1)Snares: a)AEC treadbreaker b) sniper ability c)tank hunter squad (meta/commander I know take it easy)
The problem with these is that you have to get a aec's or sniper to get these abilities that don't cause damaged engine and thus you only really use them in critical situations, also because those units are "key units" that you don't want to lose because you were snaring. Tank hunter squads do have snares but the problem here is that snares in general are something every faction should have access to in a reliable form, being commander restricted just to get snares is just bad game/faction design.
2)Indirect support(mobile): a)Pyrotechincs flares b) Sniper flares
Again, those are not reliable because of their range and the fact that they cost quite a bit of muni while other factions get mobile reliable mortars. Those are only good to stop a infantry push/cap or make support weapons move.
3)I think that UC see is ok..a small bit overtuned but ok (222 tears it apart in secs).
UC is one of the very few units 222 can counter but while 222 isn't on the field UC doesn't really have a counter, only okw has in the form of the raketenwerfer.
As for the OP, i think that my propositions in the first comment of mine are far better than a simple nerf to UKF. In my opinion just tuning down "bolster squads" is a semi solution and we have seen how those worked out in the long run.
I'm saying precisely what you said, move bolster to platoon command post. As for other things ukf needs some buffs to some things and nerfs to others.
We all say the same but why you voted No instead of Other? I mean the problem is not UKF, its all the others...
Ukf has a lot of problems (no snares, only one indirect fire unit that is stactic, op(?) early game vehicle, centaur, croc and a few others) and one of them is the fact you can get bolster super early nullifying the faction design to start with 4 models. I think Ukf really needs an overhaul and moving bolster squad to the platoon command post (t1) is a must.
As vipper said, the problem is the weapon racks mechanic introduced with the western front armies and the fact that you can double equip squads.
Another thing is 4 man main line infantry, this works early game but eventually all factions need that extra model in their main line infantry. Ukf has the bolster upgrade but wehr doesn't have anything and thus it suffers late game to basically everything. Also all "Elite squads" like commandos should be reduced to 4 man squads because they aren't main line infantry.
Tell me , what the problem you see or have with each types of planes. If thay are OP or bad, write why.
The problem is the fact that most planes are loiters that last between 55 seconds and 75 seconds, that is 55 seconds, at least, that the map is denied to the enemy without any skill requirement and not to mention that it can kill units on top of that. Besides that these loiters don't follow a pattern, most have two planes while some have one, some are anti-tank or anti-inf and are expensive while others are anti-tank and anti-inf and are cheaper, sometimes the loiter is over and the plane decides to come back one more time and more stuff.
I think loiters should go not only because of the reasons said above but also because the factions themselves weren't designed with air play in mind. So in coh2 we have to work and make the game as balanced as we can with the things we have available and thus, as much as I don't want this, ignoring/reducing the relationship between air and ground units and removing loiters from te game is the only way to make air play balanced and skill based. If relic really wants that game mechanic we only have to hope they design factions with air play in mind for coh3 and give each faction a reliable mid game aa unit.
This is one of the few game mechanics I would get rid of because it just doesn't bring anything exiting to the game and doesn't require any type of tactical thinking or effort to use. It would be much more interesting if planes were all used in "strafe mode" which requires a lot more skill and timing to pull off, keeping this in mind these abilities would have to have a reduced cost or would have to have a damage buff.
I find it super funny how some people on other threads like, lets say, british emplacement threads say "just remove them" and then in this thread say "just use AA ht"...
Blobing should be a viable strat, the main problem is the counters to blobing aren't effective. I would like to see a modifier to hmgs to increase suppression effects the more squads are caught by the hmg, this way hmgs would effectively be able to counter things like gren with mg42 blobs and infantry sections with bolster squad and double vickers blobs.
King tiger's stats are pretty bad at the moment precisely because it is a non doc "super heavy" as I like to call it and thus it isn't even worth going for one. With that being said I would like to see the king tiger strike fear on the enemy once again and the only way for that to happen is if it gets tied to a doctrine and what better doctrine for it than breakthrough?
The jagdtiger would fit a lot better in the overwatch doctrine making that doctrine a little more viable in team games.
As for the sturmtiger I think it would fit pretty well in the feuersturm doctrine which would require an adjustment to the walking stuka barrage (move it to a more apropriate doctrine or to a doctrine that needs it more).
In regards to the elite armored doctrine, I don't think it should have any type of tank attached to it but instead it should focus on greatly improving your existing non doc tanks.
Portugal
We all say the same but why you voted No instead of Other? I mean the problem is not UKF, its all the others...
0
LiquidSun
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
