lmao no
Why not? Last time I suggested it you weren't so vehement. Not to mention I've yet to see someone present an argument as to why it shouldn't be so. |
While we're talking about adjusting UKF I'm just going to once more throw it out there that Hammer Gammon Bombs should act like Penal AT Satchels. |
Everything you just quoted kind of proves the original point - all but two of your rebuttal units are doctrinal (and who considers the AVRE part of the heavy meta?) and most are mutually exclusive. There are some serious holes in the British roster. |
But AoE is one of these games, similar to StarCraft, where its scene has thrived on essentially breaking and exploiting systems which were never really designed for competitive play. Company of Heroes is a far better designed RTS in that respect, and won't have the same issue of a playerbase having to unlearn or relearn all the stupid tricks that won them tournaments in previous installments. |
I too would like more customization options. One of the reasons why I'm still sour about Dawn of War III being killed by Relic was that it was one of the few RTS games to give you nominal control over your army's look - you could change up skins for your Elites (some of which, like the Primaris Chaplain, looked pretty awesome) and you could create a colour scheme and emblem.
Obviously with a World War II setting, some of the more liberal features of an army painter might be a bit egregious (although the current "historical" toggle presents itself as an option), but I would like to see something similar in Company of Heroes 3. At the very least, maybe let us create an emblem or a company patch or something, and give us a little control over our units. Let us put decals on our tanks, choose our units' uniforms and the like.
I'd even like to see them add in customizable special squads that you have a bit more visual control over. They'd be normal units in terms of stats and weapons and such but you'd have a bit more control over them - maybe you could name them, and give them different uniforms, give each squad member a different look, and for tanks maybe add camouflage, decals, slogans, (purely cosmetic) applique armour and such. None of this would affect the game much, as all of the information you need on an enemy unit is right in its shield anyways. |
I am all for Canadian Storm/Shock Troops or ANZAC Special Forces or the like. I just regret that it's next to impossible that they'll get proper voice acting at this stage, and the quality of the UKF voice acting is honestly more than half the reason why I still play the faction at all. |
There were similar arguments for "retaining uniqueness" by keeping OKW's resource penalty, thankfully those never won out. Bad design doesn't warrant workarounds to keep it viable. |
Just check my stats
http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#global/1v1/british/by-rank?page=5&highlight=450253
Emplacements are bad because they are static - if they could be moved and replaced with different units it would open up many new possibilities. Simple. The only thing that would require balance is the refund cost. 70% may be too generous.
A refund doesn't make them not static. I still have yet to see a compelling suggestion as to how focusing on emplacements is a good thing for the faction and for the game. I also highly doubt you got your 1v1 rank focusing on emplacement play.
The only way I could possibly see your emplacement solution working is having "crews" like the USF that preserve veterancy between emplacements to make it not a total wash once you deconstruct them. Either way I have no interest in seeing emplacements become central to the Brits again. |
Because emplacement play is a sure way to lose a game. They're utterly useless, and have only ever been effective against people who have no idea about the tools at their disposal. They've never been remotely cost-efficient, and giving them "extra mobility" by allowing a refund will not change the fact that balancing a faction around static emplacements is awful for everyone involved, both those playing the faction and those playing against it.
You can claim that rank but I honestly don't believe you, because in my whole career of both playing as and against the British in 1v1, never once has an emplacement been a remotely effective choice compared to any other unit on the roster. I'd rather keep it that way and look at other avenues of improving the faction rather than give a nominal benefit to the worst part of it. |
Just refund 70% resources for dismantling ukf structures. It will give them mobility and will not lead to mirroring other factions.
I'm so glad we have you, who doesn't play UKF, here to solve all the problems with the faction. |