Login

russian armor

USF Commander Reshuffle

4 Nov 2019, 15:11 PM
#21
avatar of DerbyHat

Posts: 1026 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 13:32 PMddd
Heavy cav could use arty strike in place of terrible combined arms.


Some people still think Combined Arms is bad (or in this case "terrible")? :loco:

Watch top players like Asiamint and Jove use it, they might change your mind, it gives a huge advantage in any tank engagement. The bonusses being exclusive to veterancy was changed a long time ago.
4 Nov 2019, 15:12 PM
#22
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6402 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 14:15 PMLago


Your suggestion for Infantry Company is good, but I'm going to leave it be for now. This thread is as much suggesting the concept as the specific changes, so I want to keep edits fairly minimal.

I left Urban Assault Company alone mostly because I hate it and don't believe I'd be objective with it.

I understand where you are coming from but even these changes could only work as an interim solution.

Some things simply need to go/redesigned...USF has undergone so many stock/design changes that some abilities no longer fit the current design.

Imo commander redesign should be made with 2 different approaches:
1) Power level of commander across the same faction:
In other words removed thing that should not exist in the same commander like Priest/Tot/Reckon, Elephant/Recon/Stuka

2) Check individual abilities:
How useful an ability is and how it compares with other similar abilities

With a benchmark of how powerful a commander of faction should be it very difficult to commander's power level right and USF commander are an example of that...
4 Nov 2019, 15:15 PM
#23
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 14:58 PMddd
Did you ever wonder why mg34 was removed from luftwaffe commander after okw rework?


Perhaps because it was moved to the HQ? Instead of being in one of two exclusive tech trees?
4 Nov 2019, 15:48 PM
#24
avatar of Lago

Posts: 2722

How is it lame that the commander offers the flexibility to skip one of the officer techs to get access to both support weapon, resulting in faster tank tech (and avoiding another line infantry squad, so that calling in Paratroopers is easier). The commander has good synergy, besides being a bit munitions heavy.


That was a big deal with old USF, but is it that much of a big deal any more now sideteching is that much cheaper?

The main advantage of the airdrops now imo is less tech skipping and more the opportunity to make those weapons susbstantially stronger. Pathfinder crewed team weapons spot for themselves, and Paratrooper crewed weapons can reinforce from beacons.

Nevertheless, a straightforward commander like Airborne is bound to struggle against more recent, very versatile commanders.

That's the main thrust of this suggestion: move some of the toys out of saturated commanders like Mechanized that can't realistically use them all to buff up the less favoured commanders.
4 Nov 2019, 16:36 PM
#25
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 15:48 PMLago
Nevertheless, a straightforward commander like Airborne is bound to struggle against more recent, very versatile commanders.

That's the main thrust of this suggestion: move some of the toys out of saturated commanders like Mechanized that can't realistically use them all to buff up the less favoured commanders.


I don't think Airborne Company struggles at all, it's a very good and popular commander for team games, particularly because of access to the rocket planes to help fight Axis superheavies. Taking that away would actually be a significant nerf.
4 Nov 2019, 17:10 PM
#26
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 548



I don't think Airborne Company struggles at all, it's a very good and popular commander for team games, particularly because of access to the rocket planes to help fight Axis superheavies. Taking that away would actually be a significant nerf.


I would also let the p-47 rocket loiter in Airborne but would change the strafe in Tactical Support to an p-47 bombing run.
USA had the strongest air force in the war but the faction has less good air abilities than OKW who had zero air support in 1944/45.
Thats why i would suggest to give them at least the p-47 bombing run.
4 Nov 2019, 17:42 PM
#27
avatar of Lago

Posts: 2722

I don't think Airborne Company struggles at all, it's a very good and popular commander for team games, particularly because of access to the rocket planes to help fight Axis superheavies. Taking that away would actually be a significant nerf.


That sounds fair.

If you had carte blanche to shuffle up the USF commander abilities, what would you do?
4 Nov 2019, 17:49 PM
#28
avatar of Stormjäger

Posts: 879



I don't think Airborne Company struggles at all, it's a very good and popular commander for team games, particularly because of access to the rocket planes to help fight Axis superheavies. Taking that away would actually be a significant nerf.


Why just teamgames? Paratroopers are very strong in 1v1.
4 Nov 2019, 17:58 PM
#29
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 575

What you're suggesting amounts to an accross the board nerf for USF. These commanders are saturated with units and abilites because of the incomplete and risky non-linear tech tree USF has compared to all other factions. If you want to make it more fair you have to make some things non-doctrinal such as the Sherman dozer upgrade, the M3 halftrack, the M1919 MG.
4 Nov 2019, 21:10 PM
#30
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13777 | Subs: 7



How is it lame that the commander offers the flexibility to skip one of the officer techs to get access to both support weapon, resulting in faster tank tech (and avoiding another line infantry squad, so that calling in Paratroopers is easier). The commander has good synergy, besides being a bit munitions heavy.

+weapon drops for T1 soviets anyone?
5 Nov 2019, 01:49 AM
#31
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 963 | Subs: 1


You mean rear echelon company?


Remembering the glory days company
5 Nov 2019, 07:52 AM
#32
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2609 | Subs: 1



I don't think Airborne Company struggles at all, it's a very good and popular commander for team games, particularly because of access to the rocket planes to help fight Axis superheavies. Taking that away would actually be a significant nerf.


Can you list the USF commanders with abilities to help fighting Axis superheavies?
5 Nov 2019, 17:39 PM
#33
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Nov 2019, 07:52 AMEsxile
Can you list the USF commanders with abilities to help fighting Axis superheavies?

Airborne with the P47 loiter, Mechanized and Heavy Cavalry with Combined Arms (self spotting, +5 main gun range and +30% reload speed for Jacksons), and to some extend Infantry with the Priests (which are quite good at dislodging an Elefant or Jagdtiger).


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Nov 2019, 17:42 PMLago
If you had carte blanche to shuffle up the USF commander abilities, what would you do?

To be honest, I think most of them are fine as is. Rifle Company and Tactical Support could use a little extra perhaps, but I wouldn't really know what right now. USF actually has quite a large amount of viable/good commanders (across all gamemodes) and I personally don't think that every single commander has to be competitive, because ultimately the vast majority of the playerbase plays for fun. The faction is doing fine on all levels, so there isn't really a huge incentive to shuffle around / buff a bunch of commanders (don't fix what isn't broken).


Ideally, but impossible ofcourse, I would switch the M10 with the M36 to get rid of the overlap issues with all the doctrinal Shermans (being overshadowed by the M36), and give the USF the Sherman Jumbo (75mm/76mm) as a stock heavy medium, so that they'd have a damage sponge tank to work together with the M10s (like the Churchill/Firefly combo). Then the M36 could be toned down.
5 Nov 2019, 18:34 PM
#34
avatar of Lago

Posts: 2722

Ideally, but impossible ofcourse, I would switch the M10 with the M36 to get rid of the overlap issues with all the doctrinal Shermans (being overshadowed by the M36), and give the USF the Sherman Jumbo (75mm/76mm) as a stock heavy medium, so that they'd have a damage sponge tank to work together with the M10s (like the Churchill/Firefly combo). Then the M36 could be toned down.


The M10 has the penetration of the StuG though. Would it really cut it in teamgames?

What sort of stats are we talking for the stock heavy medium?
5 Nov 2019, 18:47 PM
#35
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6402 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Nov 2019, 18:34 PMLago


The M10 has the penetration of the StuG though. Would it really cut it in teamgames?

What sort of stats are we talking for the stock heavy medium?

The m10 lower penetration than stug but has AP rounds and speed boost to flank.

It has a different play style than Stug.

And trying to balance units vs enemy and allied units should not even be attempted. In team-games each faction should be using the stronger tools in its arsenal and not try to provide all types of units.
5 Nov 2019, 20:39 PM
#36
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13777 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Nov 2019, 18:47 PMVipper

The m10 lower penetration than stug but has AP rounds and speed boost to flank.

At hefty muni cost in most muni heavy faction in game.

It has a different play style than Stug.

In theory.
In practice, unless it would be desperate dive against KT or ele, it would be used exactly like stug - from max range in the back line, because there is no reason to use it in any other way except the two aforementioned units.

And trying to balance units vs enemy and allied units should not even be attempted. In team-games each faction should be using the stronger tools in its arsenal and not try to provide all types of units.

Yeah, no, that isn't going to happen as long as armor homogenization and generalization(which you are in full support of, if you have forgotten) continues.

Also, there still is issue of not being able to reliably counter heavies or panthers if M10 thing went through(without further changes, as Sander explained).
5 Nov 2019, 21:58 PM
#37
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6402 | Subs: 1


...
In theory.
In practice, unless it would be desperate dive against KT or ele, it would be used exactly like stug - from max range in the back line, because there is no reason to use it in any other way except the two aforementioned units.
...

If you think that M10 and Stug should be used the same way you should probably need to load the game at least once a month. Then you might have noticed that:

M10 has an ability called "flanking speed"

M10 has 140 far penetration, stug has 170

Now pls stop Trolling.


6 Nov 2019, 04:20 AM
#38
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3235 | Subs: 1


At hefty muni cost in most muni heavy faction in game.


In theory.
In practice, unless it would be desperate dive against KT or ele, it would be used exactly like stug - from max range in the back line, because there is no reason to use it in any other way except the two aforementioned units.


Yeah, no, that isn't going to happen as long as armor homogenization and generalization(which you are in full support of, if you have forgotten) continues.

Also, there still is issue of not being able to reliably counter heavies or panthers if M10 thing went through(without further changes, as Sander explained).


Could make HVAP much cheaper with vet like other shocks smoke. Not like vetted armour is an issue for usf, being able to swap crews around.

Also just because you might not always be rolling through the enemy lines doesn't mean having the ability to do so isn't huge. As a matter of fact that's part of why the Jackson is so strong--it CAN sit behind the lines like other allied TDs and work perfectly fine, or it can dive for that kill exactly like the m10 would but without making all other usf armour redundant.

Taking the step will help us see what else usf truly needs for stock at because right now we can't be sure as the Jackson covers everything absolutely and entirely.
Would buffing sherman pen help? Who knows. We won't unless we create an environment for us to properly test and as long as the Jacky Boi is omnipotent we never will
6 Nov 2019, 08:27 AM
#39
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 2609 | Subs: 1



Could make HVAP much cheaper with vet like other shocks smoke. Not like vetted armour is an issue for usf, being able to swap crews around.

Also just because you might not always be rolling through the enemy lines doesn't mean having the ability to do so isn't huge. As a matter of fact that's part of why the Jackson is so strong--it CAN sit behind the lines like other allied TDs and work perfectly fine, or it can dive for that kill exactly like the m10 would but without making all other usf armour redundant.

Taking the step will help us see what else usf truly needs for stock at because right now we can't be sure as the Jackson covers everything absolutely and entirely.
Would buffing sherman pen help? Who knows. We won't unless we create an environment for us to properly test and as long as the Jacky Boi is omnipotent we never will


I think we are all well aware of that. We reached the point where everyone agree on Jackson being the best TD in game, there is no doubt about it. Does it mean it can be nerf solely on this assessment, nop. Because USF faction is still what it is and the faction would collapse on itself if not for the Jackson.

If the idea about the M10 is to add it stock and dedicate the M36 to counter heavies, why not. If it is about swapping M10 and M36 the idea is just stupid.

USF initial faction has been design around lacks and gaps and imaginative (or not) ideas to fullfil those with different and unique abilities. At the end the result has been to make certain units OP to cover the needs in regard to the impossibility to balance it. We're still in this situation with the Jackson which need to be able to stand alone on the late game. There is no Comet or Churchill to soak damage as for the UKF or Katyusha to wipe the floor from team weapons like for the Soviet.
I mean I'll be more than happy to make the Jackson a Firefly's clone (even without tupiles) if a +900hp unit is added to USF roaster or to make it a SU85's clone if Calliope come to stock.


6 Nov 2019, 09:50 AM
#40
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6402 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Nov 2019, 08:27 AMEsxile

Does it mean it can be nerf solely on this assessment, nop. Because USF faction is still what it is and the faction would collapse on itself if not for the Jackson.
...

Saying that M36 can not be changed or USF will collapse is a just a theory not a fact and not matter how many times it is repeated it will not become a fact.

(since some people have trouble understanding or simply like to twist things, I had to edit)
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag N1cko
  • Oberkommando West flag Scotch1
  • Soviets flag Frosty
  • Soviets flag Beatricks Swire
uploaded by Frost

Board Info

321 users are online: 3 members and 318 guests
SturmtigerCobra, Katitof, Vipper
93 posts in the last 24h
1174 posts in the last week
5151 posts in the last month
Registered members: 68685
Welcome our newest member, 8gabriellac7291eg6
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM