I recommended that blob one shot abilities should not kill lone squads. I don't know how you would program this, but it should only be 100% lethal when it hits two or three squads. A lot of blobbers will use the ''it wipes lone squads argument'' to have its power reduced vs their blob. Losing a fully upgraded and vetted unit hurts. |
Im sorry to hear you think im creating problems, but im not an axis or allies whiner. I dont like choosing the easy way. I want a balanced game and until then ill play the worse factions to see whats wrong with them and the good factions to see what makes them op. I thought and think these are the problems :/
Open to new suggestions and solutions.
I did not hear you mention nerfing the uc carrier.
I don't like the easy way either. That is why I refuse to use emplacements as ukf. There is no micro involved with emplacement or mortars.
I used the current kubel to fight mgs that are out of cover. I think Okw, in FBP, has a weakness to mgs at the start of the game. However, you guys did give okw smoke barrage on leigs. But, I think if someone is going to use spamming tactics, and you know your opponent is going to do this against you, you should have an answer to their strategy. You can be two steps ahead of your opponent and still get wrecked, because you don't have the tools to deal with his strategy. People like to call these checkmate strategies.
|
I haven't done the numbers, but you're still paying a lot of resources for the Tiger Ace, on top of not being able to call a 2nd one. The resource penalty duration is adjustable, of course!
Technically, the UC is supposed to be the only mobile anti-garrison tool. Thus, the best fit for this unit is an easy-come easy-go unit. That means less manpower cost and less durability, and some fuel cost added. With the Pathing, the unit will already be stronger.
Even in the revamp mod, I don't feel we've figured out the unit properly (it's currently too strong there).
Scope works by adjusting the extreme outliers (usually nerfing, rather than buffing), and knowingly ignoring the obvious commer-ups. Everybody is already queueing with the Elite Armour commander in their loadouts. Is there somebody on this forum that can't see the Sturmtiger meta coming in teamgames after the patch hits (similar to how we got DSHK meta after Maxim nerfs)?
The Luchs costs 60FU, which is fair given that that generalist T-70, with way more utility costs 70FU. With respect to timing, it should come out earlier than the generalist beasts, otherwise why bother? You're never going to build a Luchs at the same time that a T-70 is out.
That's because you need something to kill the T-70, and now you also need to keep the Luchs safe?
The biggest offending things for the Luchs are:
- The near-absence of moving penalties for scatter
- The fact that it never misses vs non-infantry, even when moving
That means you can use your cheap early luchs to kill off all ultra-light vehicles, no sweat, and then chase after retreating infantry.
The biggest offenders for the Luchs rush are:
- Repair speed insanity
- lava nades
- the insane scaling of Volks which comes after the Luchs rush
- Poor AT options for Soviets/UKF (PIATs should get a range increase, and PTRS should get a responsiveness fix)
If you fix those issues, the tier remains an effective shock tier to complement the more conservative MedHQ tier. If MechHQ doesn't offer efficient light vehicles early enough, it just won't get built ever.
The old kubel(not fbp) could fight mgs in yellow cover.
Similarly, the uc carrier allows you to beat ostheer mgs. If you can't push ostheer mgs off the map, your infantry is going to get wrecked by mortars. Uc carrier allows you to go pure offense with ufk in the very beginning of the game. The kubel was a problem because usf don't have at guns or at nades at the start of the game. The kubel performed fine vs soviets and ukf. I would stop nerfing and buffing units and give factions options to deal with strategies. You are creating problems, not fixing them.
|
It cost so much compared to the bar/zooks upgrade. Even the mills bomb and Molotov prices seem inflated. I believe they took the wrong direction when they gave usf a mortar. The smoke and pineapple grenades are what makes usf unique.
|
They definitely can't be as good as bundle grenades; however, the anti-garrison capabilities and price to unlock and use is what bothers me. Going for early grenade unlock is not advised. Investing 25 fuel into grenades and ambo will delay your at and weapon upgrades. It would be neat if changes were made to make opening with grenades more viable. |
Yes, If I use them, it is only for mgs or mortars. Every 2 throws could equal one bar. As usf you cannot tech grenades first without leaving holes in your strategy. If you want to have counters to light vehicles, you better unlock bars and zooks and go captain. Also, you will need bars to compete with upgraded volks. Investing too much fuel, early, into semi-useful and expensive grenades is too risky, but it does come with a package.
Smoke is worth though, but mortar smoke is more efficient.
|
Hey does anyone else feel like the normal pineapple grenade cost too many munitions?
They cost 30 munitions each and require multiple of them to clear out garrisons.
Please leave your opinion.
|
The whole commander does not work. I would fix paratroopers and pathfinders cps first. However, they would have to push back their weapon upgrades to a later cp to keep them balanced. Also, Weapon team need to be cheaper and come earlier too. You can't skip captain because the at gun comes to late. The p47's are the only late game at this commander offers, so it better be dam good. |
Brits also have flares.
Rifle company provides rifles with flare, but they cost too much. |
The problem with balance are with check mate scenarios. Every faction should have basic tools to deal with different strategies. Some factions are forced into a commander to have a chance at beating a strategy. Every faction should have basic tools to function and counter a wide range of scenarios. Perhaps the 3rd coh will get this correct.
|