Played this commander countless times, I know what I'm talking about. vehicle camo is stupid gimmick fitting mostly for stealth recon for T-70. It's useless for actual tank destroyers because it renders them stationary and reduces rotation to extreme degree. Useless against both panthers and superheavy TD's
And PTRS conscripts being dedicated AT squad is sick joke, those PTRS are useless against tanks ever since their deflection damaged was nerfed several times over.
This commander is partysan tier at best.
This was my experience with it. Unless the Panther is moving in your firing arc you will lose getting the first shot in, and having to toggle the ability and then start firing makes you much more likely to lose the SU85.
I do like the stealth for the AT guns and cons in the early to mid game. I was able to kill a few vehicles with stealth and AT grenades but the PTRS upgrade makes them trash as infantry. It can be fun to play this doctrine, but only against opponents that I could beat without using any commander. Its probably the worst of the 22 Soviet commanders. |
This is simply untrue. Go to the changelog and specifically find me the changes you're talking about
The bombing runs damage is still good AND it stuns tanks.
Find the patch notes yourself, since your insisting that it didn't change. Post your playercard while you're at it. I don't care about the ranking, but am pretty sure it will show axis-only.
Anyone who ever used it knows that it used to wipe arty, team weapons, take most of the health of a truck, and would finish heavies if you could catch them repairing. Paying 250 munitions to do about 200-300 damage (AND A STUN OMG) to a tank IF they don't pay attention to it for 3 seconds or more isn't effective. The standard IL2 bombing run would be an improvement over it. |
The AT nade assault isn't "okay" it's amazing. The squad has camo too so you can easily ambush vehicles, especially since you keep hoorah as well
What patch are you referring too? The bombing run is still really good, idk what nerf you're talking about. Don't think the cmdr got any nerfs in latest patch (unless you count howy cooldowns)
To OPs point the b4 would be better than the ml20 as far as theme goes. Idk if the rest of the community is ready for another b4 cmdr though
The bombing run was nerfed several patches ago. I just tried it in a game to see if I was remembering it correctly. I did.
The bombing run now takes out about 1/4 of the health of a Panther on a direct hit. It sometimes decrews weapon teams but not reliably, nor does it kill the weapon. It's easily the worst bombing run of any in the game.
The ML20 is terrible compared to the LEFH. It's so inaccurate that its almost as worthless as the B4.
The anti-tank mine needs mine traps added to the ability. With no way to funnel tanks, it's really random trying to get close enough to use the anti-tank grenades. Also, the tank hunters still need their molos and snares. |
|
The B4 would fit in perfectly, as the rest of the doctrine doesn't do much either. The PTRS's were gimped. The bombing run which used to be useful won't kill tanks now, as that was deemed unfair. The bombing run won't kill howitzers or much of anything else. The AT grenades are okay if you can snare a LV or maybe a P4. The doctrine went from OP to terrible in one patch. |
Wouldnt it be quite useful at 3cp if the chance for lmg42 was 100% on both squads? Right now it's only 25%. And I dont think we need a third 0cp osttruppen commander
Getting both of them with LMG42's would make it worthwhile.
I wouldn't replace the Puma in this doctrine like some people are suggesting. The Puma is in a league of its own with vision, speed, good AT, and decent survivability. |
The puma was never the issue, it was the call in CP4.
Being able to skip all teching and get both a good AT vehicle and a fantastic AI vehicle was what put this doctrine over the line.
With the CP4 tied into teching the puma is balanced with forcing you to get locked into this doctrine for a good AT answer to allied light vehicles.
Remove the battlephase requirement from puma, it just comes too late. Leave it in T2 so it has to go through a build time and can't be shat out as a panic call-in, but give it a 5CP requirement like it used to have so it doesn't come too early. It doesn't need to be sidetech, the "cost" is locking into a doctrine.
I haven't played a lot of 1v1's, but what used to be nice was that I could just build T1 + T2 and use call-ins. It was like playing Soviets back then. Since you have to get BP2 anyway, the Puma doesn't arrive much earlier than a Stug, and the newly improved Ostwind isn't too bad compared to the CP4. Now it seems like you're not only NOT getting a panic Puma, you're losing access to Tigers/MHT's/etc.
It is strange that it builds from the Light Mechanized building but requires Battlephase 2. Dropping the BP2 requirement and setting the build time probably equalizes the timing with the OKW puma.
The Osttruppen should be 0 cp and single squads. At 3 cp it should be something like Relief Infantry, except that Relief Infantry is worthless currently. |
so every other faction in the game has a form or weapon upgrade for their stock units. wheather it be upgrade behind a teck or weapon rack.
.........
what u al think
I used to think cons sucked until I started using them a lot. Now I don't mind them so much, particularly with the 7th man. I don't think they could improve them a lot without badly altering balance. They're really cheap to reinforce. This really helps late game in 4v4's when artillery starts firing.
I do think the doctrinal weapon upgrades should lock out the 7th man. I think Mobilize Reserves is fine as is, and am glad the balance team set it up the way they did.
The only improvements that I would ask for are:
1) Move part (maybe 10%) of the RA from Vet 3 to Vet 1. This would help them when other infantry is getting their weapon upgrades and get their RA down to about 1.0.
2) Allow them to pick up 1 weapon (of any type) and still Mobilize Reserves. Any weapon that they pick up should have about 60-75% of its normal accuracy.
3) It seems like it takes a long time to throw a molotov. I may just be imagining this but they seem worse in terms of time and range than other infantry. It could be that rifle grenades just have longer range so they start right away while cons have to move. In either case, it seems like it could use some improvement. |
disagree here... okw has the best time against the maxim as it can barely suppress a single volk heading straight for it... when i play okw and i see a maxim spam i usually smile with glee because i know im very much likely to win the game and get +5 fuel for every maxim the opponent has made
The glaring weakness behind maxim spam being that they never have enough manpower to get maxims and cons with AT grenades and an anti-tank gun, so getting a Luchs is a no-brainer. It does sometimes feel like just deserts when the single con throws his AT grenade, then sits there until he/she realizes that they will lose the con before the cooldown is done, then ends up full retreating or losing their weapons. It's even better if they just get an AT gun as it is easy to dive and worth capturing. |
... Which would you rather have, a medicore MG that can barely scrap by as an MG, or fighting against MG spam which you have little hope of countering. And when I say little hope of countering, I mean OKW. .
This question is probably why the balance team didn't do more with the maxim. On the other hand, that same matchup on Crossing isn't fun for Soviet versus Ost. It gets really frustrating using Oorah to try to get past the MG42's firing cone, only to have one model not make it and the squad get suppressed, then have to retreat as the Pio closes.
As for your comments on the LEIG, it probably would do better against Soviets if it had a mortar AOE profile. Normally I find them to be garbage unless I get two, so now I always double them up. I play a lot of Soviets and find that double LEIG's make it hard to keep maxims on the field, and trying to keep them longer often results in getting them wiped.
I do think fear of Maxim spam is a bit overdone. Late game they bleed too much and the abundance of yellow cover means they get grenaded a lot. I normally get two but might or might not replace them if I lose them.
|
Can we get back to the maxim
There isn't really much of an actual discussion. The OP and others are claiming the maxim needs nerfing and implying that it is better than a MG42, which they think needs buffs.
For those of us that actually use the maxim, I think we would all say that the firing cone is too small given the nerfs to the setup time so it needs at least one of those two things improved. It sill doesn't do its job well. It's a little better and I'm glad the Balance team looked at it, but still think it needs a buff (without going so far that people start using them instead of infantry again).
Also, it used to win head-to-head against the MG42. Now it does sometimes but more often not, and if the MG42 has incendiary rounds then it will just melt the maxim.
On top of it all, the MG that doesn't work well costs more, which just rubs salt into the wound. OP and others will say it should cost more because of the six man squad, which is like saying we should pay more because we enjoy watching the death-loop on retreat. |
Relic Entertainment
