So the new patch just hit and a lot of people had the same question I have: why were bren blobs buffed? I think everyone is in agreement that a tune up was essential for sections, so no argument there. The problem comes where sections were buffed with no care for the implications of buffing them straight up. Instead of giving them a 5% accuracy bonus for their lee enfield rifles since brens don’t need a boost, they added the 5% accuracy bonus to the existing 20% accuracy bonus for all weapons, meaning vet 3 bren blobs are now 5% more accurate.
What’s people’s views on this? Am I just freaking out for no reason or is this valid? For what it’s worth I think bren blobs are the worst aspect of the game and need to be completely removed, not buffed.
Are bren blob buffs justified?
8 Oct 2019, 19:50 PM
#1
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
8 Oct 2019, 20:00 PM
#2
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Stop exaggerating, that's my opinion.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
8 Oct 2019, 20:02 PM
#3
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
idk what to think of it yet, most people didn't think a .1 out of cover RA nerf with lower damage but higher accuracy change would cause Tommies to feel as bad as they did.
Probably need a day or 2 until anyone can make a complete conclusion on if the changes had a major affect.
Probably need a day or 2 until anyone can make a complete conclusion on if the changes had a major affect.
bg /l
8 Oct 2019, 20:11 PM
#4
Posts: 960
In general, ALL mainline infantry units need a nerf. They've been power-creeped over the years so far that some of the core game designs don't really hold up anymore (blobs winning vs MGs head-on).
Opinions reflect all team modes (not 1v1)
I often edit my posts several times after posting
I often edit my posts several times after posting
8 Oct 2019, 21:39 PM
#5
Posts: 556
Rather than buffing all mainlines can we just bring them to Cons-Grens levels while improving all factions support weapons ? There is no point in assymetry in that aspect.
It is simply just unfair while ;
One faction bleeds his ass for first 5 minutes (SOV),
One sits on his on ass on a choke point with a super mg because it can't attack properly with mainline (OST)
One that facerolls you with much better infantry justified with no T0/T1 MG (USF)
One that overproduce and swarm you with the most versatile infantry (OKW)
One that has a really decent MG and an armored car yet people still spam its infantry and cry for buffs (UKF)
Totally agreeing on Doomlord52
It is simply just unfair while ;
One faction bleeds his ass for first 5 minutes (SOV),
One sits on his on ass on a choke point with a super mg because it can't attack properly with mainline (OST)
One that facerolls you with much better infantry justified with no T0/T1 MG (USF)
One that overproduce and swarm you with the most versatile infantry (OKW)
One that has a really decent MG and an armored car yet people still spam its infantry and cry for buffs (UKF)
Totally agreeing on Doomlord52
Grens are finally good.
9 Oct 2019, 01:21 AM
#6
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
Rather than buffing all mainlines can we just bring them to Cons-Grens levels while improving all factions support weapons ? There is no point in assymetry in that aspect.
It is simply just unfair while ;
One sits on his on ass on a choke point with a super mg because it can't attack properly with mainline (OST)
One that has a really decent MG and an armored car yet people still spam its infantry and cry for buffs (UKF)
Gren cant attacks properly because they are defense infantry with a LMG, designed to fight from static cover, yet you still have a mortar to provide smoke covering flanking move and a cqb specialist with nuke nade for offensive action.
UKF have the decent vicker but it is not mg 42 lv of effectiveness to spam and two axis faction all have various tools to deal with mg. Universal carrier die in two mg42 bust now and still depend on overpriced upgrade to do the job for basis tools that the faction lack. When things come to offensive, UKF struggle more than ost since they dont have mobile smoke and dont have dedicated cqb unit.
9 Oct 2019, 01:22 AM
#7
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Gren cant attacks properly because they are defense infantry with a LMG, designed to fight from static cover, yet you still have a mortar to provide smoke covering flanking move and a cqb specialist with nuke nade for offensive action.
UKF have the decent vicker but it is not mg 42 lv of effectiveness to spam and two axis faction all have various tools to deal with mg. Universal carrier die in two mg42 bust now and still depend on overpriced upgrade to do the job for basis tools that the faction lack. When things come to offensive, UKF struggle more than ost since they dont have mobile smoke and dont have dedicated cqb unit.
You’d be surprised by how effective lmg gren blobs are.
9 Oct 2019, 01:31 AM
#8
Posts: 2358
Gren cant attacks properly because they are defense infantry with a LMG, designed to fight from static cover, yet you still have a mortar to provide smoke covering flanking move and a cqb specialist with nuke nade for offensive action.
UKF have the decent vicker but it is not mg 42 lv of effectiveness to spam and two axis faction all have various tools to deal with mg. Universal carrier die in two mg42 bust now and still depend on overpriced upgrade to do the job for basis tools that the faction lack. When things come to offensive, UKF struggle more than ost since they dont have mobile smoke and dont have dedicated cqb unit.
Actually UKF faction design is a poor clone of OST one. They both rely on well positioned mainline inf, with team weapons (UKF Lacks mortars, OST lacks LVs) and stronger defense than offense.
Tanks are almost clone too, only that Panther counterpart, the comet got nerfed and church got buffed to separate the similarities.
UKF gets the benefit of being a standalone DLC, to be part of allied faction, with SU versatility and USF offensive design, on the other side, OST has OKW only and it has been and will be target of many complaints because it cant justify a balanced offensive design without going OP or cloning USF or SU.
9 Oct 2019, 04:34 AM
#9
Posts: 3053
Oh lord jesus christ a 5% accuracy bonus to a unit that got hit with fat nerfs last patch in what is currently the worst faction right now. Whatever will we do.
 | Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
9 Oct 2019, 06:53 AM
#10
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Oh lord jesus christ a 5% accuracy bonus to a unit that got hit with fat nerfs last patch in what is currently the worst faction right now. Whatever will we do.
And its at vet 3 lol
9 Oct 2019, 21:09 PM
#11
4 Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1
IS aren't the real issue with brits early/ midgame. That would be the lackluster performance of the vickers HMG.
For a faction that is supposed to be defensive and reliant on units supporting their mainline infantry, the vickers is just not worth its price. I have lost track of the times volks have just crawled up and flame naded my vickers while under suppressing fire.
And for all those who try to claim that the vickers is fine because of its damage output: damage output is not why you buy an HMG; it would be like touting an ATG's anti-infantry firepower.
For a faction that is supposed to be defensive and reliant on units supporting their mainline infantry, the vickers is just not worth its price. I have lost track of the times volks have just crawled up and flame naded my vickers while under suppressing fire.
And for all those who try to claim that the vickers is fine because of its damage output: damage output is not why you buy an HMG; it would be like touting an ATG's anti-infantry firepower.
9 Oct 2019, 21:50 PM
#12
Posts: 88
IS aren't the real issue with brits early/ midgame. That would be the lackluster performance of the vickers HMG.
For a faction that is supposed to be defensive and reliant on units supporting their mainline infantry, the vickers is just not worth its price. I have lost track of the times volks have just crawled up and flame naded my vickers while under suppressing fire.
And for all those who try to claim that the vickers is fine because of its damage output: damage output is not why you buy an HMG; it would be like touting an ATG's anti-infantry firepower.
Well said
10 Oct 2019, 02:37 AM
#13
Posts: 3053
IS aren't the real issue with brits early/ midgame. That would be the lackluster performance of the vickers HMG.
For a faction that is supposed to be defensive and reliant on units supporting their mainline infantry, the vickers is just not worth its price. I have lost track of the times volks have just crawled up and flame naded my vickers while under suppressing fire.
And for all those who try to claim that the vickers is fine because of its damage output: damage output is not why you buy an HMG; it would be like touting an ATG's anti-infantry firepower.
+1
That and the lack of indirect really hits brits hard cuz they cant really counter indirect and are already a faction forced to play static with how horrible infantry sections are on the move and literally no other nondoc infantry.
| Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
10 Oct 2019, 04:00 AM
#14
Posts: 888
Hey I have an idea. Maybe we could make infantry sections a 2 man sqaud and raise their Pop count to 10 since we all love nerfing Brits into the ground through the mantle and core of the Earth to China.
10 Oct 2019, 09:08 AM
#15
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Hey I have an idea. Maybe we could make infantry sections a 2 man sqaud and raise their Pop count to 10 since we all love nerfing Brits into the ground through the mantle and core of the Earth to China.
Hey I have an idea, maybe you should read the post before you comment.
10 Oct 2019, 09:13 AM
#16
Posts: 1351
Everything you seem to be criticising is, imo, not the brits but OKW. Certain OKW strategies are really efficient and here lies the problem, not with the UK.
(09.10.2019): "You really are a jewel to this forum" - feels proud, thank You
(24.03.2020): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9PiqCeLEmM
(25.06.2020): http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#profile/steam/76561198035553470/standings
10 Oct 2019, 09:27 AM
#17
Posts: 4474
IS aren't the real issue with brits early/ midgame. That would be the lackluster performance of the vickers HMG.It supresses Like mg42 now, It got buffed last patch
For a faction that is supposed to be defensive and reliant on units supporting their mainline infantry, the vickers is just not worth its price. I have lost track of the times volks have just crawled up and flame naded my vickers while under suppressing fire.
And for all those who try to claim that the vickers is fine because of its damage output: damage output is not why you buy an HMG; it would be like touting an ATG's anti-infantry firepower.
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
10 Oct 2019, 09:37 AM
#18
Posts: 39
It supresses Like mg42 now, It got buffed last patch
Suppresses sure, but it takes much longer to pin
10 Oct 2019, 10:50 AM
#19
Posts: 4474
yes , but it now suppresses like an mg 42 at least so they can't go in and lob nade
Suppresses sure, but it takes much longer to pin
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
10 Oct 2019, 10:55 AM
#20
Posts: 88
Suppresses sure, but it takes much longer to pin
You forget it has superior damage too. What it's troubles are, are the same for MG42. It has very slow traverse speed. If this was fixed and its damage modified, it would be far better. Same for MG42.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
17 | ||
|
|
|
|
10 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231