Give counterbarrage to the 25 pounder, that way it could be countered. Also, the Valentine would be a good alternative to the command vehicle.
Eliminating the buff to emplacements would make it easier to balance them. The normal ones seem pretty weak. Even the upgraded ones go down quickly to LEIGs and MHT's.
Yes, I was thinking about giving CB to 25 pounder emplacement, but I'm a bit unsure about that, considering the 25 pounder, being an emplacement, would be still more durable than other static arty pieces.
Another thing to consider is wether 25 pounder would have brace or not. Personally I would say it should with the tradeoff of having shorter range than lefH, this would force players to build it closer to the frontline, thus making it a bit easier to counter.
And yes, I agree with the buff upgrade removal. |
General Axis = The map General Mud. So-called because you drown in Axis armor due to all the strategic points. Also can work for UKF with Comet spam.
General Mud is an awfull mess of red and green/garrison cover everywhere, combined with a rather large map size, meaning that it takes minutes to retreat and bring back your infantry to the frontline. That's especially bad with efa armies without Forward retreat point. And yeah, it has mud everywhere, the whole map has a demoralizing athmosphere. I always veto this map, no matter the side.
I bet it was even worse when vehicles getting stuck in mud was still a thing. |
|
Precision Barrage is indeed quite strong, but also quite expensive, imo having it and a 25 pounder in the same doctrine wouldn't be that strong, needs testing. Thing is, I wouldn't remove that ability entirely from the game, so if it's deemed strong in this doctrine then it should be moved to an another.
Similarly wehrmacht's Storm doctrine has both a Lefh and stuka bomb, along with a recon option.
I like the command vehicle idea too, imo the Valentine tank would be a good fit if its concentrated barrage ability could work on 25 pounder emplacements too, similar to ostheer arty's officer's ability with LefHs. |
Not really. The design of commander with superior emplacements and counter barrage that counter the natural counter of emplacements, indirect fire is simply flawed.
It has lead to making emplacement irrelevant.
These is simply a bad combination that should not exist.
But if you read a bit more above then you can see I commented that this doctrine should lose emplacement health/armor upgrade and be replaced with some other ability, like access to mg bunkers. This would also make balancing emplacements easier in general as there will no longer be one doctrine that makes them even stronger.
It's the same deal as with trying to balance IS when there is bolster, one has to consider both states, same with regular emplacements and upgraded emplacements. |
|
Where's model? |
|
The JCS uses 2x grenadier k98s and 3x grenadier g43s, trying to rebalance those would cause issues for the base grenadier squads, or the other option would be to make yet an another variant of those guns using different stats. We already have like 5 different G43s alone (gren, pg/storm, fusilier, jli, sniper).
And yes, the JCS is a one off elite squad, I'm totally fine with them being stronger. |
Advanced Emplacements regiment should totally have this in place of CB:
(credits To SneakEye)
It is a step up compared to CB, but at least it would cost resources and popcap to deploy and can be killed. |
|
Popcap and reduced manpower income are there to give an opportunity to the losing team to come back. |
...
With both base arty active the total number of shells is 4 per target. I tested with panzerwerfers, only about 1 out of 5 times they managed to hit one for me (they stood still).
Yes, I can totally see the hate this commander gets, even I hated it when I was playing against it in my early coh2 days, but tbh it's rather easy to counter for experienced players, especially since the advanced forward assembly sapper respawn time was fixed.
It needs a major rework, personally instead of making existing emplacements even stronger I would increase the diversity of emplacements with the addition an mg bunker and a 25 pounder arty emplacement (all units mod has one), none of these would have brace. |
|
I was just fooling around a bit with the Advanced emplacement doctrine, I haven't played with it for a long time anyway. I tried to use its counter barrage ability, expecting it to work like the axis counter barrage, but it didn't.
For those who are not familiar with the brit counter barrage, considering that very few higher ranked player touch this doctrine: according to description while it is activated on the base arty or mortar emplacements it fires a counter barrage on enemy artillery within range. Active for 45 seconds, costs 30 muni, disables construction or regular barrage.
So I went to test it a bit, and here are my findings:
-The base artillery has a limited range for this ability, in 4v4 it may not even cover half of the map.
-The base arty counter barrage fires only two, rather inaccurate shells, unlikely to kill anything.
-The mortar counter barrage works only within normal range, not the extended barrage range.
So yeah, in conclusion this ability is pretty useless. First, there is no indication of what is the exact range of base artillery. Second, even if you manage to find that 45 second time period when the enemy uses artillery then almost certainly none will be in range for counter barrage, so it's just a waste of 30 muni. Third, even if by some miracle they are in range they will most likely miss their shots. Oh, and it also disables unit construction or regular mortar barrage for that duration.
I know, this is perhaps the most hated doctrine in the game, but broken abilities need to be fixed regardless. |
Relic Entertainment
