Profile of SuperHansFan

Having is as forth unit is not really rushing it. Pls provide replays to back your claim instead of theory crafting.

Last game I saw being streamed the officer had over 35 kill and was the most lethal UKF infatry.

In addition both Sturms and PG are mid to close infatry and there is little reason why QCQ should be able to charge thru open ground and win. That is not a good measure of the value of the unit.


I have said that about Penal more times I can remember and I actually pointed out that it will inevitably lead to PG having to come earlier. In addition PG are more expensive and come later.

The approach of trying to balance the whole faction on unit limited to 1 is bad design. The game will simply be about that units performance.


That a silly claim balancing Ro.E. can be done.


No it does not make more sense. The problem of UKF is lacking certain tools like mortar for early anti-garrison. That is the gap the officer should fill. (and the wasp which can be balanced better)

The units is would be allot more useful if it arrived earlier and was of lower power level.

35kills across the space of a game is not indicative of how a vet0 unit performs out the gate. You complain it comes too early but don't really provide an argument for why that's a problem... Really the unit gives pretty weak shockpower for the price point, it's a investment more than a unit you rush (in your words "0.5cp") right now.

Of course we know you complain about penals, but this is the reality of balance. And Brits are the only faction that has to veto CQB maps because they lack any means to trade effectively in cqb after engineers, Tommies and nades got nerfed.

Depending on bolster or AEC the officer roughly has the same timing of pgren despite being weaker vet0. So yes it's hardly OP. And nobody is going to change four factions with otheer as a benchmark.

There have been posts upon posts created saying Brits need a new infantry unit, and that relying in just engineers and Tommy is boring and stale. the air landing officer has some great voice acting and a cool model, yet this unit has been hidden away in a mediocre doctrine. So having an extra unit priced and balanced accordingly to fill the CQB role is a lot more logical than trying to mess with RE vet, price and DPS again. Especially with the mess that everything becomes with early bolster and weapon racks.

This is not my opinion, this lack of infantry variety is something pretty much all UKF players have complained about since release. And a fair few in turn also pointed at the ALO being the answer. Just look at the old UKF threads here a couple of months ago.

So good work mod team if you ask me

Both Sturm officer, J command and commais come at CP 2 not CP 0.5. The strum officer start with rifles and pistol so does the commissar...One builds the S.O or Commissar for their utility not their DPS.




Actually the only thing UKF needs is utility they have lost of damage. What they lack basic tools like early anti-garisson.

Rushing the officer is pointless vipper. Vet0 it struggles vs sturms depending on approach. And gets handily beaten by pgrens. It's a unit you invest in for flanks and to provide some CQB power mid and late game when it vets up.

I don't understand the claims if "hero unit" at all. If you're going to put forward an argument why the officer is OP for timing maybe you should look at the timing of pgrens or penals as well. Because pgrens especially are stronger out the gate.

Your argument to buff royal engineers instead has already been attempted, it turns out having cheap spamable engineers that could double as strong CQB units out trading StG axis infantry was OP and impossible to balance and they were hit by RA, dps and vet nerfs.

Surely it makes much more sense to have the officer at a premium price point to provide unit variety to a stale UKF roster and as a easy to balance CQB unit that's only role is that outside of recon and on me (which could use some minor changes, maybe recon with tech).

Maybe snakeeye can confirm but im pretty sure there's already AT commandos in the game files and was present in beta with the Churchill call-in

They didn't have elite PIAT but instead got a extra damage when ambushing a vehicle. They were removed because people complained a crocodile coming with a free AT squad was op

There was also a observation section too

It is not trash thats why im surprised sanders said it was.

Auto AOE is not as good, but just a simple manual click that stacks with auto AOE...I think it is surprisingly deadly.

Can we move it out of base or even move it to heal your team mates in base?

Again the manual healing is FAST.

Literally watch the video again, models outside of the radious just didn't get healed correctly.

Why would I build HQ medics that can't heal unless I manually micro every squad? Every other faction can just retreat to HQ and they are healed.

As I say half of the theory crafting ITT are simply just that, theory crafting. Medic upgrades for two or three Tommies is still mandatory unless medics get some big changes.

It's not really comparable to rifle smoke

Rifle smoke even if his MG repositioned you could smoke it and follow up directly with another smoke grenade. In effect smoke spamming your way through defensive lines.Pyro has a global cooldown so you can't use it or regular arty after that first drop. You have to be more selective.

As for vippers argument of upgrading every squad with pyro, this is a pointless strategy. Brens and grenades will always be preferable, with a single pyro mixed in for the smoke utility. Anything more is a waste due to the global cooldown.

As it stands you don't get the LoS bonus that's really beneficial until vet, and current HQ medics are buggy and don't really heal squads 100% or sometimes heal them at all. So no I disagree in your theory craft of pyro meta.

I imagine we will still see a lot of medic upgrades, because tommies staple ability of being able to heal in the field is better than extra LoS in cover.