[ALL Modes] [UKF] Advanced Emplacement Regiment Fix

#1
3 years ago
StormlessUKStormless… United KingdomPosts: 38
edited June 2016 in Balance Feedback

The Emplacement Regiment in the Balance Preview Mod is still incredibly broken.

Munitions cost and recharge on base artillery does not affect the OP commander at all. Goliath is not viable when your opponent has a bofors. Base artillery still seems able to fire into opponent's base which is incredibly over performing for a game where the idea is to keep units alive. Base = safezone.

British tanks still do not match up with axis tanks at mid/late game stages.

I personally don't feel like the balance patch will be good unless this is fixed

«134

Comments

  • #2
    3 years ago
    Tassos117Tassos117 Posts: 0

    You need to look at the base artillery in balance mod preview is hitting and killing everything even in the base sector of the enemy, that ability can't be balanced with some munition costs it needs to go make a new ability like you did with vet infantry (USF Ostheer). Also the emplacement the brace needs to cost munitions or something not free it is to easy to spam emplacements, the game is losing players so we need to do something about it. Let's start step by step to get the game in a balanced state for all to enjoy.

  • #3
    3 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343
    edited June 2016

    There's a lot of dissatisfaction going around UKF heavy-emplacement play, and the Advanced Emplacement Regiment commander is one bridge too far.

    30 munitions for a no-micro ability (Counterbarrage) is still a no-brainer. What I propose as a fix to the commander

    Basically, do everything that Firesparks already proposed here:
    https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/comment/247722

    Counterbarrage:
    - Substitute Counterbarrage with UKF Artillery Regiment Concentration fire (requires aiming + munitions per pop)
    - Actually fix 25pdr so that they deal AoE damage (like the Sexton)

    Rationale: It takes some effort to aim Concentration Fire, and the counterplay is obvious (move out of the way). This should also fix 25pdrs, which have been dragging down non-doc Brits and the Royal Artillery Regiment since release.

    Mortar Pit:
    - Autofire range should be reduced to 80 instead of 115)
    - Fix barrage weapon damage (Mortar-Two deals reduced damage when in barrage mode)

    (This should also apply to OKW LeIG)

    Rationale: Again, Mortar Pit should require some input to use. It will still be able to fight back vs enemy artillery due to its superior barrage range. In order to be useful vs infantry, the Mortar Pit will have to be targeted manually (barrage). Thus Pit-spam will not scale well (due to micro requirements)

    Bofors:
    - Reduce barrage range (so it can't hit back at mortars)
    - Vastly decrease its performance vs retreating squads
    - Reduce damage output vs mediums

    (This should also apply to OKW T4)

    Rationale: The Brit player is paying for a unit to deny a specific area. What the Brit player is getting is a unit that also denies ALL areas behind the Bofors (any retreating squad will be evaporated by this unit)

    Finally, also consider that the only faction with infantry capable of taking down emplacements (OKW), is losing exactly that. (No; don't reinstate Volks blobs, but pull down emplacements a bit).

  • #4
    3 years ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468
    edited June 2016

    On the subject of brace:

    I feel this is a great ability, but it's lacking focus. Let's think in terms of dota here, in terms of rock, paper, scissors. Real balance.
    This ability should Cost a fee yes, but it should only work against reducing damage against artillery, not direct ground fire. The currently ability is akin to a free invincibility mode. It's down right ludicrous.

    Knowing when to use it is what should make the ability nifty and cool, not, "I'm going to use it as an invincibility wall."

  • #5
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Good changes @Mr_Smith I could get behind those.

    My biggest issue with emplacements is that they are mostly set and forget, turning the game from a tactical rts into tower defence (which, dont get me wrong is a great genre...but I certainly wouldnt pay what I paid for a tower defence game..)
  • #6
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Hmmm if its to ONLY defend against indirects then it should be free.
  • #7
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Disagreed, the commander has been nerfed into the dirt and isn't worth it since counterbarrage was nerfed into oblivion as one IS building, as was emplacement upgrades? You basically just want to destroy the UKF faction.

  • #8
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    That's ridiculous, brace works fine and counterbattery has been hard nerfed, like everything else the brits have, so stop complaining.

  • #10
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Their massively expensive infantry, their decent MG, their normally priced engineers, their normal ATG, their decent medium tank, and a mediocre AI tank? Really? You're just completely wrong. They have massively expensive infantry, a decent MG that costs more than the mg42, weak tanks, and a td that takes half a game to reload.

  • #11
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    You're silly... Tommies are incredibly good, especially at 5 men, expensive but cost effective. The Vickers is far beyond "decent" while I concede it doesn't supress as well as the mg42 (nothing does so its kind of a standard of its own) it deals great damage, has a great arc and gets great vet. Doesnt the at gun inexplicably have bonus accuracy or was that changed? Either way its a pak40 clone, and the pak40 is fantastic. Sappers are the only unit I can recall that punch as high above their price point as they do, with average price for engies (not for how good they are, sorry I should have been clearer) but AMAZING vet. Comet is as good as a p4 (arguably better) and cheaper. The comet is God tier, only inferior to the panther when fighting the panther or a KT. And the fire fly can atm alpha strike (no other TD can) and psot preview will instead have more steady dps...

    Things I forgot to mention is the best healing in game, the ability to have multiple FRP (only really applicable in 4s but still), weapon racks and great commanders.

    The Brits function like an axis faction if you ignore emplacements - which for the record I dont want removed, just be change to require the player to have to stay in their chair while they play
  • #12
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    1. Tommies are decent, burt ludicrously expensive, requiring 3 expensive upgrades to be even decent, not health or weapon upgrades.
    2. The vickers is average, it has decent dps worse supression than the mg42 and no ap rounds like the 50 cal, it's average
    3. The atg is average as well, nothing special, unless having a decent ATG is just not allowed on the allies side?
    4. Sappers don't punch about their weight, the only thing sappers can kill is one or two of the other engie untis.
      5.Comet is decent for a medium tank, not go tier
    5. Firefly takes 10 seconds reload and sucks up massive ammo to work, post patch it'll be ok.
    6. Most of their commanders suck or have been nerfed into the ground. Commandos? Air raid and commandos got super-nerfed. Artillery commander? Garbage. Engineer commander, meh. Then some other one's that require you to pay, many of which aren't even that good.
    7. If you think the UKF doesn't require the player to stay in their chair, you've never played them.
  • #14
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Yeah, they've been almsot always second lowest performing faction for months now across all 1v1 ranking. The numbers are clearly against you, yet you seem to keep insisting that the UKF are somehow OP.

  • #15
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822

    they were up at the top when advanced cancer came out, now those same people are finding out that having to tell their units to do stuff the game is much harder?
    im sure someone can dredge up the numbers (maybe not, twas a long while ago) where players were making it into the top 100 as brits but not anywhere at all as any other factions. the game is far easier when you can lock down half the map with 2 units and focus your sub par micro skills elsewhere en masse while the enemy still has the whole front to deal with

    i mean advanced cancer LITERALLY had its bases countering unit at zero risk...ZERO
    as in: enemy plays game
    you profit

  • #16
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    1. Referring to it as "cancer" is douchey and trivializing
    2. So your argument that, across all rankings, the UKF forces players just suck? What is your gosh-darned problem man? It's pretty clear you just have an irrational hatred for the UKF, and frankly, it's getting weird.
  • #17
    3 years ago

    @Mr_Smith said:
    There's a lot of dissatisfaction going around UKF heavy-emplacement play, and the Advanced Emplacement Regiment commander is one bridge too far.

    30 munitions for a no-micro ability (Counterbarrage) is still a no-brainer. What I propose as a fix to the commander

    Basically, do everything that Firesparks already proposed here:
    https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/comment/247722

    Counterbarrage:
    - Substitute Counterbarrage with UKF Artillery Regiment Concentration fire (requires aiming + munitions per pop)
    - Actually fix 25pdr so that they deal AoE damage (like the Sexton)

    Rationale: It takes some effort to aim Concentration Fire, and the counterplay is obvious (move out of the way). This should also fix 25pdrs, which have been dragging down non-doc Brits and the Royal Artillery Regiment since release.

    Mortar Pit:
    - Autofire range should be reduced to 80 instead of 115)
    - Fix barrage weapon damage (Mortar-Two deals reduced damage when in barrage mode)

    (This should also apply to OKW LeIG)

    Rationale: Again, Mortar Pit should require some input to use. It will still be able to fight back vs enemy artillery due to its superior barrage range. In order to be useful vs infantry, the Mortar Pit will have to be targeted manually (barrage). Thus Pit-spam will not scale well (due to micro requirements)

    Bofors:
    - Reduce barrage range (so it can't hit back at mortars)
    - Vastly decrease its performance vs retreating squads
    - Reduce damage output vs mediums

    (This should also apply to OKW T4)

    Rationale: The Brit player is paying for a unit to deny a specific area. What the Brit player is getting is a unit that also denies ALL areas behind the Bofors (any retreating squad will be evaporated by this unit)

    Finally, also consider that the only faction with infantry capable of taking down emplacements (OKW), is losing exactly that. (No; don't reinstate Volks blobs, but pull down emplacements a bit).

    The commander has already been nerfed. In my opinion this would take it way too far. Emplacements are part of the faction and that's the way it is. I think people should stop complaining about brits defensive base building play style as it's built into the way they were designed. Yes the mortar range is high well then get a stuka, make it brace and throw a flame grenade. I have played brits extensively and I know when I play against a good axis player as they either:

    1. Deny the building of bofors/mortar in the first place
    2. Constantly hammer the emplacements with leIG or two separated mortars

    If you don't like the base building then try something new.

  • #18
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,090

    Keep it free and make it only work against indirect fire, or give the faction with infinity billion muni an additional muni sink to start chipping away at their reserves. I like it.

  • #19
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Well put, people seem to have a special place in their hearts for ludicrous UKF complaints.

  • #20
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,090

    @MCMartel said:
    8. If you think the UKF doesn't require the player to stay in their chair, you've never played them.

    Yeah I'm still top 200 1 v 1 Brits, and when I went emplacement heavy I literally won a game I spent a total of 5 (non-consecutive) minutes alt tabbed. Thoughts?

  • #21
    3 years ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Hmmm if its to ONLY defend against indirects then it should be free.

    @Lazarus said:
    Keep it free and make it only work against indirect fire, or give the faction with infinity billion muni an additional muni sink to start chipping away at their reserves. I like it.

    Hmm, Perhaps. I'm not against that suggestion for a brainstorming...but i ask you this...

    Because they get the fortifications doctrine that adds additional defenses to the structures, shouldn't a minimal cost be required for a non-doctrinal ability? Perhaps say 20-30muns for brace? After all brace would still provide near immunity against artillery.

  • #22
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    The doctrinal ability your talking about already has a cost, so if your decision is based off the buff that brings it shouldnt effect other doctrines. Also brace opens up things like the bofors to ground attack (which it otherwise counters) so I think making it immune to indirects but open to ground attack is a fair trade

    Also as I have said in the past I would like brace to reduce MP income when activated in the way that Soviet self repair reduces muni income.
    My biggest problem with emplacements is that there is no bleed, if it simulates bleed I would be happy with it going back to the way it was at launch (no cooldown)... User discretion would be required
  • #23
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,090

    I think advanced cancer is coming a bit closer to balanced. The benefits you get from that doctrine come with adequate costs and restrictions, or close enough to it. At this point the only things elevating emplacements in to easy mode (or rather, easy-for-cost mode) are the base elements.

  • #24
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Maybe relic thought making the 17lb garbage would balance it out
  • #25
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,090

    The 17lb is secretly actually decent against houses/trucks. I'm entirely convinced now that the issue is the flare throw range - it really shows if you play Royal Artillery and just use the coordinated barrage ability (turns out that's not a bad doctrine. Keep an eye on Imperial Danes youtube channel for an upcoming match w/Royal Artillery)

  • #26
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited June 2016

    [removed]I won't believe it without proof.

  • #27
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,090
    edited June 2016
    1. the doctrine is mostly balance
    2. this isn't 1984 and you aren't the thought police
    3. flare range is the issue
  • #28
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,090

    Lets make this interesting. I prove to you I'm top 200 1 v 1 with Brits, you HAVE to concede to me on every point regarding brits from now on. Deal?

  • #29
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Um, no, I don't care about your ranking, I'm talking about you getting up for 5 minutes during a normal game and winning. I mean, granted, even that is plausible if you just were agaisnt a terrible player, but I've played games like that as other factions.

  • #30
    3 years ago
    ImperialDaneImperialD… Posts: 3,190 mod

    Merged the threads since well. They were both created at the same time and more or less discuss the same topic.

  • #31
    3 years ago
    Mr_SmithMr_Smith Posts: 343

    @d4rkhawk100 said:

    The commander has already been nerfed. In my opinion this would take it way too far. Emplacements are part of the faction and that's the way it is. I think people should stop complaining about brits defensive base building play style as it's built into the way they were designed. Yes the mortar range is high well then get a stuka, make it brace and throw a flame grenade. I have played brits extensively and I know when I play against a good axis player as they either:

    1. Deny the building of bofors/mortar in the first place
    2. Constantly hammer the emplacements with leIG or two separated mortars

    If you don't like the base building then try something new.

    Let's be honest here. None of the nerfs that Relic instituted or plans to implement on the commander really address any of the issues surrounding the use of the doctrine.

    Instead, the real issues with the commander are:

    • Counterbarrage, which requires no micro to use
    • Passive healing micro-free, MP-free (you don't risk losing sappers), which synergises with brace

    By replacing counterbarrage with coordinated fire and buffing 25-pounders:

    • You indirectly buff ALL other Brit doctrines (since non-doc brits get access to howitzers that are useful at SOMETHING)
    • You fix Royal Artillery commander

    Another idea would be to reduce incoming (auto)healing while the emplacement is braced. Currently, there is an unholy synergy between brace and the autorepair commanders (Royal Engineer, Advanced Emplacements):

    • You (the emplacement) take significantly less damage while braced
    • You keep receiving full repair-speed benefits
    • Thus, you can top up your health WHILE being barraged, even under heavy fire

    For all I care, Relic can revert ALL previous nerfs to the commander and implement just the ones I outlined in my original post. This is because the current nerfs are mistargeted and will be ineffective.

    *Note that something can nerfed and still be overpowered after the first nerf. Recent cases in point:
    - Land Mattress (it has already received a nerf once a)
    - Artillery Cover (it took a heavy nerf BEFORE people discovered how OP it was)
    - All plane loiters got nerfed when they lost their sight, but JU-87 loiter is still OP as fuck (with the deflection criticals)

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.