UKF September patch discussion

Churchill's rear armour needs to go down there is little to no reason why flanking would be so unrewarding vs Churchill.

In addition there is also little reason for stock veto 0 defensive smoke. From a design point of view it would be better is was replaced with commando smoke providing cover status to infantry but no concealment.

One match in which the Ostheer player did not produce the adequate counters (no snares or Tellers to slow them down, nothing to spot for the StuGs to use their range advantage, not getting at least one Panther to use tank the damage for the StuGs, not using Pak 40s for their stun rounds) doesn't really prove anything.

That said, it will very likely receive a very minor price increase and one additional popcap (up to 19) for the final patch to better match its "performance" (mostly having 1400 hitpoints and decent armor). I personally think Churchills are only a problem when 2-3 of them are deployed simultaneously.

Instead of Churchills being used tactically as a damage sponge for other units, at the moment they are mostly just being spammed on masse to overwelm the enemy with their sheer number of hitpoints alone, so hopefully the higher popcap will make it very hard to build 3 of them and still have anything of an army left around them. Without support, they should be easier to counter.

Yes sounds good.
Churchill still have good pen to damage tanks from the side(rear) for 160 hp. I think that is heavy for AI tank.
I rather keep the 18 popcap and reduces main gun to 120.
Extra 2 popcap you can still put out 2 churchills.
Ukf already have FF and Pak and Piats/Snares.

Yes sounds good.
Churchill still have good pen to damage tanks from the side(rear) for 160 hp. I think that is heavy for AI tank.
I rather keep the 18 popcap and reduces main gun to 120.
Extra 2 popcap you can still put out 2 churchills.
Ukf already have FF and Pak and Piats/Snares.

It is pretty beefy indeed the Churchill. Soaks too much damage and sometimes able to deflect shots from both mediums and AT support gun pretty effectively too.

I am kind of fine with but the fact that I am not fine with is the addition to its strength in the AI departement.

It counters a bit too well the Churchill against the AT guns and just infantry in general.


What Churchill changes I would implement, that it would not have such a stronger effect than it necessarily should be since you can acquire more than 1 Churchill, is to make 2 changes only:


1.- Reduce the armour a bit more since it already has great HP (more than KT). To make it more vulnerable to take damage from both AT guns and mediums better.

&

2.- Reduce the speed. Decreases the deadly effect on dealing with infantry easily as well as AT guns. It also effectively makes the AT gun have more chances of countering the Churchill better. Since Churchill can pretty much counter anything in its path except heavier tanks.


Bonus 3.- Oh, wait one other thing which make this interesting. You know the Kubel change made with the HP and all. It should be implemented on Churchill since it is supposed to soak damage. Less HP but has damage resistance, in this way able to make repairs faster.


Currently it is a bit too mobile which contributes to its deadly effect on the field. It should be way slower as designed especially when it is designed to soak damage.

At least the AT have a better chance of countering such a beefy strong hp unit.

It will still have an impact on the field but it wont charge in as recklessly as it does now.

You have to be careful reducing the offensive power of the Churchill because the only way a meat shield unit can work is if it is WORTH drawing fire. If you know its not going to do any reasonable damage to you you can comfortably focus on other elements of the enemy army.

120 is still a lot of damage, you need 1 more hit to kill a tank, which i think is fair for its 1400hp, give axis another chance to hit it or Ukf can decide is it worth to stick around longer.

Churchill moving accruacy is better than panther p4, it has good rotation and smoke and self repair. An extra popcap doesnt make it imo.

Since it is so hard to kill which allows more vet, you can still end up with double churchill and a FF, even with the +1 popcap penalty.

ukf 5 man tommy is only 1 popcap more than grens but performs better.

Weakening its AT is most sensible that is also keeping the theme of heavy armor soaker late game AI unit.

It needs to be better countered, which means we should look at its performance and not costs imo.

You have to be careful reducing the offensive power of the Churchill because the only way a meat shield unit can work is if it is WORTH drawing fire. If you know its not going to do any reasonable damage to you you can comfortably focus on other elements of the enemy army.

My idea is to keeps its firepower, it being left unchanged and yet still strong. Has still the impact. Just nerf mobility.


What I think the Churchill is too good at is avoiding getting shot at due to its strong mobility. It deflects and counters most AT guns especially mediums effecitvely because it gives them a very small window.

So, in most case scenarios as playing Axis, you really have to concentrate fire most of the time on the Churchill because it can really counter most of your units except Panther only.


Churchill should still be strong against tanks and infantry but it should not counter some other elements too effectively.

Particularly countering AT guns.

Churchill can approach 2 AT guns and deal with them on its own unlike any other tank except heavy tanks only.


I think nerfing the mobility first before making more further changes would be definitely the right step

An extra popcap doesnt make it imo.

To be honest I think people in general underestimate small "secondary" adjustments like this, which I personally prefer over directly gutting a unit's performance. Units like Assault Engineers, Pathfinders and Assault Grenadiers, Valentine (and Jaeger Light Infantry) have all been (imo) balanced simply by changing their call-in conditions in order to regulate their availability, while leaving the per-unit performance of these units largely intact so that they can remain strong to serve their purpose.

I would much rather try creative secondary solutions and see if they work in the long run, and make further (performance related) adjustments later in case they ultimately do not (fully) work, than straight up going after performance and risking a unit to go from overpowered to underpowered (which has happened a lot in the past).

6-9 extra popcap over 2-3 Churchills is a pretty big deal, as that's going to be 1-2 fewer Royal Engineers to repair or 1-2 fewer other units to support them otherwise, which should make pure Churchill spam less attractive.

The thing is 160 -> 120 is not underperformance.

It supposed to be a AI and "support" tank, and not use its high survivable to kill tanks, which is whats happening now.

Forcing it stay a little long should compensate for this survivability.

+1 popcap isnt much availability in this case imo. I believe one can still build 2 churchills. 3 churchills is not commmon in 1v1 or 2v2. But if one wants to, 3 of them is still possible, you just keep 1 less tommy, which you dont really need with 3 churchills around.

The thing is 160 -> 120 is not underperformance.

Honestly, I think it would be. That would be 1 extra shot versus mediums, and 2 extra shots versus a Panther based only on hitpoints. But given how the Churchill doesn't have very high penetration, that would mean that the average number of shots more needed to kill Axis armor would be even higher.

With the Churchill's poor penetration alone (105 far pen), disregarding accuracy, that would mean on average:
vs P4 is 1 / (105 / 180 = 0.58) = 1.7 shots extra
vs P4J is 1 / (105 / 234 = 0.45) = 2.2 shots extra
vs Panther is 2 / (105 / 260 = 0.4) = 5 shots extra

With far accuracy at 0.025 (55-60% chance to hit a P4 or Panther) you could probably add another shot to each of those, but I won't include it because it's impossible to calculate the true accuracy with scatter based misses becoming hits.

The rng i played against churchills has always been more effective than it should at inflicting AT damage.

At most i guess you need 2 extra shots to kill panther at 120. But churchill arent meant to kill panther, so that is the problem solved.

Ukf wont go ez with churchills, and would do proper AT supporting damage soakers.

If we watched the multiple hulled KV1s vs panthers someone demo, kv1 has worse pen than churchills, but IIRC it ended with hulled kv1 victory by just.

One match in which the Ostheer player did not produce the adequate counters (no snares or Tellers to slow them down, nothing to spot for the StuGs to use their range advantage, not getting at least one Panther to tank the damage for the StuGs, not using Pak 40s for their stun rounds) doesn't really prove anything.

That said, it will very likely receive a very minor price increase and one additional popcap (up to 19) for the final patch to better match its "performance" (mostly having 1400 hitpoints and decent armor). I personally think Churchills are only a problem when 2-3 of them are deployed simultaneously.

Instead of Churchills being used tactically as a damage sponge for other units, at the moment they are mostly just being spammed on masse to overwelm the enemy with their sheer number of hitpoints alone, so hopefully the higher popcap will make it very hard to build 3 of them and still have anything of an army left around them. Without support, they should be easier to counter.

So based on one game and a lot of complaining by 2-3 posters, the balance team is going to push the standard Churchill's pop-cap to more than a Panther and just four less than a KT? Do you really think the Churchill is comparable to a KT?

Reducing its damage to 120 is just an unintuitive change. If its damage from the main gun is deemed to be too good for its cost just modify its accuracy and or rate of fire.

So based on one game and a lot of complaining by 2-3 posters, the balance team is going to push the standard Churchill's pop-cap

Who said that decision was based on one game and a lot of complaining by 2-3 posters? You literally quoted me saying that that one match did not prove anything.

to more than a Panther and just four less than a KT? Do you really think the Churchill is comparable to a KT?

I think arguably the cheer amount of hitpoints that the Churchill has, and the amount of counters it forces, makes it worth 19 popcap. I think it's comparable to four popcap less than a King Tiger. Popcap is not a universal measure anyway, it can be tailor made to fit certain units within certain armies.

To be honest I think people in general underestimate small "secondary" adjustments like this, which I personally prefer over directly gutting a unit's performance. Units like Assault Engineers, Pathfinders and Assault Grenadiers, Valentine (and Jaeger Light Infantry) have all been (imo) balanced simply by changing their call-in conditions in order to regulate their availability, while leaving the per-unit performance of these units largely intact so that they can remain strong to serve their purpose.

I would much rather try creative secondary solutions and see if they work in the long run, and make further (performance related) adjustments later in case they ultimately do not (fully) work, than straight up going after performance and risking a unit to go from overpowered to underpowered (which has happened a lot in the past).

6-9 extra popcap over 2-3 Churchills is a pretty big deal, as that's going to be 1-2 fewer Royal Engineers to repair or 1-2 fewer other units to support them otherwise, which should make pure Churchill spam less attractive.

Great post,+1

So based on one game and a lot of complaining by 2-3 posters, the balance team is going to push the standard Churchill's pop-cap to more than a Panther and just four less than a KT? Do you really think the Churchill is comparable to a KT?

u need 2 stugs to beat a Churchill efficiently

2 stug have 20 pop cap and 180 fuel cost

Reducing its damage to 120 is just an unintuitive change. If its damage from the main gun is deemed to be too good for its cost just modify its accuracy and or rate of fire.

No is not.
reducing to 120 locks down its AI soaker role more proper.
changing accuracy or rof introduces more variables and also affect its AI role.
120 is still strong enough to counter p4 and below easily.

this is the kv1 hulldown video i was speaking. it is closer than it is supposed based on armor/pen values. now add in support units and churchill 120 is still enough to trouble axis backline.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKMxUSuk2g4

One match in which the Ostheer player did not produce the adequate counters (no snares or Tellers to slow them down, nothing to spot for the StuGs to use their range advantage, not getting at least one Panther to tank the damage for the StuGs, not using Pak 40s for their stun rounds) doesn't really prove anything.

That said, it will very likely receive a very minor price increase and one additional popcap (up to 19) for the final patch to better match its "performance" (mostly having 1400 hitpoints and decent armor). I personally think Churchills are only a problem when 2-3 of them are deployed simultaneously.

Instead of Churchills being used tactically as a damage sponge for other units, at the moment they are mostly just being spammed en masse to overwelm the enemy with their sheer number of hitpoints alone, so hopefully the higher popcap will make it very hard to build 3 of them and still have anything of an army left around them. Without support, they should be easier to counter.

There was nothing Price could have done against them damage wise. 4 stugs could not kill one churchill. Bouncing like mad and not doing enough damage combined. If he went panther(s), the UKF player would simply go 2 churchills with a 6 pounder. Panther doesn't have enough dps to kill even one churchill. Pak 40s also have a huge problem with killing the churchill, especially 3 coming for you, as they can roll up and kill it easily and have health to spare. 3 churchills supported by sappers, tommies, is nearly unbeatable. There was nothing and I repeat nothing Price could have done. Mines allright, but it would only engine damage the Churchill, there are still 3 of them with a million health.

But we must be mindful not to nerf it to uselessness. A slight health reduction of 2 shots less needed to kill it would be in order, that is it. Nothing more.

yeah i think that match shows, even if you +2 popcap to churchill for sbp, i will show you 3 of them and walk over you. Really trolling at its best.

but i dont think health reduction is fun and takes away churchill asymmetrical idea.

i still stand by 120 damage to reduce its AT performance.

Actually mines would have done nothing 2 Churchill were vet 3 they remove the engine crit on their own after 10-15 seconds

Who said that decision was based on one game and a lot of complaining by 2-3 posters? You literally quoted me saying that that one match did not prove anything.



I think arguably the cheer amount of hitpoints that the Churchill has, and the amount of counters it forces, makes it worth 19 popcap. I think it's comparable to four popcap less than a King Tiger. Popcap is not a universal measure anyway, it can be tailor made to fit certain units within certain armies.

I should have been more specific. Yes, I did see the part where you said that you didn't put too much stock in the one game but that one game was a large part of the reason why so many posts have been put up on this thread.

I don't play UKF a lot, but when I do, I usually get 1-2 Churchills. That extra pop cap is going to make a difference and will result in one less section or engineer squad. It's a lot bigger nerf than some people are thinking. When the Panther's pop cap was increased, it made a noticeable difference in the number of them that I could use and still have a good unit composition.