Profile of Antemurale

In which order? I suppose it doesn't really matter, either one can kill the other. Unfortunate it took both, especially the GPU. GPUs are very expensive.

The restarts were caused by the PSU. The GPU started giving me artifacts when I attempted to play, so I decided to swap both.

At least I can play CoH2 at 60FPS now with my RX 5700

The problem is that UKF do not need band-aids but serious design changes.

The problem with band aids is that once they stick they tend to stay even when solution are applied.

For instance sniper still have 82 HP although the mortar one shot potential has been eliminated.

This is where I say we should agree to disagree. I believe in small, incremental changes that push faction balance towards the right place. Massive changes are extraordinarily hard to balance properly, just see the mess that happened after OKW got normal resources and proper tech options.

I'm not saying that I perferred the version of OKW with only 66% resource income, but it's a prime example of why sweeping changes are not my preferred way of balancing the game.

İ hope you enjoy your new GPU long time.

Thank you!

By the way, lowering the GPU's VRAM speed goes a long way. It helped my GPU last this week without incident. (I use MSI Afterburner to make the adjustment)

My suggestions would be:
IS cost down to 260, bolster now per squad upgrade taking 1 weapon slots.

Available option:
1 medic entity that give the heal option
1 entity with a scoped enfield gives the pyro upgrade now has a timed ability similar to pathfinder critical shots, take all weapon slots.
1 entity

As mentioned before, I do favor similar changes (see my response to maahowl, for instance). However, I stand by my previous statement: "the Bolster to T3 is probably the simplest change."

Vickers simply get a timed ability similar to maxim they are both water cooled weapon anyway. Some adjument to damage might be needed.

This would also be an interesting option, perhaps similar to the Maxim's (unlocked at Vet 1).

The AOE profile will need allot of adjustment since it was designed for 80 damage. (it already needs).

Imo the unit should be redesigned as an infatry support tank with less penetration and damage output (currently has the same penetration as AEC) but higher durability. Armor could go up and also have the ability to fire smoke rounds.

I looked at the AOE profile of the gun previously, and it is nearly identical to the Churchill Mk. VII's. Thus, we have a clear benchmark of its anti-infantry performance, which should be adequate.

Bofors already gets sight with veterancy.

Emplacement simply need a redesign that includes bleed and some sort crew or interaction.

For instance their performance is lower if they do not have garrison, the get a ability to auto-repair costing manpower or munition and so on.

I'm in favor of emplacement redesigns that turns them into units you actually need to invest micro in. However, as with the Bolster change, I'm going for simple changes.

The valentine can be simply replaced by a artillery commander upgrade providing the abilities of valentine currently has to any vehicle above UC.

Valentine abilities would be Sexton Concentration barrage, which is practically useless unless you have Sextons. Combining the ability with the regular Concentration barrage (that already exists in the commander) would probably be the easiest solution to keep its usefullness in team games.

Additionally, a decent indirect fire unit in an indirect-focused commander is not only thematic, but as Stormjager said, "fits UKF like a glove".

I guess that's one way to go, its a "top tier" light that performs closer to meds anyway, if its to lose speed and firepower, it should gain durability. Keeping its target size where it is, it could work.
Its pretty much a comet of lights, at least in my eyes.

Currently, its target size is 18 (StuG III is 17).

Adjusted my first post with your suggestions as well.

Drastic durability increase would be a one way, however it would lead to an engineer being permanently bound to it. 0,5 rec dmg modifier would be more reasonable idea, but with both, you'd have people REEE-ing how it just locks down a point without you having your whole army there.

Firepower way would also be awkward as it isn't exactly meant to do anything to med armor and above and it would need to erase infantry as it did pre nerfs to justify it being there over anything else.

I just don't see bofors in late game at all, 17 pounder does have a place, but I can't imagine bofors being there. Plus, there is advanced emplacements doctrine to consider as well.

The objection to Firesparks' change was the same, that it does its job of area denial too well. He stuck with the change anyway.

What if the 40mm Bofors could self-spot? Currently, its weapon's range is 45, but its sight is only 35. If the sight was increased to just 40, it would become even more capable of acting independently (e.g. you don't need to build SimCity for it to be useful).

British Cancer Doctrine increases the HP pool by 20% (the armor buff is negligable). That translates to two extra shots (which is the same even with the increased HP pool). Two 160dmg shots is practically nothing when there's a howitzer (or two leIGs) at your disposal.

Another place to put the Bofors would be to unlock it along with the Platoon Command Post, but we'd have Bofors Emplacements about one to two minutes earlier than they come out now.