Login

russian armor

Upcoming Comander Update - Wishes

PAGES (15)down
Pip
7 Mar 2021, 17:20 PM
#221
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1518

Let's talk about the Lend-Lease Assault Team, again. Remember that the defenders of this ridiculous design justified this by the fact that the assault team appears faster than the building of T3. Now there is no such excuse. With the new T3 price, resources and T3 construction occurs before CP3. And I'm heading for the redesign of the assault team.


What, the Soviet one that gives Assault Guards and an HT? Yeah, zero reason for that to be the way it is, except for some weird "Thematic" argument that degrades gameplay.

No reason not to just turn it into a regular callin that just provides the Assault Guards. (If you want to maintain the "Thematic" part of them arriving in an HT, you could even just have it drive in, drop them off, and then drive back off the map... Though I dont see why you'd bother)
7 Mar 2021, 18:15 PM
#222
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 816

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Mar 2021, 16:44 PMPip
...


Thanks for your feedback :)


Soviet: Defensive Tactics
Heavy mine: Yeah it sounds reasonable to put it on HT. Good addition.
M-42: Since patch the buffed PTRS Penals deal 1,5x the damage of M-42, have their aim time drastically reduced and are way more versatile. M-42 will get less desirable for early game. Late game you need Zis either way.
Hull-Down: I proposed KV-1 because it has Hull Down already and it is the only tank were it makes sense. You don’t want to have your T-70 or T34 in Hull-Down, they need manoeuvrability, you don’t want SU-76 or Su-85 either because of their fixed cannon. So it makes only sense at KV-1.
Barbed Wire: Don’t know either, would be something unique for sure.

Ostheer: Defensive Doctrine
I do think the forward retreat point would be a unique addition for Ostheer, especially at that the big 4vs4 maps.

OKW: Elite Armored Doctrine
I do think we are of the same opinion that something additional armored would make sense.

UKF: Commandos
There were different kinds of Commandos and even the small Tetrach tank that could be dropped by Glider at CoH1. Maybe you could introduce a 4man demolition or AT squad that gets dropped by glider. Would be cool and in the spirit of CoH1.

USF: Recon Company
Airdrop: Splitted drop would be a good thing.
Rifle Flares: Adding them to Pathfinder or Reserve falls is a good addition too.
Greyhound: Yeah it is thematic but it sucks. Bind it to tech for timing across gamemodes and balance it around that timing. That would be okay.
Pip
7 Mar 2021, 19:04 PM
#223
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1518


Thanks for your feedback :)


You're welcome.

As an aside, I don't really see the point in the "Command Point" system to begin with... It'd be a lot easier to balance things if all commander abilities were tied to teching rather than the abstract "Command point" resource. (All callin units being buildable rather than being callins would be good, too.) They're ostensibly meant to augment your faction's abilities, after all.

It's not something that's going away in CoH2's lifetime, of course, but I do hope Lelic consider just scrapping that system entirely in CoH3.
7 Mar 2021, 19:58 PM
#224
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 834 | Subs: 1

One more wish for Wehrmacht:
Considerung that the only mass usage of Goliaths in the whole war happened at the battle of Kursk it would be nice to see 1 wehr commander with this unit.
9 Mar 2021, 06:04 AM
#225
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 1905 | Subs: 2

Armored Assault Commander. In my opinion, the presence of two tank (T-34-85 and IS-2) in one commander is not the best implementation of the commander. I propose to transfer one of the tanks to another commander.
9 Mar 2021, 06:15 AM
#226
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 834 | Subs: 1

Armored Assault Commander. In my opinion, the presence of two tank (T-34-85 and IS-2) in one commander is not the best implementation of the commander. I propose to transfer one of the tanks to another commander.


Armored Assault is fine with the 2 tanks imo, because the the strength of the doctrine are tanks. This comes at a cost because you don't get elite inf. Shock Rifle Frontline should be nerfed instead. Elite inf+Off map+ 2 nondoctrinal tanks is simply too much.
One of the tanks should be removed and used for another doctrine. Especially the 2nd or 3rd tier commanders would win a lot if the (buffed) IS-2 would be included.
9 Mar 2021, 07:43 AM
#227
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 990

Replace all comanders flares (Okw Specs ops and Brits one) with recon plane. Too strong, with no counters.
9 Mar 2021, 07:58 AM
#228
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 1905 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Mar 2021, 07:43 AMAradan
Replace all comanders flares (Okw Specs ops and Brits one) with recon plane. Too strong, with no counters.


It is enough to make the lighting open the fog of war only in the depths of one sector on the front line.
9 Mar 2021, 11:50 AM
#229
avatar of OrangePest

Posts: 454 | Subs: 1

If theres a commander that needs changing for soviets its probably advanced warfare, one of my favorite commanders in the game

So whats the change? Swap ppsh with svts, fits the theme of advanced weapons, and would give some more variety.
If you wanted a way to differentiate that svt from the airborne one you could make it an upgrade or something.
9 Mar 2021, 11:52 AM
#230
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17541 | Subs: 8

If theres a commander that needs changing for soviets its probably advanced warfare, one of my favorite commanders in the game

So whats the change? Swap ppsh with svts, fits the theme of advanced weapons, and would give some more variety.
If you wanted a way to differentiate that svt from the airborne one you could make it an upgrade or something.

That's pretty good idea actually.
However ppsh also provide HTD which is very useful utility for 7 man cons.
PPSH alone however are trash.
Alternative would be to give PPSH cons an actual grenade.
10 Mar 2021, 02:59 AM
#231
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Conscript Assault Package was originally a counterpart to the Jaeger Light Infantry sidegrade, but I think these days the SVT Upgrade is more like that, and CAP would be better served as a counterpart to Volksgrenadier MP 40's; Give a full compliment of PPSh Submachine Guns and an F1 Grenade (MKII grenade model/stats).

Also we really need to fix the B-4 Howitzer somehow. We've made tons of effort to remove RNG from the game, yet there remains a literal RNG Cannon that usually does more harm to it's owner than good.
10 Mar 2021, 04:27 AM
#232
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 365

Also we really need to fix the B-4 Howitzer somehow. We've made tons of effort to remove RNG from the game, yet there remains a literal RNG Cannon that usually does more harm to it's owner than good.


I remember when they tried to fix the b4 by reducing its scatter and dmg to 320 and firing 2 shots, except it took forever to fire the second one that a engine dmg jag could even escape. They didn't really go far with testing it and scraped it in the next version of the update (this was originally ment to replace a ability in the tank hunter commander where the ml20 is now).

Could be worth trying again perhaps? Also fixing the 2 bugs with direct fire might help.

10 Mar 2021, 08:30 AM
#233
avatar of OrangePest

Posts: 454 | Subs: 1

Buffing the ppsh is a recipe for disaster. Grens already struggle, imagine if they to deal with a buffed CQC unit that has HTD *and* sprint. Youd have no real tools against it. On top of making already mega strong commanders stronger (the kv1+ppsh+il2+guard commander)
10 Mar 2021, 08:33 AM
#234
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17541 | Subs: 8

Buffing the ppsh is a recipe for disaster. Grens already struggle, imagine if they to deal with a buffed CQC unit that has HTD *and* sprint. Youd have no real tools against it. On top of making already mega strong commanders stronger (the kv1+ppsh+il2+guard commander)

Hence they shouldn't get a stat increase, but additional utility, like a grenade if we were to buff ppsh.
10 Mar 2021, 08:37 AM
#235
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12195 | Subs: 1

PPsh conscripts are a cost efficient unit.
(PPsh should take the weapon slot though and mixing smg and bolt action is not a good design)

If one want to change the ability then one should probably create a separate unit similar to assault IS and designed the unit specially for the role (cost/abilities/vet bonuses)
10 Mar 2021, 08:37 AM
#236
avatar of OrangePest

Posts: 454 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 08:33 AMKatitof

Hence they shouldn't get a stat increase, but additional utility, like a grenade if we were to buff ppsh.


Im meh on it. Soviets can easily float muni and grens+mg are fragile as fuck agaisnt nade. All it would take is one missplay and youd lose the game. Tho i supposse its worth testing before any real judgement.
10 Mar 2021, 08:52 AM
#237
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 1905 | Subs: 2

PPSh-41 should not be a non doctrine alternative for the 7th person. Because it doesn't cost a 2CP slot in the commander.
Pip
10 Mar 2021, 20:06 PM
#238
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1518

I still think they oughtta just make PPSH non-exclusive with the 7-man upgrade. I expect tweaks on top of that would be warranted, but it would be a step in the right direction.

(Also bundle the upgrade with a second option to grant, perhaps, a DP. In Conscript Support Tactics, at least)

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Mar 2021, 08:33 AMKatitof

Hence they shouldn't get a stat increase, but additional utility, like a grenade if we were to buff ppsh.


A grenade is a little more than just "Utility". Something to replace HTD would be better, as that ability "shines" better on stock/7man cons, due to its vulnerability to grenades close up.
10 Mar 2021, 21:17 PM
#239
avatar of Maret

Posts: 711

HTD is cool ability, but with changes that were made it's now more for cap point under mg-fire (or to deny OST suppresion stuka flight)not for close combat fight. Timer limit make it very vulnerable for any grenades, that means better not to use it adn save mobility, than you need to retreat instanly as will see grenade animation in HTD position.
I agree with Crecer13 that ppsh 41 should be non-doc for soviets, it's the most iconic and mass-produced weapon for Red Army on WW2 (like mg-42 for OST) and available only on docs? Argument that in game we have Red Army from 1941-1942 not good, because soviets have tons late 1943 stuff like t-34/76 mod.43, su-85, M3 (main numbers start from 1944), M17 quad-gun also was in 1944 and su-76 (main numbers start from 1943). Only Katy and t-70 from start of war.
10 Mar 2021, 22:27 PM
#240
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1179 | Subs: 1

TBH, it was always dumb that the Soviets in game are the only faction without nondoctrinal SMGs. The Red Army was famous for its widespread adoption of automatic weaponry, and they have none on their stock units.

Personally, I feel like Penals or conscripts should have had PPSHs available as an upgrade stock, but since that isn't possible, I think the conscript PPSH package should be changed into a new call-in squad (call them Avtomatchiki), and have them available at 1 CP. They can keep OORAH and molotovs to make them different than shocks, and have the combined arms ability similar to panzergrens. They would not have AT grenades though. Since they would be hard countered by vehicles, they can then be buffed to be better at the AI job (and price increased accordingly).

Not sure if this would count as a "new" unit, since they would just be conscript models with smgs. If done, this would give us another unit to help make Soviet doctrines more unique.
PAGES (15)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

208 users are online: 5 members and 203 guests
le12ro, GachiGasm, Farlion, Crecer13, suora
96 posts in the last 24h
389 posts in the last week
2354 posts in the last month
Registered members: 25289
Welcome our newest member, maxthomas65
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM