British Faction General Discussion All Welcome

2 years ago

Recent Balance Changes and Balance changes in general have been devastating how we used to play British. How I imagine and remember playing British was rather simple British were a get ground dig in faction the whole game it would be defense. Now they are removing everything that made British a defensive faction! Emplacements are even easier to counter then before infantry sections are getting their cover bonus remade the who faction is in danger of becoming another blobbing faction! We need to be vocal we need to be loud and need to be heard We need to balance the game but not change how the faction is played.


  • #2
    2 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    You're underestimating how solid the Arty Flare and FHQ changes are, as well as how bloody good Tommies/REs/Emplacements were to begin with, especially when you directly compare Brits to Ost. The difference is that, like Ost, Brits now have to apply pressure and actually actively respond to threats rather then letting emplacements resolve any problem that isn't tanks or multiple leIGs by itself. You can still play Brits defensively, but you have to be aware that your mobile units are now more critical and that actively pressuring Axis is now valid and necessary.

  • #3
    2 years ago
    Rommel654Rommel654 Fort Eustis, VAPosts: 934 mod

    Many players in the game use two basic strategies, both are effective but are dependent on their read of their opponents.

    The first is a mostly mobile army. MG's and Mortars hold a critical section while mobile forces probe for weaknesses and exploit soft targets. This has some huge advantages as it usually gains initiative, superior knowledge of enemy forces, and local firepower superiority. The down side is that if you are forced to retreat all, a properly timed counter attack will cause you to lose most of the map. This is because your offense is also your defense.

    The other basic strategy is to take a section of map, fortify and hold, build forces to take another section. Slow, methodical and effective. It slows down the decision cycle to help you have the right mix of forces in place for the next engagement. It often is reliant on superior indirect as the primary killer or shaping the upcoming engagement. The fortifying of territory by emplacements or other means is just a method of time. There is no impregnable defense - if you have no offense. The defense is to buy you time to respond with mobile forces, artillery or get a disproportionate win ratio - hurt him more than he hurt you.

    If you think of emplacements as time, then your strategy will be more aggressive.

    With allies, those teams that use both strategies can create more opportunities for success.

  • #4
    2 years ago


    The new changes are drifting away from how the faction is meant to be played. Just like Britain in the war you have to be defensive bleed the enemy defend key points etc

  • #5
    2 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    Not really, its moving away from hard defensive lines to emplacements supporting a semi-mobile but defensive army, a lot like how Wehr plays. Its definitely a lot different than live's, but its still ultimately a defensive army that waits for its tanks to get pushing. Try using the Forward Assembly as either a hardpoint or staging ground for your defensive maneuvers and you'll see a big difference.

  • #6
    2 years ago

    I understand how most people and how I myself play British I have 300 hours in the game as British, but my argument here is that British without the doctrines were made to play defensively now they are making emplacements weaker removing garrison bonuses and forward assembly bonuses and adding medics that are useless to any good British player and infantry is becoming better out of cover. And emplacements were never too strong both axis factions have multiple viable ways to destroy them easily volks have molotovs and OST get flamethrower half track/scout cars/engineers with flamethrowers. Emplacements also get easily countered by enemy mortars.

  • #7
    2 years ago


    Thanks for the advise but this isn't a skill discussion this is about how British used to be played and what they are being changed to as you said yourself they are becoming much more mobile with the new updates I personally don't think they should. Part of the reason why I main them is because they are NOT like the other factions and in fact are quite inferior excluding some doctrines to OST.

  • #8
    2 years ago
    Rommel654Rommel654 Fort Eustis, VAPosts: 934 mod

    There are some fundamental changes with the British. I'm not sure how they will play out. I agree the mindset to British play will need to adjust if you want to increase chances of success.

    There are counters to emplacements at every stage of the game, just like any other unit. I will submit that in essence you decide what your enemy will build. If you build emplacements your enemy will build the counter. A smart enemy will build the counter to the time he needs to take them down. Too early/late and he will spend too much time taking them down.

    If you have a defense that the enemy can't take down under any circumstance then you probably are so far ahead in the game it does not matter if you lose them or not.

    When I need to dominate an enemy's infantry I will build a Flame HT (if I'm Wher). Not because it can't be countered, but if I make it problematic enough he may build too many zooks/PTRS/PIATs or AT that will allow my infantry to dominate. The method to beat his infantry is to bait him into a threat that does not materialize.

    You can do that with emplacements, but it is harder. If you see your OKW enemy go Battlegroup and you want him to build a Leig's, than threaten his retreat point with a mortar pit. That will be his primary focus for if it is not, it could spell catastrophe for him. Your real threat is not the mortar pit, but the counter. Watch, he will either build Leig's, rak's, or overwhelm with infantry. Either way you are ahead of him as he is reacting to the emplacement threat. If he builds Leig's have a plan to get to them, the same with raketens, if it is infantry than with an mg your mortar pit can do some work. To beat OKW infantry you have to slow their movement. Make them stop and fight. Obviously this is terrain dependent on the execution.

    Brit's have so much in their kitbag they can do anything. The problem is they are so expensive and can be slow. So the timing is more unforgiving. The changes to the emplacements changes the time, they buy you less now. You defeat your opponent by either destroying his forces, his base, his victory points or his will to fight.

    I agree with you, it will certainly be different. Perhaps for the better, hard to say.

  • #9
    2 years ago

    Listen mate I'm not saying emplacements shouldn't be countered I'm saying a mortar emplacement costs a lot of manpower it was easy to counter now its easier to counter.

  • #10
    2 years ago

    stop looking at this as a conversation with an allies player I play both sides I know the units the costs of units I know it takes next to nothing to kill a British mortar I know that British vicars Mgs don't suppress I one marched down a squad a volks in an mgs kill zone all the way behind the mg I know British AT guns take 3 shots to kill a half track on average giving it more then enough time to just flank the at gun I know all these things because i tested them in private matches I tested them in real games I know how the game works one unit counters the other but British compared to any other army are nothing.

  • #11
    2 years ago
    Rommel654Rommel654 Fort Eustis, VAPosts: 934 mod
    edited December 2017

    I was agreeing with your premise, but I suppose that did not come across as intended.

    I have no doubt that you "know these things because I tested them in private matches...". I thought we were discussing a "British Faction General Discussion All Welcome" topic, but I may have misread.

    Your 300 hours as British is authoritative, but there are many views out there that could contribute to the conversation without being taken with offense.

    I do disagree with your thesis of "British compared to any other army are nothing". At over 6,400 hours (kind of embarrassing I know) I get taught lessons from British players all the time, often by players with much less experience. I like to think I'm open to other views.

    But sometimes when I get stuck in a none progressing discussion I am reminded of a quote from Tyson Edwards that says something like "Prejudices are rarely overcome by argument; not being founded in reason they cannot be destroyed by logic". I look at my argument and evaluate if it is based on logic, or something else. If it is something else, one can't listen.

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.