Login

russian armor

Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback

PAGES (44)down
12 May 2021, 20:47 PM
#761
avatar of GameOverMan96

Posts: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2021, 20:45 PMKatitof

Faster vet?


Honestly I never really looked past the thompsons, thanks man.
12 May 2021, 20:49 PM
#762
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2386 | Subs: 2

Can anyone justify the existence of elite vehicle crews to me? I really don't understand why it's included at all.

I think they previously had (or still have?) Thompsons to be semi capable fighters plus something else. But their whole design never worked out since it is stupid to leave the vehicle. Atm they basically just repair faster.
Not really worth a commander slot currently
12 May 2021, 21:55 PM
#763
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3200 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2021, 19:07 PMEsxile
Anyway you probably forget the initial statement which was making the M10 a mini Jackson and Jackson dedicated heavy tank destroyer,

Once again that is not correct. You are the only one who has mentioned "mini Jackson". I didn't say that at all, you are misreading. I said make m10 stock, nerf Jackson against mediums/buff it against heavies

My post:

This is why I think m10 should be stock and the Jackson should be less amazing against all classes of armor. Bring it back to being truly specialized against heavy armor. M10 fights medium armor and flanks heavy TDs

Where the fuck are you getting "mini Jackson"? I'm literally just describing what the m10 is already good at...
12 May 2021, 22:08 PM
#764
avatar of JPA32

Posts: 178


I think they previously had (or still have?) Thompsons to be semi capable fighters plus something else. But their whole design never worked out since it is stupid to leave the vehicle. Atm they basically just repair faster.
Not really worth a commander slot currently


The best part about the original iteration was that not only did you have to leave the Vehicle, but you didn't get upgraded repair speed, upgraded vet, and had to upgrade them and the upgrade both took 30 seconds and reset if they entered the Vehicle again. Was genuinely the most worthless upgrade in the game next to the Advanced Warfare IL2 Strafe.

I wouldn't be against buffing it in some form. The question being how since it's a very fragile subject and there's not much room to buff Vehicle Crews for it to matter or not be broken. Also they still have VC level RA and no combat veterancy so they drop models worse than Partisans.
12 May 2021, 23:16 PM
#765
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2021, 22:08 PMJPA32


The best part about the original iteration was that not only did you have to leave the Vehicle, but you didn't get upgraded repair speed, upgraded vet, and had to upgrade them and the upgrade both took 30 seconds and reset if they entered the Vehicle again. Was genuinely the most worthless upgrade in the game next to the Advanced Warfare IL2 Strafe.

I wouldn't be against buffing it in some form. The question being how since it's a very fragile subject and there's not much room to buff Vehicle Crews for it to matter or not be broken. Also they still have VC level RA and no combat veterancy so they drop models worse than Partisans.

Replace them with UKF style smoke self repair
13 May 2021, 00:19 AM
#766
avatar of JPA32

Posts: 178


Replace them with UKF style smoke self repair


If

A - You want to replace Vehicle Crews as a whole with smoke repair, god no. I highly disagree with the perfect mirroing of factions unnecessarily. Vehicle Crews can be balanced with a litany of options if need be.

B - You want to replace elite vehicle crews with smoke repair, why? Vehicle Crews already exist. That's arguably less useful than just having the repair speed.

Though funnily enough, maybe giving Vehicle Crews something along those lines would work. Maybe an activatable repair where the crew drops a smoke grenade at their feet, or just straight up give them a smoke grenade since they already get Thompsons. I'm sure there's some cheeky shenanigans that could be done with that. Maybe even synergize with the Thompsons and make the squad more useful than a glorified repair bot if they abandon tank as it dies.
13 May 2021, 06:02 AM
#767
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3246 | Subs: 1


Once again that is not correct. You are the only one who has mentioned "mini Jackson". I didn't say that at all, you are misreading. I said make m10 stock, nerf Jackson against mediums/buff it against heavies

My post:

Where the fuck are you getting "mini Jackson"? I'm literally just describing what the m10 is already good at...


Why do yo think it like it was you who said that first?
13 May 2021, 06:59 AM
#768
avatar of Applejack

Posts: 270

If the E8 changes stay as they are, I predict a meta where people will use the Jackson to vet up the vehicle crew and then swap crews from Jackson to E8 to take advantage of Focused Gunnery (at Vet1).

Late-game, replacing the E8 doesn't really seem worthwhile if you have to vet it up for Focused Gunnery. Its great that it has lower cost now and an option to fight heavier tanks but its worth considering just making Focused Gunnery a flat stat boost at vet 0 and adding something like Blitz or Flanking Speed to vet 1 instead. That includes the -speed, -rotation, -acceleration rate, along with +range and +pen at vet 0. Vet 1, it can get slightly more responsive and blitz/flanking speed for when you need the speed.

If I, as a USF player, had to vet up on my E8 to make it better vs heavies then I would probably just use a Jackson crew since Jacksons vet up fairly quickly. Or swapping my AAHT squad. If I don't have a squad to swap out then I simply would choose not to buy the E8 especially if there are already heavies on the field. Jackson seems like a better choice in this regard.

Speaking strictly from a team games perspective.

Right now, it feels like focused gunnery isn't something you turn off once you get it especially with the delay. The decreased stats don't feel all that bad for the benefits. I only ever need the speed in short bursts at a time which doesn't make me feel like I want to turn it off, ever. It would be much better with just a blitz ability.
13 May 2021, 15:42 PM
#769
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3200 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 May 2021, 06:02 AMEsxile

Why do yo think it like it was you who said that first?

No clue what you're trying to say here. You quoted me, misrepresented my point, so I corrected you. Twice
13 May 2021, 20:32 PM
#770
avatar of leithianz

Posts: 331

M10 is one of the unit that shows "I still can win you even with this unit".

I honestly don't know why m10 is added to UKF commander...

At least buff hp to 640 just like other tanks?
13 May 2021, 21:11 PM
#771
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1525

6 man Riflemen for Rifle company.

coms at 3 cp
Gives 1 rifle model armed with rear echelon carbines @ 60 muni.
occupies 1 weapon slot.

or maybe,

Ranger Command Squad,
A 6-Men Ranger Squad with Riflemen Garands and 0.8 RA.
13 May 2021, 21:19 PM
#772
avatar of A. Soldier

Posts: 3090 | Subs: 2

M10 is one of the unit that shows "I still can win you even with this unit".

I honestly don't know why m10 is added to UKF commander...

At least buff hp to 640 just like other tanks?


The M10 was suggested at the time of the new commanders by me and several other people as a cheaper and faster alternative to the very slow and expensive Firefly.

Since then the Firefly has been improved so there's less initiative to go for the M10 especially in team games but it is what it is.

They could instead replace it with something like an M7 Priest since it fits the lend-lease theme of the commander but then again there's already a mortar team in it so yeah...
13 May 2021, 21:28 PM
#773
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5248



The M10 was suggested at the time of the new commanders by me and several other people as a cheaper and faster alternative to the very slow and expensive Firefly.

Since then the Firefly has been improved so there's less initiative to go for the M10 especially in team games but it is what it is.

They could instead replace it with something like an M7 Priest since it fits the lend-lease theme of the commander but then again there's already a mortar team in it so yeah...

both commanders with the m10 feel lacking, due in part to the m10 so i think something to spruce up the m10 will make both commanders more interesting. i know its been said, but even a smoke shell, which would lend itself to both factions (since ass tommy smoke is phosphorus) would help.
it DOES offer an alternative, it just needs more.... something for when its combat window closes.
hell, its an open top TD, give it more vision even so it can see what kinda force is supporting where its meant to flank! something!
13 May 2021, 23:40 PM
#774
avatar of A. Soldier

Posts: 3090 | Subs: 2


both commanders with the m10 feel lacking, due in part to the m10 so i think something to spruce up the m10 will make both commanders more interesting. i know its been said, but even a smoke shell, which would lend itself to both factions (since ass tommy smoke is phosphorus) would help.
it DOES offer an alternative, it just needs more.... something for when its combat window closes.
hell, its an open top TD, give it more vision even so it can see what kinda force is supporting where its meant to flank! something!


I think it was better in the first game as a stock unit, the Jackson or M18 Hellcat feel more like doctrinal units that can provide more bang for the buck compared to cheaper alternatives of units.

Similar to how the Osttruppen often feel like lackluster mainline alternatives.
14 May 2021, 01:39 AM
#775
avatar of Ashmole

Posts: 58

M10 just needs to be a call in unit locked by CP instead of tech. That way, you can use it as a mobile AT buffer if you're running low on fuel for tech. It should be looked at like a SU76 - not as good as the SU85, but good to use if you're behind on fuel to keep away medium tanks while you regain fuel.
14 May 2021, 02:15 AM
#776
avatar of theekvn

Posts: 160

about M10, Ez8. Just give them timed HVAP, APCBC round with 200-240 DMG per shot plus more pen/ slower reload time. Flanking without Out Damage enemies tanks is not worthy anyway.
Unlike T-34-76s, they dont have any follow skill that can add on damage or True Ground control (Make target, anti ground target from IL-2... bla bla). Old-New 240 wont do that job, WP Arty too unstable to ground control.

14 May 2021, 17:48 PM
#777
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

I'm curious, is it possible to introduce a dmg modifier to proc when hitting rear armor? Not available for all vehicles but specific ones.

In that way i think you could create and really differentiate the "flanker" type of tanks by giving them a proper niche.






14 May 2021, 17:54 PM
#778
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5248

I'm curious, is it possible to introduce a dmg modifier to proc when hitting rear armor? Not available for all vehicles but specific ones.

In that way i think you could create and really differentiate the "flanker" type of tanks by giving them a proper niche.




That's something I've wanted for a long time. Hell, even on everything! Ambushes could mean something!
15 May 2021, 01:00 AM
#779
avatar of Applejack

Posts: 270

I'm curious, is it possible to introduce a dmg modifier to proc when hitting rear armor? Not available for all vehicles but specific ones.

In that way i think you could create and really differentiate the "flanker" type of tanks by giving them a proper niche.



That's an awesome idea! Diving and flanking units is a high risk but relatively low reward prospect. This would increase the reward without shaking up the risk part.
16 May 2021, 03:48 AM
#780
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 461

jump backJump back to quoted post12 May 2021, 07:05 AMEsxile




M10 in its current state should be immune to snare or having the threesold for snare lowered to 20/40% at least when activating the speed. That's the only way to make a flanker working.

.



Snares in general should be tuned to scale with Veterancy. For example Vet 0 units don't snare at all, while Vet 1 would be any vehicle below 50% HP, Vet 2 would be 75% and Vet 3 always snare. Granted these values can be adjusted but the point is Snaring should scale with the Unit Veterancy.

This would make diving a more tactical choice since you can estimate the risk vs your tank as opposed to random RNG for German Vehicles (as allied Handheld AT fails to penetrate sometimes) vs German almost always snaring allied tanks.

PAGES (44)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

182 users are online: 2 members and 180 guests
Spanky, ZeroZeroNi
40 posts in the last 24h
337 posts in the last week
2348 posts in the last month
Registered members: 25252
Welcome our newest member, palomazfowler
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM