Profile of IntoTheRain

I wonder if they could just backload some of the starting stats of sections onto their vet.

The starting power of sections is enormous, but their vet is fairly weak compared to the bonuses of other mainlines iirc. Moving some of that cover bonus onto the vet might be a way to make some tradeoffs in their overall power.

Really though they need to keep focusing more on the options for Brits. I don't know that anyone is interested in more Section Spam or Bofors becoming mainstream in 1v1.

I asked to turn the main bases straight instead of this weird banana shape to improve the positioning for everyone, but sadly it being unique apparently took priority over better gameplay. Same with the damn trees everywhere on Lienne Forrest that your vehicles continuously get stuck on.

...Seriously?

I got that position twice and I was done with the map.

Advancing past the midpoint is suicide because your retreat path goes through through the middle VP where the center players are duking out with everything they have. Once you cap your half, its usually more efficient to just help try and take the center VP.

snip

The problem is people keep comparing it to the late game tank destroyers and wind up disappointed.

Its stats need to be compared against the medium tanks its intended to fight. It has better range, penetration, and RoF than any of the stock mediums while being faster than all but the Cromwell and 30+ fuel cheaper than all but the T-34. While it has nowhere near the range and firepower of the big allied TDs, it has enough for the job at hand at an excellent price point. Its raw speed also makes it an excellent diver who can get into the rear of Panthers where the armor doesn't matter as much, (especially vetted) and once it has HVAP its frontal penetration capabilities are solid enough to be a decent poker as well if needed.

Yeah, its lousy in larger team games, I don't think thats fixable without turning it into another Jackson. Flankers don't work well there and range and pen are king. USF and Brits are extremely doctrine dependent in the bigger team games as well, (and show no signs of changing) and even if you tuned the M10 for it I doubt Armor would beat out Infantry Company or the Calliope Docs.

If you want to see Armor in big team games, it would need to focus more on making the indirect on the 105 more potent and making their Sherman and especially Jackson feel more deadly than the stock versions. 240mm being turned into something people actually want to use wouldn't hurt either.

AEC mostly just feels late now. The combat performance feels in line with its cost, and Target Tread is a monster snare. Vickers could be more like a standard MG, blobs can be a problem to handle with Brits.

Hard disagree on basically everything said about the Engineers though.

The 10 manpower difference between them and Pioneers / Rear Echelons is barely noticeable, and their combat performance at vet 0 is in line with Pioneers. Their only real problem is that their vet 1 combat upgrade sucks. Meanwhile, they are one of the only units with a Snare that also makes a good handheld AT carrier. They have good mines, destroy cover, excellent cap speed, and a reinforce cost reduction at vet 3. Fix the vet 1 upgrade and they might be my favorite engineer.

The medpacks are the same price as Sturm Medkit drops but are infinitely better, (3 uses vs infinites) and you get the alternate option to just get Medics and keep the munitions for use elsewhere.

Commandos really shouldn't be the core unit Brits are based around. They allow for a fun style of play, but clearly aren't intended to be the focus of the faction.

A few things like the Vickers and AEC I at least partially agree on, but my list of problems with the faction is very different:

1) Base Arty sucks, and no mobile indirect is present in the faction. Limiting their ability to punish setup teams.

2) Smoke and close assault options are bad. Brits struggle to push back out on the map to retake lost ground.

3) Gameplay is too linear, and vehicle roster is too top heavy. With only 1 real LV in the AEC, and weak mid game infantry in the Assault Officer, British playstyles are incredibly predictable. Meanwhile, the top end of the vehicle roster is overloaded with units that just play too similarly to one another and don't diversify British capabilities the way something like the Scott, Brummbar, and Katusha do.

I am not really convinced that top 200 analysis is good approach in 3v3,4v4 because the amount of matches which passes the specs is very little. I don't think it is enough games to produce reliable results.

I think that mode is just going to take longer to collect a meaningful amount of data.