Login

russian armor

what commanders would you revamp?

4 Jul 2018, 06:41 AM
#1
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3283 | Subs: 1

Following the last announcement, two commanders per faction will be revamp and delivered around October/November and one new commander will be added per faction in December

So which two commanders would you like to see improved?

I'd like to see Airborn being refreshed. the HMG/ATG drop could be pasted from Ostruppen doctrine (or is it another one), a plane that deliver both weapon in a single drop. The remaining ability available could be a recon, I really feel USF lacks of recon before the Major hit the field and this one could be a loiter same as Tactical doctrine.

Second Doctrine is the Armor Doctrine. I think we all agree Thompson crew need to go but I don't know yet what could be added instead of it. Then the sherman dozer could go away and be replaced by the Pershing. So USF get two doctrines with the Pershing. The doctrine would be a bit similar than the Soviet armored one with the T34/85 and IS2. If it makes it too strong, removing the arty barrage and replacing it with something softer but I don't know yet what.

What are your ideas?
4 Jul 2018, 07:27 AM
#2
avatar of wuff

Posts: 1527 | Subs: 1

Instead of just revamping commanders, I think they should condense the wehr and soviet commanders first, prune out the overlapping ones and remove the abilities no one uses.
4 Jul 2018, 08:19 AM
#3
avatar of Stark

Posts: 623 | Subs: 1

Commanders i would change

BRITS:
(kinda obvious choice)
- Royal Artillery
Sexton is really weak, valentine comes too late and last ability is horribly expensive and too situational
- Tactical Support
Forward HQ has a cool abilites but building can be easily destroyed and range of those abilities are too short. Artylery was smashed few patches ago and command vehicule after removing it from a UC is meh.

USF
(agreeing with Esxile)
- Armor Company
All units from this commader would actual look good as a new tech for USF to bring diversity (with a captain and to t2 give officer with flamer to clear houses). About the commnader - making m10 t3 require and jakson buff made volverine unused. Engineers aren't efficient, buldozer should be more accurate like brummbar and eh, that poor thompson upgrade...
- Airborn
AT gun and MG could be marge as one - would give 1 free slot, pathfinders could have ostheer sniper ability (to give option to counter snipe)

SOVIETS
- NKVD
- just add nkvd officer
- Community Defensive Tactics
Soviet meta commanders are so strong that imo best way to make other commanders atractive is by nerfing most used one. Buff shocks and see how it goes

OKW
- Elite Armour
last nerf to Sturmtiger killed that commander. Before it was too goood now it's useless
- Overwatch
Flares on points and radar on trucks could be marge and giving free slot to a commander. AT squad with 2 shrecks or maybe add a Hetzer Tankdestroyer, or flare to fit the style of commander - there are options here.

OSTHEER
There is sooo many commanders here...
- Elite Troops
After nerf to a Tiger ace is noseen commander. Best thing would be to replace it with something else (king tiger or normal tiger? Add some off map abilty as well.
- Mechanized

Same as soviets - best way to make other commander usefull is to nerf meta - the mobile defense and see how it goes.

What do you think about this ideas?
4 Jul 2018, 08:24 AM
#4
avatar of adamírcz

Posts: 921

USF:
Airborne- every thing except for the last one lowered by 1CP, possibly also cheaper paratroopers, drops should arrive with a crew.

Mechanized- Raid is unnecesary (u already have vehicle crews, so it only makes sense for situations where enemy is close enough to shoot at the crew but doesnt enter the point), this ability should be swapped with the smoke raid frome British commandos regiment (since Brits dont really benefit from global smoke). Also the jeep needs a slight buff/cost decrease. Also Possibly making the M3 upgradeable with a flamethrower?

OKW:
Add veterancy to the goliath... kappa
The sturmtiger needs either a cost decrease or just replace it with brumbarr
4 Jul 2018, 09:01 AM
#5
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3283 | Subs: 1

USF Airborn could be:

CP1 Pathfinder
CP3 HMG/Atgun drop with a mixed MP/munition cost (same as for Reco doctrine)
CP3 Paratroops
CP4 Recon loiter or run, depends on how it impacts the rocket loiter.
CPX Rocket loiter

USF Armored:

CP1 Assault engineer
CP4 Smoke barrage
CP0 M10 tank destroyer
CP12 Barrage Arty
CP13 Pershing
4 Jul 2018, 09:44 AM
#6
avatar of Seroth

Posts: 24

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Jul 2018, 09:01 AMEsxile

USF Armored:

CP1 Assault engineer
CP4 Smoke barrage
CP0 M10 tank destroyer
CP12 Barrage Arty
CP13 Pershing


I would have really liked these changes to Armor Company, but i think giving the Pershing would be too strong, so I suggest keeping the buldozer(i find it fun when it one shots Rakketen :D) just lower its CP to 9, so it actually comes into game where it can change the situation and not run into P4 just to get wrecked. About the M10, if it stays in T3(edit) it will remain unused, because Jackson is just second to none. Instead make it T3, so it forces you to tech for Captain (which is in my opinion AT oriented, so M10 fits). This way when you go Armor Company you could skip T3 and just go (tankwise) pure M10 fot AT + buldozers for AI. About the barrage, I am not sure if 155mm light barrage wouldn't fit better, but also seeing these 240mm shells wipe a squad is always satisfying :D. Nevertheless 250 munition for 80% of times useless skill isn't very promising for commander.

To sum up:
USF Armored:

CP0 M10 tank destroyer (T2)
CP1 Assault engineer
CP4 Smoke barrage (40 munition)
CP9 Buldoboy (same cost just lowered CP)
CP10 155mm Light Barrage ( 150 munitions )
4 Jul 2018, 10:24 AM
#7
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3283 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Jul 2018, 09:44 AMSeroth


I would have really liked these changes to Armor Company, but i think giving the Pershing would be too strong, so I suggest keeping the buldozer(i find it fun when it one shots Rakketen :D) just lower its CP to 9, so it actually comes into game where it can change the situation and not run into P4 just to get wrecked. About the M10, if it stays in T4 it will remain unused, because Jackson is just second to none. Instead make it T3, so it forces you to tech for Captain (which is in my opinion AT oriented, so M10 fits). This way when you go Armor Company you could skip T4 and just go (tankwise) pure M10 fot AT + buldozers for AI. About the barrage, I am not sure if 155mm light barrage wouldn't fit better, but also seeing these 240mm shells wipe a squad is always satisfying :D. Nevertheless 250 munition for 80% of times useless skill isn't very promising for commander.

To sum up:
USF Armored:

CP0 M10 tank destroyer (T3)
CP1 Assault engineer
CP4 Smoke barrage (40 munition)
CP9 Buldoboy (same cost just lowered CP)
CP10 155mm Light Barrage ( 150 munitions )


M10 have all it place in Major Tier (which is T3, Captain is T2), we are talking about a 90fu tank destroyer more than capable vs Pz4. I mean if you are a bit late and know a Pz4 is coming, a M10 can be a real surprise for your opponent. But put in Captain tier and it will kill any medium tank play, a situation similar to what we have today with Mobile Defense.

So I don't think Major M10 + Pershing would be too strong, M10 are not good vs Panthers and panthers are what kill pershing. Sherman Bulldozer is a dead horse and I don't know how to make it any better than a sherman with HE shells.
M10 + Pershing would force your opponent to build Panther and punish (but not prohibe) actual Ostheer T3 meta and more globally Pz4 rush and spam.

If anything should go, it is the 240mm barrage, and maybe replace it with CP0 Raid Tactic. So you can use your tank to cap and gives a bit more vision to your infantry during a laps of time. Something not too strong on its own but interesting to use combined with some skilled ideas.
4 Jul 2018, 11:34 AM
#8
avatar of Seroth

Posts: 24

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Jul 2018, 10:24 AMEsxile


M10 have all it place in Major Tier (which is T3, Captain is T2), we are talking about a 90fu tank destroyer more than capable vs Pz4. I mean if you are a bit late and know a Pz4 is coming, a M10 can be a real surprise for your opponent. But put in Captain tier and it will kill any medium tank play, a situation similar to what we have today with Mobile Defense.

So I don't think Major M10 + Pershing would be too strong, M10 are not good vs Panthers and panthers are what kill pershing. Sherman Bulldozer is a dead horse and I don't know how to make it any better than a sherman with HE shells.
M10 + Pershing would force your opponent to build Panther and punish (but not prohibe) actual Ostheer T3 meta and more globally Pz4 rush and spam.

If anything should go, it is the 240mm barrage, and maybe replace it with CP0 Raid Tactic. So you can use your tank to cap and gives a bit more vision to your infantry during a laps of time. Something not too strong on its own but interesting to use combined with some skilled ideas.


Sorry about that T4/T3 confusion, you are right :P i updated my post

It would be strong, but if you put M10 in Mayor tier, nobody will use it since Jackson is just so much better. For me it is obvious choice to wait for Jackson (im mainly 2v2 player). I guess, since it was nerfed from a call-in to the current state, it won't be revoked ... So i guess it could stay the way it is :/

About that buldozer being useless? Have you tried putting sherman HE vs rakketen and Buldoboy vs rakketen? I'm telling you that Sherman is likely to die or get very low, althought Buldoboy can wipe it with one shot or two. Apart from that it is call-in, so you can skip Mayor tier and rush this tank if we lower CP req. The only problem it has is accuraccy, which would need a slight buff since sometimes it misses too many times :|

Giving Pershing and removing buldozer will remove it from all commanders, so i don't want that. Also The idea with two commanders having Pershing is nice, but i would like new December Commander have it not Armor Company dude.

You are saying M10 + Pershing, but honestly i don't see that happening. When i go for Pershing i always skip Mayor tier so i can get it faster (in 2v2 its about 20 min). The additional fuel i spend on Stuart( which is mediocre) to keep myself in game. This way the M10 will be nonexistent, thats why i wanted it in T2 :/ If at some point you decide to go for Mayor Tier(long game) you are probably already facing panthers, so M10s are useless :(

I said giving Pershing would be too strong, but i call that back since it wouldn't. I just like the unique Buldozer call-in. It would only if we move M10 to T2, but it by itself could be too strong.

I'm happy you agree with 240mm being replaced, but Raid Tactics when you can hop out of vehicles ? What do you think about my 155mm light barrage idea?

4 Jul 2018, 11:46 AM
#9
avatar of swordfisch

Posts: 138

With how hard they nerfed the WC51 and removed refit last time im not sure I want to seen another "rework" :p

It seems most the changes only benefited Soviets and Axis, USF and brits need more love this time. Royal arty and tactical support are awful. USF needs another revamp on WC51 commander to reintroduce refit for vehicles. This was like the core part of the doctrine using a jeep early for a kubel/sniper counter then refitting it for some of the cost back before it dies.

Right now it's an expensive waste of mp and muni, BUT one idea I have had is on 60muni upgrade of the 50.cal it can suppress. Imagine the old Kubelwagen but doctrinal and arriving slightly later.

Now that would be a fun and unique change I would love to see, it would also mix up USF meta where you have a mobile suppression platform that's not the AAHT so could help with Captain strats vs volk blobs.
4 Jul 2018, 13:38 PM
#10
avatar of SweetrollNearTheDoor

Posts: 169 | Subs: 1

As for the specific Doctrines I'd like to see revamped I haven't got a strong opinion but there are certain units and abilities that seem to be forgotten or suffer from poor doctrine synergy that could otherwise be really cool to use. (the vanilla factions at least provide plenty of disposable commanders that could receive major revamps as well)

The revamp could also revive units that are almost forgotten or rarely seen. The first revamp that introduced the KV1 to several other commanders made it a pretty regular face in every game mode. I find that unit very thematic to the Soviets and also the commanders are very viable otherwise as well.

Another almost never seen unit is the KV2 so it would be really cool to see it in another doctrine because the Soviet Industry can be lacking at times and feels pretty situational. It also seems to be more on the non-serious side of doctrine picks. At least last time the balance team tweaked the units in doctrines chosen for a revamp so perhaps the KV2 could receive some adjustments to make it more appealing to use and play against.

There are also abilities that seem to have been designed in a haste and lacked proper testing at release but can be very powerful if they can be pulled off (cool visual effects are a bonus as well). One such ability in my opinion is the UKF Hold the Line of the Special Weapons Regiment. The problem is that the ability only affects the sectors that the player has personally capped so that makes it inconvenient in team games and the high price makes it of questionable use in 1v1. (then again if it affected every friendly sector it would be brokenly OP most likely but I think there is an in-between option)

If Hold the Line would affect a few friendly sectors next to each other instead of being tied to owned front line sectors it could possibly be a really valuable tool to stand your ground as Brits and offer some powerful off-map support for a respective price of course. It would also reduce allied losses/force the enemy to retreat making a counter attack easier to pull of since pushing as Brits can be a real pain sometimes I feel.

Other passive abilities and units I would personally like to see added in more commanders: Infrared STGs, Sector Assault, Jaeger Light Infantry, IS2, Sector Artillery and Opel Bliz Trucks.

Then again I'm unsure if these additions are really needed and now that most factions have the counters and basic tools available to almost all situations I find that commander dependency is not as critical as before. My suggestions would aim to spice up the game and increase variety in playstyles. (I dislike the idea of tying basic faction tools like reliable garrison clearing to doctrines)
4 Jul 2018, 14:17 PM
#11
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464

for USF i say mechanised for sure i want to see some chances to rifle company not revamp SOME changes to like sprint and stuff and revamp airborne
4 Jul 2018, 14:59 PM
#12
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

Armor, which has been lacking since the M10 being tied to tech.
Airborne, 4 man power abilities? Yeah, needs a rework.
4 Jul 2018, 15:38 PM
#13
avatar of Siphon X.
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1137 | Subs: 2

I'm wondering whether the prime candidate for OH should be Mobile Defense; not because it is bad (I guess that is the basis for the other nominees), but because it is too good and will tend to overshadow other doctrines. It has consistently been among the top picks over the years.

I'm more for subtle stuff. Maybe replacing "Panzer tactician" with - uhm - say, Riegel mines would make it less attractive?


jump backJump back to quoted post4 Jul 2018, 07:27 AMwuff
Instead of just revamping commanders, I think they should condense the wehr and soviet commanders first, prune out the overlapping ones and remove the abilities no one uses.


I know that there won't be many that share my opinion, but I never got why the overlap is generally disliked... Actually, I think it was done like that on purpose. This is most obvious in the SOV commanders: By default, Russians just had conscripts and weak tanks. Better infantry or late game AT options/tanks could be added via commander.

You basically have the choice to be able to upgrade the Conscripts (PPsh), or supplement with elite infantry like Guards or Shocks. When it came to late game AT, did you want to go for T-34/85s, IS-2, ISU-152 or mark Target? Since one of each is likely required, you need to offer a lot of diverse options via mix and match, so you end up with multiple tactics with guards or shocks or PPsh or T-34/85s and a lot of overlap.

This sort of emulates tech trees (although in a simplistic way) and I can see why the concept is viewed as inferior to actual tech trees of CoH1. However, given that we are stuck with the system as it is now, reducing overlap would mean you effectively would more or less end up with Guards, Shocks, T-34/85s, ML-120 being available in one or two commanders only. Good luck figuring out something that makes sense with this as premise without creating auto-pick commanders.

So, yeah, there is a lot of commander abilities that overlap. Also, there are a couple of commanders that combine the weakest version for each task from the available options or poor synergy and thus will hardly ever be picked. But how exactly would removing those make the game better?

Checking the meta of previous tournaments: Yes, there always were meta commanders and completely unused commanders, and that's how it always will be. Still, SOV players used a significant number of different commanders and even OH that had more dominant FotM commanders still sported a larger variety in picks than the "basically no overlap in commanders" factions OKW, USF and UKF.

4 Jul 2018, 16:47 PM
#14
avatar of wuff

Posts: 1527 | Subs: 1

I'm wondering whether the prime candidate for OH should be Mobile Defense; not because it is bad (I guess that is the basis for the other nominees), but because it is too good and will tend to overshadow other doctrines. It has consistently been among the top picks over the years.

I'm more for subtle stuff. Maybe replacing "Panzer tactician" with - uhm - say, Riegel mines would make it less attractive?




I know that there won't be many that share my opinion, but I never got why the overlap is generally disliked... Actually, I think it was done like that on purpose. This is most obvious in the SOV commanders: By default, Russians just had conscripts and weak tanks. Better infantry or late game AT options/tanks could be added via commander.

You basically have the choice to be able to upgrade the Conscripts (PPsh), or supplement with elite infantry like Guards or Shocks. When it came to late game AT, did you want to go for T-34/85s, IS-2, ISU-152 or mark Target? Since one of each is likely required, you need to offer a lot of diverse options via mix and match, so you end up with multiple tactics with guards or shocks or PPsh or T-34/85s and a lot of overlap.

This sort of emulates tech trees (although in a simplistic way) and I can see why the concept is viewed as inferior to actual tech trees of CoH1. However, given that we are stuck with the system as it is now, reducing overlap would mean you effectively would more or less end up with Guards, Shocks, T-34/85s, ML-120 being available in one or two commanders only. Good luck figuring out something that makes sense with this as premise without creating auto-pick commanders.

So, yeah, there is a lot of commander abilities that overlap. Also, there are a couple of commanders that combine the weakest version for each task from the available options or poor synergy and thus will hardly ever be picked. But how exactly would removing those make the game better?

Checking the meta of previous tournaments: Yes, there always were meta commanders and completely unused commanders, and that's how it always will be. Still, SOV players used a significant number of different commanders and even OH that had more dominant FotM commanders still sported a larger variety in picks than the "basically no overlap in commanders" factions OKW, USF and UKF.




I think there are several reasons why people dislike the overlap and why trimming could help.

I guess balancing would be easier without so many elements. New players wouldn't feel so overwhelmed by what commanders to use. Possibly easier to implement new commanders which do not overlap current ones.
9 Aug 2018, 18:11 PM
#15
avatar of Kanjejou

Posts: 54

Most commander with defenciv construction perk should combine trench mines and tank trap into a single commander skill to open a slot for a usefull stuff to give more flavor and utility to such commander(and it happen in pretty much the five armies).

Same for OKW truck radio and point flare shoud take a single slot...
feuermsturm also have 2 slot taken for infatery and IG fire barrage it should be combined and open slot for something else.

I think we should concentrate on commander that have too many slot taken by skill that overlap eah other and shoudl be in the same skill
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

82 users are online: 82 guests
71 posts in the last 24h
485 posts in the last week
1428 posts in the last month
Registered members: 26973
Welcome our newest member, leiaezimmerman
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM