Changin some of the reward units for all factions

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 ???

TERRORTYRANT wrote:
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.

TERRORTYRANT wrote:
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.

Last edited December 5, 2011 at 7:33 PM by TERRORTYRANT

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.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
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  :). )

PoliorcetE wrote:
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

TERRORTYRANT wrote:

PoliorcetE wrote:
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 ???

mads wrote:
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  ???

Ghost wrote:
@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

Last edited December 8, 2011 at 10:01 PM by Fishhunterx

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.

mads wrote:

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

+100000000

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

+9999999999999999

Yauz wrote:

mads wrote:
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

Last edited December 9, 2011 at 1:29 AM by Snugz

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

Fishhunterx wrote:
You guys don't seem to like RMC do you :P?

Don't get me started  ;D

Snugz wrote:

Fishhunterx wrote:
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.

Tankbuster wrote:
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.

mads wrote:
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.

Last edited December 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM by GodlikeDennis

mads wrote:
[...]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