Pgrens don't have to kiss to the enemy to work. If shocks are facing fussies or ass grens they have 1 place they need to be- on top of them no ifs ands or buts pgrens can afford to stock in cover for some engagements. If they are fighting Tommy's they CAN close for an advantage if the cover is there and if they are fighting sappers they can sit and shoot on approach. That's their flexibility not to mention the ability to transition to emergency AT. Shocks are great at 1 thing pgrens are good at a couple. All I'm saying. Plus there is not a single doctrine with a tiger or elefant or command tank or Pak or arty or railway or OPel blitz trucks ect that does not have pgrens. The availability alone is a huge boon as they allow the flexibility to pick what you want without losing out
the panzer grenadier isn't that amazing at long to mid range. bar rifle will beat them.
And really, rifle is the problem? before the terminator veterancy they are solild, but nothing amazing.
But what's stopping the enemy from moving back, if the Shocktroops use smoke. It's not like Shocks are gonna wipe anything on retreat as well.
forcing the Mg42 to move is a pretty big deal.
|
The thing about Tommies is that they don't really operate at an 'optimal' range. It's all about cover for them. A squad of tommies is nearly as effective at close range as they are at long range, both in and out of cover.
So while every other faction's infantry are maneuvering to get to their optimal range, (typically 'point blank' or 'max range/A-move'.) all Tommies can/have to do is be in cover. They operate under different mechanisms than everyone else.
Early game, a tommie squad in cover really can't be dislodged without support weapons (ost) or overwhelming force (okw). Caught out of position, though, they're as ineffective as shock troopers outside point blank range. 
err no. The cover penalty barely affect the Lee enfield, and the weapon do get better dps at close range, just not good enough. (The grenadier's k98k have better close range dps than the lee enfield)
My issue with Tommys is that mechanic makes them feel so inconsistent. Sometimes if you get time to get into cover etc they feel great and other times they feel useless as fuck.
the cover penalty mostly affect the bren and piat
Let's not forget that suppression performance isn't the only factor for MP cost.
The Vickers can spot for itself in garrisons which is a pretty huge deal, and it does very good damage. The Maxim does good damage too, and has a 6 man crew that can be very hard to wipe. Both will win in a straight up fight against the MG-42 as well.
If there is one HMG that has a big cost-performance deficit it's the MG-34. While its bad performance is justified within the OKW roster it shouldn't cost as much as 250 MP.
The vicker get bonus sight and range. the mg42 get unit eraser with their AP round. Remember that the mg42 AP round also double the mg42's damage.
however, mg42 get +20% suppression at vet 2 while the vicker get +20% penetration. the penetration bonus is frankly extremely niche at best and useless at worst. |
I check some stats Cromwell have Low AOE distance range 1.5/1/0.25
Pz4 have 1.875/1.25/0.75
T-34 have 1.875/1.25/0.625
Sherman have 1.5/1/0.5 (AP round) 2.25/1.25/0.5 (he round)
Value 0.25 it too low for AI Role ?
their damage profile is different
pz4: .05/.35/1 (8/56/160)
cromwell: .2/.4/1 (32/64/160)
(after some rough calculation)
1.5 1 0.875 0.25
32 64 80 160
1.875 1.25 1.13 0.75
8 56 80 160
cromwell HE is theoretically more consistent as it still deal noticeable damage out to 2.5 meter, but the panzer 4 AOE have a bigger OHK radius. I think it's a wash.
However, This still leave the panzer 4 with a faster reload and the assisting mg.
The goal with the faster reload and lower penetration is to balance out the mg in anti-personnel situation, still the pan panzer4 will still have better armor and penetration during a head on head duel.
The cromwell will either use its sight to pluck away at 40 meter, and exploit situation where its greater reload can fire at rear armor.
|
The AT tommies become quite obsolete after medium tanks hit the field, yes. Against light vehicles they work just fine (essentially a stopgap unit). If they were buffed to be very potent then everyone would get Tank Hunter IS and nobody in the right mind would pick up PIATs.
In my mind, you would go for 1 IS with Boys to serve as stopgap AT in the early/mid-game, unlock weapon racks and mix Boys IS with PIAT-wielding Sappers later on.
It's probably true that providing Brits with a non-doctrinal snare would not be the magic touch needed to make this faction viable again. However, it does solve the problem of Brits not having a proper snare (while every other faction has it). Giving a non-doctrinal snare to the Brits would also make them more viable than they are now.
Buffing other aspects of the Brits might be outside the scope of this thread.
or buy PIAT for your Sapper and they will remain useful the entire game.
Is lacking snare a disadvantage? yes, but it's not what's crippling the british. The insane price tag on the firefly and the overall mediocrity of the British armor is what it's crippling the British.
all the soft snare in the British army, (tulip, sniper shot, AEC shot, gammon bomb) would just be redundant if the british get actual snare. |
If higher seed players were to spam brits? Most definitely. Again, context matters.
The fact that in a tourney where the player have free choice over their faction, the british is the least played faction in the game is not evidence enough for you? Is that not context enough for your?
The british is factually the least popular faction out of 75 games. what explanation do you have for that behavior?
This is not just the fact the british lost 9 out of 10 game they played, it's also the fact they are the least popular faction by far
|
I'd actually favor this option, though I'd tweak it.
Third upgrade would be Tank Hunter Package, includes 2x Boys AT rifles, HEAT grenade, (tracking). Give it a 60MU cost and call it a day.
Of course buffs or adjustments for preexisting units and weapons wouldn't be out of line.
As for a replacement in Special Weapons, perhaps we can give upgraded IS further utility, such as Button Vehicle (Bren) or Camouflage (PIAT/Boys)
the AT tommies frankly suck. Even before the PIAT turn into heat seeker the BOY rifle were barely adequate.
All this obsession with the AT nade is distracting from the fact the british's current kit isn't that great after all the nerfs they have taken. Firefly extremely high cost, Comet underwhelming, PIAT underwhelming, Gammon bomb impractical, cromwell underwhelm.
Adding the Snare isn't going to suddenly fix the British. We need to look at what's already available to the british and identify their weak links. |
A sample of 27 means nothing. J4J and Zarok had already point out some of the issues with the results, basically because the sample is too low. When you have statistics than can explained with particular causes then you know the stats have no value.
I'm not getting into if balance statements said are true or not, i'm just saying stats over 30 samples mean absolutely nothing.
it's a sample of 75. The OP explicitly said 75.
The mere fact that the british is the least popular faction should be a concern, yet people are trying to perform mental gymnastic at how the british are secretly awesome and the best player in the game just doesn't know it.
There's also the fact the british have a win:lose ratio of 9:1 in the tourny. The okw vs USF winrate of 3:2 is close enough to make a "wash".
A winrate of 10% is the beginning of a disturbing trend. If you keep on gambling after losing 9 out 10 game, you have a gambling addiction. Do you honestly think you're going to magically win 8 games in a roll to make up the loses? |
While I understand the desire to separate abilities from each other so one unit can’t do everything, I think it’s important to remember that mainline infantry units are supposed to do just that. Each faction in CoH2 and vCoH had one basic infantry unit that could be equipped or upgraded to basically do anything or everything, just not as well as a specialist unit.
If having PIATs on a unit that can snare is OP, then why isn’t this already a problem with Riflemen with bazookas and AT riflegrenades? Button on IS once upgraded to Brens wouldn’t be op, because it would just be like Riflemen with AT riflegrenades having BARs. Same for Sappers having PIATs and an AT grenade, if that’s so OP than why aren’t Bazooka Riflemen OP?
Snares for British nondoctrinal squads isn’t an op concept, but implementation is key and other things may need adjustment as well.
Add Sapper AT sticky bomb, THAT UNLOCKS WHEN YOU TECH FOR MILLS BOMBS.
Add Button ability to Infantry Sections, THAT UNLOCKS ONLY WHEN EQUIPPED WITH AT LEAST ONE BREN GUN AND ONLY WORKS FOR INFANTRY SECTIONS, NOT COMMANDOS OR ANY ORHER SQUADS.
A. TECHING FOR WEAPONS RACKS GETS A COST INCREASE.
B. BUYING INDIVIDUAL BREN GUNS AND PIATS GETS A COST INCREASE.
C. TECHING FOR MILLS BOMBS/STICKY BOMBS GETS A COST INCREASE.
.....sorry for yelling, I just think that a lot of people are assuming things that aren’t what was proposed, which is why I thought I should clarify my statements.
I fear your attempt to make the british better is to just copy ability from another faction.
At nade snare should be the last resort. Buff their existing tools like their tanks and PIAT instead. |
UKF being bad is indicative of the overarching theme of how things are balanced by Mr Smith, you cant just nerf the things UKF crutch on forever patch after patch but he hates the faction and has 0 leeway to actually change how units/factions work so any push for things being buffed he says "we dont want 'x' Brit meta to come back" but still has to nerf whatever the fotm crutch is.
People at Relic like Duffy would have to swallow their pride and let things like Mortar Pit be locked behind commanders or taken out of the game so that you have space to make Brits perform consistently.
The games obviously being balanced to try make so that every faction is competent at playing multiple different ways but Brits straight up doesnt have access to the same types of units as every other faction so you get gimpy shit like Bolster never getting touched while all their tanks and off-maps have been consistently nerfed instead of just making Brits 'fit' in to the game and letting them have snares/mortar/movingaccuracy etc.
Give a snare when you research Brit nades, even if it’s something low range like the PTRS penal satchel.
Remove mortar pit and give them some real indirect fire to help against MGs.
Slightly buff Comet again.
Other than that I think Brits aren’t as bad as people think. Sections are great, UC is good, AEC is good, 6 pounder is insane, Vickers is good, sniper is fine, etc. It’s really just the lack of snare and lack of ability to dislodge MGs since sections suck at flanking and commandos are doctrinal.
Edit: I think every faction should have access to some form of flamer engineer, mines, AT gun, and mortar outside of commanders since these are such core components of the game.
in the absence of change like giving the british snare, flamethrower, and mortar I still believe it is possible to salvage the faction.
https://www.coh2.org/topic/70767/state-of-british-artillery
https://www.coh2.org/topic/70796/better-british-grenade-wp-and-rifle-grenade
the game files actually contain building block of a victor target for mortar. |
To Firespark
I see you Reason
But Hull mg In cromwell with 0.75-1 Sec burst time Pz4 hull mg but Pz4 have 1-1.5 sec
with 3 sec cooldown I think it Too much RNG Gap
I suggest Burst time more than 0.75-1 sec 1-1.5 sec not like 2 sec form T-34
ultimately the reload buff is going to be more useful than a mg buff. The t34/76 isn't exactly a hot item. The mg buff ironically end up buffing the t34/85 instead.
If it is a choice between faster reload or better mg the faster reload is clearly the better option.
If the intention is to turn the cromwell into a better sniper hunter, there's always the target tabled trick used on the scout car. |
Firesparks
CPU - Easy
Firesparks
Relic Entertainment
