British Emplacement Commander

#1
3 years ago
wuffwuff Posts: 88
edited April 2016 in Commander Feedback

This commander accentuates the already slow and dull aspects of the Brits faction while being quite powerful.

Emplacements are so resilient and there is such a large risk with trying to destroying them early - to mid or even late game that matches grind to a halt, becoming static, losing all drama and action.

An axis player will generally have to avoid the emplacements until medium armour is out, all infantry based IDF is countered (without effort) by the counter-arty commander ability.

Even with two mortar HTs dropping flame rounds (10+ flame rounds) emplacements survive with brace, and some repairs.

The biggest issue as I said is that this commander accentuates Brits already defensive play style while increasing passive and static aspects of their play.

«1

Comments

  • #2
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268

    If you ask me, the counter-barrage ability is 100% misplaced on this commander. There is absolutely no reason that the "Emplacement" Regiment should have a really good Artillery centered ability all the while the "Artillery" commander is absolute garbage. Give Royal Artillery the counter barrage ability (and scrap Overwatch, which is too expensive and also impractical), and give the emplacement guy something else. The counter battery makes it all but impossible for the germans to use indirect fire against the emplacements that are already being buffed by the commander's ability set.

  • #3
    3 years ago
    I agree with OP. This commander is not fun to play against at all in any mode.
  • #4
    3 years ago

    I wonder if Relic even understands this game at a high level at all given how badly designed UKF in general is and how Advanced Emplacement Commanders is absolute cancer on a cancerous faction.

    You do realize instead of making the game fun and varied like every other matchup, british always force the game be campy and stupid right?

    You do realize that advanced tactics in this game is largely based on manpower bleed and creating a faction that depends on emplacements that don't bleed manpower shows a gross ignorance of the game you designed right?

    You guys desperately need a lead game designer that knows the game.

  • #5
    3 years ago
    daspoulosdaspoulos Posts: 2,633

    This commander is not good for the game at all. Very poor experience vs sim city or even playing with it.

  • #6
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,817

    counter battery is incredibly wrong on this commander (as implemented is wrong entirely tbh) being able to counter your enemies counter without actually doing anything but tech up is incredibly silly

    what about making it a muni active ability with a duration? make it require the player to at least be at their seat to counter the enemy?

  • #7
    3 years ago

    I like the commander. Emplacements are far too easy to destroy in the first place and the British are supposed to be built around them. People who complain about the commanders are complaining about the core essence of the British Forces. Nerfing one commander won't fix their complaints.

  • #8
    3 years ago
    Fg127821Fg127821 Posts: 2

    Played with and against this commander. Emplacements are a core element of UKF as supporting units, but this regiment promotes a spam of emplacements which lead to low apm and boring static play. Boring for both sides. I understand that historically a lot of people like turtle play in RTS, but CoH2 should be different and emphasise micro and tactics rather than sim city planner.

  • #9
    3 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    Counter Battery, as others have said, is the only issue. Its a no-skill counter to emplacement spam's counter which shouldn't really be the case. Emplacements are an acceptable evil since their's quite a few counters, but counter battery throws half of them out the window with no real investment on the user's behalf. I'd say scrap it and replace it with just about anything else.

  • #10
    3 years ago

    Do you all understand that while you have counter barrage you can't build anything? And counter barrage is have a limited radius. I agree it's deadly in 1v1 and 2v2, but in team games (where it should be used coz there is no need to build heavy fortifications in 2v2 and 1v1, one bofors and mortar pit or you will lose the game if you build more) in can't even cover half of the map!
    You saying it's hard to counter? When I'm using that commander most of the time there is mortar HT and walking stuka (and they are deadly as hell!). When the counter barage are find it (if it find it coz if there is a brummbar it's triggers the barrage), MOST of the time it will miss on mobile vehicles. I agree that regular mortars and legs are 50-90% will be destroyed by the barrage. But some wehr players are building command bunkers to support and reinforce mortars and leig with veterancy have a ridiculous radius, so most okw players are just measure the distance of counter barrage.
    All I have to say that you guys need to play this commander to understand counters. Believe me, if in team games you will go full sim city you will lose coz most of the times players just leaves your points. e.g. bottom cp and fuel point on steppes, 4vs4, that commander, going full simcity - 2 mortars, 2 bofors, 17 pdr and many repairing statons. First 20 min they try to break my defence but with USF ally we push them back. They don't have mortar HT commander and one okw fighting on the other side - so luck is on my side. And when I have pop cap like 96 of 100, I have only cromwell and 2 heavy engineers and one mg they stop comming to my point. Now It's a 3 vs 4 coz I have this shiny and pretty sim city so can't do anything. As you understand, we lost the game.
    What I want to say - why are you start crying (every gardening time!) and "RELIC PLS NERF NERF NERF NERF". Maybe u need to ask - guys, any tactic against that emplacement commander? They are some broken thing in game (and there was many in UKF - like commandos or churchill).
    And if I'm using this commander in 2v2, only thing that i build is bofors. Most of the time i just enjoy repair stations. Build cromwells, repair them for free (i don't even build engineers). And there is many more ways to destroy emplacements rather than build mortar HT, mortars and walking stukas (at guns, volks grenade, even brummbar along with panzerwerfer to kill engineers (and it's like 1000 years before engineers from reparing stations are recover, just aim at FHQ, kill them and there is no repair for UKF) that try to fix emplacement)

  • #11
    3 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    I personally found HQ Counterbarrage pointless. If I want to barrage an artillery in fog of war, I got a guy there and used Coordinated barrage (or go Artillery Regiment). Most of the time however I don't. You also can't control where the howitzers are so it seems easy to fool it by diversionary tactics, and that's in addition to the howitzers traversing and firing pretty slowly. I also recall that it had a limited range, so it's not like in Sittard they can camp your side of the map with it.

    And yes, Counterbarrage disables building anything in said tier. I also recall it had a lengthy cooldown, so I think that works as compensation, so you cannot just toggle on and off every few seconds.

    I remember the first time I used this commander during free weekend: build a small simicty south of Lorsch, upgraded them all to reinforced durability, then still get raped all the same by Walking Stukas. For the munitions cost per each emplacement, I found it unremarkable, even requiring a buff.

  • #12
    3 years ago

    LoL there is no defending this travesty. Do not even try. It's super BS on smaller 4v4 maps.

  • #13
    3 years ago
    daspoulosdaspoulos Posts: 2,633

    Lol the people here defending counterbattery.

    0 mp 0 pop cap investment to completely nullify all artillery in 1v1 and 2v2 passively with next to no player input.

    TOP KEK.

    Oh noes counterbattery not so good because I might have to toggle it off when I rush cromwells.

    Give me a break.

  • #14
    3 years ago
    kreatiirkreatiir Posts: 67

    Top kek indeed.

    Players saying the 'downside' of the free counter barrage is the fact that you can't build anything, are delusional.
    It's not that you constantly build units like you do when playing Age of Empires. When reaching mid game, you have your squads and tanks and maybe you build some other units from time to time. But for the rest you can just leave Counter barrage on and sit back and relax.

    This commander is a joke. A freakin' joke for the game.

  • #15
    3 years ago
    SoylentgreenSoylentgr… Posts: 11
    edited April 2016

    There's so much that's been said about this commander on coh2.org and the steam forums already and it was never positive. No one in his right mind would defend this doctrine.

    Playing a game should be fun. Playing against someone using this commander definately never is.

    Honestly, I would be amazed if the next (april?) patch wouldn't contain any of the suggested changes to this commander.

    For the moment, whenever I see that my opponent has this commander in his loadout I just end coh2.exe before the loading screen finishes.

  • #16
    3 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,085 mod
    edited April 2016

    Well it's a tricky thing really. I can see what they are doing. But the thing is. They rather went the wrong way about it. Rather than say unlock more potential. Or even new types of emplacements. They focused on just toughening things up and giving counter artillery.

    And while in 1v1s it sees limited use. It does lead to bigger issues as you throw in more players.

    So yeah. Best i can suggest is replace some of them with actual new types of emplacements. Or unlocking new abilities. White phosporous rounds for the mortars. (costly of course) Or an ability to conduct overwatch fire. And for the bofors.. err. .Tea.

    Edit: Let's try not to get hostile about this alright ? It's not going to help the discussion. Cleaned up the thread a bit.

  • #17
    3 years ago

    The commander need rebalance for larger game types for sure. in 1v1s i always feel like i'm giving up too much mobility going for emplacements. However snipers and aecs more than offset the loss in mobility. Elephants are also more valid when your opponent goes for emplacement provided you can last long enough to get it.

  • #18
    3 years ago

    why cant we just impose a hard limit on emplacements?

  • #19
    3 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    Because emplacements already cost resources and popcap, and come with the usual tradeoff of having less units to run around taking points.

  • #20
    3 years ago
    EugeneTheDestroyerEugeneThe… VancouverPosts: 8

    @comrade_daelin said:
    I personally found HQ Counterbarrage pointless.

    early tech after bofors, double counter barrage supported with by 1-2 mortar pits hard counters all axis arty

    bofors and 6-pounder locks down area till at least mid game, brace hard counters all off maps and barrages

    don't forget about forward HQ repair upgrade, improved emplacements upgrade and IS emplacement building and repairing

    finish the game by going Cromwell spam or getting an AT emplacement to counter heavy tanks

    gg B)

  • #21
    3 years ago

    @comrade_daelin said:
    Because emplacements already cost resources and popcap, and come with the usual tradeoff of having less units to run around taking points.

    the same could be said for heavy tanks, this is a pretty weak argument.

  • #22
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,817
    null
    Which would be if emplacements didnt MORE than make up for less infantry by being able to dish out bleed and anything short of beong destroyed equates to ABSOLUTELY 0 bleed for you, throw in your base buildings inflicting bleed and you find yourself in a damn good spot...
  • #23
    3 years ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,549
    While i dont find this commander overpowered or unbalanced, i do find it out of any logic. The IS building/repairing its ok and somehow the automatic enginners repairing evericing aswell, but the others are pretty strange.

    - Counterbattery disables the indirect fire that should be a "must go" agains this regiment.

    -Upgraded HP/Armor makes emplacements more resilent so you dont have to be carefull and really be carefull about using embrace on the right time.

    - Even if this makes british defenses really hard to breakthroug, they have an arty that melts everykind of enemy defense helping on the offensive. While not godlike, its still still out of place.

    I do think that they could just change the counterbatery to other regiment, like the Royal artillery one, but it would be just strange. At the end, its probably one of the few doctrines that just allows you to play worse and get less punishment. Maybe by allowning to refound emplacements when out of combat so you can re-colocate them (like that refound on mechanized company) instead of upgrade them aswell.

    Its somehow a really strange commander :neutral:
  • #24
    3 years ago
    ValkyrieValkyrie Posts: 2,132

    You mean the cancer commander?

    It certainly has its strength, especially for 2v2 and up. 1v1 it's easy to outmanoeuvre as the Brit player will simply not have enough forces on the field to keep things going. Puma is also extremely OP against this commander, as a Bofors will simply be outranged and outspotted by the Puma.

    Moving the counter battery to the artillery commander would do a lot for both commanders however. The ability is very much a good addition to the Allies currently, with the strong artillery meta on the Axis side, and the Allied indirect fire being otherwise somewhat lacking.

  • #25
    3 years ago
    Doktor_SDoktor_S Posts: 134

    @Valkyrie said:
    You mean the cancer commander?

    This is certainly the opinion of the community over at coh2.org as well, including mine.

  • #26
    3 years ago

    I still fail to understand, why at least this Commander
    lacks tank traps.

    Some of us like to channel our enemies, to secure areas
    of the map......and generally turtle. This Commander would
    have suited this, quite nicely.

  • #27
    3 years ago
    CoffCoff Posts: 7

    Build tanks. period

    Tanks' don't receive any damage from mortars nor bofors. And AT gun emplacement is highly flankable.
    Or use something like "Zero artillery" or something that hits hard, then advance with your units and it's done.

  • #28
    3 years ago
    wuffwuff Posts: 88

    @Coff said:
    Build tanks. period

    Tanks' don't receive any damage from mortars nor bofors. And AT gun emplacement is highly flankable.
    Or use something like "Zero artillery" or something that hits hard, then advance with your units and it's done.

    bofors pens P4 and 6 pounder AT guns surrounding a emplacements can negate tank assaults.

  • #29
    3 years ago
    SAS CommanderSAS Comma… Rule Britannia Posts: 55

    I like it.....

    But, I don't know, you tried to avoid it, or get flamer units

  • #30
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    So far there are so many axis players saying that the UKF is cancer, the UKF emplacements are cancer, and the UFK commanders are cancer. Can you (the people who are saying this) just admit you don't accept the UKF as a legitimate 5th faction and be honest, because that's the implification.

  • #31
    3 years ago
    Brummbar_AceBrummbar_… Posts: 48
    edited April 2016

    @MCMartel said:
    So far there are so many axis players saying that the UKF is cancer, the UKF emplacements are cancer, and the UFK commanders are cancer. Can you (the people who are saying this) just admit you don't accept the UKF as a legitimate 5th faction and be honest, because that's the implification.

    Nice try. Funny how when Tiger Ace came out, axis players agreed that it was OP. Now that the ball is in the other court, allied players are on here religiously defending their obviously OP commander... funny...

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.