Feedback - Commander Revamp

145679

Comments

  • #242
    2 weeks ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,533

    i have been playing them lately for no other reason than because i wanted to use them, i have to say that they are reliable troops, but their veterancy being almost half of the one that antitank rifle guards which get makes them not really perform too different from what a vet 0 unit does. Though its clearly an unit that has never really been looked at, small tweaks would make them competitive.

  • #243
    2 weeks ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,430

    i too would love to see more assault guards, however with penals as they are they somewhat are unnecessary as far as role unless they had something more unique than mid range focus and a grenade.

  • #244
    2 weeks ago
    GeblobtGeblobt Posts: 1

    My Suggestions for Okw:
    Elite Armor Doctrine: Remove the Sturmtiger. He doesnt synergies with the other ablities at all. Then you could build the new Commander for december around him.
    1. You replace him with the Tiger I. The tiger can use both the heat shell and the tank commander. Vet 5 Tiger could be hard to balance though.
    2. You add the Kingtiger exclusively to this Commander. So you remove him as a non doc call in. Maybe you could buff some of his stats too. He seems pretty mediocre atm.
    Overwatch: You could add the wehr sniper ability (Fire Incendiary Explosive Round) as a vet 5 ability foor the light Jaeger unit.

  • #245
    2 weeks ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 220

    I've just had a good look at the Guards Assault Troops and their Vet 1 Trip Flares are a big weakness. It's a strange ability for an assault squad to have. Hit The Dirt seems far more appropriate.

    If Guards Assault Troops were available as a separate squad and had Hit The Dirt, they would be a better choice than Shocks for Urban Defense. They might even be better than Shocks in the Terror and Anti-Infantry doctrines but, that's for a later discussion.

  • #246
    2 weeks ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 380
    edited October 1

    Really great what you are trying to do, really great to see new stuff but imo:

    • Commissar is pretty cheesy even without the retreat point; the ultimate officer maybe (heal+buffs+debuffs+combat effective+grenade+6 man vet 1 ). The fact that, as infantry, it cannot recrew is a bit weird and annoying. I think it could be a more simple squad either combat effective (no healing then but offensive buffs) or support (weaker models and no grenade so it can't like 1vs1 pgrens + healing + only defensive skills) and be done with it.
    • i don't like Scorched Earth Policy as it is (love the hstorical reference tho); You can break a territory lockdown for instance by forcing off the major or destroy a cache that delays your capping, here you just have to wait the timer and you can't do anything about it. Maybe the ability could significantly increase capping time for 2 minutes rather than forbidding it.

    • Stormtroopers free upgrade: it's just weird to have a weapon upgrade that is really effective and need a research but is free.
      The infantry commander in this iteration seems pretty far from the "infantry supported by artillery" theme.
      It would have been great to see an elite okw troop (i have falls in mind) make it into wehrmacht rather than another stormtroopers commander althought stormtroopers changes affects a lot more commanders at once.

    -Mines on tommies squad aren't really needed, the heat grenade on RE is fine
    i'd love to see UKF get more general changes:
    -Remove the exclusivity between aec and bofor (bofor limit to 1). AEC is a cornerstone unit (as a counters light vehicules + sniper + med tanks + strong special ability) while bofors are underwelhming partly because you loose access to aec and the support it need to keep it alive just make it a weaker option vs AEC (reason you often see bofors only with advance emplacement).
    Later normalize bofor with the panzer hq something in the line of same amount of hp (remove brace), no pop cap, limit to 1 still (precedent being us officers that can be rebuilt but not more than one at a time) then review of brace and damage bonuses vs emplacements.
    -i would love to see caches moved to sappers instead of IS. It's an unnecessary asymetrical design that brings nothing.

  • #247
    2 weeks ago
    SwireksterSwirekster Posts: 8
    edited October 1

    As for 221/223 It takes a lot of dead enemies and time to even consider using mines at vet 5, and let's be honest, it is never gonna go there. It will be used by players as a cache and die when they forgot to pull it back. For now it is very phantom bonus, due to low damage of the unit, takes forever to vet and dies to any at, so using it as mine transporter is just too risky for the reward.

    For artillery commander upgrade for okw, is it just me or 80 munnitions for 4 blasts that are easy to dodge seems like a lot. Every time you want to use it, it costs you 80 munni and the commander itself is 30. Slight sight bonus is nice, but commander only for using him for arti? Not worth it imo.

