.

We're pragmatic, and we know that it will be impossible to convince Relic to let us redesign 17 pounder to a Pak43 clone. Therefore, we chose to make the 17 pounder more vulnerable to infantry this way.

For all emplacements:
- We first need to identify which units they are too vulnerable or too strong against
- Once we do that, we will adjust stats as necessary, but not before we've had a global view of the issues

For instance, if 17 pounder is perfect vs everything (not too weak, but not too strong either), but too weak vs small arms fire, we will reduce its target size first. That way, we don't penalise bolt action rifles too much.

Basically, the attack types we are considering (and want to evaluate) are:
- Bolt action rifles
- Assault Rifles (at close range)
- LMGs (at long range)
- Flame Dot attacks (lava nade, mortarHT)
- Flamer attacks
- Balistic weapons from a distance (AT guns, tanks)
- Basic indirect fire (OST mortar/LeiG)
- Turbo-barrages (OST mortar barrage)
- Heavy artillery (LeFH)
- Rocket artillery


Now this does please me a lot. With this change being made, I will no longer feel the need to fight for longer range mortars. Thank you!

Regarding Infiltration Commandos. Would you guys be able to add a "Greyed Out" button for the Demo Charges to explain how to unlock them eventually? I understand I may have... forced you to officially release the mod earlier than planned. Heh... ^^'


The other trick is that you can now rely on 25 pounder barrage to actually do stuff offensively. A defensively-built mortar pit will help protect your forward assembly, while being able to cover your troops in the offensive with long-range smoke barrage from your mortar pit.

The fact that you can upgrade medics at forward assembly means that you are no longer forced to have every single Tommy squad become medics.


-I think it should be able to repair gliders, this change does not unbalance the game. And is a solution to avoid call-in another glider.


The solution is there to allow players to call in replacement gliders. That way if your glider crashlanded and your officer died, you can still have access to that ability.

While it's true that such a change wouldn't imbalance the game, the animations look silly. The Sapper models bunch up in the middle of the glider and it just looks bad.

Maybe we can just give gliders a slow passive regen while they are in connected territory.


This is excessive, in 2 minutes offers plenty of time to do other things while the sapper is busy for 2 minutes (plant mines, repair, attack, etc)


Note that build time is per model. If you have 1 sapper model building an emplacement, it will take 2 minutes. However, if you have a full-man squad, it will take 30 seconds.
PAGES (30)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

739 users are online: 1 member and 738 guests
uk88world
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49066
Welcome our newest member, uk88world
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM