Login

russian armor

How are Infantrysections since patch?

PAGES (16)down
7 Oct 2019, 19:47 PM
#141
avatar of Pereat

Posts: 56

want to see something cool ?

Okw 1100mp/275f

1255/225f



Dude, are you illiterate? What is it that you are trying to write? The topic is UKF and why their premium price infantry should perform adequately. Its clear UKF is more expensive than both axis factions. Stop writing the opposite with hopes that people will believe that nonsense. All I see is guys with axis avatars nodding along to half baked sentences.
7 Oct 2019, 20:10 PM
#142
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1600 | Subs: 3

Go calculate how much fuel it costs to rush a Cromwell. :lol:
7 Oct 2019, 20:17 PM
#143
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12979 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Oct 2019, 18:07 PMPereat


Saying things you want to be true doesn't make for a good argument. I have laid out the numbers why Ost have an advantage by having significantly cheaper tech. A point I defended in multiple posts detailing how their tech is cheaper every step of the way. If you disagree - explain.



The perks you mentioned here are static units (Mortar pit/17p) that have a price associated with it, so not perks. Anvil/Hammer perks are mostly things Ost have by default - units with bundle nades, vehicle blitz and so on. Base arty is costly and pails in comparison to rocket arty.

What I have mentioned are "free" bonus for using the linear part of UKF tech.

Ostheer have one of the most rigid tech tree out there having both to PB and buildings and that they can destroyed. The have no advantage over any other faction when it comes to tech.
7 Oct 2019, 20:41 PM
#144
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Oct 2019, 15:11 PMGrumpy
The absolute numbers show Axis is cheaper. The quickest route to heavies is also Axis (see Sanders posts on thread for Pershing Timing Needs a Nerf)


To be fair, that only really applies to heavy tanks as they all cost the same. Absolute (fuel) numbers are only part of the picture. There's some nuance in tech timing for most standard units beyond pure fuel cost, which are mainly manpower cost (within the faction's manpower economy), build time (EFA having to retreat engineers and build tech, OKW having to build a truck, drive it somewhere, then set up the HQ, USF having side techs, etc.) and cost of units that they produce (for example OKW and SOV have similar T4 fuel teching costs, but OKW's cheapest tank is 50 fuel more expensive than the SOV's cheapest tank).
7 Oct 2019, 21:03 PM
#145
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1186 | Subs: 1

Can we please concentrate on how sections feel, and not whatever all this nonsense about tank tech rush costs are?

To the point, I feel the nerfs have really gimped non assault infantry sections in the early game, to the point where I feel grenades have become almost a requirement to make any offensive actions in the early game. I think the assault sections are over-performing a little bit, but something needs to be done to make the regular sections a bit more appealing. I also feel at least part of the problem is the vickers just feeling lackluster compared to the mg of the other defensive combined arms faction, Ostheer.

If we want to keep sections as a defensive cover focused unit, maybe increasing the build speed of Tommies might be a good way to reinforce that role for their high price. It could even be part of a T0 hammer/ anvil tech path, where anvil increases Tommy build speed and hammer increases out of cover performance, or even unlocks an M3 halftrack to emphasize movement tactics? Just spit balling, but I would like to see more hammer/ anvil style decisions in the UKF tree.
7 Oct 2019, 21:03 PM
#146
avatar of Stark

Posts: 623 | Subs: 1




So what's the conclusion? Are you planning to make some small changes to Tommies? If so what could it be and what direction are you most likely choose? Of course i'm not asking for a numbers.

Informations from you guys would allow us to give some personal feedbacks that could be helpful in future and certainly they shouldn't harm.
7 Oct 2019, 21:24 PM
#147
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Oct 2019, 21:03 PMStark
So what's the conclusion? Are you planning to make some small changes to Tommies? If so what could it be and what direction are you most likely choose? Of course i'm not asking for a numbers.


There should be a small balance patch coming out this week, minor tweaks to IS for now are planned to be a cost decrease from 280 to 270 and an increase of their vet 3 accuracy bonus from 20% to 25%.
7 Oct 2019, 21:28 PM
#148
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12979 | Subs: 1



There should be a small balance patch coming out this week, minor tweaks to IS for now are planned to be a cost decrease from 280 to 270 and an increase of their vet 3 accuracy bonus from 20% to 25%.

Lower price to 260 but have always spawn with 4 men and having to always buy the 5th, the same goes for Ro.E., that way people will not feel pressured to buy bolster early for "free" extra member.

In addition make AT tommies come with 5 by default.
7 Oct 2019, 22:09 PM
#149
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1600 | Subs: 3

I'm not sure about increasing accuracy at vet 3. The changes made them weaker at the start of the game, not in the lategame when they have 5 men 0,62 RA and possibly 2 Brens.

How about reducing the RA debuff out of cover from 10% to 5% instead? Then they can still be viable out of cover, but just not as efficient. Currently Tommy squads get overly punished from things like soft retreating from sturms/assgrens and retreating from luchs/222.
8 Oct 2019, 01:01 AM
#150
avatar of Close Support Sapper

Posts: 1187



There should be a small balance patch coming out this week, minor tweaks to IS for now are planned to be a cost decrease from 280 to 270 and an increase of their vet 3 accuracy bonus from 20% to 25%.


Cost decrease is reasonable, i welcome vet 3 buff but it may be not needed. Tommy with full vet and upgrade do it pretty ok late game for then and now.

What UKF need is an improved early game. Please consider swap royal engineer and Universal carrier, or revert some RA change out of cover of tommy.
8 Oct 2019, 01:25 AM
#151
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3046



To be fair, that only really applies to heavy tanks as they all cost the same. Absolute (fuel) numbers are only part of the picture. There's some nuance in tech timing for most standard units beyond pure fuel cost, which are mainly manpower cost (within the faction's manpower economy), build time (EFA having to retreat engineers and build tech, OKW having to build a truck, drive it somewhere, then set up the HQ, USF having side techs, etc.) and cost of units that they produce (for example OKW and SOV have similar T4 fuel teching costs, but OKW's cheapest tank is 50 fuel more expensive than the SOV's cheapest tank).

But I just wanna complain about (insert my faction here)'s tech scheme being much harder than all the others reeeeeeeeee
8 Oct 2019, 05:36 AM
#152
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 549

I wonder what people think when they want even better Infantry sections. If anyone speaks up for grens everyone goes mad but for infantry sections it is totally normal to want buffs becayse it does not have “almıst mg-42” vickers, universal carrier out of the gate to for retreat mg’s or unsuppressed flanks etc etc.
Just dont be hypocrite here. Infantry section is still the absolute best infantry in the game. They might use a cost reduction to 270mp but thats it.
8 Oct 2019, 05:37 AM
#153
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833

The problem with Tommies is that a well meaning nerf to blobbing has penalized players that ignore heavy Tommie builds and go for MG, vanilla tommy and combined arms play. It's also hit the rarely used AT tommies as well (I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure they are using tommy profile, they feel weak ingame).

Now your staple mainline infantry costs 280 for a four man squad, before the nerf four men were ok holding their ground. Now they struggle to support your MG and drop like flies unless you put all your spare fuel and mp into five man and tommie tech... Which again defeats purpose of a combined arms build. I thought people were fed up of people insta locking five man and wanted to see less, not it made mandatory...

People will most likely bring up grens but grens having Faust, nade and cheap 240 base cost makes them superior in the combined arms role with free upgrades and lots of doctrinal upgrade options. I think this is where the issue lies imo.


8 Oct 2019, 05:46 AM
#154
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

You either pick superior firepower and survivability for 280 or more versatility for 240. Simple

Grens are no superior than IS in any aspect
8 Oct 2019, 07:12 AM
#155
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

After the buff (imminent I feel) to IS maybe finally those sandbags for grens? to catch up with all tgose buffs?

Btw I'm totally against those strange imo cover extra buffs. It's cheese. You get a regular bonus for being in cover anyway and it is enough. Because of doubling things the game gets overly complicated. Just make sections sth in between the present buffed with cover stats and out of cover stats and they will be fine. The cover gives regular buffs and it is fine.
8 Oct 2019, 07:45 AM
#156
avatar of Stark

Posts: 623 | Subs: 1



There should be a small balance patch coming out this week, minor tweaks to IS for now are planned to be a cost decrease from 280 to 270 and an increase of their vet 3 accuracy bonus from 20% to 25%.


Sound good. Cost decrease is a reasonable move. Does it also include reduce reinforcing cost?

In your opinion Tommies mainly require the buff in late game. I would say the bigger issue is in the moment when they still haven't reached vet3, 5-men upgrade and bren upgrade - so around vet1-2 stage.
8 Oct 2019, 08:52 AM
#157
avatar of Close Support Sapper

Posts: 1187

After the buff (imminent I feel) to IS maybe finally those sandbags for grens? to catch up with all tgose buffs?

Btw I'm totally against those strange imo cover extra buffs. It's cheese. You get a regular bonus for being in cover anyway and it is enough. Because of doubling things the game gets overly complicated. Just make sections sth in between the present buffed with cover stats and out of cover stats and they will be fine. The cover gives regular buffs and it is fine.


What buff ? They have just been neft latest patch. Lose sandbags ? But to who, who can built sandbags for them in the whole early game?
8 Oct 2019, 10:26 AM
#158
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Oct 2019, 07:45 AMStark
Sound good. Cost decrease is a reasonable move. Does it also include reduce reinforcing cost?

At the moment, no reduced reinforcement cost. The problem is that (imo) upgraded and bolstered Tommies are well worth their 28mp to reinforce, being one of the strongest mainline infantry, so we can't really change that without creating a somewhat counterintuitive situation where they'd get increased reinforcement cost after bolstering or something.


jump backJump back to quoted post8 Oct 2019, 07:45 AMStark
In your opinion Tommies mainly require the buff in late game. I would say the bigger issue is in the moment when they still haven't reached vet3, 5-men upgrade and bren upgrade - so around vet1-2 stage.

I personally think Tommies have 3 (minor) problems right now:
1) slightly underwhelming at the start of the game;
2) slightly underwhelming mid to late game against Axis elite infantry, as the UKF doesn't get effective light AI vehicles and don't have brute strength elite infantry themselves;
3) players not having adjusted to the changes yet and still trying to run them without Bren upgrades.

The first problem should hopefully be solved by a lower production cost. We can always do some additional minor tweaking later (partially revert the RA nerf, or add a very small cooldown bonus when in cover, etc.) if early game performance is still lacking. The veterancy accuracy buff seeks to help Tommies fight elite infantry mid to late game a bit better, so the UKF isn't forced into getting a Centaur/Cromwell just to fight infantry every time.

As for the third problem, I personally feel a lot of the "Tommies feel underwhelming now" complaints are caused by players still using them without weapon upgrades, and I'd prefer to wait until people adjust to getting Brens/Vickers every game. Weapon upgrades are basically mandatory for all mainline infantry, Tommies shouldn't be an exception. Double Bren Tommies are still very strong infantry.

It does kind of suck that Bolster is a mandatory upgrade now (even though imo with UKF's cheap tech they don't really suffer from it apart from being a diversity issue), and ideally we could make it more of an interesting strategic side-upgrade so that the early and mid game / 4 men and 5 men performance gap is not as extreme, but that would require quite a major overhaul to fix and the effects of such a big change would be hard to predict (like when AT grenades were introduced to Sappers), so that's basically off the table until after the tournament at least.
8 Oct 2019, 11:13 AM
#159
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3


Brit stuff


So just make them bolstered from the start and add the bolster costs to teching and reduce initial resources a bit. It’s really stupid ht the best infantry unit by far gets a slight nerf and all of a sudden everyone screams that it needs buffs like crazy. Bolster them from the start and be done with it, everyone bolsters within the first few minutes anyway.

As for the problems you brought up:
1) You buffed the Vickers and they still have the UC. People who still spam sections and then complain shouldn’t be heard. Again, don’t balance based on people crying over here, try the units out yourselves. Unless this comes just from your observations, in which case you’re right to bring it up.

2) Soviets also struggle against them but have the T70 to carry them. Perhaps you could make the M5 a stock unit?
8 Oct 2019, 11:18 AM
#160
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1600 | Subs: 3

I feel it would be better to decrease Bren gun cost from 45 to like 35-40 munitions to improve how quickly they scale, rather than increasing how much they scale.

These types of changes result in powercreep. Mid/lategame Tommies don't have a problem against Ostheer infantry, but only struggle against some OKW elites. With such a change I see Grenadiers requiring a buff in a followup patch (also because of the Riflemen near accuracy change) and thus the cycle of buffs continues.
PAGES (16)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
GCS3 Semi Finals Live!

Livestreams

United States 108

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

71 users are online: 1 member and 70 guests
serg_codmod
22 posts in the last 24h
109 posts in the last week
923 posts in the last month
Registered members: 32153
Welcome our newest member, kinsleygwolfe
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM