Profile of general_gawain

They promised to bring the brits to balance late game but they overnerfed them in so many ways that this isn't true anymore. Here are some units that could make the lategame interesting but fail by trying:


Churchills: Their initial stats should have been completely untouched, high armor, high hp, a match for german late game tanks. Instead of nerfing them they just should have balanced them only over their price. This would have meant that all variants of Churchills would have cost more than 200 fuel and of course more manpower too. That way they couldn't be spammed or come to early and would be real powerful lategame tanks designed as a match for Tiger, KT, Jagdtiger and huge shrek blobs.

7pdr emplacement: To big to place on many spots. Prone to constant artillery fire like LEIG attacks or to flame attacks, a manpower/fuel sink which eats 20(!!) of your population. This is a joke, especially because you even can't give it up to free up popspace. You have to manually destroy it by targeting it. If your opponent builds one of these just let it alive and attack elsewhere with a bigger army than he can field, because he invested to much population in emplacements.

Sexton: In so many ways worse than a priest that it is not worth building it. A well balanced Sexton as a non-doctrinal unit in the last tech building really would help brits in late game so much.

Base artillery: As others said a joke. Short range ability with big red smoke and low impact if you find something static or somebody who just didn't run away with his troops. No smoke and more damage or more shots in a salvo would help. If this would be to good, just make it a base side tech upgrade you have to pay for to balance it. So you would either delay your tech to get a decent howitzer ability in midgame or you could buy it in lategame after completing your tech to round up your combined arms.

It's also kind of bizarre that the OKW of all possible armies ends up with reliable-ish control of the skies.

You are absolutely right. I'm really not a fan of exact historical correctness in an RTS, but this one seems to be Relics way of joking. German control of the skies at the Battle of the Bulge? They really had luck with the bad weather in the first days. Relic, sit down and be ashamed please.

+1 for removing AA-capability of base, because of recent changes to ressource altering abilities.

I'd say that's a problem with emplacements and not with the LEIG's if they are pretty much fine against everything else.

That would be a solution too of course. But I think it would be the easiest way to lower the damage multiplier of LEIG versus emplacement target_type. If you would make emplacements more resilent versus weapon_type of LEIG the Ostheer mortars would suck versus brit emplacements and you would have to change a lot of multipliers of all mortars.

I think the fact that it's side research and comes on Cons makes up for its cost. I get what your saying but IMO flame nades are still a better equivalent, on a better equivalent infantry unit. (Volks=Cons IMO, both cheap, can build sandbags, and deter vehicles.)

Your right, its only a few posts above by I write it again:
No, its dirt cheap because you have to sidetech for it, thus sacrifing units you could need at that moment or delaying your light vehicle tech. Its no secret, they pointed that out multiple times. Because of that both grenades should be inline.

Base bombing of any kind shouldn't have a place in this game. It doesn't matter if howitzer or offmap. Such cheesy tactics are for people which can't win on the field itself. As I was playing with USF in a 3vs3 I encountered an Ost player which was heavenly beaten on the field mainly by my Vet2-3 Falls with M1919A6 and Shermans with smoke usage. The match changed as I hit the retreat button for three Vet3 Falls. He sent a Recon plane and then a diving stukka to the point the Falls were retreating to. I couldn't save them, three squads for over 1000 MP and 360 Mun with Vet3 blown to pieces. He did this again in this match. Ridiculous.

So I would change it like this to prevent base bombing and make howitzer performance less dependent on opponent comamnder choices:

- no offmap abilities can be called on base sector (like USF 240mm artillery strike, which can't be used there)
- base structures get reduced damage from onmap artillery
- structures other than base structures can't be build in base sector, so that howitzers can't abuse the no offmap abilitiy rule for base sectors and can't use base defences for their protection so that they are more prone to standard troop assaults and artillery counterattacks
- howitzers barely survive any single offmap attack, so they are not completely useless versus some commamders
- add an incoming sound for artillery/rocket shells at target location so that you have a chance to prevent full squad kills if you are aware -> this is especially true for walking Stukka which can easily wipe out full squads.

The other unit that is really strong at producing full squad wipes is the walking stukka, I always play it myself when playing OKW and I hate to play versus it. Especially in larger team games there has something to be done. Once you know how to use the stukka you will easily kill full squads,I myself managed to kill 28 soldiers with one salvo (4 squads wipes + some more casualties)

- add some more airtime to rockets of walking stukka
- add the incoming noise I already mentioned above (this will help in the big games, you just can't retreat with any squad on the map when you hear the stukkas firing sound)
- spread out the impact points of rocktes a little bit to help preventing full squad wipes

Imo this would help a lot to prevent base bombing and hinder full squad wipes.

So this forum is bound to NDA?