Hard limits on the number of Artillery pieces per team might go a long way to help. I'm neither sure this is feasible, nor am I sure it wouldn't introduce other balance issues, though.
If its possible, it might be worth considering though. |
Im not sure that Fusies and Penals are that comparable in terms of "What they can do". They've practically got inverse scaling. Fusies are terrible combatants early. |
I, personally, would use Hulldown more as OST if it were more similar to the KV1 version. While you might have infantry nearby when defending a position, it's far less convenient to pull them from whatever they might have been doing before, dig in a tank, and then send them back, than to press one button and have the tank do it on its own.
It's an extra micro tax that is annoying to have to do, and oftentimes you might want to dig a tank in at a moment's notice. Would you be happy if the KV2 were changed to need an Infantry squad to dig it in? |
There is a mortar that can be equipped by one guy - if that is possible...
I honestly think it would be a cool faction feature and a balance improvement.
The 120mm being crewable by one guy isn't quite the same as a contextual "two or three man recrew", though. The Pack Howie is similar, needing three men minimum, but it's not the same code-wise as what's been suggested. |
As a quick suggestion regarding OKW teching changes, Sanders, have you considered something along the lines of this regarding OKW medical:
"Medics" is now an upgrade directly from the HQ building, available when any truck has been placed. Medics initially surround the HQ, but either automatically (or upon a toggle) move to the Battlegroup HQ if one is built. I'll have to admit ignorance as to whether this is feasible, but it would give OKW an avenue to heal without having to go down a particular tech line, and potentially has the added benefit of being able to still heal if the BGHQ is either dead, or not close enough to the HQ building. Perhaps investing in the BGHQ increases the number of medics, as well. (Not from 3 -> 4, i mean having 1-2 by default, and then going to 3 once the BGHQ is built)
Admittedly this would make Mechanised even MORE appealing, if further changes aren't implemented alongside. I imagine such a change would have to come with a reshuffling of the units inside the trucks, and really I'm not sure if it's entirely worth all the hassle.
Thoughts? |
Simply put, Bolster is a huge can of worms that we don't really want to open. Changing or removing it would require huge changes to the faction, while having no idea what implications it'd have and what would be needed to compensate for it. Which is something we can't really afford and/or aren't allowed to do at this point. Relic (rightfully) wants changes to be as simple as possible at this point in the game's lifecycle.
I worry that Brits aren't gonna be able to join the big boy table without some fairly major changes, is the problem. How "Advanced" are relic gonna let changes even be?
Have you guys considered trialling significant balance changes in a mod more often, in the same fashion as the December patch? Just throwing ideas at a wall and seeing what sticks? |
Because we felt it was the only way to keep Infantry Sections strong (power level is problematic because of Bolster early scaling, so they do need to have some drawbacks to restrain their early power) while nerfing the near unbeatable A-move blobs. It was very hard to predict the full extend of the Lee Enfield damage change, so we changed both to be sure. Given how fed up everyone was with Infantry Section spam, we went for a better safe than sorry approach (imo). Better to make the faction slightly underperforming and do some adjustments soon after, than keeping it overpowered and toxic, especially with the world tourney on the horizon.
To be honest, it was obvious that nerfing the crutch unit was likely going to cause some problems, although obviously we hoped it wouldn't have too much of an impact, but we can't predict every outcome. We just had to throw out the changes and see where the faction landed so that now we can identify some holes and attempt to fix them in the next patch. Balance isn't done overnight. In my opinion UKF is still very playable and good, at least in 3v3 and 4v4, even if not competitive for high level 1v1, but they could use some adjustments now that the dust has settled.
We have thought out some (hopefully) exciting changes for UKF, although all still very WIP at this moment, one of which is changing Lee Enfield moving accuracy to ~0.5 so Infantry Sections can fight more mobile.
Would appreciate discussing this without throwing around sarcasm.
Honestly, removing (or changing) Bolster would probably help. IS have another problem, in that either 4man tommies are total shit, and 5man are good and usable, or 4man tommies are OK, and 5man tommies are broken.
You'd then maybe be able to fiddle with IS veterancy to maintain their power curve, rather than relying on a totally mandatory upgrade. Or is there another reason Bolster is kept around? |
It would have been an easy, straight forward adjustment to make Infantry Sections less potent at max range. The +5% accuracy at vet 3 is also very weird because the issue Infantry Sections have is not late-game scaling.
IMO they should revert both the initial RA nerf and at the same time the cover buff and keep the damage as it is and see how good/bad Sections are. At the moment they are a horrible design and force you into defensive playstyles because as soon as you leave cover and move your expensive infantry just acts like Osttruppen. Not sure why defensive camping playstyles are encouraged when everyone agreed that this is not fun.
I think the issue is less that IS being fantastic in cover, but hot shit out of cover, and more that the intended use of Brit infantry (Hammer and anvil tactics) is only half complete. They simply dont have a "Hammer" unit.
My understanding is that Sappers were meant to act in this fashion, but they just aren't strong enough to perform that role. I've suggested giving them an "Assault package" upgrade to rectify this.
Maybe it's the wrong way to go about things, but I like the concept of Sections being longrange cover fighters, It's just that they cant JUST do that with the faction's current roster. |
That is correct and helps in most cases, but not in ALL!
Also this is NOT an solution for the future tho^^. Searching for the error.
The other problem with this workaround is that it ceases to function if there are no garrisons left on the map. Unless it works with trenches, bunkers, and similar structures. And/or it ceases to happen when all structures are gone |
Username: Pip
Numberals: 9216 |