Login

russian armor

Looking at USF

28 Sep 2018, 18:59 PM
#21
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1

Teching is obviously an issue but I don't know how to really fix it without blowing up balance. I guess you could have conditional unlocks tied to major tech- for example AT Gun is available either Captain or LT + Major or .50 Cal is LT or Capt + Major. This obviously makes Airborne completely irrelevant (hello commander revamp 3?)
28 Sep 2018, 20:08 PM
#22
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

In team games, the pak howie works well vs ostheer, but a waste of resources vs okw. 8-minute walking Stukas prevents it from being used most of the time. The mortar half-track is safer.
28 Sep 2018, 20:10 PM
#23
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

Best way to resolve USF teching issue and gameplay is making all tiers mandatory with an adjusted cost.
30 Sep 2018, 06:12 AM
#24
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
The ONLY slight problem with USF is teching is a bit weird. My solution is to swap the place of AAHT and Stuart. Suppression on both tiers and both tiers have AI and AT
30 Sep 2018, 06:27 AM
#25
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

Teching is obviously an issue but I don't know how to really fix it without blowing up balance. I guess you could have conditional unlocks tied to major tech- for example AT Gun is available either Captain or LT + Major or .50 Cal is LT or Capt + Major. This obviously makes Airborne completely irrelevant (hello commander revamp 3?)

You know, the worst part of usf teching is that it’s so bad that there’s a commander where 2 of its abilities are literally just more expensive stock team weapons. They should make a commander next where okw gets a 300 mp version of the kubel as a callin at 1cp.
30 Sep 2018, 17:34 PM
#26
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

The ONLY slight problem with USF is teching is a bit weird. My solution is to swap the place of AAHT and Stuart. Suppression on both tiers and both tiers have AI and AT


Only issue is why would u ever bother with Cpt tier. That swap on vehicles and swapping LT/Cpt (if we consider that LT > Cpt as a unit).
I think there are also alternatives in making the shock value of the free officer lesser while providing a richer and more available tech/tool options.
30 Sep 2018, 17:42 PM
#27
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



Only issue is why would u ever bother with Cpt tier. That swap on vehicles and swapping LT/Cpt (if we consider that LT > Cpt as a unit).
I think there are also alternatives in making the shock value of the free officer lesser while providing a richer and more available tech/tool options.


Pack Howitzer and ATG are really good in maps where there is chokepoints or lanes, I feel ATG would work really well with static AAHT play, the Stuart is really weak nowadays.
30 Sep 2018, 18:09 PM
#28
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3600 | Subs: 1

Stuart + HMG.50 >> M15 + ATG

I don't see any real solution for USF in fact.
30 Sep 2018, 21:53 PM
#29
avatar of Oziligath

Posts: 192

Maybe something that could be nice would something like whenever you tech for LT or CPT the other medium tier get it's fuel price lowered by half, just saying here, maybe the idea have been discussed and anbonend, just my thought here. A part from that i'd say to loooower the nade tech price.
1 Oct 2018, 00:56 AM
#30
avatar of Leo251

Posts: 311

I think, maybe, that the main problem is not the USF itself. USF is almost not picked anymore by any top player because Allies has the allmighty Soviet faction. Soviet faction is THE problem of USF faction. Of course that USF can be hard to play sometimes, but, what faction doesnt. OKW and UKF are also really hard to play nowadays.
1 Oct 2018, 04:38 AM
#31
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

Maybe something that could be nice would something like whenever you tech for LT or CPT the other medium tier get it's fuel price lowered by half, just saying here, maybe the idea have been discussed and anbonend, just my thought here. A part from that i'd say to loooower the nade tech price.

Yeah that’d be a great idea.
1 Oct 2018, 07:50 AM
#32
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1



Too bad flamethrowers on IS would be too OP.



There is still the glaring issue of the mobile indirect fire tho, and even with some good suggestions on keeping it unique Andy said that they can't, or at least won't do anything about it because of "reasons" which absolutely baffle me, they're willing to let an Army be a cripple only because they're too proud or some other stupid shit to admit they're wrong and actually listen to the community on how to fix it.



Since relic refuses to give them a mobile mortar your basically shoe horned into mobile defense, even then the land mattress is very mediocre at best.

Maybe the sexton is going to be better now that its getting buffed (If i remember correctly).

If they are insistent on not adding the mobile mortar then a pack up for resources back is almost necessary for the faction.
1 Oct 2018, 08:02 AM
#33
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3143 | Subs: 2




Since relic refuses to give them a mobile mortar your basically shoe horned into mobile defense, even then the land mattress is very mediocre at best.

Maybe the sexton is going to be better now that its getting buffed (If i remember correctly).

If they are insistent on not adding the mobile mortar then a pack up for resources back is almost necessary for the faction.


I don't see a problem in implementing Planet Smasher's Artillery Pit, at least just for testing purposes. Their mortar pit model won't go to waste and won't be put in a doctrine or whatever and the Brits will have a more balanced and practical mortar which is proven to work.

Apart from that tho the Land Mattress costs fuel and is slow, and is pretty easy to take out as I've experienced.

While the Sexton is in a basically team game commander that no one in hell is going to choose or at least call in a Sexton in a 1v1 or 2v2 since they're small maps and you're already spread thin and low on manpower as a Brit.

The other options for a doctrinal mortar were to add it to Arty Regiment to make the commander useful in small team games or give it a mortar HT, the mortar which was added to the air resupply operation for Tac Support Regiment and the new commander coming out around on Christmas having a mortar team as well.

Apart from that I don't see which other doctrine could be given a mortar besides maybe Special Weapons (to replace the Tank Hunters?) but it's sad that we're trying to think of ways to fill commander slots with something that can be done much more easily and with less headbutting, commander slots which could be used for something else entirely.
1 Oct 2018, 08:18 AM
#34
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Oct 2018, 00:56 AMLeo251
I think, maybe, that the main problem is not the USF itself. USF is almost not picked anymore by any top player because Allies has the allmighty Soviet faction. Soviet faction is THE problem of USF faction. Of course that USF can be hard to play sometimes, but, what faction doesnt. OKW and UKF are also really hard to play nowadays.

Oh yeah, that 36% win rate on CGS2 is because soviets are OP with their 51% win rate.

OKW also must be so hard to play, they only got highest win rate of all factions on CGS2 while UKF got the lowest, so hard to play and poor OKW.

Flawless logic.
2 Oct 2018, 01:19 AM
#35
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220

I basically agree with everything everyone has said so far. The whole american faction is designed around brawling and trading out better than the enemy do. But that falls flat once the enemy can kill you for free.

I think in team games USF is kind of getting the rough end of the stick from artillery meta, they have powerful infantry but they're all expensive and axis artillery means they can just kill them for free at no cost to themselves which USF have a tendency to just curl up and die once they get wiped. They also have powerful team weapons but they can just get deleted by an early stuka, which usf can't really respond to.

It's easy to see the flaws in UKF as half it's roster is useless or just missing. USF has a weird problem of that every single unit in the faction performs very well (other than the Utility car), nothing is useless and they are still losing. Which means yeah, the problems lie somewhere else, either cost adjustments to units to help USF fit the meta or, more likely, probably their Bull**** teching which makes you chose between the 2 most essential units in any roster, the machine gun and the AT gun and if you choose to take both you don't get armour out on time and get screwed by no retreat point. I think USF probably needs the OKW treatment of reorganising all of the units to make USF a linear progression like UKF and decreasing the price of each stage to fit. I propose:

-Lieutenant reduced to 30-40 fuel, unlocks MGs AT guns and Utility car. Lieutenant becomes an AT squad, (upgrades to bazooka rather than having a BAR and thompson). Maybe allow utility car to fire the crew's bazooka whilst inside the vehicle to stop it just getting squashed by it's counterparts (222, P2)? Without the bazooka the utility car is basically an expensive Universal carrier but worse, alternatively just make it cost like 5-10 fuel, 20 is ridiculous. Having an extra crewman poking his head out to fire a bazooka from the top of the vehicle would be cool.

-Captain reduced to 20 fuel (similar to OST medium armour building) and must have Lieutenant unlocked, has Thompson and BAR, unlocks Pack Howitzer, AA halftrack and Stuart. Perhaps decrease price of stuart to make it worth taking rather than rushing for a major.

-Major, requires lieutenant and captain.

I'd also like to see the WC51 truck able to drop BARs and Bazookas, similar to the British halftrack allowing you to arm your team with spare munitions.

Personally I think the sherman is amazing, especially if you have 2 of them with radio net. It's probably my favourite tank in the game, an HP buff would make it probably one of the best in my opinion, but seeing it able to take an extra hit would make it much more usable in the late game. The Sherman already has really good Vet though if you ask me, I'd rather see USF get an upgrade similar to Hammer/anvil from the major for 50 fuel to give shermans access to an "additional protection package" or something which either just buffs all your tanks right then or allows you to upgrade shermans with "extra armour" which grants an increase in HP and armour for, say, 10 fuel per tank.

(not munitions, seeing as this upgrade will be basically mandatory and USF already require far too many munitions for their infantry and still need to call in artillery every now and then)

I'd love to see shermans covered with tracks and sandbags from this upgrade, even if Patton hated it that way XD. Historically the Sherman only had 0.4 of an inch less effective armour than a tiger 1, it totally doesn't act like that in game.
2 Oct 2018, 01:22 AM
#36
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 220

Also buff bazookas, they are garbage. Although even with buffs, using them is difficult because nowadays you need BARs or 1919s in order to not just get blended by volksgrenadiers or cut down by grens. Volksgrenadiers just basically do american infantry's job better now that they get STG44s, they're better CQC and better at range, have better vet, snares after 1st HQ and must be literally molded out of dirt they are so cheap. US infantry just trade out worse in most scenarios if you ask me.
2 Oct 2018, 04:51 AM
#37
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

@hoverbacon

+1

I actually think bazookas are more or less fine in their own right, especially with how strong Jacksons are right now, as they have more dps than schrecks but less pen so you do have to be on the flank. That makes me think that they’re more of a defensive weapon and I use them as such. They’re also very accessible, but I think the one problem that comes up is how much munitions usf infantry has to spend to trade properly. IIRC the 2 volks stgs combined actually have a bit more raw dps at all ranges than 1 BAR, but they’re the same price and rifles are much more expensive to reinforce. Then you have to put another BAR on each rifle just so they outtrade veteran volks while being aggressive and carrying the rest of your army, which is what they’re supposed to do anyway. I did a little breakdown in some thread, it might have nbeen this one, but usf has to spend an absurd amount of munitions on literally just BARs compared to other faction’s anti infantry weapon upgrades and I think that along with the teching system pulls them down. So in a roundabout conclusion, bazookas are fine as a weapon but not fine because it means almost 2 less vital BARs for riflemen.
2 Oct 2018, 05:38 AM
#38
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911

Also buff bazookas, they are garbage. Although even with buffs, using them is difficult because nowadays you need BARs or 1919s in order to not just get blended by volksgrenadiers or cut down by grens. Volksgrenadiers just basically do american infantry's job better now that they get STG44s, they're better CQC and better at range, have better vet, snares after 1st HQ and must be literally molded out of dirt they are so cheap. US infantry just trade out worse in most scenarios if you ask me.


Wait let me get this straight, you think bazookas are bad because they cut down on the AI damage output of riflemen?

Do you understand the phrase "having your cake and eating it too?

Also volks don't have better vet and don't do more far dps ( stg vs 1 bar ) than riflemen
2 Oct 2018, 10:33 AM
#39
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979



Wait let me get this straight, you think bazookas are bad because they cut down on the AI damage output of riflemen?

Do you understand the phrase "having your cake and eating it too?

Also volks don't have better vet and don't do more far dps ( stg vs 1 bar ) than riflemen


zooks are bad because theyre inferior to schrecks and shooting at superior armor... volks have similar DPS to riflemen using STGs and are 250 mp opposed to the 280 MP rifles... rifles suck big time and need serious buffs... if you dont believe me then believe the GCS tournament numbers... and if you dont believe that then theres nobody who can help you
2 Oct 2018, 10:43 AM
#40
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Oct 2018, 00:56 AMLeo251
I think, maybe, that the main problem is not the USF itself. USF is almost not picked anymore by any top player because Allies has the allmighty Soviet faction. Soviet faction is THE problem of USF faction. Of course that USF can be hard to play sometimes, but, what faction doesnt. OKW and UKF are also really hard to play nowadays.


not exactly... sov has a 51/52% winrate vs OST/OKW respectively... which isnt even statistically significant... meaning sov is fairly balanced against OST and OKW... what needs to be done is USF getting buffed... not sov toned down

tbh i wouldnt touch any of the core units for all 3 factions... penals volks grens kubels m3a1 sturms raks mortar sniper (both) pak and zis... the core balance between the 3 is really good as it stands...
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

New Zealand 74
Poland 11

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

664 users are online: 664 guests
5 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
137 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45072
Welcome our newest member, deliveryservice
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM