Login

russian armor

How to fix UKF: Unit overview

PAGES (9)down
16 Sep 2018, 18:24 PM
#81
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

A shame the Hammer specialisation in game isn't as effective as the Hammer we seem to have on the forums XD

Lol +1

On that topic, the other day I was thinking that it’d be cool if the gammon bomb (on infantry sections) would stick to tanks. IIRC it doesn’t actually engine damage, but stuns for a bit (don’t remember if it just stops movement of the tank like the AEC or disabled weapons too). It’d make hammed a bit more appealing and give some actual function to it other than comet, as anvil is picked both for Churchills and the airburst shells, while the only driving force behind picking hammer is really the comet.. Heavy engineers are nice too, but IMO are on the same level of usefulness as FoW vehicle tracking (as in nice to have but not something that plays a part in dictating which specialization one chooses). It’d also lend some more nice synergy and mobile aggression thematic to hammer to the brits, which I think is fine because they would still be the only faction without snares on mainline infantry. Snares on sappers are great, but inherently less powerful and ubiquitous than snares on tougher and highly prevalent (in terms of actual numbers of squads) mainline infantry of other factions. I think that’s balanced though, since brits will have all those other abilities that mess with tanks (treadshot, sniper crit, tulips sort of). It’s actually a perfect compromise IMO for sappers to have snares.
16 Sep 2018, 18:48 PM
#82
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

All they need to do is buff the comets scatter again, and MAYBE increase fuel price by 5 if its too spammable as both an AI/AT source. It has 800 HP, 290 armor, which is 10 less than a Tiger, and can engage both infantry and tanks. Alternativly we could lower its armor to around 250 instead of a price change. Veterancy would have to be looked at, but I have no idea why the comet is not being changed, along with many other things...
17 Sep 2018, 01:31 AM
#83
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 17:30 PMAlphrum


isnt panther and AT guns SUPPOSED to counter the comet?

From a team game perspective, buffs to the comet is a nono, as having a non doc tank that will be effective against all targets will be op and usually those kind of tanks are limited to 1. Comet is most definitely more viable now with the panther armour nerf.

If the comet gets some sort of armour, health or main gun buff, ther would need to be corresponding nerf along with it (like the panther), probably its speed or something.


The panther shouldn't be a counter to the comet, they should be somewhat even, at guns should be though. The comet has not been effective against all for a long time.

I don't think the comet needs to have good anti infantry, if I want that I'll grab a centaur, it should be a valid answer to the panther as they cost the same and the comet has a short 17 pdr (arguably the comet costs more due to hammer) and it should be a good flanker, neither of which it does very well right now. Making the comet average AT and good anti infantry would make it a non-tanky churchill which would still make it, although better, still not useful.

I still say leave it's scatter as it is but give it an accuracy bonus against armour (like the 6 pdr) and better moving fire accuracy, this prevents any issues about it being OP against infantry by buffing it's accuracy. Or I still like the idea of it getting discarding sabot rounds that you pay munitions for like the jackson. Remove all it's other abilities if you like, they're pretty much gimmicks anyway as phosphorous doesn't kill anymore, smoke rounds are pretty situational and the grenade ability is only good on the churchill.

@loopdloop: With the gammon bomb thing I liked that idea as well until they announced brits are getting actual snares for sappers and sort of for tommies too. I personally think it's quite OP to make satchels stick to tanks anyway as a couple of penal Battalions can straight up delete Panthers with their Frisbees of doom.
But if the patching team think it's a good addition for soviets, that's fair enough, I personally think the range is a bit much though. British don't cos weapon racks. Brits get Piats which are really lethal anyway, Soviets have no other infantry AT other than PTRS's which is why they get it. Can you imagine how good infantry sections would be if you could give them Piats and they could stick gammon bombs to tanks? With a gammon bomb and 2 piats infantry sections could insta gib most medium armour and kill a panther after the second volley. 3 infantry sections could straight up delete anything on the map. XD
18 Sep 2018, 05:05 AM
#84
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

Hoverbacon: fair point. Keep in mind it would probably have to be a very short stun with no permanent effects if it was implemented at all. Maybe an increased throw time and/or decreased damage against vehicles too. I’m just trying to think of ways to make the thing actually useful/appealing besides occasionally throwing them at unlucky schwerers. Another consideration is that Brits do also have chronically smaller and somewhat less mobile infantry squads than soviets
18 Sep 2018, 19:18 PM
#85
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220

True dat, If infantry sections were any slower I think they might actually break time itself, still not as bad as CoH1 though. XD

I don't think increased throw time would work as you'd just get more situations like with satchels were the gammon bomb gets targeted and then frisbees half way across the map to stick to the tank. I'd prefer decreased damage to vehicles but allow it to snare or a chance to like the satchel. Nearly all axis infantry can snare and like half of them can get panzerschreks if they want, seems somewhat fair to me that Allies be the same.

I think part of the issue is they're goddamn expensive and aren't very good at their job, they're pretty useful at disposing of MG42s in buildings and bunkers etc when you can get them there, which brits can really struggle with due to lack of indirect fire, especially before vehicles. Satchels were good even before they stuck to tanks, I think the issue with gammon bombs is they come far too late. Why would I spend 50 muni on something when I can just get a tank to do it for free. Brits also can't deploy smoke without a mortar pit currently, (next patch recovery sappers and mortar teams will be able to though.)

If it arrived earlier, maybe with the armoured car unlock, cost a little less, and brits had more readily available smoke, perhaps from the Universal carrier, or giving all sappers smoke grenades rather than just recovery ones, I think it could be quite potent for dealing with axis weapon teams. This would also be a nice work around for the fact that it's unlikely brits will be getting a non-doctrinal mortar team any time soon.
18 Sep 2018, 20:37 PM
#86
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

True dat, If infantry sections were any slower I think they might actually break time itself, still not as bad as CoH1 though. XD

I don't think increased throw time would work as you'd just get more situations like with satchels were the gammon bomb gets targeted and then frisbees half way across the map to stick to the tank. I'd prefer decreased damage to vehicles but allow it to snare or a chance to like the satchel. Nearly all axis infantry can snare and like half of them can get panzerschreks if they want, seems somewhat fair to me that Allies be the same.

I think part of the issue is they're goddamn expensive and aren't very good at their job, they're pretty useful at disposing of MG42s in buildings and bunkers etc when you can get them there, which brits can really struggle with due to lack of indirect fire, especially before vehicles. Satchels were good even before they stuck to tanks, I think the issue with gammon bombs is they come far too late. Why would I spend 50 muni on something when I can just get a tank to do it for free. Brits also can't deploy smoke without a mortar pit currently, (next patch recovery sappers and mortar teams will be able to though.)

If it arrived earlier, maybe with the armoured car unlock, cost a little less, and brits had more readily available smoke, perhaps from the Universal carrier, or giving all sappers smoke grenades rather than just recovery ones, I think it could be quite potent for dealing with axis weapon teams. This would also be a nice work around for the fact that it's unlikely brits will be getting a non-doctrinal mortar team any time soon.


I already suggested that all Sapper variants get the smoke grenades however, as an "improvement" package for the Tactical Support Regiment instead of the Recovery Sappers but I guess replacing the ability entirely is a much better option.

And yeah the mortar from air supply operation is nice, I also suggested that a 2nd mortar be added as well or for it to replace the AT gun that's being dropped so act as a sort of mobile alternative to the Mortar Pit so to speak. But I really don't see a problem in just adding another mortar and increased the price a bit in terms of manpower.
18 Sep 2018, 21:53 PM
#87
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

Yeah a lot of the gammon bomb’s relative uselessness has to do with timing and faction design. That’s mostly why I suggested making it stick to vehicles (with extensive changes etc.) as that would at least let them add something useful to the faction. Even if they came earlier, the issue still remains that literally 2 units have smoke before tanks come out: the mortar pit, which is not very practical for 1v1s IMO, and commandos, which clear fortifications better by themselves anyway and would probably only be slowed down by trying to support infantry sections trying to clear fortifications with heavy gammon bombs in most situations.
18 Sep 2018, 22:48 PM
#88
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Sep 2018, 17:30 PMAlphrum


From a team game perspective, buffs to the comet is a nono, as having a non doc tank that will be effective against all targets will be op and usually those kind of tanks are limited to 1. Comet is most definitely more viable now with the panther armour nerf.
.

are you using a Comet from 2 years ago? Current comet is nowhere near effective as panther vs tanks and is only just on par with pintle panther if not slightly worse on the move (it can't hit nothing on move anymore and has water gun MG's).

Try sinking 185f and 18pop cap in comet and watch it miss more shots than a cromwell or P4 while inf caps in front of you... the tank sucks.

it has same price as panther but you get none of the perks of a panther, less range.. health.. pen... way way worse vet. All you have in return is slightly faster main gun and armour, but the main gun is only good vs P4 spam for the previous mentioned downfalls.

Comet needs a range buff to match panther at least, also some form of pen buff with vet if the anti-inf is going to stay so mediocre for the price point.

19 Sep 2018, 00:35 AM
#89
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220



are you using a Comet from 2 years ago? Current comet is nowhere near effective as panther vs tanks and is only just on par with pintle panther if not slightly worse on the move (it can't hit nothing on move anymore and has water gun MG's).

Try sinking 185f and 18pop cap in comet and watch it miss more shots than a cromwell or P4 while inf caps in front of you... the tank sucks.

it has same price as panther but you get none of the perks of a panther, less range.. health.. pen... way way worse vet. All you have in return is slightly faster main gun and armour, but the main gun is only good vs P4 spam for the previous mentioned downfalls.

Comet needs a range buff to match panther at least, also some form of pen buff with vet if the anti-inf is going to stay so mediocre for the price point.



+1 If I'm spending the same price as a panther on a tank, I want it it to be as good as a panther or better than the panther at something. Whether it's slightly worse AT but better AI or equal in AT terms. Any buffs to any unit need to make them fit meta however otherwise UKF will remain being carried by the same 4 units.
19 Sep 2018, 16:35 PM
#90
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053



+1 If I'm spending the same price as a panther on a tank, I want it it to be as good as a panther or better than the panther at something. Whether it's slightly worse AT but better AI or equal in AT terms. Any buffs to any unit need to make them fit meta however otherwise UKF will remain being carried by the same 4 units.

+1

IMO the comet should be a little weaker in the AT department (which it is) and be less durable (which it is) than the panther, but have good AI capabilities (which it doesn’t) and retain its abilities.
19 Sep 2018, 20:18 PM
#91
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



+1 If I'm spending the same price as a panther on a tank, I want it it to be as good as a panther or better than the panther at something. Whether it's slightly worse AT but better AI or equal in AT terms. Any buffs to any unit need to make them fit meta however otherwise UKF will remain being carried by the same 4 units.

It's better than a panther at smoking enemy strong points, and blows it out of the water when it comes to using white phosphorus!

The original design of the comet was awful (copy and paste Pershing stats aaaaaand make it unlimited, but also give it 70 range WP that unlike all other forms in game doesn't cap damage!) plus the commander upgrade....

They did this to themselves to make money via ignoring balance.

It could use a bit more main gun reliability vs infantry but that's about it...
19 Sep 2018, 22:29 PM
#92
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220


It's better than a panther at smoking enemy strong points, and blows it out of the water when it comes to using white phosphorus!

The original design of the comet was awful (copy and paste Pershing stats aaaaaand make it unlimited, but also give it 70 range WP that unlike all other forms in game doesn't cap damage!) plus the commander upgrade....

They did this to themselves to make money via ignoring balance.

It could use a bit more main gun reliability vs infantry but that's about it...


Hahahah, yeah it's much better than the panther at being a comet as well. I agree, it used to be a essentially the wallet warriors mini-pershing, and that anti at gun sniper phosphorous was in-game for far too long.

The thing is, the comet isn't an anti infantry tank, it will never be as good as the churchill or centaur for that. Currently with the churchills health pool and abilities the churchill is better against the panther too! Buffing the anti infantry isn't going to make the unit more usable, it will be slightly better, but what does that matter if everyone just goes churchills? It'll not get used. The unit needs a role and it's role is not anti infantry. This doesn't mean it needs to be a carbon copy of the panther, it just needs to do something to make you go hammer for it, which it just doesn't do right now, nor will it do if you buff it's anti infantry.
19 Sep 2018, 22:46 PM
#93
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



Hahahah, yeah it's much better than the panther at being a comet as well. I agree, it used to be a essentially the wallet warriors mini-pershing, and that anti at gun sniper phosphorous was in-game for far too long.

The thing is, the comet isn't an anti infantry tank, it will never be as good as the churchill or centaur for that. Currently with the churchills health pool and abilities the churchill is better against the panther too! Buffing the anti infantry isn't going to make the unit more usable, it will be slightly better, but what does that matter if everyone just goes churchills? It'll not get used. The unit needs a role and it's role is not anti infantry. This doesn't mean it needs to be a carbon copy of the panther, it just needs to do something to make you go hammer for it, which it just doesn't do right now, nor will it do if you buff it's anti infantry.


Keep in mind the comet isn't the only thing that comes from hammer. The tracking makes Firefly's better (as well as the comet) gammons could be made a bit better and warspeed is great as well and effects all armour you build.
The comet is just an elevation of the cromwell.

However, I could get behind making the comet and church much better and limiting them to 1 because even the broken old comet wasn't TOO bad to deal with (barring 70 range WP...) , it was 2 and 3 of them, same as heavies that was the worst. They were good enough to become your Army instead of being part of it. Same thing we have with churchills now. Critical mass is the goal.

Edit: also of course the comet won't be as good as a dedicated AI vehicle at AI or a slow ass meatshield. The hammer is about taking the fight to the enemy and the comet is one of the fastest tanks in game iirc. It could easily be king jack of all trades with some adjustments, but it shouldn't be comparable to dedicated units like it was. Hell the only comet despite all its perks could beat a panther 40% of the time in a slug fest AND had mobility on its side meaning it was simply king tank.
20 Sep 2018, 00:00 AM
#94
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220

True, the tracking is quite powerful especially for allies. But it just hammer just pales in comparison if you ask me, airburst makes the 25 pdrs somewhat threatening, heavy engineers is great and extra point vision is certainly not a negative. The churchill is just better against more stuff, and a churchill sat in front of a firefly is a more useful and powerful combo than anything you can do with hammer. The war speed is nice I suppose and allows you to pull off some crazy flanks with comets if people decide to attack your teammates.

I dunno, I think hammer in general needs a buff, the spotting is nice, but the gammon bomb isn't really that useful. Warspeed will save the life of your comet pretty well but late game you're only going to be using comets and fireflies really and you shouldn't really be needing it on a firefly, and it's not as good as churchill smoke anyway.

Limiting them to one and making them awesome would work but the historical accuracy aspect would bug me a little. The other tanks limited to one are the tiger, IS2, pershing and tiger 2s (and superheavy TDs) which the comet really shouldn't be an equivalent to. If they wanna do that, at least give me a centurion/Black prince. XD

I suppose when you look at it like that, comet can take the fight to the enemy, but the churchill is still a better spearhead in that regard and can kill lone at guns with ease. The old comet was just straight up better than the panther, at close range to medium range, it would straight up beat a panther 100% of the time due to the firerate. It was also a pretty good infantry squasher too, but back then volksgrenadiers didn't have snares.

2 or 3 comets were god tier yeah, but 2 or 3 panthers god tier too and were an even match if not better. The only reason 3 panthers aren't as scary as 3 comets is because of the prevalence of allied tank destroyers. Axis tank destroyers i.e.- jagdpanzer 4s aren't any where near as prevalent . This means 3 panthers nearly always goes up against their counters whereas comets normally only end up fighting panthers.
20 Sep 2018, 04:57 AM
#95
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

I actually think that buffing comet anti infantry is the solution to its problems. I think that it needs to be able to exert pressure on the enemy, but as it stands right now infantry can basically just sit under its fire with hardly any casualties. I think most aspects of its at ability are balanced but it’s just unable to fight infantry well enough for its cost and role. I mean, I understand it’s a generalist, but that implies that it’s decent at multiple things. Whereas the thing practically has to run away from infantry because it’ll hit like one guy in 3 shots. I guess my point is that it just doesn’t feel threatening enough to infantry to justify its status as a generalist (or “elevated cromwell”) tank. Meanwhile the Cromwell also kinda sucks and can’t even eat rockets (justifiably ofc) like the comet can.

Also it’s a bit odd that “cruiser” tanks are so bad on the move.
20 Sep 2018, 09:45 AM
#96
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

The Comet is steaming pile of liquid garbage in its current state and should only be used if you are a sucker for punishment or just want to loose the game faster.

Played as Ost, and all the Brit players went for comets instead of Fireflies. Its was a shameless massacre, needless to say.

The Comet is so bad in comparison to the Panther and yet is more expensive (a whole 10mp more, yes). Its bad at every role and Brits instead get units that are much better at definitive roles, like fireflies AT and Tommies and AI.

Several critical problems (in comparison to the Panther):
- No Vet: biggest issue, I recon, is that the Comets Vet does absolutely nothing for its combat ability. This means that as the game drags on, the Comet gets even worse in comparison to the Axis counter parts that get meaningful Vet.
The worthless Vet is from the glory days when the Comet had it all and didn't need serious vet to stay relevant.

- Bad anti-inf: The comet is categorically worse at anti-inf compared to the Panther. The poor accuracy of the main gun means that it doesn't play much of a role in infantry killing and instead its the MG's that does most of the work.

- Bad AT: Low penetration and low range (40 range) versus Axis heavies (45 range) mean that this unit can't deal with units its meant to tackle when it hits the field. The only thing it can reliably tackle are mediums in which case just get a Firefly.

The comet is expensive both resource and population wise but fills no role whatsoever.
If comet wants to become a useful and balanced unit, then it gonna need a more definitive role in the Brit army roster.
I would lean more towards Panther treatment but mainly because I'm not sure what other type of role it might fulfill and people weren't too happy when it was at good anti-inf in days past.
20 Sep 2018, 16:42 PM
#97
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

@combatwombat comet has respectable pen iirc and its range is 45, not 40. But to everything else I agree.

Its chassis stats are plenty fine imo, it's like a slightly lighter Pershing. But it's gun let's it down. A bit more AoE and/accuracy. Hell maybe even a 0.66 modifier on moving accuracy instead of the 0.75 it was and the 0.5 it is now.
20 Sep 2018, 18:35 PM
#98
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

@combatwombat comet has respectable pen iirc and its range is 45, not 40. But to everything else I agree.

Its chassis stats are plenty fine imo, it's like a slightly lighter Pershing. But it's gun let's it down. A bit more AoE and/accuracy. Hell maybe even a 0.66 modifier on moving accuracy instead of the 0.75 it was and the 0.5 it is now.


Woops, yes that correct, its 45 range for comet - Panther is 50 range.

The penetration (far 170), while better than the average medium, doesn't work so great against the axis heavies, which is what it will be facing.

Chance for Comet to pen Panther at max dist is 65%

Chance for Panther to pen Comet at max dist is 75%

Given that the Panther has more health, it really is an unfavourable matchup, which begs the question; what is the Comet good for?
20 Sep 2018, 19:53 PM
#99
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220

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.
22 Sep 2018, 23:19 PM
#100
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833



+1 If I'm spending the same price as a panther on a tank, I want it it to be as good as a panther or better than the panther at something. Whether it's slightly worse AT but better AI or equal in AT terms. Any buffs to any unit need to make them fit meta however otherwise UKF will remain being carried by the same 4 units.



It's funny because when I watch imperialdane casts when UKF is eventually clubbed by vet command panther, brumbar, vet panther etc dane always says stuff like "well they could have gone for comets here which would have been a wiser choice lategame". As if comet can even trade vs panther vet xD

I think a lot of people don't realize just how crappy the vet is, you get no reload or extra armor buffs like the panther does. Really the unit scales so badly, it needs extra range and punch. imo some choices worth testing


1: simply revert to it's old range so matches panther and give it an extra 30% pen at vet 2. Comet now becomes worth the 500mp 185f pricetag like panther.

2: Make the AI reliable again, I think increasing MG damage for on the move (less wipes but can kill stuff) and decreasing the scatter for static shooting. Also make the inc shell a bit more responsive and faster to fire.

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)
PAGES (9)down
3 users are browsing this thread: 3 guests

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

943 users are online: 943 guests
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49432
Welcome our newest member, weekprophecy
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM