Login

russian armor

USF Tech Changes Mod Changelog

PAGES (17)down
29 Nov 2018, 12:26 PM
#301
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13477 | Subs: 1



The problem with USF doctrinal infantry has more do with "free" officers than the actual USF tech.

Some of these units are very powerful and if one allows many of them to be called in one should restrict them some other way.

A "promotion" system for where USF infantry could be exchanged for doctrinal units could offer a solution.

In addition the new CP 0 doctrinal infantry allow USF to put allot of pressure to Ostheer who have to spend manpower and time to get the T1 building up.

Finally many USF units are extremely cost efficient and only see little action due to tech restriction removing those restrictions would mean re-balancing these units.
29 Nov 2018, 14:04 PM
#302
avatar of Coh2user34

Posts: 10

How about pathfinder sniper rifle 2->1 and some manpower sale?

Because it's now 0cp unit...

I felt previous pathfinder + rifle + airbourne was too manpower expensive...
29 Nov 2018, 15:43 PM
#303
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

How about pathfinder sniper rifle 2->1 and some manpower sale?

Because it's now 0cp unit...

I felt previous pathfinder + rifle + airbourne was too manpower expensive...

I haven't used Airborne for a while so I'm not sure if RA of Pathfinders and Paras was changed, but previously you suffered when you used those units because they bleed like swine. I don't think that lowering MP costs will make them more preferrable than Riflemen.

In the end I've stopped using Paras completely and usually used just 1 Pathfinder unit for stealthy recon for Jacksons and M8A1.
29 Nov 2018, 17:23 PM
#304
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Point of the USF Redesign for those who thinking it's meant to create a power imbalance is to add more diversity to the USF forces and give them more options, while still having their own unique structure.

-Unit placement for the Stuart and AA HT were meant to give each tier its own set of tools and play styles. LT is focused on offense, Captain on defense. It makes no sense why one building needs two suppression based units where Captain can't defend its own team weapons from being overrun by infantry.


These two don't jive with each other.

You have got to be aware that by switching the AAHT and the Stuart you're stacking LT tier. (Unless by increasing build diversity you're expecting players to be teching first for just AT guns? Investing more for pack howies and an AAHT that comes out later than it currently does?) Captain first is just a clear dead end. I mean, why invest 20 fuel to unlock a 50 fuel unit to defend your team weapons when you can just invest 35 fuel to unlock a 0 fuel HMG that also comes with a free infantry squad?

People go AAHT because the 140 fuel to get a Stuart after going LT currently is foolish. The AAHT is the available unit that can bridge USF players to Major. It is effective enough to deal with the OKW AAHT and Ostheer's 222s and halftrack. It doesn't hard counter, but it is enough to buy the necessary time. The only non-backtech thing Captain has ever offered was a rushed Stuart.

This "0.5" teching for LT and Captain I think is a good idea, and it may prove to be quite beneficial to USF and the game as a whole. It'll open up a much more diverse set of builds that get to not only use elite infantry squads, but also the many light vehicle callings that USF has. By going just LT and Captain (which means forgoing the stock vehicles), the Greyhound or the M3 HT would see more potential value. Incidentally, I wager free officer squads make it harder to field non-riflemen than anything.

But switching the AAHT and the Stuart just serves to reverse the very goals you're purportedly seeking. It'll always be LT first, with a decision to rush a stuart or go for an ATG.
29 Nov 2018, 17:26 PM
#305
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

How about pathfinder sniper rifle 2->1 and some manpower sale?


That was not done so units could beat Pathfinders by closing the distance where the unit is relatively weak. Despite having paratrooper carbines, they lose those first when models are dropped, allowing them to be countered by basic infantry early game.

Finally many USF units are extremely cost efficient and only see little action due to tech restriction removing those restrictions would mean re-balancing these units.


Only the M8A1 and M36 in the core is what I call incredibly cost-effective, but that is a different discussion. And M36 Jacksons have to be as USF has only 1 true TD in its core and the M10 will never be stock.

But switching the AAHT and the Stuart just serves to reverse the very goals you're purportedly seeking. It'll always be LT first, with a decision to rush a stuart or go for an ATG.


Worst scenario we go back to where the units are paced in the tech. We are keeping an eye on the Stuart rush with LT backing that is backed by the .50cal.

I know it can be an issue, we had the discussion behind the background how these units would be used. Captain we knew won't be the main pick for the majority, but would still be used for a more defensive and attritional gameplay.

There is also the issue Captain would not be picked in general even if it kept its Stuart as you can back-tech to ATGs to deal with vehicles and protect the AA HT with another squad to support. Stuart is only considered decent enough to do it job, mainly against other lights particularly.
29 Nov 2018, 17:39 PM
#306
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

Due to in-house data, tournament data, and player sentiment, it has become clear that USF is in need of a little bit of help within its tech structure.

The current USF tech choices of Lieutenant or Captain, and the units within these tiers is seen as an overly punishing and restrictive choice.


We did end up agreeing Captain won't be the main pick for the majority


All of my cringe.
29 Nov 2018, 17:43 PM
#307
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13477 | Subs: 1


Only the M8A1 and M36 in the core is what I call incredibly cost-effective, but that is a different discussion. And M36 Jacksons have to be as USF has only 1 true TD in its core and the M10 will never be stock.
...

If the M36 is the only true core TD re-design to counter super heavies not PzIV. The unit can hit and penetrate PzIVs with chances 100% even at max range while being faster, making PzIVs obsolete.

One should test returning original design where Ostheer had to play defense until T3 where they could start pushing.
29 Nov 2018, 17:44 PM
#308
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13





All of my cringe.


Captain isn’t going to be the primary pick even with the Stuart places back since it only performs okay vs infantry. And people are more likely to gravitate towards the HMG for the early game for anti infantry suppression, particularly vs OKW. Any tier with the ATG, will likely be less chosen because you don’t need a 3-4 minute ATG unless your OKW facing ultra lights.
29 Nov 2018, 17:47 PM
#309
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13477 | Subs: 1


Captain isn’t going to be the primary pick even with the Stuart places back since it only performs okay vs infantry. And people are more likely to gravitate towards the HMG for the early game for anti infantry suppression, particularly vs OKW. Any tier with the ATG, will likely be less chosen because you don’t need a 3-4 minute ATG unless your OKW facing ultra lights.

And if USF decide to turtle with fighting positions (LT?)/captain, howitzer and/MHTT how is Ostheer going to push?
29 Nov 2018, 17:49 PM
#310
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742


There is also the issue Captain would not be picked in general even if it kept its Stuart as you can back-tech to ATGs to deal with vehicles and protect the AA HT with another squad to support. Stuart is only considered decent enough to do it job, mainly against other lights particularly.


Like I said, the only value Captain tier has ever had outside of backteching for AT guns is rushing the Stuart. Keeping the proposed costs as is, but also keeping the Stuart in captain would mean the Stuart would still be coming out faster than in live. That's not insignificant.
29 Nov 2018, 18:09 PM
#311
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2018, 17:47 PMVipper

And if USF decide to turtle with fighting positions (LT?)/captain, howitzer and/MHTT how is Ostheer going to push?


Same way USF deals with HMG+Bunkers, Mortar(MHT), Pak and Sniper.
Grit~
29 Nov 2018, 18:10 PM
#312
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2018, 17:47 PMVipper

And if USF decide to turtle with fighting positions (LT?)/captain, howitzer and/MHTT /pershing spam how is Ostheer going to push?

Easliy if u are not noob but serously why u think mg at gun howitzer and light vehicule combo is dead sentence for wermaht ? So then why aiborne company is not op someone can tell me ? I feel like people like pro viper think that usf have infinity manpower
29 Nov 2018, 18:16 PM
#313
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2018, 17:47 PMVipper

And if USF decide to turtle with fighting positions (LT?)/captain, howitzer and/MHTT how is Ostheer going to push?


Smoke and flank.



These two don't jive with each other.

But switching the AAHT and the Stuart just serves to reverse the very goals you're purportedly seeking. It'll always be LT first, with a decision to rush a stuart or go for an ATG.


Captain would become more a teamgame tier and lieutenant 1vs1 tier. On teamgame you can rely on your parnter HMG and you focus atg and pak.

29 Nov 2018, 18:20 PM
#314
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2018, 18:16 PMEsxile


Smoke and flank.


I'm dying here, of laughter.
29 Nov 2018, 18:30 PM
#315
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Captain isn’t going to be the primary pick even with the Stuart places back since it only performs okay vs infantry. And people are more likely to gravitate towards the HMG for the early game for anti infantry suppression, particularly vs OKW. Any tier with the ATG, will likely be less chosen because you don’t need a 3-4 minute ATG unless your OKW facing ultra lights.


I think Captain Tier's probably stronger than it was before. In 1v1 you'd go Captain now for the AAHT, which I think it's fair to say is USF's strongest shock unit. The ATG and Captain are stronger support for the AAHT than the Lieutenant and the .50 cal.
29 Nov 2018, 18:32 PM
#316
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2018, 18:16 PMEsxile


Captain would become more a teamgame tier and lieutenant 1vs1 tier. On teamgame you can rely on your parnter HMG and you focus atg and pak.


Exactly even now i only use captain tier in teamgames because howitzer and at gun are more important for me so after change i guess i will still use it
29 Nov 2018, 18:41 PM
#317
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Nov 2018, 20:08 PMKatitof

2nd most underpowered faction in game is getting much needed love and you still complain.



I'd make an argument for worst faction if you take into consideration the 2v2 stats, atleast brits are viable along with a soviet buddy. USF is pretty bad in both 1v1 and 2v2 judging from the stats.


Also the USF AT gun might warrant a price increase to keep it in line with the Pak and Zis gun. Right now its only 270 mp and is incredibly good against LVs thanks to its high ROF and huge arc and is viable in the late game with muni. I think 270 for it is a bit low and we will likely see them a lot more since they arent stuck behind a mediocre tech anymore.
29 Nov 2018, 21:43 PM
#318
avatar of adamírcz

Posts: 955

Point of the USF Redesign for those who thinking it's meant to create a power imbalance is to add more diversity to the USF forces and give them more options, while still having their own unique structure.

-Tier 1/1.5 and 2/2.5 allows USF to have easier back-teching and more choice early on; no other faction has this and the British system is still different as more of an individual unit choice and a tech/upgrade route for the army.

-You're not stuck needing 3 Riflemen every game outside strange strategies as officers can take the role of one rifle squad, though this does mean slower and less aggressive starts for team weapons.

-This also means USF is not punished for doctrines with elite infantry as you don't have a glutton of Riflemen; Riflemen need to remain strong with upgrades and as a unit for they have to carry USF in doctrines without elite infantry or Axis core elite infantry would stomp on the faction at a certain point. Yet, since you've invested so much into Riflemen as a necessity for early game, particularly vs OKW, fitting in more elites is difficult, especially since you take the choice of weakening your 4-5 core squads with delayed weapon racks due to lack of munitions.

-It also means USF can go a very infantry heavy strategy revolving around team weapons, at an increased cost, when going towards Major rather than you being locked to one officer and having a very major weakness in your arsenal that few other factions have with not enough reward to compensate. Pershing stall is another issue, but that can be associated with many things that can call-in vehicles.

-Unit placement for the Stuart and AA HT were meant to give each tier its own set of tools and play styles. LT is focused on offense, Captain on defense. It makes no sense why one building needs two suppression based units where Captain can't defend its own team weapons from being overrun by infantry.

-On tests, Ostheer, might have the most issues but we're keeping an eye on timings.


+1
Great analysis
29 Nov 2018, 22:03 PM
#319
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Point of the USFOKW Redesign for those who thinking it's meant to create a power imbalance is to add more diversity to the USFOKW forces and give them more options, while still having their own unique structure.


Well now you need to do this. Or is 4x volks into luchs/AAHT into command panther every game "diverse"

29 Nov 2018, 23:01 PM
#320
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

I thought most OKW players liked it that way.
Simple enough, effective in most maps, I feel that's the biggest problem with USF... It easily gets predated on by it's predictable builds, but that OKW build is really effective, enough a lot of people complain about them daily.
PAGES (17)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

337 users are online: 2 members and 335 guests
Katitof, SturmtigerCobra
4 posts in the last 24h
16 posts in the last week
116 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45813
Welcome our newest member, findyournextoffice
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM