Login

russian armor

USF Tech Changes Mod Changelog

PAGES (17)down
21 Nov 2018, 00:42 AM
#201
avatar of Kirrik

Posts: 573

So why not drop CP requirement for Greyhound at all? It's less of shock unit than AA halftrack despite costing more. What makes it so different from Valentine?
Also with Valentine changes Greyhound might the *only* vehicle in game that is not late game heavy tank that has CP requirement instead of tech
21 Nov 2018, 00:48 AM
#202
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

Your officer should still be arriving as the third unit if you're rushing for it. You might float a bit of MP, but you can also immediately build a team weapon off the bat, just delayed, which we found as a fair thing.

You want map control/early combat power: you go with the 3 rifles. You want a slower, but more diverse start, you go LT then .50cal or have your Captain fast build delayed units. Or build an extra RE instead during the delay.


I see the rational, I'll try and see with a couple more games.

A couple of things I noticed: all first light vehicles had their cost increased by 50 manpower with the exception of the m20 (which had a 100mp discount with v1 and now a 50mp discount) due to the change to Lt and Cpt cost in comparison to vanilla pricing. I don't think it is a problem, but maybe something to be further tested.

The M20 hits the field later now if one goes for a 3 riflemen start. The only build order that allows similar timing is 2 rifles, Lt, rifle, unlock, m20 which is a build that sacrifices a lot of map presence due to the high build time of the Lt and the delay of the 3rd riflemen due to the Lt tech as the third unit. I'm not sure if this is a problem either, but something that might require further testing. (Edit: I should have mentioned that this is in comparison to vanilla m20 timings)

With a couple of games, I like most changes. I think nades could be bumped up to 20 fuel due to the added utility of smoke and the increase in starting resources.
21 Nov 2018, 02:12 AM
#203
avatar of Bonewhite

Posts: 14



I see the rational, I'll try and see with a couple more games.

A couple of things I noticed: all first light vehicles had their cost increased by 50 manpower with the exception of the m20 (which had a 100mp discount with v1 and now a 50mp discount) due to the change to Lt and Cpt cost in comparison to vanilla pricing. I don't think it is a problem, but maybe something to be further tested.

The M20 hits the field later now if one goes for a 3 riflemen start. The only build order that allows similar timing is 2 rifles, Lt, rifle, unlock, m20 which is a build that sacrifices a lot of map presence due to the high build time of the Lt and the delay of the 3rd riflemen due to the Lt tech as the third unit. I'm not sure if this is a problem either, but something that might require further testing.

With a couple of games, I like most changes. I think nades could be bumped up to 20 fuel due to the added utility of smoke and the increase in starting resources.


I think that's right. The light vehicle comes a bit late. It would be better if we raise initial mp and roll back major mp also
21 Nov 2018, 07:23 AM
#204
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810


Lieutenant and Captain Dispatch

-Cost from 150/30 to 200/35.
-Research time from 60 to 70.
-Now grants 1/4 of a CP upon completion.

Platoon and Company Command Post Upgrade

-Cost remains 50/20 to preserve light vehicle timing (as of 1.2)
-Research time from 30 to 20.
-Now grants 1/4 of a CP upon completion.


increase unlocking lieut and captain MP cost is fine but why post upgrade still need 50MP?

it should be cost 15fuel only

And reserch time is too long to use lieut

get back to reserch time 60s and give back free BAR to lieut




-50 cal HMG now costs 125 manpower - 60 munitions
-57mm ATG now costs 125 manpower - 75 munitions. Now comes at 3cp


in this patch, USF get easy than now to get both 50cal and 57mm

who use munition for them?

Recon support air drop is worth because can get airborn and 57mm together

just change another skill or price buff

50cal 280mp -> 260mp

57mm 280mp -> 260mp


and plz buff "glass infantry" airborn

buff some target size 0.95~0.96%
21 Nov 2018, 08:22 AM
#205
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Airborne Doctrine
The following changes have been made to Airborne as the doctrine faced borderline irrelevance in this new tech structure. Both weapon drops should represent an attractive choice for players using a full LT or CPT build. The munition cost should prohibit weapon drop spam in team games.
-50 cal HMG now costs 125 manpower - 60 munitions
-57mm ATG now costs 125 manpower - 75 munitions. Now comes at 3cp
-Pathfinders available from 0cp


Why don't you simply put them a 200mp each. You're not making this doctrine anymore viable by making it heavy munition sink. The only thing in it that doesn't cost/need munition are Pathfinder...

Just a question, why not dissociating the M20 from T1 and put it at T0 available when first officer hit the field. At the moment I see close to 0 reason to build captain first on 1vs1, the lieutenant got all the pressuring stuff while the captain is relegated to be a kind of support tier in team game. Having the M20 would make it more appealing in any game mode.

Nice to see that finally USF get CP from teching, M8 is maybe going to hit the field before the sherman now...
21 Nov 2018, 08:25 AM
#206
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Nov 2018, 08:22 AMEsxile
Why don't you simply put them a 200mp each. You're not making this doctrine anymore viable by making it heavy munition sink.


Donating the team weapons (especially the .50) to a Soviet ally would become real problematic at 200MP. The munitions cost presents a strategic choice. The drops still give USF plenty of advantages, mainly not having to spend fuel on team weapon unlock (so faster tanks) and preventing getting another officer squad when what you really want is Paras.
21 Nov 2018, 08:37 AM
#207
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



Donating the team weapons (especially the .50) to a Soviet ally would become real problematic at 200MP. The munitions cost presents a strategic choice. The drops still give USF plenty of advantages, mainly not having to spend fuel on team weapon unlock (so faster tanks) and preventing getting another officer squad when what you really want is Paras.


Better have both officer squads and one less riflemen + Para than spending munition on drops. It is not like USF is floating in munition.

If you want to rush sherman with Lieutenant first, what would be the reason to unlock the Stuart? better unlock the captain
If you want to rush sherman with Captain first, what would be the reason to unlock AAHT + pakH? Build 1 or 2 mortar if you need that much indirect fire. Better unlock the Lieutenant next.

Then Para will greatly benefice from officer smoke, in fact para have much more synergy with officers than riflemen.
21 Nov 2018, 09:10 AM
#208
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Nov 2018, 08:37 AMEsxile


Better have both officer squads and one less riflemen + Para than spending munition on drops. It is not like USF is floating in munition.

If you want to rush sherman with Lieutenant first, what would be the reason to unlock the Stuart? better unlock the captain
If you want to rush sherman with Captain first, what would be the reason to unlock AAHT + pakH? Build 1 or 2 mortar if you need that much indirect fire. Better unlock the Lieutenant next.

Then Para will greatly benefice from officer smoke, in fact para have much more synergy with officers than riflemen.


That's your point of view and your strat decision. Many people are keen to go heavily light vehicule build (as many top players shows in every game mode) especially on more open maps. Early game preasure, better map control etc.

0.5 cal and AT gun from Airborn doctrine must be a little bit diffrent than basic version - even discrepancy in cost. As someone meansioned that also locks possibility to spam support weapons to your ally (for example dengerous when it's given to soviet penal spam). Best solution would be to change call in units to prevent overlap (diffrent mg, diffrent AT gun) or replace it with something else like med package drop. Anycase it's still big improvement from 1.0 version and more usefull. Besides thanks to powerfull p47 strafe commander never gonna be useless.
21 Nov 2018, 09:28 AM
#209
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Don´t know why you say "my strat" since I was responding to Sander93.
21 Nov 2018, 09:47 AM
#210
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...
The M20 hits the field later now if one goes for a 3 riflemen start. The only build order that allows similar timing is 2 rifles, Lt, rifle, unlock, m20 which is a build that sacrifices a lot of map presence due to the high build time of the Lt and the delay of the 3rd riflemen due to the Lt tech as the third unit. I'm not sure if this is a problem either, but something that might require further testing. (Edit: I should have mentioned that this is in comparison to vanilla m20 timings)
...

I am under the impression you are looking things from of perspective how to optimize USF build order with the tech changes.

Imo you should be looking things from of the perspective of how it compares to Ostheer tech options.
21 Nov 2018, 09:47 AM
#211
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

What´s the reason of putting Pak Howi behind side-tech? Doesn´t make that much sense to me. It would be fine if it was just unlocked after you get your Captain out. Against Ostheer you need indirect fire relatively early to deal with MG42s. It´s not really viable to get Pak Howi for that because it just arrives way too late.

We played around 10 games with the revamp patch. USF seemed good in 1v1. The earlier officer squad makes a real difference. So does the availability of AT options in every tier. I don´t think there is much of a problem with the changes in 1v1. Generally positive IMO.

In 2v2 USF still seemed pretty bad though. Not sure if the revamp mod will make USF a viable 2v2 faction, I guess UKF and Soviets will still be better than them. The problems that USF had in team games aren´t really solved.

21 Nov 2018, 09:56 AM
#212
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Nov 2018, 09:47 AMVipper

I am under the impression you are looking things from of perspective how to optimize USF build order with the tech changes.

Imo you should be looking things from of the perspective of how it compares to Ostheer tech options.
You are mistaken. I am playing the mod and point out what I observe. I am looking at how the timing compares to how it is now (the unmodded version). I also realise the futility of these "bait and switch" discussions, which is why I'll refrain from entertaining them, within threads, if you wish to discuss this and other points further, please feel free to pm me. :)

As it stands, the m20 is now less potent when it hits the field since the close range damage was reduced (for good reason) and hits it slightly later depending on build order. Its window of opportunity is notoriously short and potentially shortened, which is why I pointed it out.
21 Nov 2018, 10:29 AM
#213
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

You are mistaken. I am playing the mod and point out what I observe. I am looking at how the timing compares to how it is now (the unmodded version). I also realise the futility of these "bait and switch" discussions, which is why I'll refrain from entertaining them, within threads, if you wish to discuss this and other points further, please feel free to pm me. :)

I am sorry you feel that I am baiting you.

Comparing time is one factor and it is important, the new versatility is another.


As it stands, the m20 is now less potent when it hits the field since the close range damage was reduced (for good reason) and hits it slightly later depending on build order. Its window of opportunity is notoriously short and potentially shortened, which is why I pointed it out.

On the other hand M20 has become significant cheaper, vets faster and better. For 240/20 fuel the crew armed with a bazooka almost covers the cost.
21 Nov 2018, 10:36 AM
#214
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

21 Nov 2018, 10:39 AM
#215
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The far accuracy of the M20 is buffed considerably both base and vetted and the unit can kite from range 40, at vet 3 the close accuracy is superior to current one.

The unit should be able to vet allot faster.
21 Nov 2018, 11:27 AM
#216
avatar of Bonewhite

Posts: 14

Really I cannot understand why you added munition cost to HMG&AT drop. Airborne company requires a lot of munitions. paratroopers need at least 90 to upgrade their weapons, and 240 to P47 air support.
I think we can adjust their cost to 260/300mp, and drop 3 additional paratrooper crews who can reinforce near that antenna pathfinders can build. It was in COH1 as I remember. Or we can change them like supply drop in ostruppen doctrine. Spend 500mp, drop HMG, AT, and additional resources or medical supplies.
21 Nov 2018, 11:37 AM
#217
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Nov 2018, 10:39 AMVipper
The far accuracy of the M20 is buffed considerably both base and vetted and the unit can kite from range 40, at vet 3 the close accuracy is superior to current one.

The unit should be able to vet allot faster.

And close accuracy of M20 is gutted completely.
It'll be 222, but without a weapon that would be good against anything.
21 Nov 2018, 12:19 PM
#218
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Nov 2018, 11:37 AMKatitof

And close accuracy of M20 is gutted completely.
It'll be 222, but without a weapon that would be good against anything.

I can give a very long list of differences between a 222 and m20, including cost, tech cost, tier armor.

When it comes to DPS 0/10/20/30/40
New m20_utility_car_m2hb_50cal_mounted_mp
Vet 0 16.43/12.73/9.74/6.40/3.83
Vet 3 23.90/19.07/15.06/10.79/7.10


old
Vet 0 22.41/15.60/10.28/6.17/3.06

Now it might be that in your opinion close accuracy is "gutted completely", but the number seem to another story.

21 Nov 2018, 12:36 PM
#219
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

You are mistaken. I am playing the mod and point out what I observe. I am looking at how the timing compares to how it is now (the unmodded version). I also realise the futility of these "bait and switch" discussions, which is why I'll refrain from entertaining them, within threads, if you wish to discuss this and other points further, please feel free to pm me. :)

As it stands, the m20 is now less potent when it hits the field since the close range damage was reduced (for good reason) and hits it slightly later depending on build order. Its window of opportunity is notoriously short and potentially shortened, which is why I pointed it out.


But it hits harder thanks to the accuracy bonus, I see it as a sniper on wheel now, you also vet it with 5 to 6 kills when the old one needed around 10 to 12.

Less damage but more consistent
Vet faster
Cheaper as unit but more expensive to unlock

I think you can make pay an Ostheer player who went sniper by simply applying the same pressure on his squads which isn't possible on live version.
21 Nov 2018, 15:44 PM
#220
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

What´s the reason of putting Pak Howi behind side-tech? Doesn´t make that much sense to me. It would be fine if it was just unlocked after you get your Captain out. Against Ostheer you need indirect fire relatively early to deal with MG42s. It´s not really viable to get Pak Howi for that because it just arrives way too late.

We played around 10 games with the revamp patch. USF seemed good in 1v1. The earlier officer squad makes a real difference. So does the availability of AT options in every tier. I don´t think there is much of a problem with the changes in 1v1. Generally positive IMO.

In 2v2 USF still seemed pretty bad though. Not sure if the revamp mod will make USF a viable 2v2 faction, I guess UKF and Soviets will still be better than them. The problems that USF had in team games aren´t really solved.



Just putting it here since your post address pack howie, but what about we actually put it to tier 0 and properly balance it, remove that mortar (and maybe give it to brits instead cough cough) ?

There's really no point in giving usf two similar type of artillery.

These days light howietzer have hardly anything over mortars anyway.
PAGES (17)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

911 users are online: 911 guests
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50007
Welcome our newest member, Helzer96
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM