Login

russian armor

Feedback for Commander Revamppatch

PAGES (107)down
5 Nov 2018, 12:37 PM
#1981
avatar of Kirrik

Posts: 549


As for one major change I would really like to stress the consideration of replacing Overwatch's LeFH 18 with the Jagdtiger. The LeFH 18 feels out of place. It fits the doctrine much better and there was a lot of positive reaction to the idea. Unless you guys already discussed and dismissed this?


IMO there's also still the issue of the 221 coming out a bit too late for what it can do (practically saw no use in the tournament). IMO it should be buildable after having an SWS truck out with a bit longer build time.



If object collision can't be fixed, it should be worked around by:
1) Slightly higher arc with increased speed (same time to hit);
2) Decrease random scatter so the player can actually manually aim around obstacles.


Jaeger Light Infantry need some lower requirements. They have very good vet but the current requirements are through the roof. It should be 1/4 to 1/3 lower I think.


You realize they get insane RA bonuses with veterancy compared to Pathfinders? They dont need any more buffs considering they are already flat out better than their US counterpart

Also I really hope finalizing changes means giving booby traps to actual combat units instead of engineers and making AT overwatch actually track faster instead of ramping up and missing all the shots on moving targets anyway.
5 Nov 2018, 13:34 PM
#1982
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 536


As for one major change I would really like to stress the consideration of replacing Overwatch's LeFH 18 with the Jagdtiger. The LeFH 18 feels out of place. It fits the doctrine much better and there was a lot of positive reaction to the idea. Unless you guys already discussed and dismissed this?

IMO there's also still the issue of the 221 coming out a bit too late for what it can do (practically saw no use in the tournament). IMO it should be buildable after having an SWS truck out with a bit longer build time.

If object collision can't be fixed, it should be worked around by:
1) Slightly higher arc with increased speed (same time to hit);
2) Decrease random scatter so the player can actually manually aim around obstacles.

Jaeger Light Infantry need some lower requirements. They have very good vet but the current requirements are through the roof. It should be 1/4 to 1/3 lower I think.


+1
Priority list for OKW commanders:
  • Lower XP requirements for Jaeger light infantry
  • 221 NEEDS TO COME OUT EARLIER: the unit itself is good and the damage buff very welcome but unless it comes out earlier the car will not build which would be a shame.

    These minor changes would have significant impact and would improve both commanders a lot.


5 Nov 2018, 13:45 PM
#1983
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 1807


Doctrinal, optional gimmick vs a stock unit that needs to be reliable, is expensive and costs a hefty amount of fuel and pop cap.

Yeah, you go boy, compare them apples to oranges.

Don't like it, just go for ele/jt.


Are u drunk?

- the pak43 and the 17pdr cost THE SAME (when i remeber right: even the popcap goes down on the 17pdr to the near same lvl from pak43.)!
- pak43 comes late at 8cp. 17pdr is ready after building the sec buidling.

5 Nov 2018, 13:45 PM
#1984
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 860



What about a Sten package for Tommies? Get some CQC infantry without having to go Commandos.
Maybe 3 Stens and 2 Lee Enfields à la Cons PPSH so they're still kinda decent at mid range.

U have already sappers with sten i think tommies should only have long range upgrades because they are more defensive unit
5 Nov 2018, 13:48 PM
#1985
avatar of Lago

Posts: 2677

U have already sappers with sten i think tommies should only have long range upgrades because they are more defensive unit


If Infantry Sections get a second upgrade, it should be a midrange one in my opinion, like G43s or BARs. CQC upgrades clash a little with their cover bonus nature.


Are u drunk?

- the pak43 and the 17pdr cost THE SAME (when i remeber right: even the popcap goes down on the 17pdr to the near same lvl from pak43.)!
- pak43 comes late at 8cp. 17pdr is ready after building the sec buidling.


Why do you even play OKW if you're convinced they're underpowered in just about everything?
5 Nov 2018, 13:49 PM
#1986
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13678 | Subs: 7



Are u drunk?

- the pak43 and the 17pdr cost THE SAME (when i remeber right: even the popcap goes down on the 17pdr to the near same lvl from pak43.)!
- pak43 comes late at 8cp. 17pdr is ready after building the sec buidling.


Are you?
Go into the game and write down the costs and pop cap costs, then compare them.
You are already massive joke.
Instead of making yourself into even bigger one, at least get basic values you bitch about correctly.

Unless in your world 10=14, 350=400 and 45=75, then no wonder you have such problems with the game if you think everything is equal, but then again, how would you know? You don't even play allies, much less brits themselves nor you even use pak43, just bitching, never using units in question.
5 Nov 2018, 13:52 PM
#1987
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1920 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Nov 2018, 12:37 PMKirrik
You realize they get insane RA bonuses with veterancy compared to Pathfinders? They dont need any more buffs considering they are already flat out better than their US counterpart


I know how good their veterancy is, I mentioned that. They should not be easy to vet, but the current requirements are off the charts.

If we're comparing to Pathfinders... Pathfinders need about 13 Ober model (80xp) kills to reach vet 3.
JLI need about 20 Ober model kills just to reach their vet 3. They don't get the big RA bonus until vet 5, which takes them about 50 (!) Ober model kills, which is insane IMO.

So I'm not saying they should be as easy to vet up as Volks are, but the requirements should definitely be brought down a little because getting them to anywhere above vet 3 with the current numbers is practically impossible.


And I'm all for giving Pathfinders the same treatment (lower CP, weapon upgrade) in a later patch and bringing them up to par. I believe they already have the same camo and sniper damage/accuracy.




U have already sappers with sten i think tommies should only have long range upgrades because they are more defensive unit

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Nov 2018, 13:48 PMLago
If Infantry Sections get a second upgrade, it should be a midrange one in my opinion, like G43s or BARs. CQC upgrades clash a little with their cover bonus nature.

I know, but Sapper Stens are quite pathetic. I also think a mid range high ROF upgrade weapon would be nice, but without new models that would be impossible. Afaik the only weapons available are Lee Enfield, Scoped Lee Enfield, Stens, Brens and Vickers K? None of which make sense for mid range (Bren would if it wasn't already a long range weapon).
5 Nov 2018, 15:09 PM
#1988
avatar of Knuckles2095

Posts: 3


I know, but Sapper Stens are quite pathetic. I also think a mid range high ROF upgrade weapon would be nice, but without new models that would be impossible. Afaik the only weapons available are Lee Enfield, Scoped Lee Enfield, Stens, Brens and Vickers K? None of which make sense for mid range (Bren would if it wasn't already a long range weapon).


What about an upgrade for the sappers like 2 Thompson smgs for 45 munitions? it could go even further and give RA reduction for increased cost
5 Nov 2018, 16:01 PM
#1989
avatar of A. Soldier
Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 2703 | Subs: 2



What about an upgrade for the sappers like 2 Thompson smgs for 45 munitions? it could go even further and give RA reduction for increased cost


Hmmm, I have seen pictures of Brits in Africa with Tommy guns, plus their prime minister holding one:


But I've only seen their regular infantry use it, not the Royal Engineers or Sappers.
5 Nov 2018, 16:05 PM
#1990
avatar of miragefla
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1234 | Subs: 12



  • Lower XP requirements for Jaeger light infantry
  • 221 NEEDS TO COME OUT EARLIER: the unit itself is good and the damage buff very welcome but unless it comes out earlier the car will not build which would be a shame.



JLI changes are already on the way.

221 likely won't come earlier due to how badly USF would get rolled over by an actual combat vehicle and the faction already struggle vs OKW. The Vehicle arriving after 35 fuel, if it were put behind an sWS Truck would be too much.
5 Nov 2018, 16:12 PM
#1991
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 1920 | Subs: 3

221 likely won't come earlier due to how badly USF would get rolled over by an actual combat vehicle and the faction already struggle vs OKW. The Vehicle arriving after 35 fuel, if it were put behind an sWS Truck would be too much.


For this I had suggested slightly lowering the armor value on the 221 so USF and Brits can kill it with small arms fire if it overstays its welcome. The 223 upgrade could then improve the armor to current values. Which would also be historical as early 221 models had very thin armor and it was thickened throughout production. With the current timing I don't think the 221 is very competitive as it's probably better to wait a bit more for a Luchs, which is what mostly happened in the tournament.


Great to see that JLI vet requirement is being changed though! Thanks!
5 Nov 2018, 16:57 PM
#1992
avatar of Sully

Posts: 317 | Subs: 2

We are finalizing things at this point for internal testing so likely no 1.9. No major changes, though there is a discussion of possibly placing the Valentine to tech since it arrives so late to the field. Likely after Bofors/AEC tech and then figuring out if it's balanced appropriately.


I appreciate the status update, and I like the Valentine idea. As others have mentioned, there are still a lot of issues though, and I hope they can be addressed before we call it a wrap.

OKW:
  • SturmTiger projectile: I think the projectile arc idea you proposed would be a great thing to test. Couldn't be worse than the current way it fires I assume.

  • The SturmTiger vet 1 ability is still rather useless, it collides with terrain most of the time, and if it hits you'll be lucky to kill 1-2 models. Please replace it with either a flare ability (like Panzerfuss, soviet sniper, soviet mortar, UKF 17pdr), or smoke shells (like the USF sherman)

  • 221 arrives too late for what it can do on the battlefield, I'd like to see it build-able after your first truck is called in to the field. If that means reducing its armor until you upgrade it to a 223, so be it.

  • JLI camo could use the same tweak StormTroopers got, would allow them to scout efficiently

  • LEFH vet 5 ability should be something different. My pick would be artillery flares.


OST:
  • Pak 43 still isn't worth using. By the time you'd be interested in pulling the trigger on the scuttle ability, it'll be well on its way to getting deleted by indirect fire/offmap abilities. It needs a brace function to be viable

  • The Entrenching Tools ability could use something more, a demolition ability for infantry like UKF sappers would be nice since it'd help open up sight lines for bunkers/mgs and clear areas for the large Pak 43 footprint

5 Nov 2018, 17:29 PM
#1993
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 536



JLI changes are already on the way.

221 likely won't come earlier due to how badly USF would get rolled over by an actual combat vehicle and the faction already struggle vs OKW. The Vehicle arriving after 35 fuel, if it were put behind an sWS Truck would be too much.


Thx for your fast response! Great to hear that JLI changes are already on the way. Your projectile arc idea for the Sturmtiger is good too.
Regarding the 221:
I can fully understand why you are reluctant to changes that would let the 221 come out earlier. Maybe you could test if a earlier arrival with lower armor could work as Sander / Sully suggested.

All in all the OKW commanders will be in a decent spot after the release and show what different design approaches can do. Overwatch needed major changes which the mod team delivered but Elite armor is nice too and you did that with a more conservative approach.
5 Nov 2018, 17:29 PM
#1994
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3174 | Subs: 1

Pak 43 is supposed to be shock value and then scuttle? At the very most you'll get a single medium kill from it and at the very least you'll get 1 shot off. Not worth the resources even remotely to inflict 1 320 damage shot.
5 Nov 2018, 17:48 PM
#1995
avatar of Lago

Posts: 2677

What about having Scuttle work like cancelling a building? It returns resources proportional to the unit's remaining hit points?

If you've secured the area you can dismantle it and rebuild it somewhere else, but scuttling it during combat's going to cost you.

You'd probably have to make the Pak 43 non-decrewable so it's got a visible health bar for it, but that's an acceptable tradeoff in my opinion.
5 Nov 2018, 18:36 PM
#1996
avatar of RoastinGhost

Posts: 274

I would also be available for helping with tooltips. I think they need a pass in general, but making sure the new ones are as good as they can be would be a nice place to start.

I like Lago's writing style!

For my own reference, I made the "Updated Text" mod for Red Orchestra 2.
5 Nov 2018, 18:45 PM
#1997
avatar of Switzerland
Donator 33

Posts: 471

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Nov 2018, 17:48 PMLago
What about having Scuttle work like cancelling a building? It returns resources proportional to the unit's remaining hit points?

If you've secured the area you can dismantle it and rebuild it somewhere else, but scuttling it during combat's going to cost you.

You'd probably have to make the Pak 43 non-decrewable so it's got a visible health bar for it, but that's an acceptable tradeoff in my opinion.


This would encourage emplacement creep, not really a good idea with the pak43 in its current state of long range and shooting through all obstacles and terrain.
5 Nov 2018, 19:31 PM
#1998
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 779



What about an upgrade for the sappers like 2 Thompson smgs for 45 munitions? it could go even further and give RA reduction for increased cost


Germans also used PPsh41, also convertet it to 9mm Parabellum, to increase their performance.

http://www.ppsh41.com/ppsh2.html
5 Nov 2018, 21:17 PM
#1999
avatar of A. Soldier
Social Media Manager Badge

Posts: 2703 | Subs: 2



This would encourage emplacement creep, not really a good idea with the pak43 in its current state of long range and shooting through all obstacles and terrain.


This is why I suggested that "emplacing" the Pak 43 would take away the block-shooting.
5 Nov 2018, 21:42 PM
#2000
avatar of Switzerland
Donator 33

Posts: 471



This is why I suggested that "emplacing" the Pak 43 would take away the block-shooting.


Removing the ability to shoot through terrain and making it a building rather than sudo fixed team weapon still doesn’t warrant the potential of ever getting a 100% refund. The partial refund is a pretty huge buff as it is. 17 pounder is a structure as it lacks range, collisions with objects and also now can’t pick up and move elsewhere. It is really impossible to put the comments of the PAK 43 shock value in a vacuum and call it a unique issue to the unit when the 17 pounder suffers the same issue.
PAGES (107)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Thank you everyone for making WCS possible!
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • The British Forces flag [c.B] Guard2707
  • Soviets flag [c.B] Brosras
  • Oberkommando West flag 女性主意
  • Ostheer flag 101 Airborne Divison
uploaded by koreanmaphack

Board Info

165 users are online: 3 members and 162 guests
MMX, Mazianni, Doomlord52
117 posts in the last 24h
1426 posts in the last week
7034 posts in the last month
Registered members: 65836
Welcome our newest member, Hayhurstse40
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM