Login

russian armor

How to fix UKF: Unit overview

PAGES (9)down
23 Sep 2018, 15:48 PM
#101
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742


1: simply revert to it's old range so matches panther

3: price decrease to 400mp 155f, popcap down to 17. (probably the worst of the three options here imo, cheap doesnt exactly mean good either with how old t34/76 was)


Both of these changes at once would probably be most appropriate. The reductions in cost alone drifts the cost effectiveness of the unit far more in UKF's favor. Even if it continues to fail to trade with Panther's directly, it would be a much more powerful counter to Ostheer T3 and OKW's P4. This is the exact role that lategame allied tech decisions should be: forcing Axis to spend their fuel reserves to stay competitive.

The reduction of range on the Comet only made sense in the context of Comets fighting Panthers in a vacuum.

The Comet's anti-infantry capabilities should likely be made more reliable, indeed, but I hesitate to think it should be outright improved. If that makes any sense. I mean like a more accurate and larger AoE shell with a tighter lethal radius.

I think, in a sense, the Comet is sort of the British T34/85 to the Cromwell as the T34/76. Performance between the units should probably correlate in a similar fashion.
23 Sep 2018, 16:07 PM
#102
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

I've been using the comet a bit recently, when I get an easy game or whatever, It's anti infantry seems ok-ish if you ask me, it's nothing compared to the churchill or centaur obviously but when it hits it'll nearly wipe a squad. If the comet is stationary it's gun isn't too inaccurate either and the phosphorous does deal a lot of damage very quickly, it just doesn't kill. It's just if it moves at all it'll whiff the shot to oblivion. It seems to me, moving accuracy is the main problem right now because a loopdloop said, it's a goddamn cruiser tank, it's supposed to move.

With brits getting snares, I kinda think and buffs to pen or range or whatever might end up with the Brits getting the best AT in the game again, especially seeing as fireflies are set to become really powerful next patch. Which might be a balance issue.

Huh I. mostly agree but in my experience the comet seems to only hit like 1 guy when it hits (very rarely two if the models are literally almost clipping). The AoE seems kinda bad for how often it misses even while stationary IMO. I’d be fine with the low AoE if it hit more often but it still seems to whiff a lot of shots on flat ground while not moving.

@supremehansfan and zombifrancis
I actually think the shorter range than the panther is a good way to keep the panther more superior in the AT department (as it should be). I think a cost decrease would actually be a bit OP because the comet is still very tough and decreasing it to okw p4 cost would not justify that toughness. IMO the only thing that needs to happen to fix it is a buff to its offensive capabilities, namely improved and/or more consistent anti infantry on the main gun and maybe better moving accuracy penalties.
23 Sep 2018, 19:55 PM
#103
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Well yes, if Comets were only fighting Panthers.

I think when you start bringing into account all the other units Axis have that the Comet might be trying to deal with, such as JP4s for instance, is where the 45 range starts to fall short as an effective balancing device. It just ends up making the Comet more vulnerable to taking damage without being able to retaliate than any other tank, which I would argue heavily impacts those offensive capabilities.
23 Sep 2018, 20:17 PM
#104
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Well yes, if Comets were only fighting Panthers.

I think when you start bringing into account all the other units Axis have that the Comet might be trying to deal with, such as JP4s for instance, is where the 45 range starts to fall short as an effective balancing device. It just ends up making the Comet more vulnerable to taking damage without being able to retaliate than any other tank, which I would argue heavily impacts those offensive capabilities.


Wanna know something sad? The JP4 has less of a chance to pen a comet than the pershing does a KT.
23 Sep 2018, 20:39 PM
#105
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

Churchill is better than Comet, that is also my experience. Especially the artillery improvemt which comes with the tech-tree.


Beside that sitiuation UK's bigest problem are its emplacements. They would benefit from a normal mortar with a range-handycap if not garrisoned. (like old Ostheer Trenches with mortar). And in garrision it gets extra range.


After Sappers gets the AT-grenade the 6 pounder should get normal stats, same as US 6punder. Same pen as US one but maybe a rapide fire-mode + the fast-movement.


Vickers needs more pen, but less dps. More like the MG34 in performance. But with the passive Phosphor-Vet as now.


Bofors should get same stats as OKW-base.


The mine should become a Ostheer clone, not explode by infantry.


etc.








25 Sep 2018, 13:53 PM
#106
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264



Wanna know something sad? The JP4 has less of a chance to pen a comet than the pershing does a KT.


The JP4 is a medium counter, isn't the Comet classified as a heavy?
25 Sep 2018, 13:57 PM
#107
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2018, 13:53 PMKharn


The JP4 is a medium counter, isn't the Comet classified as a heavy?


Comet just like Panther and T34/85 plus easy 8 are more of premium mediums then heavies.
25 Sep 2018, 15:15 PM
#108
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98



Wanna know something sad? The JP4 has less of a chance to pen a comet than the pershing does a KT.


And what is sadder is that the Comet has a lower chance of scoring a penetrating hit against a JP4 than the JP4's chance against the Comet when you take into account accuracy and unit size:

Comet chance of scoring penetrating hit against JP4: 37%

JP4 chance of scoring a penetrating hit against Comet: 51%

Situation does not improve with vet either as the JP4 gets actual befits from it while the Comet does not.

25 Sep 2018, 15:52 PM
#109
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4



And what is sadder is that the Comet has a lower chance of scoring a penetrating hit against a JP4 than the JP4's chance against the Comet when you take into account accuracy and unit size:

Comet chance of scoring penetrating hit against JP4: 37%

JP4 chance of scoring a penetrating hit against Comet: 51%

Situation does not improve with vet either as the JP4 gets actual befits from it while the Comet does not.



Then you factor in potential AI and utility from the comet and waow, still holds some value!
25 Sep 2018, 15:59 PM
#110
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



And what is sadder is that the Comet has a lower chance of scoring a penetrating hit against a JP4 than the JP4's chance against the Comet when you take into account accuracy and unit size:

Comet chance of scoring penetrating hit against JP4: 37%

JP4 chance of scoring a penetrating hit against Comet: 51%

Situation does not improve with vet either as the JP4 gets actual befits from it while the Comet does not.



Here ye here ye!
Dedicated AT unit that can do literally nothing but fight armour and only from head on is better at fighting armour than a generalist unit with utility! Gather yer pitchforks, relic dun goofed!
26 Sep 2018, 01:58 AM
#111
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053



Here ye here ye!
Dedicated AT unit that can do literally nothing but fight armour and only from head on is better at fighting armour than a generalist unit with utility! Gather yer pitchforks, relic dun goofed!

Lol +1

Don’t forget the part where the JPIV doesn’t have a turret.

Meanwhile people still complain that the jackson can fight p4s (that’s a topic for another thread but I had to draw the parallel).
26 Sep 2018, 02:25 AM
#112
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

If you want to fix UKF, then fix the faction, the units are only its minions. I see lots of people arguing: "volks VS IS, grens VS tommies..." but remember, every faction evolves in a different way, also allies have some synergies that axis cant enjoy. The game has changed so much since its release its hard to keep track of the nerf/buff ratio, but you can always help proposing either a change of dynamic of the faction itself or either prupose a change on the units to give them the desired usefulness.
Its like asking for conscript squads to overwhelm lategame and killing tanks single handed, its just silly...
UFK has some solid gameplay, sometimes hard to adapt, but thats the tradeoff...
26 Sep 2018, 07:40 AM
#113
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...
Meanwhile people still complain that the jackson can fight p4s (that’s a topic for another thread but I had to draw the parallel).

The problem is not that Jackson can fight PzIV but that it can fight the majority of axis vehicles effectively.

In the case of PzIV the problem is that the chance to hit and penetrate a PzIV is very high even at max range while it not easy to be flanked like the SU-85 or have slow ROF like FF.

M-36 performance is part of the reason that M-10 which is a cost efficient unit sees little action.

TD should actually be separated to those best fitted vs medium tanks and those better fitted to fight heavy tanks.
26 Sep 2018, 12:51 PM
#114
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

The only reason why you would ever get M-10 instead of jackson before any jackson buffs was because it didn't required teching.

And Jackson can not be not effective against any kind of armor, because its the only TD USF has.

M-10 also supports TD doctrine which doesn't exist in coh2, swarm of expendable TDs - why risk losing vehicles, when you can get jackson?

26 Sep 2018, 13:17 PM
#115
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

USF have tools to deal with medium armor and bellow and do not need the M-36 to do so. Even if they did the unit should not be able to hit and penetrate PzIV from 20 unit outside the PzIV range with such high probability.

Before the buff to M-36 allot of top player preferred the M-10 to the M-36 in many situations.

The M-10 in live is a cost efficient unit.
26 Sep 2018, 14:50 PM
#116
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833



@supremehansfan and zombifrancis
I actually think the shorter range than the panther is a good way to keep the panther more superior in the AT department (as it should be). I think a cost decrease would actually be a bit OP because the comet is still very tough and decreasing it to okw p4 cost would not justify that toughness. IMO the only thing that needs to happen to fix it is a buff to its offensive capabilities, namely improved and/or more consistent anti infantry on the main gun and maybe better moving accuracy penalties.


It still wouldn't be the same price as a P4, Comet suffers because it is mediocre for cost (500mp 185f) and it is locked behind a premium tier like panther in Ost T4 (this is what everyone moaned about when panther was eh for price). Even if you reduced price to 400mp and 155-160f and pop a little you would still be paying extra for what is really a better cromwell that scales worse than any other tank in the game. Just now it wouldn't cost more than any other non-doc tank in the game.

This was my least favorite suggestion, but like I say I would rather Comet price stay the same and range and vet be improved so allies can have a tank that can fill the premium TD role that can also bully the odd squad off a VP like panther can.

I don't think anyone can argue Comet wasn't overnerfed, the vet was the worst in the game to begin with but then it got hit by mobility, main gun, fire shot, war speed and range nerf all in one. If it was going to see so dramatic changes I think some stats should have been shifted to one of the suggestions like I promoted.


26 Sep 2018, 15:00 PM
#117
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2018, 07:40 AMVipper

The problem is not that Jackson can fight PzIV but that it can fight the majority of axis vehicles effectively.

In the case of PzIV the problem is that the chance to hit and penetrate a PzIV is very high even at max range while it not easy to be flanked like the SU-85 or have slow ROF like FF.

M-36 performance is part of the reason that M-10 which is a cost efficient unit sees little action.

TD should actually be separated to those best fitted vs medium tanks and those better fitted to fight heavy tanks.


It seems you are bringing this subject of M10 and Jackson in other threads, and the correct reasons why the unit is underused in the current meta have already been debated.

Now if you would return to the subject of this thread, that'd be great. This reply from elchino7 which understood to your concerns still applies today:



It's not used because:

1- It's no longer a cheesy unit that at vet 0 could crush any infantry squad easily.

2- No longer a call in unit.

The whole point of armor was going LT + Cpt for a strong early/mid game play, and finish it off with M10 to deal with any medium tanks.


It was needed. The problem comes that different factions, have different cost/timing for unlocking their tank tech and/or are less flexible to do so.

OP: i don't think M10 needs to be made a stock unit but i agree with the concept of "mid tier" unlocks which would help with the timings of certain units.

OKW: i've suggested previously for a mid gap between JPIV/Ober and PIV/PV which would also help with other call ins such as Ostwind and Hetzer.

USF: i guess applying the same principle is worth a try. It's no longer "free tech" but not as expensive as of now.



26 Sep 2018, 15:11 PM
#118
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833



Then you factor in potential AI and utility from the comet and waow, still holds some value!


We keep hearing about this great comet AI, maybe I am really trapped in a patch from two years ago :S

I've not seen Hans or any other pro player touch them in months in a serious game.
PAGES (9)down
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

927 users are online: 927 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49070
Welcome our newest member, Blesofsk
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM