Login

russian armor

Brits in 1v1 is a joke

PAGES (9)down
27 Oct 2019, 06:37 AM
#161
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 414


To me sections are fine. Brits have great versatile infantry. I always use bolster. As UKF you must play like ostheer and use the full power of sections AND mgs. You just can't play them like USF or Sov. Sections can easily carry you to next stages of the game and remain your staple infantry. I can't imagine a scenario where realistically speaking you don't put sections in cover where they are boosted. In their "natural" circumstances and when properly supported, they rock.

When it comes to testing - one should test all scenarios and only then draw conclusions. You can't set up a test in probably the only scenario when a given unit loses and use it as an argument to boost a unit. A risk of unbalancing is too great then.


I think for the cost and getting their nades and lmg,s and punishment out of cover they are slightly up.
Your pay for a 5 men squad but get 4 men until you pay more. The 2mp less reinforce cost and sandbags dont cover that completely.
27 Oct 2019, 09:27 AM
#162
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4108



I think for the cost and getting their nades and lmg,s and punishment out of cover they are slightly up.
Your pay for a 5 men squad but get 4 men until you pay more. The 2mp less reinforce cost and sandbags dont cover that completely.
nope u pay for a 4 men squad not a 5 men
27 Oct 2019, 09:56 AM
#163
avatar of Freestyler1992

Posts: 88

You wont fix this faction without an overhaul. They won't overhaul it now this late in the game's life. So yeah.
27 Oct 2019, 14:31 PM
#164
avatar of PanzerFutz

Posts: 97

The faction doesn't need a complete overhaul, just some tweaks to make it competitive in 1v1.

It needs Smoke that's not tied to the mortar pit (which isn't very useful in 1v1). Giving Smoke of some description to Pyro Sections makes the most sense.

The faction also needs a stock assault option, given that it has none designed for this purpose.

Fix those issues and let doctrine take care of the rest.
27 Oct 2019, 14:42 PM
#165
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 1649

The faction doesn't need a complete overhaul, just some tweaks to make it competitive in 1v1.

It needs Smoke that's not tied to the mortar pit (which isn't very useful in 1v1). Giving Smoke of some description to Pyro Sections makes the most sense.

The faction also needs a stock assault option, given that it has none designed for this purpose.

Fix those issues and let doctrine take care of the rest.


Mortar pit isn't useful in 2v2+ either. Other than that I agree.
27 Oct 2019, 14:46 PM
#166
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 414

nope u pay for a 4 men squad not a 5 men


They cost more and preformance difference with grens is not much in cover, out of cover they are worse. Their price also does not change after they bolster.
27 Oct 2019, 14:46 PM
#167
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2732

The faction doesn't need a complete overhaul, just some tweaks to make it competitive in 1v1.

It needs Smoke that's not tied to the mortar pit (which isn't very useful in 1v1). Giving Smoke of some description to Pyro Sections makes the most sense.

The faction also needs a stock assault option, given that it has none designed for this purpose.

Fix those issues and let doctrine take care of the rest.

+1

They also need mobile indirect or something to at least counter indirect spam, because double leig or mortar against brits is basically gg. They can't assault the position super well because most of the faction is not at all mobile and can't hunker down and play trench warfare attrition because they have no answer to indirect. Even smoke and a stock assault option wouldn't fix this entirely.
27 Oct 2019, 15:36 PM
#168
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4108



They cost more and preformance difference with grens is not much in cover, out of cover they are worse. Their price also does not change after they bolster.
again they are not worse out of cover , only on the move , they beat gren out 9f cover
27 Oct 2019, 17:14 PM
#169
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 668

If you give them assault squad stock, sections will have to be nerfed.
27 Oct 2019, 17:24 PM
#170
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13995 | Subs: 7

If you give them assault squad stock, sections will have to be nerfed.

Well, you're up for a surprise then, because they just were nerfed so hard, they had to have a cost decrease.
27 Oct 2019, 17:30 PM
#171
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 668

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2019, 17:24 PMKatitof

Well, you're up for a surprise then, because they just were nerfed so hard, they had to have a cost decrease.


I'm aware as I play them a lot. They are balanced as they are. Adding different types of units will make them too potent. Players should start using some structures, UKF tanks are awesome and extremely sturdy. It is a really cool army in 1v1. USF is OP at the moment and shouldn't be used as a benchmark.
27 Oct 2019, 18:08 PM
#172
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 399



I'm aware as I play them a lot. They are balanced as they are. Adding different types of units will make them too potent. Players should start using some structures, UKF tanks are awesome and extremely sturdy. It is a really cool army in 1v1. USF is OP at the moment and shouldn't be used as a benchmark.


As said, sections are fine as now, but the faction is not. I dont see why adding some basic tools that the lineup lack suddenly make sections op, because their performance as an individual unit unchanged, the faction will be better then, but isn't it the purpose ?

Also, You say you play UKF alot, but if so, you must know all emplacements are in a terrible point and almost cant be seen in competitive lv. So far, i only see 1 single game as UKF in the championship, it is LLAR from Amstrong and there is no emplacements in it.

27 Oct 2019, 18:44 PM
#173
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 668



As said, sections are fine as now, but the faction is not. I dont see why adding some basic tools that the lineup lack suddenly make sections op, because their performance as an individual unit unchanged, the faction will be better then, but isn't it the purpose ?

