Login

russian armor

Let the UC cost fuel

24 Mar 2018, 22:46 PM
#1
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

In my opinion this Unit rolls just too fast onto the battlefield and is overperforming for its low price. Its cost should get changed to 240 MP and 15 Fuel because at the moment it is just to strong to only cost some MP (it is effective against buildings,Infantry can counter MGs without any skill and does not even delay Upgrading your HQ since it doesn't cost fuel)
24 Mar 2018, 23:19 PM
#2
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

15 fuel is pushing it. 5 is fine.
24 Mar 2018, 23:29 PM
#3
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

It does cost lots of munitions to get the upgrades that make it anything more than a scout vehicle, though.
24 Mar 2018, 23:30 PM
#4
avatar of ZaneyZap

Posts: 264

The UC...

Small arms fire can hurt it, a bit.
It can kite away from faust attempts.
OKW can build a raketten from the start to counter it, OST cannot.
OST can use armor piercing incendiary rounds to shred it to pieces, but this ability is locked behind vet.
Its front armor is 1 point stronger than a 222.
It handles like a brick
I also think the UC's upgrade cost is fair.
15 fuel is a bit much.

maybe lower its armor, lock the upgrades behind the first HQ upgrade and let the upgrades increase its armor
24 Mar 2018, 23:46 PM
#5
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

It does cost lots of munitions to get the upgrades that make it anything more than a scout vehicle, though.

You could say the same about the SdKfz 251 ... which costs 30 Fuel more
24 Mar 2018, 23:50 PM
#6
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

Ukf do not have mortars or snares though. Uc is there to help vs suppression, kubels,snipers, and mortars. You cannot nerf this unit without a ukf early game redesign. Maybe add a substitution for thus unit if you want it to get nerfed.
24 Mar 2018, 23:57 PM
#7
avatar of Justin xv

Posts: 255


You could say the same about the SdKfz 251 ... which costs 30 Fuel more


Poor attempt.

251 is for reinforcing on the battlefield.
25 Mar 2018, 06:39 AM
#8
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

I think the UC is completely in line.
25 Mar 2018, 12:14 PM
#9
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I think it's of similar value to the Infantry Section and HMG it competes with.
25 Mar 2018, 14:09 PM
#10
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063

Going UC means UK capping power is even shittier than before and now give it fuel cost, no thank you, I would prefer we have a 2-inch mortar upgrade for UC than maybe you can slap a fuel cost on it, otherwise that is a lot of investments on a unit that generally don't survive past 10 mins of the game.
25 Mar 2018, 17:37 PM
#11
avatar of Hater

Posts: 493

Let the kubalwagon™ cost fuel? No, what a dumb thought. If someone forgot, OKW is dead anyway. And wait... wait... let M3 cost NO FUEL AT ALL!!!11
25 Mar 2018, 18:01 PM
#12
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
I think 5 fuel is a good change. UKF have dirt cheap nade tech for fighting mgs. The nade range on those UKF nades are almost as long as rifle nades. As well, UKF tech is the cheapest of all factions. But this is far from the most important problem with UKF.
26 Mar 2018, 01:09 AM
#13
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

UC is fine. It's not abusively used. Totally a L2P issue. 2 sources of small arms will push it away and brits don't have repair until down the road.
26 Mar 2018, 04:35 AM
#14
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
The armor value of UC is too high. 222/251 have lower armor and they cost 30 fuel.
26 Mar 2018, 04:57 AM
#15
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

The armor value of UC is too high. 222/251 have lower armor and they cost 30 fuel.


citing armor without HP is useless. the UC only have 200 hp compared to the 320 HP on the 222 and 251.

as well as the fact the 222 have a 20mm cannon, and the 251 being able to reinforce troops.

the basic bren carrier is hardly worth the MP cost. You don't have a turret and you're relatively slow and cumbersome, so you can't flank.

You can't reinforce squad and the occupants can't fight. Tommies are long range combatant so it doesn't make sense to try to dump them behind the enemy.

Of all the Allied light trucks, the UC is most likely the least threatening of them all.
26 Mar 2018, 05:25 AM
#16
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

The armor value of UC is too high. 222/251 have lower armor and they cost 30 fuel.

222 can engage infantry, light vehicles, planes, have 50 sight range and turret.
251 can reinforce and transport 2 squads at once.

You're comparing apples to airplanes.
26 Mar 2018, 07:00 AM
#17
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

Don't forget that while OKW can get a Kübelwagen that doesn't bleed because it can easily be repaired by OKW's starting unit, the UC needs T2 in order to be repaired at all without the cost of mun.
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

788 users are online: 788 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49082
Welcome our newest member, 23winlocker
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM