CW - AT boys commando

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Lionelus
Posts: 51
Joined: 16 Dec 2015, 10:20
Location: Paris (France)

CW - AT boys commando

Postby Lionelus » 11 May 2017, 22:29

Hello BK community

This time, I'm writing about the At Boys commando.

I never tried this unit before. I was doing some test yesterday, and here are my feelings :

- the tool is not available at the right time : to get the Boys commando, you need 2nd truck + captain + 4 Command point. So much time, tech-wise. By that time, panzers are rolling on the field, against which Boys are useless. Even Piat commando are available earlier than boys commando. There is something incoherent here.
- the tool is very weak : single man squad, get killed very easily, even though with 125 HP, can't camo without "commando ambush" (which require 2 command point), no gammon bomb, no demolition charge.


I suggest :

- make it a 3-man squad, with cost between 300 and 350 MP, and with the commando features (gammon etc)
=> it shouldn't break any balance. That would be quite an expensive squad for 2 lee-enflied and 1 boys, so I guess that won't be an OP unit (I know many people rage against Boys tommy squad, and tbh, I don't understand why)

- make it available immediatly in the commando glider, along with Sten and Lee-Enfield Commando
=> it would give some AT capacity right away with first glider

What do you guys think ?

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 2980
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Tiger1996 » 12 May 2017, 04:55

Hmm, I am OK with it! Either ways...

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 217
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Redgaarden » 12 May 2017, 06:33

Shouldn't they have stens instead of enfields?
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 381
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby sgtToni95 » 12 May 2017, 07:44

Yeah i never built this unit, i totally agree with Lio.

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 12 May 2017, 08:18

Ok, im not against this too...but what will it really change?
Like, i dont see much use of commando Piat squads, or even simple Piat squads and at the point of availability of Commando glider will there be a need in BoisAT rifle?Or will it become another unit, that rushes in with massive blob and drops instant gammon bombs but for lower MP price?
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Leonida [525]
Posts: 137
Joined: 26 Jun 2016, 09:25

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Leonida [525] » 12 May 2017, 08:35

Yes I think they shouldnt have gammons

User avatar
Lionelus
Posts: 51
Joined: 16 Dec 2015, 10:20
Location: Paris (France)

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Lionelus » 12 May 2017, 11:47

idliketoplaybetter wrote:Or will it become another unit, that rushes in with massive blob and drops instant gammon bombs but for lower MP price?


3 men squad, with a cost between 300 and 350, that wouldn't be cheap at all.
Gammons, demolition charge and traps are not necessary though, as these are anti-anfantry oriented capacity.

Yet, what about droping mines ? that could be useful, to set ambush. Hawkins mine are well enough, they cripple light vehicules and do no harm to tanks. It shouldn't break any balance and give CW some more AT capacity mid game (people tend to rush to Achilles at the moment, because mid game AT capacity are limited, yet better now with piat buff)
At some point, if you want to play full commando, and infiltrate enemy territory, that could be good, if you have no engineers around.

idliketoplaybetter wrote:Like, i dont see much use of commando Piat squads, or even simple Piat squads


Maybe, people are not aware of the Piat buff lately. They one-shot halftrack now, which makes it a reliable weapons (before that, they needed 2, even 3 hits). I oftenly use Piat squad, not only with AT purpose. You got the attack ground feature : the explosion is good at destroying cover, and enemy infantry kind of panick (if not in "hold position"), which result in less damage output (panicking, running, instead of shooting).


I'm the kind of guy trying to make use of every unit. Most of the time, there is one.

As for now, Boys commando is totally useless and terribly underperforming

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 12 May 2017, 12:33

I didnt say "cheap", i said "lower price".Its different.
If those "anti infantry" things are not necessary, then ok, my argument goes off.

I feel like changing this, wont change anything at all anyway, aside of fact, that this unit will be in "somewhat" use.I mean, there is a gap in CW mid-game AT capabilities and it has nothing to do with BoysAT squad and etc.However this is other topic question...


P.S. - Lio, better take a look on 57mm gun, that is available even later than 17pdr and not in use as well :P
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Lionelus
Posts: 51
Joined: 16 Dec 2015, 10:20
Location: Paris (France)

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Lionelus » 12 May 2017, 13:20

idliketoplaybetter wrote:I mean, there is a gap in CW mid-game AT capabilities and it has nothing to do with BoysAT squad and etc.However this is other topic question...


true

idliketoplaybetter wrote:I feel like changing this, wont change anything at all anyway, aside of fact, that this unit will be in "somewhat" u


maybe. At least it would give another tool, which will give players new opportunity to find solutions and strategies. Better this than nothing, i guess

In any case, if the mod is going on steam, BK community will grow up, which is good (can't wait to see that moment). And this BOYS commando issue will come up again for sure. New players will test things out, and they'll notice, as I did, that there is something really really wrong with this unit

idliketoplaybetter wrote:P.S. - Lio, better take a look on 57mm gun, that is available even later than 17pdr and not in use as well


Still not available in 2nd truck. I guess there is a balancing reason not to implement it. It seems we have been talking about this for ages already.


Maybe, remove the boys commando. I would be perfectly fine with this tbh
At least, there won't be that "what the heck is this unit ?" feeling around it

speeddemon02
Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 03:11

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby speeddemon02 » 12 May 2017, 17:01

What about removing them and replacing them with a commando sapper type unit so there is a unit that can repair use flamethrowers?

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 13 May 2017, 08:32

speeddemon02 wrote:What about removing them and replacing them with a..



What i would rather see and i think could be(if even possible) a solution to this, is a combination of two, now existing units.

Commando Piat squad and BoysAT Commando unit.
So yes, as Lionel proposed, shifting BoysATcommando to somewhat earlier stage of the game, will might give CW player more variants on what to do.However, as i honestly think, it might not change nothing at all, if only, we wont make getting this unit more preferable in any way, without making other ATunits of that game stage, useless.

Before telling u my view, i must say, that i have no clue, if this would be even technically possible to implement..

So with a change of unit's state(from 2to3 soldiers in a squad), u get to build BoysATcommando unit, with 1ATrifle only.
They dont have all of the commando features, except of Smoke bombs to escape maybe, but with later capacity on placing mines.

Later, after the 2nd-3d Glider upgrade, u get the ability, to upgrade this squad with 1extra man and 1 or even 2 piats maybe(only near the HQ).And they are getting the rest of the bonuses, normal CommandoPiat squad has now(and if that was ever possible, smoke grenade launch ability for them with long CD and Price that wont make it abusive).

In result, we will NOT have 2units with basically 1 of them (atriflesquad) getting useless to mid-late stage of the game AND we also making Glider upgrades more desirable and maybe increasing player wish to keep HQ safe.

All of the Prices/Upgrades nuances should be moderated ofcourse and i hope all of that wont appear to be full non-sense.

Cheers
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1648
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby MarKr » 13 May 2017, 12:42

idliketoplaybetter wrote:Before telling u my view, i must say, that i have no clue, if this would be even technically possible to implement..
I am not saying we will do this - we have not talked about it with Pblitz and Wolf yet, so this is just theoretical thinking...It would be possible but I think there would be sort of a problem with the weapons loadout - BOYS rifle has range of 60 while Piats have 45 that means that if you give to such a squad attack order I guess the dude with BOYS could fire from distance but will try to move to the Piats attack range anyway OR he will keep shooting from distance while the Piats guys will try to move closer which would cause the squad to "spread out" which I am not sure how it would work in praxis. Also Piats can shoot over obstacles while BOYS requires direct line of sight so if you would cover your squad behind a bush line and ordered them to fire over the bush at some target the guy with BOYS rifle would probably try to walk to such a position to have direct view on the target also suppression counts for entire squad so if this one guy get suppressed it will automatically suppress the piat guys behind the bush etc.

So I am not sure how would this mixed AT loadout work in the game.
Image

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 13 May 2017, 13:03

Well, first of all thanks for the response on this, now i feel like it was not a complete-complete disaster : )

But what if Piats shifted BoysAT rifle instead of just being added to the squad?As if im not wrong happens when u pick dropped weapon, or like in this case, Upgrade for free bren mg?It simply changes weapon loadout to other.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 381
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby sgtToni95 » 13 May 2017, 18:39

Playbetter's idea is actually nice, tho i think the fact that they become quite useless in late game is comparable to what happens to pak 36s, so i don't really consider that as a problem to solve. Allowing AT boys to be "promoted" to PIAT squad seems to me like giving pak 36 a panzershreck upgrade to prevent them from becoming useless in the late phases of the game.
Increasing the price and enlarging the squad to 3 members, equipped with lee enfield, would be a nice solution to me, tho i think making them available in the standard glider or, at most, after the first glider upgrade, is somewhat necessary because of their AT capability. I've seen people complaining about Boys squads being too good against infantry, so they would still mantain this purpose in the late game, and while ambushed they can still be a non conventional scout unit.

Maybe, tho i'm aware this suggestion might probably be "dangerous" for balance, to make them really worth it even in the late phases of the game, they could get (back), together with one of the last tech tree commando's upgrades, that ability they had, which allowed them to immobilize an enemy vehicle (even the bigger ones) by destroying its tracks.
Of course, if this ability was given them it would cost some ammo when used, with a price to decide, depending on the chance they'd have to immobilize the targeted vehicle, the maximum distance from which this could be used and other factors which would be discussed.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 2980
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Tiger1996 » 13 May 2017, 18:44

Allowing AT boys to be "promoted" to PIAT squad seems to me like giving pak 36 a panzershreck upgrade to prevent them from becoming useless in the late phases of the game.
Increasing the price and enlarging the squad to 3 members, equipped with lee enfield, would be a nice solution to me, tho i think making them available in the standard glider or, at most, after the first glider upgrade, is somewhat necessary because of their AT capability.

Agreed.
Maybe, tho i'm aware this suggestion might probably be "dangerous" for balance, to make them really worth it even in the late phases of the game, they could get (back), together with one of the last tech tree commando's upgrades, that ability they had, which allowed them to immobilize an enemy vehicle (even the bigger ones) by destroying its tracks.

One big "NO" from my side... I think the tread-breaker ability should never be implemented again.

speeddemon02
Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 03:11

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby speeddemon02 » 13 May 2017, 19:38

For RAF I might have agree with the tread breaker, RAF units do not have much to counter heavy armor

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 381
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby sgtToni95 » 13 May 2017, 19:39

What if it costed around 60/70 or even more ammo?
Pak 38 has rocket ability which not only makes it useful in late game, but it even allows you to oneshot allies heavy tanks, bringing on its effectiveness to late game phases.. I do realize immobilizing a panther or any kind of "big tank" on axis would likely doom it because of an incoming airstrike, but since it does not remove any hp (without other units attacks) it could be immediately repaired by pios..

I think losing a pershing or a churchill to a 100 ammo rocket is very painful too, and de-tracking ability combined with airstrike would cost much more 70(?) ammo + 200 ammo for airstrike (i still recognize axis tanks are more expansive).

I realize this ability was removed for a reason, that's why i suggested that so cautiously.

@speeddemon: RAF has achilles, 17 pounders, fireflies, rocket airstrike and gammon bombs... i think they don't really lack AT tools, my suggestion was more to be taken as a solution to make AT boys very useful in late game.

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 13 May 2017, 20:35

Well, first of all, i think i was kinda missunderstood and now this thread went somewhere far, from its main topic with all this "Lack of late game AT etc etc".
I was only responding to a "shifting ATboys/removing them" part of this.And my proposition was based only on that.
And from that, in total u wont get anything, but 1 unit(basically same commandoPiat squad) but more universal and dependable on teching.Which in my opinion, will bring both originality and usefullness for it.And might to feel that early-mid game AT gap CW sometimes might experience.

I've suggested it, simply to save this from desperity of taking ATboyscomm's from mod at all, or simply making them by Lionel plan(but maybe its just unnecessary effort).
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

speeddemon02
Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 03:11

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby speeddemon02 » 13 May 2017, 21:52

I was thinking more from the gliders in enemy territory, 17pder wont last long and isnt very mobile, being able to break the treads has a much greater range than any grenade in terms of stopping the advance and not necessarily destroying. It would be simpler to the pak38 where it still has use in late game. I too would rather have more units then take away.

User avatar
Lionelus
Posts: 51
Joined: 16 Dec 2015, 10:20
Location: Paris (France)

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby Lionelus » 15 May 2017, 23:05

Tiger1996 wrote:Maybe, tho i'm aware this suggestion might probably be "dangerous" for balance, to make them really worth it even in the late phases of the game, they could get (back), together with one of the last tech tree commando's upgrades, that ability they had, which allowed them to immobilize an enemy vehicle (even the bigger ones) by destroying its tracks.

One big "NO" from my side... I think the tread-breaker ability should never be implemented again.


agree, that would be too much. If I remember well, this abilities is still up in PE. So, the "never be implemented again" is kind of untrue at the moment

All in all, AT boys tommies, or boys commando, are quite weak. i would say that's ok historically wise. Yet, if you compare it to other early AT, you'll notice that boys are useless mid game
- you need 3 hits minimum to destroy light vehicule ; not to mention how poorly accurate they are
- very little anti-infantry capacity : you can't compare the 2 lee-enfield to HE rounds other AT guns got.

For Boys commando :
- make it a 4 men squad. Available first glider. With piat upgrade. And mines.

for Boys gun (tommies and commando)
here are suggestion :
- first strike bonus (when camoed) : increased critical hits
- with veterancy, that bonus goes up

Boys are crappy at killing things. We could make it at least usefull at crippling things

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby JimQwilleran » 15 May 2017, 23:21

Lionelus wrote:All in all, AT boys tommies, or boys commando, are quite weak. i would say that's ok historically wise. Yet, if you compare it to other early AT, you'll notice that boys are useless mid game
- you need 3 hits minimum to destroy light vehicule ; not to mention how poorly accurate they are
- very little anti-infantry capacity : you can't compare the 2 lee-enfield to HE rounds other AT guns got.

Boys are crappy at killing things. We could make it at least useful at crippling things


I wouldn't agree with that. Imo Boys are much better at than guns:

- They cant be outmaneuvered, that's like a level up already
- For most of PE vehicles they need only 2 shots, for schwimms only 1 shot in 95% of cases. Only the bigger cars like pumas need 3 shots, quite like US 37mm gun. So they are basically just like AT gun but with 360 degree fire cone. Their accuracy is at least comparable with at guns imo.
- They are more mobile than AT gun, with possibility to sprint and enter structures and vehicles
- Also I would pick 2 lee enfields over pak HE. HE costs ammo, very important in early game, it fires around 4 times, most of the time enemy runs away after the 1st shot... but
- If you pay 500 mp for 2 boys squads, not only you receive 2x AT that denies 2 tiers of axis units, but also 2/3 of regular tommy squad, because of those 4 regular soldiers that make up those teams. That's often enough to win with Volks over long distance.

Please don't touch tommy boys. They have already been buffed over a few patches. This balance is very fragile, and already slightly pro Brits currently. I shouldn't say that, early brits could use a nerf, so I won't say that :).

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 16 May 2017, 09:54

Lionelus wrote:All in all, AT boys tommies, or boys commando, are quite weak. i would say that's ok historically wise. Yet, if you compare it to other early AT, you'll notice that boys are useless mid game
- you need 3 hits minimum to destroy light vehicule ; not to mention how poorly accurate they are
- very little anti-infantry capacity : you can't compare the 2 lee-enfield to HE rounds other AT guns got.



Lionelus wrote:Boys are crappy at killing things. We could make it at least usefull at crippling things


Well, first of all, u kinda missleading everyone now.

U say "historically" its ok, but then they get useless mid game. And DUH.That's what happened to all ATrifles in real life.

And later, u say "you can't compare..", and duh again, u really can't/should not compare those by many factors.

BoysSquad itself is original unit, no wonder they never got brave enough to bring it to vCoh concept.

Im not saying ur wrong, but ur bringing wrong arguments for promoting ur point.So even Jim can beat that.

Best reason for any change there, was fact, that no one is using the unit on that late game phase, simply, cause u have no need in him.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby JimQwilleran » 16 May 2017, 10:16

idliketoplaybetter wrote:So even Jim can beat that.

What the hell is your problem?

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby idliketoplaybetter » 16 May 2017, 10:17

Relax
By that, i meant that u were not paying any attention to this topic at all, but with 1 simple post have managed to close it.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: CW - AT boys commando

Postby JimQwilleran » 16 May 2017, 10:26

I pay attention to all topics. I have read them all!


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests