Company of Heroes: Eastern Front
Eastern Front Mod (Read-Only) => Suggestions => Topic started by: TERRORTYRANT on December 04, 2011, 03:04:35 PM
-
First of all id lke to start of with tanks i think we shuld replace the m18 becuz to me i think its way to weak in armour and attack u may think diff but this is wat i tink so we shuld replace it wit the m36 as it is said the m36 was the most effiective us tank destroyer so it does hav a place in Coh i mean the axis have far better tankdestroyers than allies y not the allies hav equal tank destroyers. And im not sure wat to replace for the brits but i tink we shuld add in the valentine 3 inf tank becuz it seems to be a gud tank n plus u culd have some upgrades on it like it usually has 2 dpr gun into 6 and other ones for anti mine etc and has potential to replace russian tanks as it was built also for the russians to use also the kangaroo carrier i think shuld hav the choice to either build a 2pdr gun which is the ram mark 1 and tht i think the inf should have more options to better anti tank weaponery. For the russians i think there shuld be more anti inf tanks lke some of the amphibious tanks and actually making them able to cross water becuz i think its unique replace the first 2 tanks in the light tankovy. And thts it tanks suggestions for the allies
-
Oh bout the topic its meant to say allied factions sorry
-
You should list your suggestion rather than make one large paragraph. Its easier to read.
Maybe the M36 could replace something else. Its pretty powerful :-\. Maybe replace the Pershng? But reduce cost and give it slightly better stats ???
And im not sure wat to replace for the brits but
To be perfect honestly you shouldn't just suggest things just for the sake of doing so and with no justification. I can understand why you might want a M26 but to suggest a Valentine tank for no reason is........weird. And what would this Valentine replace? Stuart? Cromwell?
-
The valentine shuld replace the stuart with a slight increase in manpower
-
Well if the Valentine was to be replaced (Im not saying it s or isnt) It should get a specal ability like the Stuart. Stuart has canister rounds. Maybe the Valentine can have special HEAT rounds or a shrapenl round like the 25 pdr uses in Overwatch. This woul obviousl cost more and dmg would be reduced :P
-
Well the valentine shuld start with a 2pdr gun with no abilities then 3 diff upgrades 6 pdr with a armour piercin rounds, self propelled howitzer gun and a flamethrower
-
Oh i was doin some research n the is 3 wasnt initianly made until after the war n it said tht they dont allow tanks tht was made after the war
-
The IS-3 is an exception. Or so Ive been told :P
-
Do u think we can replace sten 3 with sten 4 for the brits
-
It would only be a visal change :P
-
Wat does the name dev mean cuz some ppl say if the dev agrees
-
Devs = Developers.
-
Oh i was doin some research n the is 3 wasnt initianly made until after the war n it said tht they dont allow tanks tht was made after the war
Nope, several IS3 were produced and entered in service many months before the war ended. Ofc, they weren't as common as the other soviet tanks but they were still there.
Also, we don't like to add stuff just for the sake of it. Likely every faction besides soviets has it's reward units settled up.
-
I can imagine the M36 replacing the M26 Pershing but that would kinda be a waste of time, since the M36 was much faster, had the same gun but very little armor, making it easy pickings for even a Panzer IV if used properly. The M26 if it ever gets a reward unit, should be replaced with either the Super-Pershing with the extra armor and slower speed, make it slightly more similar to a King Tiger, only 1 call-in per game or the Jumbo Sherman(which should be 2 or 3 on the field at once), which has more armor, and a smaller gun.
And yes the IS-3 was by the end of WWII in deployment with several units, but no concrete evidence exists about whether they fought in Europe or not. I'm pretty sure that a few were used in August Storm, but other than that, no one knows.
-
Ok so the m36 wuld be pointless but how bout addin the m24 chaffee to replace the m8 cuz firstly it was the best light tank in the war plus its gun is a powerful gun which culd be used for en masse on enemy tanks as it wuld be cheap, gud speed n powerful gun also it wuld also be gud against inf as it holds 3 mgs and also had variants with anti air guns which wuld be gun gaisnt german henschels. So yea i think we shuld add in the m24 as a replacment for the m8 amoured car.
-
No matter what you replace the M8 with it has to fill the role of a light armored car. You can't spam M8s and expect them to take down Panthers, so you shouldn't be able to spam M24s and do the same, or the choice between the two would be obvious.
-
Oh i get it then i hav one for the russians a light for a light how about we replace the t80 for the bt5/7 it had the same gun, 1 more mg and it was faster n more heavier in armour maybe pointless but a suggestion. And plus the t90 was a prototype tank i thought ull neva add prototypes tanks
-
Personally, I support the BA-64 armored car to be included as a replacement for the T-90. Cheaper and weaker. It would be nice to see 2 Russian wheeled vehicles instead of the medical truck.
-
I dont think so ba64 is a amoured car and the t90 is a light anti inf/air tank so it doesnt rlly balance the game unless it could be used as a anti air vehicle but it euld be way to weak
-
However there is a light tank replacement id lke to suggest replacin the stuart to either a valentine tank with special abilities such as ap, canister shots lke the stuart but with a 6 pdr upgrade or the mark vi light tank which may be weaker in its weapons than the stuart with its 7.92 mm mg and its 15 mm besa mg and the fact that the stuart is a inf support tank supossivly in game tht is gud agaisnt inf but the mark vi has 2 mgs which i think is better as a role of an inf support probably better gaisnt inf than stuart cause it can suppress inf unlke most Rmc squads.
-
Anyone who wants to see the BA-64 or BA-10 can check them out in worldbuilder. We experimented with putting them on the Soviet side but they didn't really fit so they won't be included there for the forseeable future.
-
Anyone who wants to see the BA-64 or BA-10 can check them out in worldbuilder. We experimented with putting them on the Soviet side but they didn't really fit so they won't be included there for the forseeable future.
I thought the BA-10 would fit fairly decently, but there were some problems with modeling at the time and now that we have some nice new features coming we really could be adding too much.
-
I think a BA-10 would look pretty sweet ;D. Its like a SU M8 or Puma :P. But then again thats just my opinion
-
hi
i'd love to see the Nashorn for Wher to change with flak88 ( defensive doc ) and then the lufwaffe keep the flak88
what do you think about this ? good or bad idea ? .......(don't shot me , it's just a idea :). )
-
hi
i'd love to see the Nashorn for Wher to change with flak88 ( defensive doc ) and then the lufwaffe keep the flak88
what do you think about this ? good or bad idea ? .......(don't shot me , it's just a idea :). )
I lke this idea it makes more sense being in the wher as the lufwaffe are supposed to be the type to build anti air guns not adding a tank
-
hi
i'd love to see the Nashorn for Wher to change with flak88 ( defensive doc ) and then the lufwaffe keep the flak88
what do you think about this ? good or bad idea ? .......(don't shot me , it's just a idea :). )
I lke this idea it makes more sense being in the wher as the lufwaffe are supposed to be the type to build anti air guns not adding a tank
PE lacks hard counters against a multitude of targets. The Nashorn fills that gap for the PE in the heavy tank killer. Flak88s are risky and redundant do to snipers and fixed positions.
Plus Wehrmacht is stock full on rewards.
-
In my opinion is the panzer elite’s reward units perfect.
But I do not think that the Americans new reward units are particularly good, since I cannot see any reason to use them, especially M4 Sherman jumbo is very useless.
Instead of m4 Sherman jumbo, I think they should have M12 Gun Motor Carrier. It will fit nicely as a replacement for Sherman Calliope.
Verhmachts tiger ace, I also find very boring and misplaced. I do not think that the tiger ace is either cool or powerful enough to replace the king tiger. Here would only other large tanks like Jagdtiger are good enough.
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.
-
Maybe the Nashhorn can apply to both ???
-
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
-
@mads: You've got a point. RMC is suppose to be sorta aggresive + flexible. RMC is kinda aggresive + flexible :P.
-
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.
-
seems like some good suggestions to me, but just remember, the devs focus is on othseer.
-
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.
-
@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 ;)
-
These are my opinions and ideas. Sorry this message is so long :P. 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 :P
-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 :P
-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 :P
-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
-
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 :P 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. :-X
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 ;D.
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.
-
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
-
You guys don't seem to like RMC do you :P?
-
You guys don't seem to like RMC do you :P?
Don't get me started ;D
-
You guys don't seem to like RMC do you :P?
Don't get me started ;D
I dont mind ;D. Do you find them OP? UP? Weird :P? Unnecessary?
-
RMC needs some adjustments, that's all ;D.
-
I suggest RMC sappers getting flamethrowers.
-
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
-
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. :)
-
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.
-
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. :)
Yeah, Rifle-grenades are alright, WHEN THEY HIT. Which is not often.
-
Rifle grenades does not hit particularly good, but this is where you should use Lieutenant. otherwise build a Mortar Emplacement they can pick infantry out of buildings. ;)
Lieutenant.
Veterancy:
Default: 15% Increased Weapon Accuracy, +1 Speed.
Level 1: Heroic Charge Ability, +15 health on self.
Level 2: 10% Reduced accuracy on self. 15% + Weapon Accuracy, 25% Reduced Cooldown Weapon.
Level 3: +80 Exp, +4 Pop.
Sherman Firefly is good, but up against 2 panthers, they will die.
Panzer Elite can get 2 panthers for 1000 manpower.
the British can get 3 Sherman and a Cromwell Command Tank 1560 manpower and 350 fuel.
just saying. :-\
-
Those 3 Fireflies + CCT will beat those Panthers very easily. PBG is excellent value for money but takes a lot to tech to. It'd be more appropriate to compare 3 Fireflies with CCT to 3 Panthers and Vet1, so 1550MP 350FU vs 1900MP 360FU, and the FFs still win. That would only happen in teamgames though. It'd be far more appropriate to say that 2 FFs + CCT will beat a Tiger or KT, since it's more likely to occur. They would also beat 2 Panthers.
Riflenades can be pretty devastating against volks or MGs early on. It's actually better to get in close with them to reduce scatter. Many people make the mistake of trying to close the distance with their volks, only to have a nade wipe out 3-5 members instantly.
Back on topic, the biggest problem with RMC at the moment are their tiers, as well as several fundamental mechanics that they still use from Brits. The tiers currently seem hashed together and unfinished, and they lack specific roles. Brit trucks and vet systems are plain awful as well and contribute a lot to RMC's lameness. Not to mention the bad balance on a lot of the units themselves.
-
[...]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. :)
i just don't get it ???
like dennis said, fireflies are strong and can engage enemy tanks at a long range, especailly with comwell command tank giving it bonuses. and giving that "super tank" option to 1 of the 3 doctrines wouldn't make a large difference :-X
rmc will be balanced and then they will be fine, just wait for it ;)
-
I also hope that the RMC will be balanced, but in my opinion as it is now is far, far too big an extension. delete RMC and extend the original.
my opinion.
and of course 2 Fireflies + CCT could easily kill a tiger or king tiger, that can even a tetrach tank do ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JKIZR9zuns
-
[...] 2 Fireflies + CCT could easily kill a tiger or king tiger, that can even a tetrach tank do ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JKIZR9zuns
well, where do i start?! the KT player was a massive noob not moving his tank and not repairing it. and it was more like 2 tetrachs, the KT crippled 1 of them, so this vid only proves the noobishness of the wehr player ::)
but back to topic:
why remove RMC? many players hate the vBrits and think that they are OP, do you want to remove the vBrits as well?!
vBrits may have early AT weaknesses, but they have many things to balance that out. and if you take their weaknesses away, you will make them OP. simple as that.
just wait until RMC are fully balanced and if you still don't like them...just don't use 'em ;)
-
You rarley ever see 3 fireflies in one game :P. I've seen formations of 2 and a CCT but never have I seen 3 :P
But can vBrits (or RMC) Tommies gain acess to Boys AT rifle after the FHQ is purchased? It would help in AT. Cause atm you need to need to set up the truck, buy sappers (which are weak alone), buy PIATs (which take a bit to process) and then button an enemy down cause most players will back their tanks up when they see the PIAT team. Or buy an AT gun which is powerful but can be unreliable :P
-
I have just played a game of of COH ef, with both RMC and without. It is not necessary with 2 of a kind, but it the RMC there is 3 if you choose Commando royal support. Sapper’s whit PIATs, PIAT Commando and sas raiders, that is 3. Then there is the tetrach tank and Daimler armored car. And Commando and sas raiders.
Why would anyone ever choose royal commando support when you have the half of it in advance.
The Sherman Firefly and M10 archiles. Then there is the Bren caries and the sas recon jeeps.
To me it seems as if many of the new units are not necessary.
There is no reason to have 2 of a kind.
And yes if you take away all the British's weaknesses they will be op you have done that whit he rmc. Only give them Boys Anti-Tank Rifles and Matilda 2 og det vil være balanceret. Those 2 units would be perfect in mid game. The Matilda 2 will most of all, resemble a miniature of Churchill in many ways.
Sappers.
Boy’s anti-tank rifles: (75 Munitions). Reward weapon for the PIATs.
Same stats as the soviets anti-tank rifles.
Matilda 2.
The Matilda 2 will most of all, resemble a miniature of Churchill in many ways.
Armor: 20 to 78 mm max
almost the same armor as a cromwell.
Main armament: Ordnance QF 2 pounder
too weak to really be able to do damage.
Secondary armament: 7.92 mm Besa machine gun
Speed: (26 km/h on road)-(14 km/h off road)
too slow to be able to hunt down light vehicles.
Upgrades: first after the Cromwell Command Tank has been build.
Tank Commander:(10 Munitions).
Bulldozer: (75 Munitions).
Hedgehog: (100 Munitions).
Give the British those 2 things and they will be fun and balanced.
-
What does this Hedgehog ability for 100 muni do?
-
Rifle grenades does not hit particularly good, but this is where you should use Lieutenant. otherwise build a Mortar Emplacement they can pick infantry out of buildings. ;)
Lieutenant.
Veterancy:
Default: 15% Increased Weapon Accuracy, +1 Speed.
Level 1: Heroic Charge Ability, +15 health on self.
Level 2: 10% Reduced accuracy on self. 15% + Weapon Accuracy, 25% Reduced Cooldown Weapon.
Level 3: +80 Exp, +4 Pop.
Sherman Firefly is good, but up against 2 panthers, they will die.
Panzer Elite can get 2 panthers for 1000 manpower.
the British can get 3 Sherman and a Cromwell Command Tank 1560 manpower and 350 fuel.
just saying. :-\
So you suggest a static emplacement with low range, no mobility and capturable by the enemy to do the job of a flametrower?
-
Ridle nades are pretty decent. And they can hide behind a wall or hedgegrow and fire :P
-
Can they ever replace mortars?
-
Not really. A single riflenade squad probably wont do too well. Mortar is meant to help clear buildings out and cover an area with mortar fire i guess :P. Helps vs infantry :P
-
what do you mean whit low range? a Mortar has a longer range than both rifle grenades and flametrowers, so what do you mean low range? ???
and no no no enemy should never ever have the opportunity to capture it, Defend it or delete it if there are problems.
-
Hedgehog is an upgrade and gives it an artillery ability. Just Google Matilda 2 Hedgehog. don’t know how to post pictures sry. :-\
I do not know if it was used in war, but from what I know neither was knights cross holders.
-
If you are not careful they will capture your mortar pit and also if you delete them you don't get manpower back, neither can you reinforce them. So it will always be inferior to the american one.
-
I have just played a game of of COH ef, with both RMC and without. It is not necessary with 2 of a kind, but it the RMC there is 3 if you choose Commando royal support. Sapper’s whit PIATs, PIAT Commando and sas raiders, that is 3. Then there is the tetrach tank and Daimler armored car. And Commando and sas raiders.
Why would anyone ever choose royal commando support when you have the half of it in advance.
The Sherman Firefly and M10 archiles. Then there is the Bren caries and the sas recon jeeps.
To me it seems as if many of the new units are not necessary.
There is no reason to have 2 of a kind.
And yes if you take away all the British's weaknesses they will be op you have done that whit he rmc. Only give them Boys Anti-Tank Rifles and Matilda 2 og det vil være balanceret. Those 2 units would be perfect in mid game. The Matilda 2 will most of all, resemble a miniature of Churchill in many ways.
Sappers.
Boy’s anti-tank rifles: (75 Munitions). Reward weapon for the PIATs.
Same stats as the soviets anti-tank rifles.
Matilda 2.
The Matilda 2 will most of all, resemble a miniature of Churchill in many ways.
Armor: 20 to 78 mm max
almost the same armor as a cromwell.
Main armament: Ordnance QF 2 pounder
too weak to really be able to do damage.
Secondary armament: 7.92 mm Besa machine gun
Speed: (26 km/h on road)-(14 km/h off road)
too slow to be able to hunt down light vehicles.
Upgrades: first after the Cromwell Command Tank has been build.
Tank Commander:(10 Munitions).
Bulldozer: (75 Munitions).
Hedgehog: (100 Munitions).
Give the British those 2 things and they will be fun and balanced.
omg, where do i start ;D
1. sorry, but i think the vBrits are rather OP than UP and giving them additional AT options makes it even worse...
2. having 2 units for the same role is part of the game (stug-pzIV-panther...) and every unit has different pros/cons
3. what's going to be the difference between piat and AT rifle?
4. according to the info it found the matilda was mainly used in north africa or by the russians via lend/lease
5. what units will the matilda replace?
6. if the gun is useless (you said it is too weak) than what's the point of this unit? it would be slower than a KT making it only cannon fodder ???
-
I was thinkin we shuld not use the matilda but the valentine as it is the matilda successor although almost havin the same weapons it actually the later models of the valentine was equipped with a 6 pdr AT gun i suggest we put this in with the hedgehog, bulldozer and take out the tank commander to put in the 6 pdr AT gun for about 70 - 120 munitions OR have an upgrade in the command truck making the 6 pdr gun default when u build it so instead of the matilda use the valentine as it was also mainly used in north africa it was also used by the russian on lend-lease
-
Sry my English is not the best but do you want the Matilda or the valentine in the game? Because the hedgehogs and bulldozers were never used on a valentine tank. :-\
You could also use it as a reward unit for the Matilda 2. If you choose Matilda you get better armor but less firepower, if you choose valentine you get more firepower but less armor. ;)
Upgrades for the valentine tank could be.
(The QF 75 mm gun or the QF 6-pounder gun)
(Better engine and a side skirt upgrade)
I have just played a game of of COH ef, with both RMC and without. It is not necessary with 2 of a kind, but it the RMC there is 3 if you choose Commando royal support. Sapper’s whit PIATs, PIAT Commando and sas raiders, that is 3. Then there is the tetrach tank and Daimler armored car. And Commando and sas raiders.
Why would anyone ever choose royal commando support when you have the half of it in advance.
The Sherman Firefly and M10 archiles. Then there is the Bren caries and the sas recon jeeps.
To me it seems as if many of the new units are not necessary.
There is no reason to have 2 of a kind.
And yes if you take away all the British's weaknesses they will be op you have done that whit he rmc. Only give them Boys Anti-Tank Rifles and Matilda 2 og det vil være balanceret. Those 2 units would be perfect in mid game. The Matilda 2 will most of all, resemble a miniature of Churchill in many ways.
Sappers.
Boy’s anti-tank rifles: (75 Munitions). Reward weapon for the PIATs.
Same stats as the soviets anti-tank rifles.
Matilda 2.
The Matilda 2 will most of all, resemble a miniature of Churchill in many ways.
Armor: 20 to 78 mm max
almost the same armor as a cromwell.
Main armament: Ordnance QF 2 pounder
too weak to really be able to do damage.
Secondary armament: 7.92 mm Besa machine gun
Speed: (26 km/h on road)-(14 km/h off road)
too slow to be able to hunt down light vehicles.
Upgrades: first after the Cromwell Command Tank has been build.
Tank Commander:(10 Munitions).
Bulldozer: (75 Munitions).
Hedgehog: (100 Munitions).
Give the British those 2 things and they will be fun and balanced.
omg, where do i start ;D
1. sorry, but i think the vBrits are rather OP than UP and giving them additional AT options makes it even worse...
2. having 2 units for the same role is part of the game (stug-pzIV-panther...) and every unit has different pros/cons
3. what's going to be the difference between piat and AT rifle?
4. according to the info it found the matilda was mainly used in north africa or by the russians via lend/lease
5. what units will the matilda replace?
6. if the gun is useless (you said it is too weak) than what's the point of this unit? it would be slower than a KT making it only cannon fodder ???
1.
how do you find vBrits op. RMC has a million times as many units that can handle any job, where are their weaknesses. ???
2.
why do people so constantly say that there is no need for two of a kind?
3.
AT-rifles are more accurate than PIATs, but do less damage.
4.
there you are right but they were also used in france. ;)
5.
no one, but if you find this sounds silly then let it replace the stuart.
6.
the point of this tank here is to protect the the infantry so that the infantry can move in and take the kill (it is an infantry tank, it is supposed to support the infantry). And yes its role is cannon fodder, but if supported by infantry it will be a deadly combination. The most of the Matildas that was lost in france was because of lack of infantry as support. The Matilda had much armor and with a buldozer upgrades even more armor to the front. With the bulldozer upgraded it should almost be able to fight a fair fight with a stug 1vs1 but still lose. :)
-
1.how do you find vBrits op. RMC has a million times as many units that can handle any job, where are their weaknesses. ???
more units does not mean OP. it's their unique style with the trucks, tiers and strong defenses/arty that messes with the vCoH system and makes them near to impossible to balance.
2.why do people so constantly say that there is no need for two of a kind?
IMO it is not important how many units there are for the same role.
4.there you are right but they were also used in france. ;)
well, i couldn't find any data about that. just about north africa i found it. but there were just a few used by the brits in 1940 in france
5.no one, but if you find this sounds silly then let it replace the stuart.
the problem of adding a new unit (without dropping one) is that it will require a lot of balancing and sorry, but i don't see a need to add it.
6.the point of this tank here is to protect the the infantry so that the infantry can move in and take the kill (it is an infantry tank, it is supposed to support the infantry). And yes its role is cannon fodder, but if supported by infantry it will be a deadly combination. The most of the Matildas that was lost in france was because of lack of infantry as support. The Matilda had much armor and with a buldozer upgrades even more armor to the front. With the bulldozer upgraded it should almost be able to fight a fair fight with a stug 1vs1 but still lose. :)
again, i don't see why it is needed. if you need such a tank, choose royal eng. and call-in a churchill. if that matilda is added to the 2nd truck and requires the leut. upgrade to unlock it. it would have to be balanced so that it comes at the right time for the right price. if it comes too early it would screw up balance, if it comes to late it would be useless.
about the upgrades:
- bulldozer would come to early in the game, making tank traps more or less useless from midgame.
- that hedgehog was developed in 1945 and never mass-produced, so it's prototype or postwar stuff.
-
[...]
2.why do people so constantly say that there is no need for two of a kind?
IMO it is not important how many units there are for the same role.
[...]
Well, RMC glider has a lot of units, we need to check this out in order to avoid that problem.
-
@Ghost: You brought uo the point that if someone needed a cannon fodder tank, they should get a chruchill. Maybe the Matilda could replace the churchill ???. IDK how much armor Matildas had but it could be a faster but weaker version of a churchill. Both have weak guns :P. Just an idea to consider :D
-
There are 3 different Churchills. So it means 3 different Matildas, who is gonna animate that?
-
There are 3 different Churchills. So it means 3 different Matildas, who is gonna animate that?
IDK. Just a suggestion :-\
-
@Fishhunterx:
IMO that would work perfectly.
1. matilda call-in
2. churchill AVRE call-in
3. churchill call-in with upgrade to crocodile or mine plow
i never understood why to have 3 churchills ::)
balancing could be done by changing armor, speed, costs and CPs.
would be more change of vCoH though :-\
-
i never understood why to have 3 churchills ::)
Me neither :P. Why have 1 churchill have a gun and a plow while the other has a gun and a flamer :P? I know its balance but it looks weird :P
-
i never understood why to have 3 churchills ::)
maybe cause brits have no tanks, therfore, they have to clone the same one in order to compete?
-
Brits have Comwell, Firefly, CCT, and Stuart. Thats 4. US has Sherman, Sherman Croc, M10. Thats 3 :P. Brits aren't lacking tanks :P
-
The Stuart seems more like a tankette.
As for the Churchills, they kinda seem a part of the doctrine.
-
Stuarts are resistent to gunfire. Its good enough ;D
-
Throw an AT grenade at them.
See how they run away
-
Yeah. The sturat will back up when you throw it. And then roll right back where it was :P
-
Then use AT HT, Immobilize them.
Throw an AT grenade at them.
See how they blow up
-
Stuart, tetrarch and stag are ACs or equivalent. CCT doesn't really count. Brits therefore have 3 tanks: Crom, FF, Churchill. US has 4: Croc, Sherman, M10, Persh.
In EF, Brits also have the Achilles and comet of which one is a reward. US also gains 2 tanks in EF, with 1 as reward and the other replacing a unit that is not a tank (Jumbo-Calli).
-
Well considering how the croc and the basic sherman count as 2 seperte tanks, the Brits theoretically have 5 tanks since each churchill variant does a different thing :P
-
They all support infantry. That is all.
-
it really doesnt matter how many tanks the brits have, i was just suggesting that maybe they dont have that many since i rarely see that many during games.
-
since i rarely see that many during games.
That in itself is rare :P
-
well the brits ive had the [irony]pleasure[/irony] of playing against have mostly been campers.
-
IMO its not good to camp it out :P. Against higher lvl players you will probably see more tanks. Although I have been paired up with some brit allies (in 2vs2 ofc) who insist on camping one small area. Guess which team loses :'(
-
Meh, RMC is way better.
-
Meh, RMC is way better.
Yea RMC is the 1337 . . . . . .
-
the 1337?? what does that mean?
-
Its some sorta internet term. I never really understood it :-\
-
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=1337
-
I guess I get it. Its kinda like when ppl use letters to make animals or images.
-----------
Thats a worm ;D
-
I would like to see the curchill MKVII somewhere in game, maybe for the RMC instead of the comet. Excelent armor and a decent 75mm gun. could be upgraded to 6 pounder gun for better AT power
-
Why would you upgrade a 75 mm gun to a 57 mm one.
-
You must mean the other way around robotnik. ;)
Here are some gun comparisons.
British tank guns of the Second World War
Gun : Shell : weight : Muzzle velocity : Muzzle energy
(lb) (kg) (ft/s) (m/s) (kJ)
2 pdr 2 0.9 2,650 810 295
6 pdr 6 2.8 3,000 910 1,100
75 mm 14.9 6.8 2,050 620 1,300
17 pdr 17 7.7 2,950 900 3,100
a Churchill with extra armor and the same gun as a Cromwell. it could be a little exciting. but not as a replacement for the Sherman Firefly, maybe for the Churchill Crocodile.
-
295 kJ
It won't even dissociate Iodine
-
seriously, i think somebody messed up.
-
Reward option for the M4 croc? Yes, we have the 105 sherman...why not something else? Or as a replacement for the M8--the current patch's T17 is utter crap (IMO) and EF deserves something...better? Or at least more interesting.
Unit idea is for the M5 Stuart 'Rhino'. I originally drew up the Rhino for CoH: Europe in Ruins: Reinforcements as well as other reward units, the majority of which were generally accepted as good ideas. The M5 for use in the context of EF (a non persistent, semi-vCoH environment) is in the first of the two attached PDF documents, and the full PDF with all of the units that were drawn up for EiR: R is thrown in below if anyone is interested in browsing through it for unit ideas.
For the most part, armored units' weapons' names are taken from coh-stats, while infantry weapons' names are drawn directly from the RGDs via Corsix--if it's on treads you'll probably have to check coh-stats and then find the statistical equivilent within the RGDs, as I'm sure the names probably don't match.
Cookie for anyone that can find the unit in the full PDF that made its debut in one of my EF concepts, went to EiR, and came back 8).
EDIT: The 'Repair' ability that's mentioned under Upgrades isnt supposed to be there. I missed it when I was editing the stats.
-
The American's new reward units are all good with the exception of the Sherman jumbo. I will never ever prefer the Sherman jumbo over the Sherman calliope. In my opinion is the Sherman jumbo is too bad compared to Sherman Calliope. The Sherman jumbo is otherwise a great tank but it can simply not replace the Sherman Calliope. Therefore I think it should be removed.
Here are 3 suggestions on new reward units that could replace the Sherman jumbo.
M22 Locust:
As the fourth and new reward unit, I could see M22 Locust replace the Para dropped 57mm AT Gun. As far as I know it was intended to be parachuted on to the battlefield. This never happened but it was sent down with gliders. As this is only a game, I think it would have best effect if it came down by parachute.
M22 Locust will in many ways resemble a tetrarch tank, approximately the same speed, armor and main gun.
lvt4 water buffalo:
And now to a really cool unit the lvt4 water buffalo 8). Lvt4 Water buffalo could be a great new reward unit for the M3 Half Track. Armed to the teeth with 2 × .50 cal Browning hmg and 2 × .30 cal Browning hmg and armor up to 6-13mm thick, this vehicle could bring troops forward through the toughest terrain under light fire. It could transporter more troops at a time than the M3 Half Track and if need small vehicles. However it will run slower.
2 upgrades would be possible.
75 mm Howitzer: a 75-mm Howitzer will be upgraded and thicker armor. But can no longer serve as troop transports.
37 mm Gun M6: a 37 mm Gun M6 will be upgraded plus thicker armor. But can no longer serve as troop transports.
-
Maybe the Sherman Jumbo could replace the M10 or the Hellcat. Heavier armor + 76mm gun would make it an okay TD. We could probably tweak a few stats to make it more in line with the stats of a TD
-
Na vCoH reward units aren't going to be replaced (unfortunately)
-
Na vCoH reward units aren't going to be replaced (unfortunately)
So is the Jumbo replacing the M10 still up for discussion? Cause quite honestly who in their right mind would replace a Calliope for a Jumbo? Well Calliope is better vs Infantry and Jumbo is better vs Tanks. Thats why it'd probably be appropriate to switch it out.
-
It is obvious that Jumbo -> M10 is not up for discussion.
1) Both units perform different function, the Jumbo would be better as reward unit of the M4 Sherman rather than M10.
2) M10 already has a reward unit, the M18, and we already said that we are not going to mess with units that already have reward unit.
-
2) M10 already has a reward unit, the M18, and we already said that we are not going to mess with units that already have reward unit.
Sorry I did not know this part :P
-
what about replacing the M1A1C 76mm Gun upgrade or the Defensive Smoke Screen upgrade with a M4A3E2 Sherman Jumbo upgrade. :)
-
^That would involve and armor type change and HP increase, would be hard to instate aestetically, and wouldn't serve any purpuse as to progressing the Sherman's AT effectiveness--ergo, it just makes the sherman even more of anan iron squirt gun (as opposed to a glass cannon).
-
For some reason I think that you sound negative about my proposal.
A Sherman jumbo will be able to fill out functions witch an ordinary a Sherman cannot do. A Sherman jumbo shoots high explosive rounds, and can withstand more punishment than most other allied tanks.
and also the Americans have already plenty of good anti-tank weapons such as M10, M18, M26, M4 Sherman, 57mm anti-tank gun, rangers and airborne. Perhaps many of them are glass cannons. But they still have airborne which slaughters tanks.
i finde My suggestion a better suggestion on what a Sherman jumbo can replace. I totally agree with Fishhunterx Cause quite honestly who in their right mind would replace a Calliope for a Jumbo?
Na vCoH reward units aren't going to be replaced (unfortunately)
So is the Jumbo replacing the M10 still up for discussion? Cause quite honestly who in their right mind would replace a Calliope for a Jumbo? Well Calliope is better vs Infantry and Jumbo is better vs Tanks. Thats why it'd probably be appropriate to switch it out.
nice one about the Calliope for the Jumbo, Fishhunterx ;)
-
^That would involve and armor type change and HP increase, would be hard to instate aestetically, and wouldn't serve any purpuse as to progressing the Sherman's AT effectiveness--ergo, it just makes the sherman even more of anan iron squirt gun (as opposed to a glass cannon).
mads idea wouldnt be that hard to implement I think. Maybe the "Jumbo" could be a upgrade, much like SU has uprades and once purchasefd, it completely replaces the option to build shermans and now its only Jumbos, like how buying the Heavy mortars replaces SU medium mortar but Heay mortar cost more.
And the Jumbo doesnt have to be AT. The KV-1 replaces the T-34 but neither are better at AT. Well, maybe one can circle strafe better but thats another discussion..
-
I totally agree with Fishhunterx.
-
I just have some suggestion on Brit AT
does anyone think of Archer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(tank_destroyer) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(tank_destroyer))
it is sth like wehr Geschutswagen
I don't know if it was used in France
but IMO it may fit the role of early-mid game AT
-
I just have some suggestion on Brit AT
does anyone think of Archer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(tank_destroyer) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(tank_destroyer))
it is sth like wehr Geschutswagen
I don't know if it was used in France
but IMO it may fit the role of early-mid game AT
Maybe it can replace the m10 achilles. Wasnt very unquie to begin with ::)