Login

russian armor

UKF absent from tourney play again

PAGES (8)down
25 Nov 2019, 13:28 PM
#81
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17884 | Subs: 8



hit brace or what?

Or like the 120mm wipe machine?


Auto attack range was reduced by a lot.
You need to barrage for any kind of accurate and frequent barrage.
If auto attack alone is tearing you apart, I would advise you to stop blobbing all your units and leaving them AFK for 2 minutes within 90 range of pit.
25 Nov 2019, 13:36 PM
#82
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1



hit brace or what?

Or like the 120mm wipe machine?


As i thought, you probably never use the mortar pit.

In actual game, a decent ukf player will have to constantly use the barrage if he want to dish some effective out of the pit, not to mention all of the calculations one have to take when picking a position to built and all of the effort to babysit, repair and protect after that.

All of the effort sometime just to get some smoke and got hard counter by a couple of leig/mortar.
25 Nov 2019, 13:47 PM
#83
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 214



As i thought, you probably never use the mortar pit.

In actual game, a decent ukf player will have to constantly use the barrage if he want to dish some effective out of the pit, not to mention all of the calculations one have to take when picking a position to built and all of the effort to babysit, repair and protect after that.

All of the effort sometime just to get some smoke and got hard counter by a couple of leig/mortar.


sure because there is no cover on the map....
"all the effort":rolleyes:
Auto attack range was reduced by a lot.

for a good reason, no one wants the sim city shit back
25 Nov 2019, 13:49 PM
#84
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17884 | Subs: 8

You really are advanced stupid here.... you deny increased micro tax despite acknowledging it and underlining the reason why its there.... all this while claiming its some kind of wipe machine, despite again, underlining yourself why its not anymore....

You take "contradiction" to a whole new level.
25 Nov 2019, 13:54 PM
#85
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

I would consider the opportunity cost of building a mortar pit too. If the frontline moves back it will eventually leave the range of fire.

But also mortar pits are not worth defending when raided or counter fired with abilities like feuerstrum.

Can mortar pits be turned into standard trenches and the mortar team simply crews it?
25 Nov 2019, 14:05 PM
#86
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

I would consider the opportunity cost of building a mortar pit too. If the frontline moves back it will eventually leave the range of fire.

But also mortar pits are not worth defending when raided or counter fired with abilities like feuerstrum.

Can mortar pits be turned into standard trenches and the mortar team simply crews it?


A cheap, quick to built, qick to tear down, single mortar trech will be handier, i think.
25 Nov 2019, 14:24 PM
#87
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 214

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2019, 13:49 PMKatitof
You really are advanced stupid here.... you deny increased micro tax despite acknowledging it and underlining the reason why its there.... all this while claiming its some kind of wipe machine, despite again, underlining yourself why its not anymore....

You take "contradiction" to a whole new level.


does it autofire double shot ? yes ... this is a huge wipe problem

the manuel fire is just a bonus of a "unit" wich dont bleed mp and win against every other mortar.
The only counter is 20 min of leig fire and heavy arty wich u can Brace against...

axis have to invest 3times more mp to counter that stupid thing .. while ukf just "send one engineer" and rep.

its clear that the most allied fanboy want a stupidly op mortar with 0 micro... but not today!

I would consider the opportunity cost of building a mortar pit too. If the frontline moves back it will eventually leave the range of fire


thats part of the balance. every emplacement in the game "can get a out of range"
25 Nov 2019, 15:19 PM
#88
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

its totally funny that some one here thing to barrage some target is "micro". this isnt even nearly comparable with real mortar teams...which need often micro with retreat, reinforce, move to the front, move to other places and barrages targets.

its like you compare a self-automation data backup system with the complex manual data backup from hand.

one is one click...the other is a painful task
25 Nov 2019, 16:52 PM
#89
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1


does it autofire double shot ? yes ... this is a huge wipe problem

Dose it cost nearly double the price of a normal mortar and cant move? Yes.

the manuel fire is just a bonus of a "unit" wich dont bleed mp and win against every other mortar.

Again, it cost twice as much and cant retreat so what's wrong with it wining gain ONE of others mortar? It not like it can win gain double mortar in any mean, unless the other player is fools enough to put both of the two mortar teams in a same place.

The only counter is 20 min of leig fire and heavy arty wich u can Brace against...

Brace last for 10s and have a significant cooldown so if someone smart enough to barrage the mortar pit in between the brace, it won't envent take 5 min.
Meanwhile, what stock counter does ukf have again 2 leig 18? Basically nothing.

axis have to invest 3times more mp to counter that stupid thing .. while ukf just "send one engineer" and rep.

If ut take you 1050 mp just to counter a single mortar pit then you chose to do it the hard way. And repair under fire can be ccount as bleed with a seriously risk of wipe for that engineer.

its clear that the most allied fanboy want a stupidly op mortar with 0 micro... but not today!

Is there Any buff request for the mortar pit in this thread? At least from me ?
25 Nov 2019, 17:01 PM
#90
avatar of Support Sapper

Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1

its totally funny that some one here thing to barrage some target is "micro". this isnt even nearly comparable with real mortar teams...which need often micro with retreat, reinforce, move to the front, move to other places and barrages targets.


For a comparison:
- barrage with a mortar pit and a normal mortar team take the same effort = 2 click.
- Retreat a mortar team and brace a pit take the same effort = 1 clik.
- Reinforce a mortar team and move it back to the front is equal to moving an engineer squad and repair a pit.

It not like i'm trying to say the mortar pit need more input than normal mortar team, but it definitely not a nobrainer that requires 0 micro like someone claim.
25 Nov 2019, 20:37 PM
#91
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Just refund 70% resources for dismantling ukf structures. It will give them mobility and will not lead to mirroring other factions.
25 Nov 2019, 21:09 PM
#92
avatar of Vermillion_Hawk

Posts: 218

Just refund 70% resources for dismantling ukf structures. It will give them mobility and will not lead to mirroring other factions.


I'm so glad we have you, who doesn't play UKF, here to solve all the problems with the faction.
25 Nov 2019, 21:46 PM
#93
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



I'm so glad we have you, who doesn't play UKF, here to solve all the problems with the faction.

I play them. I'm around 150-200 1v1 with them.

I seriously think it is a very good solution. Simple and addresses a lot of problems. Add mutually non exclusive Bofors and aec and the faction is ready without core changes. Please state why my solution would be bad rather than suggest that I don't play them (which is simy false) :) You don't have to agree with me but al least give some arguments
25 Nov 2019, 22:36 PM
#94
avatar of Vermillion_Hawk

Posts: 218

Because emplacement play is a sure way to lose a game. They're utterly useless, and have only ever been effective against people who have no idea about the tools at their disposal. They've never been remotely cost-efficient, and giving them "extra mobility" by allowing a refund will not change the fact that balancing a faction around static emplacements is awful for everyone involved, both those playing the faction and those playing against it.

You can claim that rank but I honestly don't believe you, because in my whole career of both playing as and against the British in 1v1, never once has an emplacement been a remotely effective choice compared to any other unit on the roster. I'd rather keep it that way and look at other avenues of improving the faction rather than give a nominal benefit to the worst part of it.
25 Nov 2019, 22:55 PM
#95
avatar of aerafield

Posts: 2981 | Subs: 3

[...] Ostheer in their current state are just not competitive alternatives in 1v1.


are you sure we watched the same tournament? OKW definitely was played more often but I have seen a lot Wehrmacht games too.. and IIRC most of them resulted in an axis win unlike the Grand Offensive doc insta click games that the opponents seemed to be prepared for almost every time
25 Nov 2019, 23:08 PM
#96
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Because emplacement play is a sure way to lose a game. They're utterly useless, and have only ever been effective against people who have no idea about the tools at their disposal. They've never been remotely cost-efficient, and giving them "extra mobility" by allowing a refund will not change the fact that balancing a faction around static emplacements is awful for everyone involved, both those playing the faction and those playing against it.

You can claim that rank but I honestly don't believe you, because in my whole career of both playing as and against the British in 1v1, never once has an emplacement been a remotely effective choice compared to any other unit on the roster. I'd rather keep it that way and look at other avenues of improving the faction rather than give a nominal benefit to the worst part of it.

Just check my stats :)

http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#global/1v1/british/by-rank?page=5&highlight=450253

Emplacements are bad because they are static - if they could be moved and replaced with different units it would open up many new possibilities. Simple. The only thing that would require balance is the refund cost. 70% may be too generous.
26 Nov 2019, 00:07 AM
#97
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


Just check my stats :)

http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#global/1v1/british/by-rank?page=5&highlight=450253

Emplacements are bad because they are static - if they could be moved and replaced with different units it would open up many new possibilities. Simple. The only thing that would require balance is the refund cost. 70% may be too generous.


If they could be moved and refunded, they will either be too cheesy with high refund return or utterly useless as they are now.
In either case, you are not promoting a healthy playstyle or something people would like to play against.

It's been the case with OKW release (playing around Med HQ with MG34 -doctrinal- ISG and stalling with Flak HQ) and it's been one of the most obnoxious things to play against when UKF simcity was at it's strongest.

This does not fix them on 1v1 either (which is their main issue).
26 Nov 2019, 00:09 AM
#98
avatar of Vermillion_Hawk

Posts: 218


Just check my stats :)

http://www.companyofheroes.com/leaderboards#global/1v1/british/by-rank?page=5&highlight=450253

Emplacements are bad because they are static - if they could be moved and replaced with different units it would open up many new possibilities. Simple. The only thing that would require balance is the refund cost. 70% may be too generous.


A refund doesn't make them not static. I still have yet to see a compelling suggestion as to how focusing on emplacements is a good thing for the faction and for the game. I also highly doubt you got your 1v1 rank focusing on emplacement play.

The only way I could possibly see your emplacement solution working is having "crews" like the USF that preserve veterancy between emplacements to make it not a total wash once you deconstruct them. Either way I have no interest in seeing emplacements become central to the Brits again.
26 Nov 2019, 00:27 AM
#99
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351



A refund doesn't make them not static. I still have yet to see a compelling suggestion as to how focusing on emplacements is a good thing for the faction and for the game. I also highly doubt you got your 1v1 rank focusing on emplacement play.

The only way I could possibly see your emplacement solution working is having "crews" like the USF that preserve veterancy between emplacements to make it not a total wash once you deconstruct them. Either way I have no interest in seeing emplacements become central to the Brits again.


Ranks aren't that important imo. You should get a cool experience when you're playing across all leaderboard.

My point would be to retain the uniqueness of the 3rd allied faction. Emplacements are the key imo. I don't agree that they must be either of the two extremes (too cheesy or too meh). If they are refunded when deconstructed by sappers, a good player would use that to surprise enemy with new positioning of various emplacements keeping the enemy on their toes. It would allow the faction to become unique by making it possible to convert one unit into another by using the refunded resources. Removing emplacements would create some natural bleed (not all resources would be refunded) but it would be powerful enough to give the ukf much needed flexibility. Imo simple solutions are best. Butterfly effect we could say would do the rest. I used to create games and I seriously believe it would work with ukf brilliantly. The only thing to consider should be how much resources should be recouped not to make it too powerful on the one hand but to giv the required flexibility on the other.
26 Nov 2019, 01:51 AM
#100
avatar of Vermillion_Hawk

Posts: 218

There were similar arguments for "retaining uniqueness" by keeping OKW's resource penalty, thankfully those never won out. Bad design doesn't warrant workarounds to keep it viable.
PAGES (8)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
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

451 users are online: 451 guests
0 post in the last 24h
37 posts in the last week
146 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44954
Welcome our newest member, Mtbgbans
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM