Login

russian armor

Smartie's commander reworks: USF

PAGES (10)down
21 Jan 2021, 17:59 PM
#121
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3242 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jan 2021, 14:19 PMVipper

You are the one failing to understand that the only thing I have posted so far it that your claim about the one commander is false.

On top of that you are responding to fabricated things I have not posted anything about.


Can't help you if you stick to a sentence taken out of context.


If every, or almost every commander provides the tool in one way or another its not quite as big a problem. Not that I'm even suggesting only doctrinal options-I'm not nor was I. Exile is pissy because a usf Panther clone is a God awful idea and I told him such so he ignored my multiple declarations that usf medium AT needs brought up to snuff to accompany the Jackson nerf to try and make me look like he.

Elite zooks on officers would help not only with usf medium AT but also make the officers feel... More,for example.
More accessible HVAP on the 57mm via price reduction would help
Sherman AP could be looked at and made more AT with a bit less AOE.

There are options but I maintain, the do it all Jackson is overshadowing a number of USF vehicles and smothering diversity.


Couldn't care less about what you think about it. It wasn't even a formal proposal just an example of what would really make the Ez8 useful in its actual context of AT specialist. Thing is except you and Vipper everybody got the point.


21 Jan 2021, 18:07 PM
#122
avatar of Aarotron

Posts: 561

Also the fact that jackson is only usf mobile anti tank unit when other factions can deploy 2. Soviets have su 76 and 85. Ost stug and panther. Okw jadgpanz and panther. Brits firefly and comet (not exactly dedicated but it can effectively fill that) usf only has jackson unless you try to pull my leg and insist stuart is that. Jackson has to be good because you cant without doc alternate from it.
21 Jan 2021, 20:47 PM
#123
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1090

Jackson should not and will not be changed when you have 260 armour stock tanks on both axis teams with a non doctrinal King Tiger. Not to mention the 234 armour on OKW P4 and 230 armour on JP4. Same as why allies have TDs with such range and firepower.

I still stand by what I said about the E8. Buff armour a bit and cannon AI by even less and increase fuel by 10.
21 Jan 2021, 22:08 PM
#124
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 834 | Subs: 1

Before I posted my ideas I chekd the 2 year old new us commander thread
https://www.coh2.org/topic/85214/new-commander-submission-usahttps://www.coh2.org/topic/85214/new-commander-submission-usa

I found a very interesting idea I would like to share so we can discuss it:
Gliderborne Infantry Insertion (American Soldier’s idea)
• 2/3 CP.
• An Airborne unit is inserted to the battlefield by a Glider which can then be used as a sort of forward base if it's in friendly territory so infantry can reinforce from it.

I like this idea a lot. What do you think? It could replace the shitty p-45 strafe in Tactical Support for example.
21 Jan 2021, 22:21 PM
#125
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5248

you guys saying the jackson needs to be good because its all there is are not reading what i am saying
MAKE THE OTHER STOCK OPTIONS BETTER AND TONE DOWN THE JACKSON
yes. RIGHT NOW it has to be good because the stock options are not great
YES there is no real stock alternative
YES it has to be good against heavy armour

BUT in its current state it is taking the role of 2 sherman variants and the m10 as well as its own
this is BAD for diversity AND balance. this means that any doctrine with these vehicles is automatically obsolete and working at 80% of a full commander loadout (except the mechanized one that has like 12 vehicles and 15 abilities, but thats the result of trying to make a commander with a medium AT tank attractive when the Jackson already fills the role better)

the Jackson would remain as is against heavy targets, but lose efficiency against medium targets and stock medium options would be brought up to snuff.

again for those in the back
THE JACKSON WOULD STILL COUNTER HEAVY TANKS AND THE REST OF THE USF AT WOULD BE BROUGHT UP TO SNUFF

this means if the enemy is playing heavy in the mediums/lights your BO is a bit different than if they are going heavy tanks. you may build something other than the jackson until they come out with something heavy.
right now from kuble to JT jackson is your tool
this means the 76mm shermans and m10s are redundant, the jackson will do the job at least as well with none of the risk AND if the enemy builds literally anything, itll still be Gucci.


as for making the shermans all AI variants, that would probably be worse than them being AT variants, because while the jackson covers all AT, usf doesnt lack for AI either. the M4 has the best aoe of any medium on its HE shells. BAR rifles are amazing, elite infantry are godly, scotts, pak howis, AAHT... the only thing the USF have more of than AI is smoke...


the long and short is that unless you make ALL doctrinal AT vehicles blatantly broke, you will never ever ever ever see them. ever. hell, the m10 is a great lil TD, but people only used them when they could roadkill infantry as well. despite being half the price nearly of a jackson, even when you go mech you will probably still skip it because the jackson is SO MUCH better, unless you cant afford one and need AT 2 min ago.

as long as these units are competeing with the jackson they will never be up to snuff adn those commanders will be underwhelming.
buff the core medium AT and reduce the jacksons medium power. then there is a range of units to fill the gap both doctrinally and not.
21 Jan 2021, 22:59 PM
#126
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103

Wolverine would need some serious looking into if Jackson were ever to be brought down in terms of AT. The only times I remember getting a Wolverine was when first trying the doctrine out and after that only if I/my team was completely rolling over the axis.
On that note including the Pershing in any list but a meme one shows how little some people know about how mediorce it is.
21 Jan 2021, 23:10 PM
#127
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1090

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jan 2021, 22:59 PMTygrys
Wolverine would need some serious looking into if Jackson were ever to be brought down in terms of AT. The only times I remember getting a Wolverine was when first trying the doctrine out and after that only if I/my team was completely rolling over the axis.
On that note including the Pershing in any list but a meme one shows how little some people know about how mediorce it is.


Everyone knows how mediocre pershing is. Nobody dares to touch it ATM because you'll see a lot of whereaboo screams. Wolverine is actually not that bad. Used it a couple of times in 3v3s to great effect with it's hit and run. It does fall off once the heavier stuff starts rolling out, but the whole point of playing USF in teamgames is to lock down the game early on. Don't think it's possible to win super late game vs a good OKW/OST combo players (as USF without soviets in team)
21 Jan 2021, 23:43 PM
#128
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103



Everyone knows how mediocre pershing is. Nobody dares to touch it ATM because you'll see a lot of whereaboo screams. Wolverine is actually not that bad. Used it a couple of times in 3v3s to great effect with it's hit and run. It does fall off once the heavier stuff starts rolling out, but the whole point of playing USF in teamgames is to lock down the game early on. Don't think it's possible to win super late game vs a good OKW/OST combo players (as USF without soviets in team)


Key word being good. Then again axis have so many tools to just mouthbreathe through a game especially later on it doesn't really matter that much if I think about it now. Maybe UK is comparable but that's just with the infantry sections only and only for as long as the new patch doesn't drop.
Coming back to the Pershing though the tank needs help but so does the doctrine. Ideally I'd see another doctrine similar to the one Soviets have with T-34-85 and IS-2 in it so the US would have a dedicated armoured doctrine. Right now there are a few of them but not a single one is really that concentrated on armour. With a better Pershing and possibly the E8 that could maybe fix two things in one stroke.
22 Jan 2021, 00:14 AM
#129
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 764

pershing is meme unit??? how is the pershing medicore? ive used it so many times and think its a very good unit.



Everyone knows how mediocre pershing is. Nobody dares to touch it ATM because you'll see a lot of whereaboo screams. Wolverine is actually not that bad. Used it a couple of times in 3v3s to great effect with it's hit and run. It does fall off once the heavier stuff starts rolling out, but the whole point of playing USF in teamgames is to lock down the game early on. Don't think it's possible to win super late game vs a good OKW/OST combo players (as USF without soviets in team)


the only whereaboo here is you. The reason ppl dont go pershing is the same reason thedarkarmadillo been talking about. If you need AT you go jackson, if you need AI usf have exclelent INF and HE sherman if you want AI on tracks. Ive used pershing many times in conjuction with jacksons, making the pershing more of damage sponge, very good AI and can suppport the jacksons in AT.
22 Jan 2021, 01:27 AM
#130
avatar of theekvn

Posts: 160

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jan 2021, 00:14 AMAlphrum
pershing is meme unit??? how is the pershing medicore? ive used it so many times and think its a very good unit.



the only whereaboo here is you. The reason ppl dont go pershing is the same reason thedarkarmadillo been talking about. If you need AT you go jackson, if you need AI usf have exclelent INF and HE sherman if you want AI on tracks. Ive used pershing many times in conjuction with jacksons, making the pershing more of damage sponge, very good AI and can suppport the jacksons in AT.

sadly, Compere to all heavy tank, M26 is the weakest. Panther can win it in 1v1, AI and heatlh cant win tiger or quick enough to moving around the map.
22 Jan 2021, 08:11 AM
#131
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3242 | Subs: 1

you guys saying the jackson needs to be good because its all there is are not reading what i am saying
MAKE THE OTHER STOCK OPTIONS BETTER AND TONE DOWN THE JACKSON
yes. RIGHT NOW it has to be good because the stock options are not great
YES there is no real stock alternative
YES it has to be good against heavy armour

BUT in its current state it is taking the role of 2 sherman variants and the m10 as well as its own
this is BAD for diversity AND balance. this means that any doctrine with these vehicles is automatically obsolete and working at 80% of a full commander loadout (except the mechanized one that has like 12 vehicles and 15 abilities, but thats the result of trying to make a commander with a medium AT tank attractive when the Jackson already fills the role better)


Sherman variants/m10 =! stock option.

And it is not like everyone here has not already proposed solutions to make USF less dependant on the Jackson with the only result of the balance team adjusting the Jackson price and armor.
This says something: the jackson isn't going to be touched, even in this patch which is supposed to focus on CORE units, absolutely nothing has been done to modify the Jackson synergy within the USF late game.
So maybe you like to fight windmill but don't call it balance.
22 Jan 2021, 08:31 AM
#132
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5248

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jan 2021, 08:11 AMEsxile


Sherman variants/m10 =! stock option.

what's the only line that is entirely caps in the quoted text say? It's the very first bit of caps in the stuff you wuoted

And it is not like everyone here has not already proposed solutions to make USF less dependant on the Jackson with the only result of the balance team adjusting the Jackson price and armor.
This says something: the jackson isn't going to be touched, even in this patch which is supposed to focus on CORE units, absolutely nothing has been done to modify the Jackson synergy within the USF late game.
So maybe you like to fight windmill but don't call it balance.

because they don't know what to do with it and changing it without other changes means USF could fall apart. Doesn't mean we can't talk about it especially when it's holding back multiple other vehicles and mudding up multiple doctrines as a result.
22 Jan 2021, 09:35 AM
#133
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3242 | Subs: 1



If it was their priority that would have already be included in the patch. But Ostruppen and butchering the Scott into irrelevant are more important things to do.
22 Jan 2021, 09:41 AM
#134
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17536 | Subs: 8

Yeah, you aren't going to see any kind of Jackson AT change without compensating it with buffing 57mm and since that haven't happened despite multiple patches tackling that issue, don't get your hopes up.

Jackson was and will be what keeps USF AT together, because it has to.
22 Jan 2021, 10:06 AM
#135
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jan 2021, 00:14 AMAlphrum
pershing is meme unit??? how is the pershing medicore? ive used it so many times and think its a very good unit.



the only whereaboo here is you. The reason ppl dont go pershing is the same reason thedarkarmadillo been talking about. If you need AT you go jackson, if you need AI usf have exclelent INF and HE sherman if you want AI on tracks. Ive used pershing many times in conjuction with jacksons, making the pershing more of damage sponge, very good AI and can suppport the jacksons in AT.


I think you should look up what wehraboo means. Also yes, Pershing is average to bad. It's a fun unit but it is in no way competitive, considering it's price and performance. The rest of the doctrine is nothing to write home about either.
22 Jan 2021, 10:47 AM
#136
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1090

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jan 2021, 10:06 AMTygrys


I think you should look up what wehraboo means. Also yes, Pershing is average to bad. It's a fun unit but it is in no way competitive, considering it's price and performance. The rest of the doctrine is nothing to write home about either.


Actually, the doctrine is great IMHO. The offmap smoke is absolutely great in a pinch. Saved my ass plenty of times. Sandbags/mines is great. Rangers are a bit pop heavy but put 3 zooks on them and you have a medium killing squad that does not have the range of the AT gun but also much more mobile + nade (great for baiting tanks into them). The only ability I never used is the combined arms. It shines if you blob the shit out of an enemy during some pushes but other than that, too expensive for my blood.
People saying that they had fun with Pershing is such an indicator of it's non-meme status... I still play the Pershing commander quite often. Also, one big fat lie I spotted is having Pershing and JacksonS (multiple). Unless you have no rangers/paks/AT guns/AA HT or anything like that, you won't fit a Pershing and Jacksons into a winning roster, especially not if the enemy has more than one AT gun.

I also never play the Sherman. Not planning to get a tank just for it's AI and god forbid another tank charges and you have to switch shells. Pak howis and AA HT do the trick just fine.

22 Jan 2021, 11:28 AM
#137
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 834 | Subs: 1


The only ability I never used is the combined arms. It shines if you blob the shit out of an enemy during some pushes but other than that, too expensive for my blood.


I agree that Combined Arms is too expensive. It should be toned down but cost less. Should be in the same price range of VA and FMR.
22 Jan 2021, 13:19 PM
#138
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103



Actually, the doctrine is great IMHO. The offmap smoke is absolutely great in a pinch. Saved my ass plenty of times. Sandbags/mines is great. Rangers are a bit pop heavy but put 3 zooks on them and you have a medium killing squad that does not have the range of the AT gun but also much more mobile + nade (great for baiting tanks into them). The only ability I never used is the combined arms. It shines if you blob the shit out of an enemy during some pushes but other than that, too expensive for my blood.
People saying that they had fun with Pershing is such an indicator of it's non-meme status... I still play the Pershing commander quite often. Also, one big fat lie I spotted is having Pershing and JacksonS (multiple). Unless you have no rangers/paks/AT guns/AA HT or anything like that, you won't fit a Pershing and Jacksons into a winning roster, especially not if the enemy has more than one AT gun.

I also never play the Sherman. Not planning to get a tank just for it's AI and god forbid another tank charges and you have to switch shells. Pak howis and AA HT do the trick just fine.



I don't like that doctrine. Like I mentioned before I'd rather have a purely armoured doctrine with some kind of 76 Sherman, be it either E8 or M4A3 76 and the Pershing than what it currently has. It's all over the place in my opinion. Sure, I use it from time to time but only because the Pershing is a fun unit against axis teams with their combined IQ of a melon. Otherwise it's absolutely noncompetitive.
22 Jan 2021, 15:21 PM
#139
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 764



Actually, the doctrine is great IMHO. The offmap smoke is absolutely great in a pinch. Saved my ass plenty of times. Sandbags/mines is great. Rangers are a bit pop heavy but put 3 zooks on them and you have a medium killing squad that does not have the range of the AT gun but also much more mobile + nade (great for baiting tanks into them). The only ability I never used is the combined arms. It shines if you blob the shit out of an enemy during some pushes but other than that, too expensive for my blood.
People saying that they had fun with Pershing is such an indicator of it's non-meme status... I still play the Pershing commander quite often. Also, one big fat lie I spotted is having Pershing and JacksonS (multiple). Unless you have no rangers/paks/AT guns/AA HT or anything like that, you won't fit a Pershing and Jacksons into a winning roster, especially not if the enemy has more than one AT gun.

I also never play the Sherman. Not planning to get a tank just for it's AI and god forbid another tank charges and you have to switch shells. Pak howis and AA HT do the trick just fine.



are you in my house? can you see the games i played? i have used perishing’s with Jacksons so many times, stop speaking BS. The reason perishing is not competitive is because it lacks any real role to provide something unique for USF as USF already can get very strong AT from Jacksons and very strong AI from other units, which is what dark has been mentioning, but you seem to be purposely ignoring it. The only way people will use perishing more competitively if the unit becomes OP by becoming a superior option to already powerful USF units, which seems to be some people’s agenda here.

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jan 2021, 01:27 AMtheekvn

sadly, Compere to all heavy tank, M26 is the weakest. Panther can win it in 1v1, AI and heatlh cant win tiger or quick enough to moving around the map.


Once again you making vague points weak this, weak that, tell me how is it weak? its AI? AT? health not enough? too slow?, put out statsitics or something, have a look at the pershing stats and tell me whats bad about it. And a panther IS SUPPOSED TO COUNTER A PERSHING
22 Jan 2021, 16:47 PM
#140
avatar of Dharx

Posts: 83

Pershing does not compete with Jackons or Shermans, just like Tiger doesn't compete with Panzers and Panthers. It's a heavy, and as such you expect it to perform these roles, which mediums simply cannot:
  • Provide staying power, the ability to directly remain in a fight for longer periods of time before resorting to hit/reverse strategy.
  • Converting recuperation costs from resources (manpower, fuel) into repair time, thus helping to spread resource/repair economy more evenly across your composition and generally saving resources in the long run.
  • Frontload DPS into big blasts, resulting in more wipes.
  • Fitting multiple roles (damage sponge, AI, AT) into relatively small amount of pop, making your overall composition more efficient in relation to popcap.

Tiger can do all of that in accordance with its price. IS-2 too, but being more clunky and less dangerous at that, hence its lower popularity. Pershing kinda does fit these roles too, but does so at a very high price despite having comparably low durability, which is the key stat if you want it to perform well at #1, #2 and #4. As such it's simply not so desirable at its price, especially considering that sticking to the baseline composition is goood enough and leaving you with the option to pick the best possible doctrine.
PAGES (10)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

Board Info

206 users are online: 1 member and 205 guests
Lady Xenarra
62 posts in the last 24h
404 posts in the last week
2404 posts in the last month
Registered members: 25201
Welcome our newest member, Neumeierlik
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM