1.20 and 1.21 Observation about brit changes

[AdmV0rl0n]

No AbhMkh, somehow YOU don't understand this. The rest of the troops don't die with the kang - they are recyclable. Their cost therefore doesn't factor in. It's like calling in a Tiger for 900mp, but when it dies each subsequent Tiger is only 50mp. A little unfair right?

AdmV0rl0n: Since English appears not to be your first language and you won't seem to listen I'll not debate with you much longer. There isn't any peer pressure abuse, you are simply wrong in your arguments. You have been provided with counter arguments yet you still cling to your position despite having the rebuttals being made by far more knowledgeble and skilled players than you. Balance is gauged by the majority opinion of the (informed) community. Balance is absolutely not achieved by making some units OP to compensate for UP things. Every single unit must be balanced so that it gets used frequently for it's intended purpose, and not abused.

Get your facts straight, in most cases, part of the crews die when Kangeroos are killed.

Secondly, you;re bashing the brits claiming they have the range, in a thread where everyone whined about the staghound. So, having read your name calling and sliding in the 'English is not my first language' - maybe you'd like to stick to things said here, and actually make the case.

The brits don't get the range if they take a stag, therefore, they get a mid game bump. If whining about the stag is taking place, it has to be ofset by the _fact_ the brits pay for it. It is not a one way OP.

[AbhMkh]

I get your point Godlike Dennis , about the recyclable thing , but tell me do you field just kangaroo??


lets say you field 2 roos which require an investment of about 3000 mp and they get destroyed   pretty quick as they are highly vulnerable to AT fire

Then do you think the player will be in a position to invest nymore in the roos or for tht matter any other unit , cuz while hes sending the roos in the thick of the batttle he's plans on making more units......


Its like sporting 5 panthers on the field and coming back for more when they are destroyed ... , think about it...



And hey no quarrels man, AdmV0rl0n , Godlike Dennis just state your points dont implicate nybody,no abuses please , thank god we dont have many americans on this forum , easy lads easy...


Ps : English is the first language of only the commonwealth and USA(they too fall under the category of commonwealth whether they like it or not) , i dont think any other country has english as its first language

[GodlikeDennis]

I have no idea how you think stags enter into this Adm. My point about English not being your first language (it it's true) was due to your sometimes poor grammar that made reading bits of your posts difficult and I couldn't know if you were understanding my arguments correctly. I'm not trying to bully you but you're extremely stubborn, and wrong.

In the hands of a semi-decent player the crew of the kang will never die because they are ejected when it is low on health, they then instantly retreat (Brits have better retreat bonuses than the other factions as well). The stag had an MG gunner that was far better than any other and suppressed as well. This was widely considered OP.

This argument is over. You've lost. Stop reusing the same failure arguments and actually try to come up with a good reason why kangs did not deserve the nerf. Oh wait... you can't for some reason...

AbhMkh: If you reread my Tiger analogy, you might see what I mean. Sure, you need to obtain the upfront cost. But each subsequent kang only costs a fraction of the original cost because you use the same troops from the first.

[Seeme]

@GodlikeDennis

Well its true that people probaly agree with you more, you cant just shoot people down say you won. If he feels that it shouldnt have been nerfed, he can tell the people and the devs decide. Well, as long as hes not being a idiot over it, he can talk about it. You dont like it, dont repley.

[AbhMkh]

Ohh really

[GodlikeDennis]

I didn't tell AbhMkh he lost, as he's still making half-decent rebuttals.

AdmV0r... however is coming up with nothing new and is instead stamping his feet on the ground like a child and I'm not even going to respond to him again.

[AbhMkh]

Hmm..................



Lets close this roo chapter

Someone said

"Men of integrity are generally pretty obstinate, in adhering to an opinion once adopted. "


I finding This to be pretty true here.....

[AdmV0rl0n]

I didn't tell AbhMkh he lost, as he's still making half-decent rebuttals.

AdmV0r... however is coming up with nothing new and is instead stamping his feet on the ground like a child and I'm not even going to respond to him again.

The stag = brits lose any ranged advantage they get. The only thing the stag is - is a potent midgame tool. AT weapons of various types kill it quickly enough that all is required is an atypical counter. Thus its not over powered.

Command tank, they get range but have no stag equal, and in exchange for range they lose a vehicle mid game bump the stag offers.

When pointed out to you, brits lose their ranged advantage in exchange for the stag, you claim its people stamping feet.

So, pointedly and specifically, either the stag is a potent platform, yet still killed easily by AT weapons and counters, or it loses some of that but returns the command function to the FF.

Nerfing the stag and doing nothing to correct the command issue simply robs the brits of the platform, makes the stag useless, and steals away the ranged ability they were always _supposed_ to have had.

Therefore, bluntly. Either give the stag the command function in exchange, OR leave it as a mid game potent. I have to say, this thread has been pathetic. 'Oh look, the officer can climb out and arty me, NERF THAT!' Oh look, the Kangeroo is potent' - Nerf that. Oh look, the stag comes out and kills a bunch of Inf - Nerf that, we cannot have that'.

Lets run through all the things that nerfing has done to the faction. The faction is screwed from the start - the bren was potent to counter that - Nerf. The brits had the best emplacement with range and suppression, Nerf it quick. The brits have too much mobility with those trucks, nerf that, stop the retreat, AND make them easy to kill if found moving. The FF and 17 Pounder are too potent, even though they are wiped out by decent inf, nerf them.

Having nerfed the hell out of the faction, TOV brought in the Kangeroo and stag which both provided punch all the previous nerfing killed off. And now true to form the Kangeroo and the stag have been nerfed again.

I don't need to say this, but nerfing has nothing to do with balance. Counters in game offer balance, not consistent nerfing of the base factions.

I've tolerated some abuse, including the language and idiot tagging, and thats all well and good. Anyone who things nerfing the stag is ok, but not correcting the command issue is wrong. The stag was potent for a reason, and it cost the brits ranged capability in taking that vehicle choice. It is not OP, it has a price, and a hefty one when a decent player realises the range issue in game. I'm not going to debate the point. I don't need to. And its good to see others who are wrong no matter how much they type otherwise in their own articles won't bother to write back now.   

[Seeme]

This argument is over. You've lost. Stop reusing the same failure arguments and actually try to come up with a good reason why kangs did not deserve the nerf. Oh wait... you can't for some reason...

It sounds pretty clear that you said he lost...

[Paciat]

The stag = brits lose any ranged advantage they get. The only thing the stag is - is a potent midgame tool. AT weapons of various types kill it quickly enough that all is required is an atypical counter. Thus its not over powered.

Command tank, they get range but have no stag equal, and in exchange for range they lose a vehicle mid game bump the stag offers.

When pointed out to you, brits lose their ranged advantage in exchange for the stag, you claim its people stamping feet.

So, pointedly and specifically, either the stag is a potent platform, yet still killed easily by AT weapons and counters, or it loses some of that but returns the command function to the FF.

Nerfing the stag and doing nothing to correct the command issue simply robs the brits of the platform, makes the stag useless, and steals away the ranged ability they were always _supposed_ to have had.

Therefore, bluntly. Either give the stag the command function in exchange, OR leave it as a mid game potent. I have to say, this thread has been pathetic. 'Oh look, the officer can climb out and arty me, NERF THAT!' Oh look, the Kangeroo is potent' - Nerf that. Oh look, the stag comes out and kills a bunch of Inf - Nerf that, we cannot have that'.

Lets run through all the things that nerfing has done to the faction. The faction is screwed from the start - the bren was potent to counter that - Nerf. The brits had the best emplacement with range and suppression, Nerf it quick. The brits have too much mobility with those trucks, nerf that, stop the retreat, AND make them easy to kill if found moving. The FF and 17 Pounder are too potent, even though they are wiped out by decent inf, nerf them.

Nicelly said. US still has stickies and T-17 blinding shot, PE AT halftracks but Brit BRENs were nerfed. Wasnt US the most OP fraction of 2.601?

While I dont mind nerfing Kangaroos I do mind nerfing Stags. Stags have 450 HP becouse they cant get vet. Its like having only one type vet3 wehrmacht unit and all other at vet 0.
If someone tries to fight Staghounds (anti infatry vechicles) with shrecks he should expect looses.
Hate when people try to win using only PE shreck blob and when they are countered by well microed Cromwells and Stuart+canister shot flank, or AVRE, or miltiply Stags.
I also hate when people say that PAKs should win vs Stags.
PAKSs are not counters to Stags. Stugs, Ostwinds and tanks are. 1 thing that can be nerfed in Stags is the dmg multipier vs most PE vechicles. Right now its 2 (like a Stuart that is an important counter to midgame PE) but it should be 1.5.

P.S
Someone said that Fireflies have longer fireing range than Marders.
The truth is Fireflies have shorter fireing range, they reload slower, and do less dmg than Marders. They have better spoting range (tank commander only upgrades spotting range - not gun range). Cromwell CT also dosnt upgrade Fireflies gun range nor its sight range. It does slightly (at vet 0, more at vet 2) upgrade gun and sight range of all other tanks.

[Wilson]

The Firefly has some interesting stats. I've just used Corsix's Mod Studio to have a look at the stats. For those who don't know them:

Range: 55 (compared to Marder: 60)
Accuracy: 0.85 at long, 1 at medium or lower (this is a bit better than Marder at medium/long)
Reload: 8.5 (nasty, but drops to 5.5 at long range. Still worse than Marder which is 4 at all ranges)
Damage: 125 (compared to Marder: 150)

The Command Tank gives bonuses of course, but I can't be bothered to check exactly what. The above stats are just for the guns, and don't take into account all the other odd little adjustments for target armour types.

@AdmV0rl0n - I think you make a decent point about the Stags and Fireflies. In fairness though, the Firefly still has a longer range than any other vehicle except I think the Marder. So against Wehrmacht there is still a range advantage (closest is Panther with 47.5). However, I think it's necessary to look deeper than individual units to find the problems with the Brits. The Kangaroo was OP, and I don't think the Bren Button inside vehicles was especially great either. Also, as a comment on the ultimate price of Kangaroos, you'll have infantry squads on the field anyway. So you aren't building them specially to go into the Kangaroos, and their cost doesn't really count, since they'll be capping and fighting until the Kangaroos are built.

As other people have said, the solution to a faction being UP in some areas is not for them to be OP in other areas. Could you highlight the weaknesses of the British faction please? I'd be interested to have your take on it (I don't play that much Brits).

[Blackbishop]

Stags should replace the Stuart. I don't know who was the genius who decided to replace the command tank in CoH code.

Also it should have an ability as it's brother T-17 or the Stuart that should replace.

[Paciat]

Stags should replace the Stuart. I don't know who was the genius who decided to replace the command tank in CoH code.

Also it should have an ability as it's brother T-17 or the Stuart that should replace.

If Stag was a replacement to Stuart than its HP should be nerfed. 300 HP (same as Stuart) is to low becouse it takes time to suppress infantry with an MG (unlike a canister shot) and UKs armor is weaker to shrecks than US. 350 (same as vet 1 T-17) would be fine. 

The Command Tank gives bonuses of course, but I can't be bothered to check exactly what. The above stats are just for the guns, and don't take into account all the other odd little adjustments for target armour types.

Heres CCT vet stats:
http://picly.us/coh/Veterancy_Cromwell_Command_Tank.html

[Budwise]

If anyone is arguing that the Roo nerf was unjustified please uninstall and break your CoH disc.  They were/are the most broken unit in CoH's history without a doubt.

[AdmV0rl0n]

The Firefly has some interesting stats. I've just used Corsix's Mod Studio to have a look at the stats. For those who don't know them:

Range: 55 (compared to Marder: 60)
Accuracy: 0.85 at long, 1 at medium or lower (this is a bit better than Marder at medium/long)
Reload: 8.5 (nasty, but drops to 5.5 at long range. Still worse than Marder which is 4 at all ranges)
Damage: 125 (compared to Marder: 150)

The Command Tank gives bonuses of course, but I can't be bothered to check exactly what. The above stats are just for the guns, and don't take into account all the other odd little adjustments for target armour types.

@AdmV0rl0n - I think you make a decent point about the Stags and Fireflies. In fairness though, the Firefly still has a longer range than any other vehicle except I think the Marder. So against Wehrmacht there is still a range advantage (closest is Panther with 47.5). However, I think it's necessary to look deeper than individual units to find the problems with the Brits. The Kangaroo was OP, and I don't think the Bren Button inside vehicles was especially great either. Also, as a comment on the ultimate price of Kangaroos, you'll have infantry squads on the field anyway. So you aren't building them specially to go into the Kangaroos, and their cost doesn't really count, since they'll be capping and fighting until the Kangaroos are built.

As other people have said, the solution to a faction being UP in some areas is not for them to be OP in other areas. Could you highlight the weaknesses of the British faction please? I'd be interested to have your take on it (I don't play that much Brits).

You should. They are almost always an interesting, and yet can be frustrating faction to try and play.

Comments on what you've said. Infantry on the field. Well two points, they won't have too many at 450 per squad. And secondly, capping with them is difficult. Unless you weaken the squad into a sniper squad, anytime they walk into none allied terrory, they slow and become utterly immobile. Capping slowly AND being so expensive must be a comically sick joke. Anyway, getting back on the point, brits if trying to upgrade will always find the 450 manpower per inf squad hard to swallow, and they will usually have to expend resource on upgrading rather than inf.

By this early stage, the Germans in game are already out capping brit.

Early game the brit has to choose LT or Bren. And if they go bren, the early thinking was to harry the enemy with its potent mobility. Having now cast away your ability to get an LT until your next 250 manpower, - the germans are still pumping Out PIOS or bumping to next level, they get two pio squads for less than an LT anyway. At this stage some idiot has decided to nerf the bren carrier.

Anyway, if you go LT, early game you are still being out capped, because one squad and an LT can't close the pop cap level of the germans on WER, - PE is a bit closer, but PE out run the brits early if they get vehicles up. And their squads are only 255, 200 less than a brit inf squad. Both PE and WER are capable of out pop production, capping, and soon out upgrading the brit. The brit has to be competitive in capping enough to dig in.

By now the brit is trying to gather enough for the sapper truck. If it can be got out, he'll still lack fuel for the stuart.
If he deviates from officers at any early stage in spending, he will limit his upgrades. And if he wastes too much time on Brens now, they leave him over exposed and behind on upgrades.

At this stage, the brit is normally forced to dig in because the germans should nominally be harrying his limited units, and doing so with vehicles, bikes and similar. Having got ahead with early units, the germans should be capping and recapping as required and with ease.

Unless the brit has had an easy ride, he will not have been able to gather 450 for a squad of inf, and will probably be waiting (depends on fuel) for sappers, stuart, or maybe the capt.

Either way, the brits by now are likely very out matched numbers wise, and will have had to dig in somewhere with 280 per emplacement costs. 

If the stuart can be gotten out early, it can harry the early german vehicles, half tracks, bikes and so on, and can blunt inf attacks. The stuart shot gun cart is nice, but you'll be hard pressed to find the ammo for it if you choose to upgun the now nerfed bren, which frankly was suppoed to be the original weapon for harrying and chasing down the german early game capping attempts.

If the game has devolved into an inf blobbing affair, the Germans should be out massing the brit anyway, and the first brit sniper squad is really seriously only combat ready in early game. Later game combat leaves them in poor shape.
 
Finally, the brit if he can scrape enough res from the game design of brit having less cap ability early game, he gets the final truck out. He'll probably at this stage not have got decent numbers of any particular troops or vehicles out.

A note on firefly's. Much has been said, but frankly FF's are no longer anything akin to what they should be. The 17 pounder is slow firing and with regular hilarity can't hit half the behicles, with Wer armoured cars being fantastically hard to hit. Its hopeless against AT, or in fact any inf, and against the late game tanks, it generally feels weak in most areas. Its also a 100 fuel, and beyond that, for all the talk of the stag, if someone buys into the stag, they just placed their FFs in a perenially poor game position where its no longer really anything more than average, and any tank combat in mid or close range is hilarious in general. So you tell me, would you now talk the weakend stag, or would you remove it and take the command tank.

I'm sure other players enjoy having pointless FFs being killed by Paks that are invisiible, while the FF misses, farts, and is generally crap as well as being nothing like the original awesome vehicle killer it was painted to be early on in COH.

Now, some players do inf blob with brits. And if you micro with LTs very well, it can be effective. But as far as I am concerned, both Wer and PE inf late game when vetted and kitted chew up brit inf. And frankly speaking the brit AT (sappers) is damaged in the same was as the INF in that they never offer capping ability because they will again become imobile in enemy territory.

The doctrines can sometimes help.
Eng doctrine may get you a churchill which in early and mid game does have bite. Not cheap and mental pop cap.
The arty doctrine makes the mortar pits powerful and on small maps can counter IMHO the bren nerfing. The 280 Per emplacement and a dent in head cap takkes some toll.

Airborne early game is harsh, because you either have to choose arty or the commandos, and each commando squad will be 560 or 510 post first glider.

The kangeroos - well here is my take. By mid game you may be able to make kangeroos. But I think only one or two.  Not because of their cost, but beecause everything else - especially inf costs limit the brit. And he'll have top throw the kangeroos in to fend off the growing ger armour.

Usually this might mean two sapper squads and an LT. If anyone can load it fully with 320 + 75 ammo+ LT + 125 ammo+ 450 + whatever for brens or grenades - then they have done well anyway.

I have never ever seen a kangeroo ever delivery the weight of fire from loaded crews. Ever. You can load up 3x sappers + 75+75+75 and you'll only ever see 2 piat shells coming out, and if you park too close, no fire at all. The inf fire was never impressive and never forces GER to be surpressed if you blew 450 on it. Even with all this, the brit has probably loaded up most or perhaps all of his capping ability into one vehicle. Even via raiding, this loss is not a one way deal.

Even so, this will deal with most armour. But its not a game winning deal. Mines and AT weapons take a toll, and I am sorry, I fail to see at this point a kangeroo being a vehicle of death doom.

Late game, more roo's perhaps? But if so, a question would be, have you been letting the brit blob? With high inf costs, and high replacement costs, there is no real excuse for having been letting the brit blob.

By this stage, panthers are on the field, and panthers cost less than loaded roos. And thats before we talk about fully kitted Ger inf, which has better all round At abilities than the brits have (FF, 17 Pounder, and sappers?)

The raw truth is come late game, any faction ahead is able to field vehicles and troops of doom. And the likely thing is the stronger side at that stage of the game is going to be the likely side to do it. But from my perspective, the brits early game costs and severe limits place them in a difficult position from the early point, and they should always be under severe capping pressure if the germans get things right. The whining about roos and stags is partially understandable, but any weapon system in game may need counters not blunting, and just because you have to find counters to the threats should not mean 'Nerf it'.

Anyone who can must 240+320+450 +75ammo+125ammo+ more ammo, and do so in several vehicles costing several times as much, is doing well. Someone said early that people will eject the crews before they die and retreat them. This is simple good play and not OP. But its rare that a kangeroo properly caught ejects all its crew and they get away with no losses. Each time the brits have the heaviest cost in replacements for any loss taken. 

In terms of the nerf of kangeroo, I've said in several places, I understand it, but not by itself. If you are going to nerf it, it has to be with some more general rebalances of the brits.
Post Merge: August 05, 2010, 02:04:27 AM

Stags should replace the Stuart. I don't know who was the genius who decided to replace the command tank in CoH code.

Also it should have an ability as it's brother T-17 or the Stuart that should replace.

If Stag was a replacement to Stuart than its HP should be nerfed. 300 HP (same as Stuart) is to low becouse it takes time to suppress infantry with an MG (unlike a canister shot) and UKs armor is weaker to shrecks than US. 350 (same as vet 1 T-17) would be fine. 

The Command Tank gives bonuses of course, but I can't be bothered to check exactly what. The above stats are just for the guns, and don't take into account all the other odd little adjustments for target armour types.

Heres CCT vet stats:
http://picly.us/coh/Veterancy_Cromwell_Command_Tank.html

How is the stag a stuart replacement? Where are some of you heading with this? The stag comes out of the final brit upgrade, and has cost them 250 LT and 300 Captain, and 185 and 205 to get here, and you're saying all it should do is screw the brit range (cos you now have no command tank), get nerfed to being a stuart, and have its late game anti inf ability squashed.

That IS a 50cal gun mounted on it, and its meant to be meaty.

Hey, why don't you take the wheels off it too, and put a bren on top instead of the 50 cal.
Post Merge: August 05, 2010, 02:07:06 AM

If anyone is arguing that the Roo nerf was unjustified please uninstall and break your CoH disc.  They were/are the most broken unit in CoH's history without a doubt.

Lets see if the change helps. I still suspect you and those like you will still be squeeling in 3 months time for more nerfs.