Partisans could do with a complete rework, they are very interesting units but don't live up to all the changes that the game has seen over the last 2 years.
It is rather hard to do a complete rework of these units, so, what ideas do you propose?
And yeah, will this idea also consider putting AI Parties in more commanders? Because having only the AT version everywhere is rather annoying, even tho useful. |
|
I don't even think it should be in T3 at all. Just leave it passive in T4 and that's it. No one ever gets it at T3 timing. |
This is a problem create by allowing increasing powerful unit available earlier. The window of opportunity for some of those units has become very small and thus their shock value has been increased too much to even be considered to be built. That can easily lead to snowball effects.
Imo the pace of the game should be slowed down allowing more time for each phase of the game and more more options should be available for to counter light vehicles.
For instance Ostheer could get the 221 in durable version with limited AI but good at fighting cars and snipers and then 222 could be be delay become more expensive and become more AT oriented.
Flame vehicles could have their DOT moved to an ability so that they remain effective but for a limited timed.
All that would reduce the need for early AEC or for an OP T-70.
Too many changes too early and proposed at the same time. We have to make really small steps, considering balance changes, especially that late into the development of the game. |
"Now, let's talk about the Bofors... Pretty much everyone here can agree that Emplacements, by design, are outdated and are too easy of a target for artillery, and, in such modes as 3v3-4v4 only can be somewhat useful, but for a very small window, again, due to arty (again, I suppose and can be wrong, if I am-tell me). So I thought, what about to buff the Bofors a bit? Give it a cost decrease for the tech from 15Fuel to 10, with 15s decrease in the required time, while the Bofors itself has a Fuel cost increase (up to 40), and MP cost decrease (no idea how much MP it costs, I never use it). I also wanted to make the Bofors tech decrease the cost of the Mortar pit from 350MP to 320-300MP, but the increase in the cost of the tech itself up to 20Fuel +MP, to make it somewhat fair.
"
its pretty much a buff for emplacments...or what else?
Read more carefully. That is because they're underused heavily and more often than not people say that they want them deleted from the game. I just see Emplacement as a British Su-76. And yes, a buff for Emplacements means a nerf for AEC, because I think it is simply too good, and because of that also overshadows the Emplacements. |
If UKF bolsters (and maybe even buys weapon racks) before the AEC, the AEC comes at an okay timing of about 7-8 minutes, which is not far off the timings of other LVs like Luchs, Puma, Stuart etc. However, if they don't, they can just skip these two minutes of fuel income and get it at 5-6 minutes.
That's exactly how I get AEC at pretty much the same time 222 and 251, which makes it roll around when Mediums hit the field. That's why it is so oppressive.
I think we have only a couple of options:
- Increase some price by a very low fuel amount (5-10 max, otherwise UKF fuel economy could get screwed). AEC side tech would probably be the best target.
- Add some time (~20-30 sec) to the AEC research or build time
- Move some fuel costs. I think the only way to go here is to move 5 fuel from the grenade to the Platoon Command Post. UKF having grenades is not super oppressive and would not change too much, while at the same time we'd increase the total teching costs and delay the AEC a bit. However 5 fuel is really not much and translates to only 5-10 seconds of time. This also means that UKF tank timings get a mini nerf as well.
That is the solution that will work the best, imo. Because it still has to be very good to fight off other LVs effectively, but not come out to early to make an LV phase a loss for the Axis. As you said before, neglecting the Bolster and Racks makes an AEC come out faster, so just the cost is not enough.
Final possibility I can think of: Rework the whole synergy between IS, UC and AEC. The current issue is that - if played correctly - UKF can propel itself through the early game with the UC, neglect infantry upgrades if it works well, force a LV from Axis as a counter and then insta build the AEC. I don't know what would be the best course of action here since the UC has a narrow window and IS are difficult to touch.
Exactly how I play. There is my build somewhere here, which shows how exactly I force that insta AEC. |
You are doing meth, not math.
I highly advise you to go into the game and actually add the costs up, you'll find that its nowhere close.
T-70 comes out much later then luchs.
AEC can't be on field in 4th minute, unless opponent just goes afk or its 4v4 fuel cache spam.
...or if the Brit is winning. Happened to me a million times, when I had at least 1 fuel and was pressing on the enemy.
And I use T-70 pretty rarely, I still use that Su-76 out of pure nostalgia... |
A timing nerf for AEC is irrelevant. You cant either nerf its stats because 222's and luchs will wreak havok towards UKF heavy IS investment, only if PIATS were "reliable"...
Its no simple matter to touch such a cornerstone for UKF like AEC's. Its like touching SU T70's or USF Jacksons.
T-70 comes at the same time a Luchs does, or Luchs even earlier, while AEC sometimes comes at the same time as a 222 does. Simply not fair. I just want it to come out later, maybe when a Luchs does.
Idk about Jackson, I dun play USF. |
The fact that bofors cant destroy anything that shoots above 40 range is not enough reason to consider it trash.
I never said that Bofors is trash, I just said that it would use some tweaks, because it is rare, and it could EVEN have a buff, because I said in the post, that AEC is too good. So, if we nerf AEC, Bofors will see some use more often, but it is NOT trash.
For me, personally, Bofors is like Su-76. Neither is bad, in fact, both are really good and reliable, and can be used effectively in the right hands, it's just that you see them not so often, and it begs a question of "Why?" and "How to fix this?". |
We don't need any more Brit buffs right now. Sections, AEC and Valentine are overperforming already.
Bro do you ever read posts lol |
As I have posted elsewhere imo emplacements simply need more dept.
A number of changes can implement that could include extra tech or doctrinal abilities that allow player to invest more and get more out of emplacements.
For instance:
One could get pop reduction from commander or teching
one could buy extra armor and HP with manpower/fuel
Emplacement could perform superior when manned while occupants could take less damage
Player could have access to auto repair by spending manpower or fuel
On the other hand certain units abilities could be designed to do extra damage to them so that there is more counter play
Emplacements simply need an redesign.
I can't disagree nor agree. Each emplacement has to be looked at specifically with it's own tweaks, and also while looking at the bigger picture of each mode. So we can't just generalize all this and then agree/disagree. For example, I talked about Bofors and Mortar Pit in my post, and tried to look at them + the bigger picture. |
Russian Federation
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
