Profile of Foxbat

retreat just because you threw some red smoke at him. use it as a "area denial" tool, because that's all it is. enemy has to move or risk getting actually hit (the damage of the shells is actually pretty decent, it's just the initial delay and delay inbetween shells thats a bit too high).

except it doesnt work as area denial tool anymore, now that axis figured out that it does 0 damage. Do you even play brits yourself or pull your arguments out of your ass?

"it does decent damage" LMAO

brits don't have mobile mortars, usf and okw dont have snipers, ostheer doesnt have green cover or elite infantry (that is not behind a paywall). you can cry for "balance" all you want, but in the end, if mobile indirect fire like mortars are introduced to brits, something else has to go.

and you have multiple options to take out entreched enemies: air supremacy, croc (or churchills in general) commando drops, comet/firefly spam... you name it. all of the brits late game units are multiple times more (manpower) efficient than the units of the other factions. if the enemy tries to turtle early you've pretty much already won.

why does has anything to go for a proper, reliable artillery unit? You dont even have to include new units, just make 25 pdr useful.

I dont get this logic of "USF doesnt have snipers, so brits dont need mobile mortar". Unlike USF brits are way better designed and allow for choices, whereas USF has a very binary gameplay. But still USF doesnt have issue in the artillery department, which brits have atm.

Just because it is like that now, doesnt mean this is the right design direction. USF still lacks a way to deal with MGs in T0 on small maps with garrisons. What you are implying is that this is fine because USF has a different strenght somewhere else, unrelated to the problem, e.g. vehicle crews.

Sorry but this is retarded game design approach. Every faction should have the tools to deal with any possible situation, without forcing you to deal with it in a single possible way. THis is why Wehr is great: you can deal with garrissons with a sniper or a mortar or flanking or teching to t2 flame HT. YOu have choices and this is great. Whereas as USF you have to research nades and flank - thats it.
And dont argument this shit with "assymetrical balance" - if one faction has ALL the tools to deal with something in different manners and you have a faction with only 1 counter to something, especially hidden behind a commander choice, which is super predictable - this isnt assymetrical balance, this is bullshit. Plain and simple.

Again: all what you said about how to counter an OKW defensive line is also possible as soviets. But you can also go the other way and just katyusha the shit out of it, and punish this strat very hard. Brits dont have this OPTION and this is my main gripe here.

every matchup plays out differently. us has to make due without snipers, ostheer has to make due without a t0/t1 vehicle or reliable early AT, us has to make due without super heavy tanks, okw has to specialise for AT or AI...

and brits have to make due without mobile indirect fire (for the most part).
brit base arty is not supposed to replace that. that arty is there to make the enemy move from whereever he is entrenched at the moment. it WON'T force the enemy to retreat outright, but it WILL force them to move.



just like every other faction has weaknesses. for brits its early game.

aha, so brits are "supposed" not to have good mobile arty for the sake of it? flawless balance approach you have. Let us make world in conflict out of 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 mb, where you have to pick soviet if you want good arty as allies? You should be lead game designer at lelic dude.

Again please answer my question how to counter entrenched enemies in 2v2+ with a brit only team

@cr4wler: what type of flawed logic is this? So you are basically saying "hurr, brits have good late game tanks, so they dont need good arty, this is a soviet thing"? Really? What is your magical counter to heavily defended positions? Churchill croc rush against the pak wall?

How many games did you play as british? Pls play some teamgames vs ISG spam or 3v3 with Ost new Panzerwerfer and come back to this thread and tell us how brits DONT need good artillery. Please tell me again how you can counter panzerwerfe with the mortar pit

The way you describe the 25 pdr as "Rather ineffective" is nowhere near how the unit performs in reality. its more like "Nowhere near effective", it does absolutely nothing.

Who cares if those guns are free if they do not do any job at all? They are useless for damaging defensive positions and also useless for area denial, mainly due to abysmal damage and huge scatter.

I would pay for 25pdr anyday, ressources and pop if you will, if it would even remotely mirror a useful arty unit, which it does not.

And dont tell me you have to leave it as it is because it is a base unit. Noone requested it to be a base unit, I would happiliy build it outside my base with RE for a cost, if it was useful.

while i do agree that the british base arty is a bit underwhelming, i think it shouldn't be strong since it both non doctrinal and pretty much indestrucable. iirc it's pretty cheap too.

now as to why i think the indirect fire options of the ukf aren't as bad as brit players make them out to be:

1. doctrinal arty: you have offmap arty and onmap callin arty already.
2. mortar pits: if you want to play defensive with emplacements, you can get mortar pits which do a pretty decent job. brace nerf made them actually destructable, and not every faction/commander does have a ISG/Mortar HT available to them.
3. you didnt go for emplacements? great, that means you chose the offensive tree, why would you want indirect fire in the first place then? you are running around, capping the map, fighting favorable engagements, avoiding unfavorable ones. enemy dug in in front of his base, trying to cling on to like 1/4 or 1/3 of the map? now even the inaccurate arty becomes a whole lot better AND you already have most of the map anyway... you can just defend what you have and wait for late game, where you will crush pretty much everything he can throw at you.


every faction plays differently, thats why almost every person has a preference for one over another. If you try playing another factions using the same tactics despite them functioning completely different... maybe you deserve to lose a few games. how about you try playing what you think is so OP against brits and start crushing opponents if it is that easy? there's two possible outcomes: a) you crush everyone because what claimed is OP really is OP and you become the best there ever lived yadda yadda or b) you get beaten.
if b) happens, you now have a blueprint to beat what you were facing all along and claimed was so OP.

1. Every other faction has some sort of stock, mobile, artillery UNIT. I dont see why this shouldnt be the case with brits
2. you said it yourself. Only "viable" if you plan to dig in and even then it is easily countered by enemy artillery because you cannot reposition it.
3. This is soviet tech tree discussion all over again. The changes to their tech tree cheese were made for a reason. You either have artillery and anti tank or light vehicles and tanks, not both?
This is terrible design. Just because I want to play agressively doesnt mean that I shouldnt have the tools to deal with defensive enemies.

You cannot run over an OKW defensive line with brute force tank and infantry rushes, not against potent enemies and it certainly should NOT be the only viable tactic vs defensive enemies. Brits need arty to deal with it plain and simple