But the faction is fine, too. Maybe churchill's rear armour is just too good.

Also, You say you play UKF alot, but if so, you must know all emplacements are in a terrible point and almost cant be seen in competitive lv. So far, i only see 1 single game as UKF in the championship, it is LLAR from Amstrong and there is no emplacements in it.



Emplacements are ok. Most players will go for USF as it is just soooo powrful atm and Soviets also have some crutch units thay are very good. It is more about putting USF in line and removing some cheese from Sov., more than buffing UKF. I'd add some more refund for packing up an emplecement rather than do anything else. For UKF it would be good to promote emplacements more to retain the design. Top players don't use them as static postions are not the best idea on high level play. If they were refunded with more resources it would lead to interesting engagements where they could prepare new static positions in different places surprising the enemy. It would be cool and players could experiment more with all those cool structures and the unique UKF design.
27 Oct 2019, 19:01 PM
#174
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 399


But the faction is fine, too.



With the lowest win rate at all mode and lowest pick time at the championship, sure.
27 Oct 2019, 19:06 PM
#175
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 399





Emplacements are ok... For UKF it would be good to promote emplacements more to retain the design.


Trust me, i like trench warfare, too, so Let buff emplacements.

Top players don't use them as static postions are not the best idea on high level play.


Cant fit in high lv of competitive play but still "OK". I'm so confused.
27 Oct 2019, 19:11 PM
#176
avatar of save.penguins

Posts: 3

Might aswell throw in my 2 cents.

Regarding the assault sections, I think it would solve a lot of issues, if they would be buildable from T0, spawned with the sten guns the currently have in game. The thompson upgrade would be locked behind weapon racks. The WP grenade would be bundled with it, or with the mills bomb upgrade. That is up for a debate. Assault sections from T0 would synergize well with the unupgraded UC, and carry brits through the rough early game. These guys might even be worthy to carry the PIATs.

I agree that the pyro sections should get some kind of smoke. I don't think that the faction needs a mobile mortar, just some tweaks to the barrages in the pit. But overally I find it viable if it is really well microed.

This would promote a lot more diversity in the infantry spectrum of the faction, which it in my opinion needs the most. The three types of sections would synergize together very well along with the universal carrier, so the medic upgrade won't be the obvious and no brain choice. I also think it's reasonable to make these upgrades lock one weapon slot. The thompson upgrade should lock both weapon slots.

The bofors should not be exclusive with the AEC, because brits have nothing against aircrafts other than the centaur, which is a pretty big investment and you sometimes really don't need it. Perhaps even remove the HQ upgrade and make it buildable by royal engineers from the start but with increased price by 10 fuel and some manpower.

The last thing is some kind of light vehicle. Perhaps the valentine, as it was proposed in the previous threads. This one should be locked behind tech and it should be exclusive with the AEC. I find these tweaks a lot simpler than those proposed in the previous threads and I think it should make brits unique, competitive and yet not too difficult to implicate and balance.
27 Oct 2019, 22:13 PM
#177
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 359



As said, sections are fine as now, but the faction is not. I dont see why adding some basic tools that the lineup lack suddenly make sections op, because their performance as an individual unit unchanged, the faction will be better then, but isn't it the purpose ?



I agree with you on many points in this post but if Brits got their much needed tools (Assault Infantry,Non-doc mobile indirect platform) then Tommies will definently be nerfed.

In contrast with OST you can see the reason why Grens lose to any other infantry other than Cons (they lose to them when they get ther 7 man too) is because they have all the tools to help them out. Now imagine a faction which can grab 5man (durable) man with double LMGs supported by assault infantry and mortars :snfPeter:

Have a good day.
28 Oct 2019, 00:21 AM
#178
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 399

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Oct 2019, 22:13 PMJilet


I agree with you on many points in this post but if Brits got their much needed tools (Assault Infantry,Non-doc mobile indirect platform) then Tommies will definently be nerfed.

In contrast with OST you can see the reason why Grens lose to any other infantry other than Cons (they lose to them when they get ther 7 man too) is because they have all the tools to help them out. Now imagine a faction which can grab 5man (durable) man with double LMGs supported by assault infantry and mortars :snfPeter:

Have a good day.


While saying about basic tools, i dont mean a complete set like ost. Beside some direct solutions of adding usf mortar and assault sections, Many ideas has been posted about how to fill the gaps in the lineup while still remain the unique. For now, pyro smoke barrage and a stock flamer is all i will ask, may be non exclusive bofor and AEC on top of that but not necessary a must.
28 Oct 2019, 02:25 AM
#179
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 359



While saying about basic tools, i dont mean a complete set like ost. Beside some direct solutions of adding usf mortar and assault sections, Many ideas has been posted about how to fill the gaps in the lineup while still remain the unique. For now, pyro smoke barrage and a stock flamer is all i will ask, may be non exclusive bofor and AEC on top of that but not necessary a must.


Well thats reasonable.
PAGES (9)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag tightrope
  • The British Forces flag Kobal
Faymonville Approach
Faymonville Approach Honor
Honor it
3
Download
Download
13
uploaded by Kobal

Board Info

165 users are online: 3 members and 162 guests
Selvy289, MMX, sq212
223 posts in the last 24h
1301 posts in the last week
3973 posts in the last month
Registered members: 74540
Welcome our newest member, sq212
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM