A CP 0 camo unit with free smoke available to it, what can possibly go wrong?
Maybe that it will totally counter HMG's?
Airborne company
4 Apr 2017, 06:40 AM
#61
Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1
4 Apr 2017, 16:31 PM
#62
Posts: 309 | Subs: 1
What if you would give airbourne rangers the possibility to purchase the recoil-less anti-tank rifle like in vCoH? Then you would give some at capabilities to the commander instead of having various AI options. Would that be viable?
Have you ever woken up in the middle of the night, totally shaken and lost, because in your dream you were hearing Katyushas firing?
4 Apr 2017, 17:10 PM
#63
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
What if you would give airbourne rangers the possibility to purchase the recoil-less anti-tank rifle like in vCoH? Then you would give some at capabilities to the commander instead of having various AI options. Would that be viable?
They must be better than zooks then (otherwise USF player will just go echelons with 2 zooks not paras with 2 zooks. All squads in game can purchase zooks even paras). Something like schrecks I think. Slow reload, yet high pierce to penetrate heavy armor.
4 Apr 2017, 17:14 PM
#64
Posts: 309 | Subs: 1
They must be better than zooks then (otherwise USF player will just go echelons with 2 zooks not paras with 2 zooks. All squads in game can purchase zooks even paras). Something like schrecks I think. Slow reload, yet high pierce to penetrate heavy armor.
I agree, this would even be something that can be useful for USF, especially in team games. They should be similiar to schrecks, as you said, maybe slightly more expensive since they will be on a 6-man squad. The question is how this will impact on overall balance. I think no one wants a riflemen/airbourne blob meta (similiar to what you saw in CoH1 team games from time to time).
Have you ever woken up in the middle of the night, totally shaken and lost, because in your dream you were hearing Katyushas firing?
5 Apr 2017, 06:10 AM
#65
Posts: 1954
It's a bit difficult to have enough screentime for 3 specialist AI-only units (Pathfinders, Thompson Paras and LMG Paras) that offer zero AT utility, when the faction already has access to the best mainline infantry, and they have no AI issues to begin with.
Recon Company's vision of Pathinders as a utility unit seems more coherent than a "hey, let's strap another AI only unit in the roster" implementation of Airborne. Given that beacons are Paratrooper's main feature, it should be more affordable to field a Pathfinder & Paratrooper mixed army.
For Paratroopers, the simplest change I would make is allow Paratrooper-equipped support weapons to reinforce near beacons.
Pathfinders just need to be cheaper scout units, and provide the utility necessary to complement Paratroopers. I don't know:
- Smoke artillery callins?
- Allow Paratroopers to retreat to Pathfinders (in friendly territory only)?
- Lay mines? (or let Airborne paras also lay mines?)
Maybe this:
Popcap to 1/model plus 1 for the squad (5 when called in - pop cap is part of what ruins these)
Cost -decrease 240-260, 30 to reinforce
Abilities: mines, beacons, smoke barrage
Decrease weapon slots to 1 (so that people don't abuse barfinders with lower cost) - this would make sure that they are only scouts as barfinders work much better with 2 bars
Make this change, change MG to 1 cp, AT gun to 3 (either of them for 75 muni's) and commander would be more viable. Would still need to buff P47 to make viable in 4v4's but would probably be solid commander in 1v1 and 2v2.
5 Apr 2017, 06:19 AM
#66
Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1
IF one want to make USF doctrinal infantry more attractive one need to tone down riflemen and not buff the the doctrinal infantry.
5 Apr 2017, 07:45 AM
#67
Posts: 245
IF one want to make USF doctrinal infantry more attractive one need to tone down riflemen and not buff the the doctrinal infantry.
ahha no USF having the best mainline infantry is what makes USF good
USF is probably the worst performing faction now since update with riflemen and stuart nerfs their early-mid game isnt as good and their late game is garbage.
Tone down rifles and suddenly you notice how bad the faction is, lacking in variety of units abilities and quality. The faction is all about spamming riflemen.. This thread was really only about making rocket strike good so airborne could be a viable doctrine choice. And even if Rocket strike was good people would still probably choose heavy cavalry over it. Because every part of heavy cavalry is good, it addresses USF at every point in the game, heavy tank mines, elite inf etc..
5 Apr 2017, 08:41 AM
#68
Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1
The performance of riflemen is to high leaving little room for doctrinal infantry. They should be toned down. For instance riflemen have access to smoke that on top of everything else disables vehicles weapons since they have a mortar they do not need anymore.
My response aim at people asking for Pathfinder buffs not P47 buff. The only buff pathfinder need is reducing reinforcement time but so odes most of 4 men elite 4 men squads.
My response aim at people asking for Pathfinder buffs not P47 buff. The only buff pathfinder need is reducing reinforcement time but so odes most of 4 men elite 4 men squads.
5 Apr 2017, 08:55 AM
#69
Posts: 245
So basically your saying ruining the faction is worth making doctrinal infantry better by comparison, leaving little room for the faction, but, more room for the doctrinal infantry on a faction nobody would play competitively xD
You must really want usf kicked to the dirt if you want usf infantry toned down, they would be worse than every other faction it's all they have lol.
You must really want usf kicked to the dirt if you want usf infantry toned down, they would be worse than every other faction it's all they have lol.
5 Apr 2017, 09:00 AM
#70
Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1
That is one to look at it, another would be that instead of having a faction based on a unit that over-performs one should better design the faction so that there is room for all units of the faction to useful.
Either wise the only thing you will see would riflemen, riflemen and riflemen.
Either wise the only thing you will see would riflemen, riflemen and riflemen.
5 Apr 2017, 09:06 AM
#71
Posts: 245
thats exactly their build order rifle rifle rifle...into teching, and guess what teching gives you... basically more riflemen squads lol..
It's a poorly designed faction with not enough tools thats why they compensated with making their mainline infantry brute force.., take that away they still don't have a wide range of abilities or brute force power and they would be gimped..
It's a poorly designed faction with not enough tools thats why they compensated with making their mainline infantry brute force.., take that away they still don't have a wide range of abilities or brute force power and they would be gimped..
5 Apr 2017, 09:37 AM
#72
Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1
USF get 3 T0 units. There should be room for all those units to work and there should be room for doctrinal units to work.
There is a number of changes that can be made to better design USF. (for instance the promotion system)
The basic point I made here that buffing doctrinal USF units to make more attractive compared to riflemen is not the way to go since riflemen are already OP.
There is a number of changes that can be made to better design USF. (for instance the promotion system)
The basic point I made here that buffing doctrinal USF units to make more attractive compared to riflemen is not the way to go since riflemen are already OP.
5 Apr 2017, 12:03 PM
#73
Posts: 1954
IF one want to make USF doctrinal infantry more attractive one need to tone down riflemen and not buff the the doctrinal infantry.
1) This isn't buffing pathfinders to be a replacement, it's making them useful without being a replacement.
2) You already got a nerf to rifles and the Stuart. Nerf them any more and USF will fall apart.
5 Apr 2017, 12:27 PM
#74
Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1
1) This isn't buffing pathfinders to be a replacement, it's making them useful without being a replacement.
2) You already got a nerf to rifles and the Stuart. Nerf them any more and USF will fall apart.
Again Pathfinder are inline with JLIRS and are balanced, they would be used allot more if they where available in any other army. There is no real need to buff them.
The Stuart has nothing to do with riflemen performance or infantry balance. The nerf to riflemen was at vet 3 so it has little impact on early infantry fights.
If and when riflemen are toned down the road will be open for other units to be buffed if there is a need to be buffed. Unit balance and faction balance are separate issues most of the time unless directly implement in faction design.
Compared to USF most Ostheer and Soviet infantry seem like a to UP.
5 Apr 2017, 12:34 PM
#75
Posts: 1220
just make p47 rockets more accurate (distance bettwen rockets need to be shorter) and maybe pathifinders at 0 cp and commander is fine
5 Apr 2017, 16:44 PM
#76
Posts: 75
For Paratroopers, the simplest change I would make is allow Paratrooper-equipped support weapons to reinforce near beacons.
Pathfinders need to be cheaper scout units, and provide the utility necessary to complement Paratroopers.
- Allow Paratroopers to retreat to Pathfinders (in friendly territory only)?
IMO, the commander is fine (ok maybe p47 needs a SLIGHT buff or cost reduction) but, you have to use pathfinders correctly (like a 'sniper' and plant as many 'map hack' beacons as you can).
If you make paths cheaper, this will change their unit role and could give USF an even bigger early game advantage or even worse, make them spammable (which would help in build order diversity? Specially if they become CP 0)
Focus on what makes the commander unique- Pathfinder beacons.
IMO, these would be really good changes to help the commander:
- Para-support-teams can reinforce near beacons
- Pathfinders can reinforce near beacons
- Paras and paths can retreat to pathfinder beacon (al la Captain toggle)
- P47 cost reduction (very small)
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
63 | ||
 |
|
|
14 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
142 | ||
|
|
|
|
74 | ||
 |
|
|
21 | ||
 |
|
|
10 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.29446.865-1
- 4.275110.714+13
- 5.259143.644+3
- 6.250150.625+11
- 7.22491.711+11
- 8.19265.747+5
- 9.672425.613+1
- 10.5611.836+3
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
744
Board Info
691 users are online:
1 member and 690 guests
capiqua
capiqua
10 posts in the last 24h
22 posts in the last week
138 posts in the last month
22 posts in the last week
138 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45031
Welcome our newest member, Pet ID Tags
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Pet ID Tags
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM