Soviet - New Commander Mod Official Discussion

1246

Comments

  • #92
    3 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    I still think it needs an air-dropped AT gun but, at least my fears about the AT Strafe seem unfounded. I honestly couldn't tell the difference when I was using it. A 2 second delay hasn't wrecked it. I just hope they don't water it down any more.

  • #93
    3 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346
    edited April 16

    I've been reading the comments on the other forum and there are some good ideas there about how to make this commander scale better into the late game. It feels like this commander won't fare well against armor as the game progresses and the only item which will be useful at that point is the AT Strafe. Based on that understanding and utilizing some of the ideas from the other forum, I've come up with a way to enable this commander to stay relevant throughout a game.

    First, the Rally Point should be revamped to make it the centerpiece of the doctrine. It's clear, at this point, that it will be used extensively as a Forward Retreat Point with both reinforcement and healing capability. This makes it a high value target for opposition players; once destroyed Soviet infantry will (temporarily) have to retreat all the way back to base.

    Such a high value target should have some ability to protect itself, just as the British Forward Observation Post does. For this reason, the Suppression Strafe should be moved to the Rally Point and given a good radius of action. This will give the RP some protection against infantry. To give it some AT protection, Mark Target should be added to its abilities. Neither of these items are particularly powerful on their own but, they will improve the chances of Soviet units fending off enemy attacks in the vicinity of the Rally Point.

    Additionally, the Airdropped Weapons should be moved to the Rally Point and limited to the same radius as the Medical Supplies. This would limit their deployment until such time as the first Rally Point is built and it would force players to give some thought to its location. However, the trade-off is that it would free up a slot for another unit, preferably one with some AT capability. I previously advocated for the M-42 light AT gun but, I now believe the Partisan Tank Hunters are a better choice. They fit the theme better and their weapons are better suited to dealing with heavier armor so, they will scale better into the late-game.

    Finally, to offset the loss of the Suppression Strafe, the Airborne Guards would receive the Inspire ability and the PMD-6 AP Mines. The Inspire ability suits their role as an elite leading unit, while the mines will improve their disruption capability and allow them some protection against being overwhelmed by blob attacks.

    In my opinion, these changes would improve this commander sufficiently to allow it to compete against the heavier doctrines of other factions, without being overly powerful.

    It's a pity that, so far, the team seems unwilling to make the Allied doctrines anywhere near as strong as the German doctrines. It would be a shame to see so much effort wasted if, 6 months from now, very few players are using the new Allied commanders.

  • #94
    3 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    Nice observation and suggestions @PanzerFutz however, an alternative solution to scale into the late game against heavy armor without affecting the commander so drastically could also be: Adding AT Partisans to the Forward Command Post. In this way the other abilities will remain untouched and to be honest, it will prevent them from 3 very risky points:

    1. Losing your Airdrop weapons option if the Command Post gets destroyed.
    2. Depending so high on one single fragile building
    3. The retreat point gets unlocked after you build a T4-HQ so is very fragile before that

    Aside from that, the purpose of this Commander is to allow the Soviets to keep pushing anywhere on the map with airdrops, not actually having to spent resources on building tents before that around the map to be able to do so. Causing it to slow the pace of the game to benefit the arrival of Axis tanks.

    Apart from that, once again Axis players complained about this building and asked to nerf it so it can be destroyed by rifles without the need of thinking or spending other resources to accomplish it! Simply ridiculous! and now it feels like if any Infantry can destroy it with mere rifles!!!!! Something **unprecedented ** on the COH2 buildings! It definitely has to go back to match any other building from this game.

    Final opinion:

    The Commander is great at it is, but it could definitely have an addition to counter enemy armor.

  • #95
    3 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,802
    Soviet have one of the best TDs in the game to help against enemy armour they don't need a doctrinal unit to do that.
  • #96
    3 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    @Patrol_Omega The Rally Point is already a high-value target so, opposition players are going to target it anyway. I just suggested a couple of ideas to protect it. Others have made the point that the Rally Point fulfills a similar role to the US Airborne Beacon but, I actually see the RP more like the British Forward Assembly (given that it can be used as a retreat point). Beacons are not worth defending; a Forward Assembly requires a lot more investment, which will need to be protected lest it becomes a waste of resources.

    The Rally Point serves as an established place to drop replacements and medical supplies. To me, it makes sense to add the weapons to that list but, I can understand that other players see this as unnecessarily restrictive. Tying the Airdropped Weapons to it is merely a way to free up a slot; they could still be dropped anywhere if players thought the restriction was too much. Plus, it would just be the crates; it doesn't include the Dushka. All is not lost if the RP gets destroyed.

    From my perspective, this is a disruption doctrine, much like the US Airborne Company. As such, a player should be able to take an isolated sector and hold it against enemy incursions, forcing the enemy to make a concerted attempt to retake it. For this reason, it is important that the doctrine has sufficient AT options to allow the player to hold the isolated sector against an attack by a single medium tank. The US doctrine has the 6 pdr gun and the Rocket Strike loiter for this purpose; this doctrine has only a single-pass strafe. It needs an AT unit which can be deployed anywhere on the map, not just relying on core AT units which might have to traverse a large portion of the map before they can offer assistance.

    The Partisan Tank Hunters are well suited to this doctrine, being an infiltration unit which can deploy from buildings anywhere on the map. The have enough firepower to damage a tank sufficiently that the Rocket Strike can finish it off or vice versa. A combination of the Partisans with the Airborne Guards or a Dushka (or, better still, all 3) will require a dedicated assault to dislodge.

    That's the sort of doctrine Soviet faction players thought they would get when they voted. Anything less is a rip-off.

    PS. Patrol_Omega, does the air taste sweeter, now that you're out from behind bars?

  • #97
    3 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    There is a first time for everything @PanzerFutz

    PS. Patrol_Omega, does the air taste sweeter, now that you're out from behind bars?

    Makes sense to add an additional anti-tank ability or unit to this Commander. Attaching the dropped crates to the Forward Command Post kind of sounds better now, if that will leave an open slot for an additional AT unit. Personally, I agree with you that adding Partisan Tank hunters after applying that change will be the best option for this commander.

    Anyway, it will really hurt if they increase the cost of the FCP as it is a viable alternative to the high cost for having 3 Medics in your base, which is totally out of phase with other factions way of healing their units.

  • #98
    3 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Soviet have one of the best TDs in the game to help against enemy armour they don't need a doctrinal unit to do that.

    Do you mean the overly nerfed that no one ever uses or the that comes out from your T4-HQ to deal with the enemy P4 arriving so much sooner? Both tanks feel just very clumsy but you can make them work.

  • #99
    3 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,802
    @Patrol_Omega yes. One of those. The AT vehicle that out ranges tanks by 50% and can barrage weapon teams and the one that, while still outranging tanks by 50% has one of the highest pen values and accuracy values in the game. Use the tools at your disposal, that's what they are there for.
  • #100
    3 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    The new Soviet commander is quite fragile against enemy armor as several players have stated before, but is still a great commander to play with.

    Now going back to this have you wondered why don't you see it anymore during games? Even with its barrage is still not that great against anything better than light armor. 75 fuel for an overly nerfed tank with low armor, pen values, and rotation speed no thanks.

    And the famousS SU-85 Medium Tank Destroyer that can be utterly destroyed by any medium tank with ease, due to its low armor and longtime rotation speed. Of course you will always want to use it at the max range but still, Blitzkrieg or just 2 squads of Sturms with Panzerschrecks are more than enough to deal with it.

    Then, of course, this tank destroyer loses its efficiency against the King Tiger or even worst to the Elephant that has the same max range as the SU-85 with its ability on. However, the max range advantage against medium armor is fair enough to compensate for the low armor and low rotation speed, don't you agree? @thedarkarmadillo

  • #101
    3 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    Why would you expect a dedicated AT unit to be able to deal with AT infantry? Can the stug, the closest comparable vehicle, fight medium tanks? of course it can, if given the proper support. the same way a single t34/76 can kill an Elefant or Jagdtiger or a recklessly unsupported King Tiger gets swarmed by Bazookas and shermans. What even would be your idea of an AT option?

  • #102
    3 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,802
    Defend your armour? Literally a single con and either SU is enough to secure a kill if they try and dive after it. I don't know what you want from me and I don't think I can help you if you don't understand how the units work.
  • #103
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    On which Mod did you solo kill an elephant or Jadtiger by only using a T34/76mm. You are going way too out of concept and reality. @Romanov

    And yes we all know you gotta have a diverse army to compensate for weaknesses All good @thedarkarmadillo .

    No need to keep on talking on side themes from the main topic of this post.

    Commander
    Is kind of fine as it currently is, but adding a Partisan Tank Hunter to it by moving the Airdropped crates to the FCP seems like a viable option. If not, the commander is still very fun and well designed to fulfill its main purpose.

    Alternative solution
    1. Add airdropped stolen/confiscated Panzerschrecks to the crates, after all the Soviets defeated the Nazis during the invasion of Stalingrad where 91,000 survivors became prisioners of war and of course they confiscated all of the prisoners' weapons.
    2. Add stolen/confiscated Panzerschrecks available for upgrade on the FCP

  • #104
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    After all, this new commander portraits the URSS offensive tactics in late 1942 until the end of WWII, after being victorious from invading forces. Allowing the Soviets to get new advantages from their prisoners of war (pow),

  • #105
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    I was simply exaggerating to point out that just because its a TD doesnt mean it will always win vs tanks.
    As for your proposals, i dont think AT partisans fit the doctrine well, they have pretty much nothing to do with air power or Airborne troops. Captured Panzerschrecks could prove too strong aswell , they are balanced on the expensive panzergrenadiers and sturmpioneers which only have 4 men, same reason i frankly am not the biggest fan of the Füsilier changes, gives you a flashback of schreckvolks. Airdropped schrecks for 6 men conscripts would be pretty bonkers, snare+schreck is simply too powerful.
    A lend leased Bazooka would be more reasonable, in general the airborne rally point could serve for different drops and abilites like the Brit observation point as you mentioned.
    But then again your main complaint was late game AT option, right?Schreck equipped infantry would get flattened by StuPas and KTs, I dont think the soviets have anything that caters to that need as a doctrinal ability, they rely on SU-85 and ZiS-3 and we already discussed that.

  • #106
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    Version 5.0 Feedback

    Conscripts

    1. Adding one more squad member does not solve the late game problem for them
    2. Unlocking this only after you have built your T4 is even a worst idea since it doesn't bring something useful against the enemy army composition
    3. On the late game, Conscripts will need weapon upgrades, not another member to a 6 man squad
    4. 50 Ammo for this is a total trap during the late game since you will require expensive Aerial abilities, mines or other crucial abilities to basically win the game
    5. This new upgrade leaves all the Soviet Commanders with Conscript weapon upgrades useless, as you won't be able to upgrade them with Ptrs Rifles, Assault Packages or even pick Panzerschrecks among other weapons.
    6. The problem was terribly "solved"

    Possible Solutions

    • Add non-doctrinal Ptrs rifles available for upgrade to Conscripts (So much useful to scale against enemy armor)
    • Add non-doctrinal DP Light Machine Guns available for upgrade after having two HQs built (Cheap Grenadiers are wrecking Penals and Guards with MG42 light machine-gun upgraded without requesting anything to get that weapon upgrade)
    • Remove the current useless Veterancy1 ability and replace it for something like "Unbreakable Union" Better defense and/or fire of rate after entering in combat for 12 seconds, 25 seconds cooldown.

    SU-76

    1. 76mm units get a lot of bullets bounced by enemy medium tanks. The new penetration value nerf will make this unit even worst against the PanzerIV, the newly buffed Osthwind and of course against the Stu II
    2. 75 fuel to deal against a single Light vehicle? Really?
    3. Soviets already have Conscripts, Penals and Guards that can destroy light vehicles
    4. Terribly handled this unit
    5. The unit will now be a trap because you will spend 75 fuel to destroy a single light vehicle and then get totally wrecked by any medium tank This is not how this Tank destroyer should work for its price.
    6. The point is not making the Soviets even worst against enemy armor

    The SU-76 only needed two buffs to bring it back to the game (instead of nerfing it to outclass a single enemy light vehicle recruited during the entire length of the game in most of the cases)

             -Increasing the rotation speed from 30 to 34
             -Decreasing the reload time for its main gun (to compensate for the low armor and 75 fuel)
             -Optional buff: Increasing the chances of penetrating enemy armor by 10 to avoid getting its damage deflected
    

    Possible solutions

    • Decrease the Fuel cost from 75 to 50 after the penetration values have been nerfed so it can remain as a viable option
    • Applying the buffs mentioned before

    M42 45mm Anti-Tank Gun
    1. Why would someone even go for this bad unit? Now that has been nerfed is even worse than before.

    M5 Half-Track and Conscript AT Grenade Package
    * Are finally coherent with cost performance compared to other factions investments.

    Overall suggestion

    Axis Medium Tanks require nerfs to its frontal armor because they get to bounce a lot of AT-bullets from 76mm which is basically most of the Allied non-doctrinal forces to deal against enemy armor.

  • #107
    2 months ago
    pfcpfc Posts: 8
    edited April 19
    aasd
  • #108
    2 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346
    edited April 29

    @Patrol_Omega You have hit the nail on the head (removed)

    What a terrible "solution" for the Conscripts. Gaining a man but losing the weapon slot (and the ability to share a building with another team) - whose stupid idea was that? How is not being able to fight going to help them in the late game? Manpower Reserves should be called Extra Cannon Fodder. They are trying really hard to avoid the obvious solution of giving Conscripts a DP-27, bringing them in line with Osttruppen.

    The SU-76 nerf is also pretty bad, especially since they are buffing the Ostheer equivalent.

  • #109
    2 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    It needs to be asked: Are they also dropping the penetration values on the Zis-3 AT gun because, it is the same gun on the SU-76.

    My opinion of these changes:

  • #110
    2 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited April 20

    The total sum of changes for the SU-76 is a buff, for its intended role. Better accuracy, better mobility while still retaining solid base penetration (and vet 2 penetration increase) means it will be able to fight Panzer IVs at max range with ease. The changes are intended to take away its unfair cost effectiveness when fighting heavier vehicles and emphasize its role as an intermediate TD.

    The ZiS-3 won't receive any changes, it doesn't matter that historically it uses the same gun. The game is historically based, not historically accurate. Unit stats are based on gameplay first and foremost.

  • #111
    2 months ago
    Dangminh25Dangminh25 Posts: 64

    too many shocktroop in this commander
    now we have air drop shocktroop and Anti tank shocktroop

  • #112
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    The conscript buff is a decent idea, but i dont agree with the removal of the weapon slot. the Su-76 change i do agree with. the AT gun canister shots should either get a buff or retain their range, just because they are causing a slight headache when spammed doesnt make the unit OP. at least give them the same range as infantry, 35 instead of 30.

  • #113
    2 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    If they were serious about improving Conscripts for late game play, they would make their veteran ability an extra weapon slot and give them a single DP-27 upgrade once T4 was reached.

  • #114
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    I mean, Grenadiers also cost 240MP and can unlock the best Mg/lg-mg on the game for themselves very early into the game. Conscripts, on the other hand, are not allowed to get a single non-doctrinal weapon upgrade.
    Apart from that, every Soviet player feels like "meh nothing accomplished yet" after Conscripts unlock their Vet1 ability, is simply a phase that you must skip as it is currently worthless.

  • #115
    2 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited April 20

    @PanzerFutz said:
    If they were serious about improving Conscripts for late game play, they would make their veteran ability an extra weapon slot and give them a single DP-27 upgrade once T4 was reached.

    That would just make Ostheer-Soviet late game an incredibly boring LMG war. On top of colliding with Penals' damage dealing role.

  • #116
    2 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    Every faction but the Soviets has a core unit that can upgrade with an LMG. I find the idea of every faction but one having something to be positively repugnant. It's historically inaccurate, it's unbalanced and the game is diminished in every instance that it occurs. I will argue against it at every opportunity.

    I think reinforcing the Cannon Fodder role of Conscripts is the wrong way to go. I think having Conscripts who can only merge or die is boring. Russian players seem to find it positively insulting.

    But don't worry. I'm not a high-ranked player so, Relic will just ignore any of my suggestions.

  • #117
    2 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

  • #118
    2 months ago

    @PanzerFutz said:
    @Patrol_Omega You have hit the nail on the head, while it looks like the Relic team have been hitting themselves on their heads. I can feel their (collective) IQ dropping below 80 with the latest changes.

    What a terrible "solution" for the Conscripts. Gaining a man but losing the weapon slot (and the ability to share a building with another team) - whose stupid idea was that? How is not being able to fight going to help them in the late game? Manpower Reserves should be called Extra Cannon Fodder. They are trying really hard to avoid the obvious solution of giving Conscripts a DP-27, bringing them in line with Osttruppen.

    The SU-76 nerf is also pretty bad, especially since they are buffing the Ostheer equivalent.

    Have the Nazi's taken over the game team? Or has someone turned off the oxygen supply to their offices?

    For one thing, Soviet is on the first rate of winning for the moment, which means even with some units like su-76 or conscripts, this faction is still powerful and strong. If you insist on enhancing other units of Soviet, ok, that's fine, it's your choice and freedom of speech.

    BUT, " Have the Nazi's taken over the game team? Or has someone turned off the oxygen supply to their offices?" You are going too far sir.

  • #119
    2 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346
    edited April 24

    @Yanggesaisi I apologize for overstepping the mark. I was frustrated by seeing constant changes strengthening the German commanders and the faction in general, while seeing almost no changes to the decidedly weak (by comparison) Allied commanders. It doesn't excuse my behavior but, perhaps it explains it. I've decided to not comment on the new commanders anymore so, I shouldn't be offending anyone from now on.

  • #120
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    Win rates are not clasified by seasons -even on Coh2.org they stated that- meaning that you have an overall stat from when the game was released till this date. So claiming that the Soviet faction holds the highest win rate is totally nonsense and fake.

    Patches change with time and with it faction win rates as well.
    In present time players infer that the Okw holds the the highest win rate, if you get to read updated forums and watch official streams.

  • #121
    2 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,802
    Yupp. Win rates don't account for current balance, but all previous balance. From 5 minute T70 windustry to pretty much auto lose SWS truck pushing, Sturm, Supression Kuble at your cut off all contribute to the current winrate value. It's not an accurate representation of current balance because it's a combination of every balance for the last 6 years
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.