Changin some of the reward units for all factions

[mads]

My idea of how the British should be. Royal Marine Commandos should completely be forgotten. And then they should have some more units.
The big problem whit the British is there mid game lack of mobile antitank weapons. The Stuart Light Tank can deal whit small vehicles as pumas even StuH 42 if you are tough. But The British are missing something to take the beatings from opponent’s armor in the mid game. If the opponent pumps out StuH or hetzers you cannot do anything if you don’t Chose Churchill. They have their 17 pdr but it cannot move. They also have their PIAT’s but they hit like shit if you don’t Button the enemy vehicle which cost 25 Munitions to do. And you also have to upgrade both your sappers and your Infantry Section to button and kill enemy vehicles. Unless you got a Bren Carrier then you only got to upgrade your sapper’s.

My solution:

Headquarters Command Truck is fine as it is, nothing should be changed there.

In the Field Support Truck they should add the Matilda 2 tank. The Matilda 2 tank would be a great counter to the StuH 42 together whit the sapper’s whit PIAT’s. Matilda 2 doesn’t have the fire power or the speed to take out a StuH 42 but a decent armor to take the hits so the PIAT’s can do the job. 

The sapper’s should have a reward weapon instead of the PIAT, the Boys anti-tank rifle. Whit less damage but bigger chance of hitting a moving target this would be a good choice I think.
If a reward weapon to the sapper’s sounds like a stupid idea maybe the QF 2 pdr would work better as a replacement for the Stuart Light Tank.

The Armored Command Truck is also fine I think.

And as a last reward unit the “Super Churchill” ore Black Prince would work as a great reward unit for the Churchill Crocodile. In late 1943 Vauxhall was asked to design a Churchill with a 17 pdr. It was a wider Churchill Mk VII with stronger and wider tracks and suspension and an armor thickness up to 152mm thick. Initially nicknamed the "Super Churchill" but was renamed the Black Prince. Only 6 prototypes were mad.
Imagine a stronger and bigger Churchill than Churchill Crocodile. It would have More life, be more reliable and have a 17pdr as main gun, but without the flamethrower, but still able to use Tank Shock. It would give a king tiger a fair fight especially if it Hull Down.
It would work well as a replacement unit for the Churchill crocodile. But as a one-time call in.

[stealthattack1]

seems like some good suggestions to me, but just remember, the devs focus is on othseer.

[mads]

I know they work on ostheer, but is a big fan of the British so thought I'd give my suggestion. would also prefer that they do ostheer before the British.

+ I dont think that Nashhorn would be good for the Wehrmacht. they have enough anti-tank weapons. could well imagine swapping tiger ace out with sturm tiger would act as a Churchill Avre on steroid.

[Ghost]

@mads
1. what's the problem with StuH's? only blitzkrieg doctrine of wehr get's them (when OH is finished that's 1 of 9 axis doctrines)
2. black prince was a prototype unit and they (maus, obj 704, etc.) are not added to EF
3. the tiger ace was requested by many EF forum users, because many missed it after i got replaced by the kingtiger in OF
4. RMC was invented to balance the brits against vanilla factions as well as adding something new to them. they are designed to be more like US because the vanilla brits were unbalanced and not everyone liked their style of play. it's simple: if you don't like RMC, don't play it

[Pac-Fish]

These are my opinions and ideas. Sorry this message is so long  . Dont feel the need to read the whole thing Im also kinda a noob so don't attack me :

-IMO one of the more annoying points that should change is the HQ truck to start generating resources from where ever they park their huge truck ass, making it hard to near impossible to cut them off effectively and widely.

-IMO they dont really need a heavy hitting tank. US doesn't have a heavy hitting tank except Pershing but that's doctrinal and so is the Churchill. And the Black Prince was a prototype. A tank w/ 152mm armor and a 17 pdr? That would probably either need a limit of 1 call in, one on the field at a time, or not at all. But that is my opinion

-Why replace the Stuart with a Matilda? They're essentially both light tanks. They both cant stand up to StuG or StuH 42 as you said. And they both have a decent amount of fire power, dmg per shot, and speed as you said. It would only serve to please those who like seeing all possible WW2 tanks in the game 

-I think the vBrits also need to have their Secure Reasources removed. They can already gain an additional  +10 muni and +10 fuel, potentially having +30 muni or + 30 fuel (if they get all 3 trucks on high points) and its free. Why give them the ability to get around +30 to +45 muni or fuel .

-The Lt. bonus is also annoying, but RMC removed that so no problem really 

-The Cromwell is also pretty cheap, costing 20 less mp and 20 less fuel than a Sherman but basically performing the same. And they perform even better with a Command Tank and a tank commander. Yes Tank commanders cost muni but tank commanders are only 10 muni anyways and cosidering how you've probably already secured a hgh muni point, that is practically nothing.

-They're MG emplacemnts are also annoying and should cost more IMO. US must use mp and fuel to get an MG emplacement out and if you're ging fast m8, chances are you wont build one. Wher must spend MP and Muni, forcing a choice b/w a flamer, 2 mines, and a MG bunker. SU MG is more expensive than both US and Wher. Brits however must only spend 280 MP. Considering how Brits probably gain MP the fastest, thats not much to them.

-I think Brits need a light AT option. Maybe give Tommies the ability to wield Boys AT rifle after the FHQ has been purchased? B/c brits only options early on are really just Piat and 17pdr. Both those take tme and if your a bit behind on teching, you're in trouble. And 17 firing range is long but if there is a lot of obstacle, you're screwed. PIATS do decent dmg but are kinda innaccurate and with vet, Axis armor isn't as badlt effected by it. Later on Brits can use firefly but those are not onl expensive, but they're "glass cannons". Im not sre what would win on a 1 vs 1, Panther or Firefly, but Im pretty sure firefly would win 

@mads
1. what's the problem with StuH's? only blitzkrieg doctrine of wehr get's them (when OH is finished that's 1 of 9 axis doctrines)
2. black prince was a prototype unit and they (maus, obj 704, etc.) are not added to EF
3. the tiger ace was requested by many EF forum users, because many missed it after i got replaced by the kingtiger in OF
4. RMC was invented to balance the brits against vanilla factions as well as adding something new to them. they are designed to be more like US because the vanilla brits were unbalanced and not everyone liked their style of play. it's simple: if you don't like RMC, don't play it

Damn Ghost you beat me XD

[mads]

1st
Yeb you're right there. But not only StuH and hetzers are the problem stug is also causing problems and a few other early tanks. hope you know what I mean all the cheap medium tanks, can really cause problems.

The Germans early tanks can cause problems when the British cannot get anything els than PIAT's and 17 pdr at bunkers to kill tanks i mid game.

The Americans can get at-guns and sticky bombs besides rangers and airborne.
Soviet can get at-guns, at-rifles and tanks, as fast as it takes the British to come up to t2.


2nd
It’s all just suggestions.
Yes black prince was a prototype and I do not know if it ever saw combat. But it is still extremely cool and I think it would work well.


3rd
I did not know that so many were so excited about tiger ace. I self thought it was the bummer and that’s the only reason I brought it up.


4th
Main point I what I'm saying is at such big changes as the RMC are not necessary. The British are just a bit different from the other teams and maybe harder to play because they are so unique as they are. I myself am lv 14 with the British in the original COH online while not  1 vs 1 but still pretty good. But in my opinion, are the British just as good as any other team you just need to learn how to play them.

And of course I can just turn the RMC off, but again it is stupid because why would I turn anything of there is overpowered when it is to my advantage. I am only saying these things because I think there is a better way to balance the British and because I love them .


5th
I thought that the British are too slow to get up to t3, since the first is here they get something properly to fight tanks away. here I mean the Matilda 2 could help battle tanks off together with sappers with PIATs. the Matilda 2 had a good armor as far as I know better than Stuart. the Matilda 2 would act as a suport tank / cannon fodder so sappers with PIATs could deliver the final shot to the enemy tanks. this would help the British in the mid game since a stuart not have very much lives up against stuh or stug ore all other medium tanks.


tank comparison

Matilda 2
Armour: 20 to 78 mm max
main gun: Ordnance QF 2 pounder

M3 Stuart
Armour: 10 to 44 mm max
Main gun: 37 mm M6 in M44 mount

almost the same canon.

[SublimeSnugz]

Main point I what I'm saying is at such big changes as the RMC are not necessary

+100000000

My idea of how the British should be. Royal Marine Commandos should completely be forgotten.

+9999999999999999

The British Royal Marine Commandos, I also find very annoying since I am a big fan of the British and such a large expansion of the British seemed to me unnecessary. They should just have maybe an extra tank, + 1 more reward unit. Maybe a QF 2 pounder antitank gun, or the matilda 2 tank.
The British Royal Marine Commandos expansion feels too American and I do not like that. They no longer feel British when I play with them. A small extension would be fine I thought but it's too much to change their whole setup. They just need a few new units.

QFT
+99999999999999999

+999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999.1337

[Pac-Fish]

You guys don't seem to like RMC do you ?

[SublimeSnugz]

You guys don't seem to like RMC do you ?

Don't get me started 

[Pac-Fish]

You guys don't seem to like RMC do you ?

Don't get me started 

I dont mind  . Do you find them OP? UP? Weird ? Unnecessary?

[Blackbishop]

RMC needs some adjustments, that's all .

[Tankbuster]

 I suggest RMC sappers getting flamethrowers.

[Pac-Fish]

I suggest RMC sappers getting flamethrowers.

Would that be OP? I dont actually know Im just askin. I always thought one of the Brits weaknesses was lack of incindeary weps

[mads]

the mistake I made when I first started playing with the British, was that I used too many tanks and vehicles as I thought their infantry were too expensive but they are certainly not if you use them correctly.
Brits do not need flame throwers they have rifle grenades + their infantry is probably the strongest in the game if you use them correctly whit Lieutenants and the Captain.
hope this might helps some of the noobs out there .

but they need some better mobile anti-tank weapons in mid game. Boys anti-tank rifle or Matilda 2 as suport tank. these two things I think would make the British much better without being overpowered like RMC is.

they could also use a slightly stronger anti-tank tank in the end game since Sherman Firefly has less armor than the the American Sherman, strange I think ? it is not absolutely necessary but it would be nice to have. and therefore I suggested the black prince so you could choose whether you would have an anti-infantry or anti-tank tank if you chose Royal Engineers Support.

[GodlikeDennis]

Fireflies are one of the best units in the game. They truly excel at what they're for, especially in groups of 3 or more with a CCT.