  • #248
    2 weeks ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 220

    From my point of view, no upgrades/abilities should be coming in at Vet Level 5. For the most part, only tanks and infantry make it to that level so, there's no point in giving light vehicles or artillery pieces Level 5 upgrades. Level 4 is long enough to wait but, at least there's some logic in it. It's the first level above Level 3 so, getting there deserves a reward. The Walking Stuka uses this system so, why not everything else?

    I don't have the Elite Armor commander and I can't tell from the notes but, does the 221/223 have AP Incendiary rounds for its machine-gun? It seem like this unit really needs them as standard, not an upgrade, to give it any chance of surviving for any length of time. I'd be very interested to hear whether anyone could get a 221/223 to Vet Level 5. It seems improbable to me.

  • #249
    2 weeks ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,533

    To be fair if assault guards had its tripwire skill changued i would prefer a more assault/offensive focushed skill like Oorah!, tactical movement, or even somekind of grenade/molotov cocktail assault (though guard grenade assault may be terrorific), hit the dirt is nice but i never saw any real use on it apart of capping under mg fire. Unless Oorah!, both of the other skills can be used both on attack and defense, as the first on cover will destroy any enemy incoming, and the second would deny an area of assault/smash a blob.

    The 221/223 is there for its utility, and making it somewhat too good at light AT and AI, as incendiary rounds give an insane dps to mgs, which would make it become really expensive to deploy for balance issues. It would also become one of those units that, if you fail to control them or happen to be caught out of position, it means you are out of the match because the unit would completely destroy you, which is pretty much what happens with the flame halftrack as of today.

    It should be better if it gets added a secoundary option for upgrade, since you can purchase more than one but only upgrade one perhaps giving the others the old 222 upgrade or spotting scopes would improve other 221 performance, because even though i dislike how many okw units have what would be doctrinal on osthern as a base upgrade, perhaps its the way to go on this case.

  • #250
    2 weeks ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 220

    As said above, the problem with Guards Assault Troops is equipping them in a way which distinguishes them from other Soviet infantry units. Hit The Dirt and Oorah are both abilities possessed by other units whose roles would overlap with Guards Assault Troops. Trip Flares are all wrong for them but, finding something unique which suits their role is really hard. An ability like the Fight To The Death buff would be more appropriate for them, as it would make them unique, but it would probably need a movement buff as well to truly fit the assault role.

    As for the 221/223, my feeling is that, while Defensive Smoke makes a lot of sense for a mobile vehicle like the 221, it's not very good for a unit that is stationary while it's locking down a sector. The 223 looks like it needs something with which to defend itself while in lock-down (like AP Incendiary rounds), otherwise a player will always need to station another unit nearby to protect it. Vehicle Detection will help give it a head-start if an opposition player sends a light vehicle to destroy it but, a bit more firepower will help it survive long enough to get away.

    Given that only one 223 is allowed on the map at a time, giving this version AP Incendiary rounds won't upset the balance too much. It can't be spammed so, I can't see a way to abuse the upgrade.

  • #251
    2 weeks ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,533
    edited October 2

    Since it can lock down sectors by placing itself anywhere on them, i believe that it shouldnt be able to be a powerhouse on itself. On small sectors its not an isue, but on others that literally cross half map, like that bunker hill map, this unit its overpowered, as it allows OKW to never be cut off as they can protect the sector by placing the 223 literally near its spawn when the capture point that would cut it off is near the enemy spawn. Now dont just only put that, but also add the fact that 223 will absolutely destroy everything until a tank gets there, that would be absurd.

    My opinion on Guard assault troops keeps still the same, i dont really want for them skills that are meant to penal batallions or to merelly hold the line. A grenade assault, sprint or tactical movement would be more fitting on my opinion, and im only explaining on skills that are already ingame and easy to implement. They arent meant to die like penals or bleed like conscripts, they are the guards, unlike the previous they should have the advantage of having access to more equipment and training.

  • #252
    2 weeks ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,662

    Urban Defense Units KV-2
    Apart from fact that this unit is not good for the commander as I have explained the changes made to unit are also in the wrong direction.

    KV-2

    In reality the KV-2 was more of self propelled gun providing indirect fire and although the gun of the same caliber as the ISU it was the M-10 and not ML-20 and was inferior. The unit become obsolete as soon 75mm gun become available to the German and it was a far less successful design than the ISU-152.

    In game the unit has several difference from ISU-152. The idea of modeling the KV-2's after ISU-152 is problematic for a number of reason.

    Comments:

    Bugs:
    The unit still gets a red icon over it while switching modes indicating a penalty although those have been removed.

    (?)The uni does not have an option to attack vehicles in siege mode only to attack ground.

    The idea of giving the same AOE profile as the ISU-152 is bad for number of reason. ISU HE munition have very low penetration and the chance to do AOE damage to tank is very low. KV-2 with an AOE 6 combined with the lower scatter be able do AOE damage to tanks far more often.

    In addition KV-2 get 120!!! deflection damage when ISU-152 get half that, the value is simply way to high.

    Further more KV-2 can fire behind shot blockers, has lower reload and has a turret that allow to better track enemy targets.

    Finally KV-2 has increased range with veterancy to 80 which even longer than the Elephant.

    When comparing the 2 units ISU is more difficult to use since it requires open space and can be flanked (although its rear armor is a bit high at 155) while KV-2 is easier to use and much harder to flank with 180!!! rear armor and a turret.

    If one really wanted to follow the ISU-152 solution one would give the unit two types of munition maybe general purpose munition for tank mode and HE for siege mode.

    The idea behind the vision penalty was that the commander would go into the tank to help with reload and thus the animation. Although the 0 vision in siege mod is wrong one could make use of the idea and animation with either making the penalty smaller (20?) or having the commander as an upgrade or vet bonus.

    Replacing the vet 1 bonus is a good idea but "inspiration" is badly designed ability that promotes blobbing and allow PTRS Penal to protect the Tank very effectively. CD increases PTRS DPS vs Vehicles allot and sprint allow easier use of satchel charges.

    The damage reduction at vet 3 is simply over the TOP, I am not sure why some many units are given that ability. Having a deadly 300/180 armor unit with effectively 1300 HP makes little sense.

    Suggestions:
    The unit in siege mode has a minimum range of 25 that is apparent to users especially since they cannot manually target enemy unit and can only fire on the ground. Maybe reduce that minimum range to 15? and/or give some indicator of that limitation.

    Lower the rear armor value of the unit 180 is simply way to high for the unit
    If the unit need more armor or HP that should come via veterancy since mobility should not included as vet bonus for this unit.

    If the unit need addition firepower that again should come with veterancy.

    Instead of trying to replicated the ISU-152 and creating another Soviet super heavy, reduce CP and price to lower level even than IS-2 and balance the unit accordingly.

    Alternatively redesign the unit so that once is siege mod can fire a 3 shell barrage or give switchable munition to the unit similar to the Sherman (maybe for tank and siege mode).

  • #253
    2 weeks ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,430

    to start off, i LIKE the KV-2, always have, its a neat little unit and its finally useable BUT i agree with @vipper that its moving in the wrong direction. again, i LIKE it and the way it feels, however it doesnt feel unique. its kinda like a different take on the isu. it plays nice, but its not quite.... right.

    i would like to see what it would be like as a psudo mobile howitzer/ assault gun instead of heavy 105 sherman with a lock down.
    i feel that the devastation brought by the siege mode, especially with vet is too much for little input. its devastating to a good distance out but plays more as an emplacement than a siege tank.

    as stated, inspire as a vet 1 ability is strange, strange as cap territory if you aske me because you are requiring the unit to be in a place its design says it shouldnt.

  • #254
    1 week ago
    Boris_yeltsinBoris_yel… Posts: 104
    IMO, it'd be better make the ISU and AT SPG, more like the Elefant or the Jagdtiger, and revert the KV-2 to the 1.4 patch stats. Thus KV would be more of a hard-counter to the Pz4/Brumbar, while the ISU would be a heavy tank hunter.

    It would also probably be good to consider the following option for the KV-2 ability: after the shot, the next shot happens twice as fast, and costs 45 munitions. Like, you shoot, use the ability, KV shoots and then shoots after the next 4.5 seconds. Cooldown 1-2 minutes. The timings are approximate, but the core idea is great for such a tank.

    Or, it could be a passive ability, that boosts entering and exiting the siege mode.
  • #255
    1 week ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,662
    edited October 3

    Another approach for the KV-2 (possibly for dozer and brumabr also) would be the following:
    Unit can act as tank but with munition with allot smaller AOE and low deflection damage.

    The unit can enter siege mode where it can not move and gets to fire up to 3 HE rounds at extended ranges not as barrage but shots directed by the user, sort of an attack ground.

    After exiting siege mode the ability goes to cool-down.

    With these change the unit's balances can be near KV-1 (having better AI and some deflection damage) with a price in the vicinity of 500/160 and CP around 10-12. One could even try to increase limit from 1 to 2 (or even completely remove it if it is moved to T4) since the unit would be closer to heavy tank than a Super heavy tank.

    This approach is closer to reality since KV-2 was closer to KV-1 than to ISU-152, while make the unit different than ISU and adds more instead of one more doctrine with an ISU clone.

  • #256
    1 week ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,430
    Idk. I think a hard hitting tank in direct fire is fine with standard range, siege mode makes it more of an isu than the unit itself.
    I'd see siege mode removed and replaced with the ability to fire a Salvo at range for a decent munitions cost. It would act sort like an armour way up gunned zis or AI su76. Both commanders lack a proper way to dislodge hard points (well outside cheesy siege mode) and I would personally like to see more player input and less emplacement style "game plays itself, you just keep it repaired" type game play
  • #257
    1 week ago
    Andy_REAndy_RE Posts: 186 admin

    The latest mod is now live chaps. Check out the notes and let us know your thoughts.

    https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/245307/commander-revamp-preview-changelog#latest

  • #258
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,063
    So why did the concrete bunker have its population cost removed? In my opinion we should be moving in a direction that gives ALL bunkers, fighting positions, etc a population cost.

    It should definitely be significantly lower than mainline infantry. But it was a popcost of 3, which is exactly that. I would say give regular bunkers and FPs a popcost of 1.5 or something
  • #259
    1 week ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 31

    Buttons are not displayed after the patch.
    -pzgren repair
    -pzgren marksman
    -shock troops grenade
    -sturmtiger reload

  • #261
    1 week ago

    GERMAN INFANTRY DOCTRINE

    Grenadier Veteran Squad Leader
    The changes to the Grenadiers are great it makes the VSL more than just an extra grens, and makes the upgrade more competitive with comparable upgrades

    Panzergrenadiers Support Package
    Its broken only the passive buff is available there are no buttons for the other abilities

    Assault and Hold
    was unable to test because there is no button to activate ability

    250 Half-Track
    Good change making a already good unit better

    Overall I was unable to use half of the changes due to bugs , but the changes that did work were positive ones

  • #262
    1 week ago
    KenchovaKenchova Posts: 1

    I confirm the bugs stated by @SomeguyfromIdaho, Also, the Combined Arms Panzergrenadiers passive with the support package also work with enemy vehicles as well ( the tool tip says only friendly ).

  • #263
    1 week ago
    ARMYguyARMYguy Posts: 783

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    So why did the concrete bunker have its population cost removed? In my opinion we should be moving in a direction that gives ALL bunkers, fighting positions, etc a population cost.

    It should definitely be significantly lower than mainline infantry. But it was a popcost of 3, which is exactly that. I would say give regular bunkers and FPs a popcost of 1.5 or something

    Don't you think this game has enough problems with pop as it is? Why does everything have so much pop compared to vcoh? Its just hold overs from lazy balancing. Everything needs massive population decreases.

  • #264
    1 week ago
    SwireksterSwirekster Posts: 8
    edited October 4

    Stormtroopers: They ability to cloak is removed at ver 2 for some reason.
    I think it is a bug, i just spawned fresh squad and they do cloak. Vet 2 ones do not.

    Also, by nerfing their range by giving them smg's, the tactical assault ability is too risky most of the time. You already need to go super close for mp40s to do damage, this ability with that weapon type is not good. I think it should be edited in 2 ways:

    1- removing moving speed penalty, It was risky with stg44 and now it is suicide to use this ability if not facing already wounded squad or support weapon crews. It is overkill against support weapons, coz you already getting close, and mauling the crew, using this ability you risk being wiped by other enemy units while mp40s do fine without it.

    2-removing movement penalty on retreat.

  • #265
    1 week ago

    @SomeguyfromIdaho said:
    GERMAN INFANTRY DOCTRINE

    Grenadier Veteran Squad Leader
    The changes to the Grenadiers are great it makes the VSL more than just an extra grens, and makes the upgrade more competitive with comparable upgrades

    Panzergrenadiers Support Package
    Its broken only the passive buff is available there are no buttons for the other abilities

    Assault and Hold
    was unable to test because there is no button to activate ability

    250 Half-Track
    Good change making a already good unit better

    Overall I was unable to use half of the changes due to bugs , but the changes that did work were positive ones

    reinstalling the mod resolved most of the bugs

    Panzergrenadiers Support Package
    I like it so far, but it needs work because right now it is overshadowed by the existing panzerschreck upgrade

    Love the Combined Arms its fun to use vehicles to "slingshot" Panzergrenadiers into the enemy lines

    Rudimentary Repair works well with the 250

    Mark Target/ Infantry
    Not a fan of making a debuffung one of my units almost as much as the enemy, I would prefer a mark vehicles since the Pgrens are giving up their AT capabilities and would fit the "Support" role the upgrade implies

    suggestions
    Since the support package denies panzerschreck to Pgrens. I think the support package should come with panzerfausts giving them some means to defend themselves Against enemy AFVS

    Smoke grenades would be good

    Adding IR STGS to strengthen the Panzergrenadiers Anti-Infantry role in exchange for removing their AT capabilities

    Assault and Hold
    excellent change really adds some teeth to the doctrine, and synergies Infantry play this Doctrine should prompt

  • #266
    1 week ago
    vsrvsr Posts: 79

    @Andy_RE said:

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    So why did the concrete bunker have its population cost removed? In my opinion we should be moving in a direction that gives ALL bunkers, fighting positions, etc a population cost.

    It should definitely be significantly lower than mainline infantry. But it was a popcost of 3, which is exactly that. I would say give regular bunkers and FPs a popcost of 1.5 or something

    It was a tough one. We wanted to attach pop solely to the MG upgrade, and not to repair bay/ standard bunker. However, the tools don't allow this. It feels unfair to have pop attached to the repair bunker.

    As I said, a tricky one, but we'll be keeping an eye on it.

    A quick thought on potential solution to this issue. How about splitting this into two separate independent bunker abilities, one can be MG-upgraded bunker with pop cap and the other one can be standard bunker without pop cap. These two abilities can be built by the player manually based on his/her preference using a pioneer squad.

    Or, completely remove MG upgrade, just keep it as a standard/repair bunker, so the player has to put an MG42 in the bunker (thus resolving the pop cap issue).

  • #267
    1 week ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 28

    My idea on OST bunker, make it 2 options instead of 3:
    1. MGbunker: 150mp/60ammo ; can take 3 tank rounds ; 2x buildtime ; no upgrade time needed ; 3 popcap ; huge sight all around is too much,make it sight forward the MG direction like SU85 focus sight
    2. Double bunker (reinforce & medic as one): 200mp/100ammo ; can take 4 tank rounds ; x2 buildtime ; no upgrade time needed ; make this target as big as Brit Forward Assembly


    As an Allied player, i feel a single Teller mine destroy a light tank is too strong for its cost, beside Teller vs Reigel43:
    Teller destroy a light tank / Reigel43 doesnt (2/3 health)
    Teller is easier to get (Pioneer) / Reigel is harder (251 halftrack)
    Teller is non Doc / Reigel is Doc
    Both cost the same 50ammo

    How to fix: Give Pioneer Reigel mine, make Teller doctrinal for 251, Teller cost 60

  • #268
    1 week ago
    NoitatohtoriNoitatoht… Posts: 181
    > @C3Tooth said:

    > As an Allied player, i feel a single Teller mine destroy a light tank is too strong for its cost, beside Teller vs Reigel43:
    > Teller destroy a light tank / Reigel43 doesnt (2/3 health)
    > Teller is easier to get (Pioneer) / Reigel is harder (251 halftrack)
    > Teller is non Doc / Reigel is Doc
    > Both cost the same 50ammo
    >
    > How to fix: Give Pioneer Reigel mine, make Teller doctrinal for 251, Teller cost 60

    As a Wehr player, I support this as it would make Wehr completely, stupidly overpowered.

    Seriously, though, it's a bad idea. Riegels are good because the fully immobilize vehicles.
  • #269
    1 week ago
    HyperBlancatHyperBlan… Posts: 7
    edited October 7

    @Noitatohtori said:
    > @C3Tooth said:

    > As an Allied player, i feel a single Teller mine destroy a light tank is too strong for its cost, beside Teller vs Reigel43:
    > Teller destroy a light tank / Reigel43 doesnt (2/3 health)
    > Teller is easier to get (Pioneer) / Reigel is harder (251 halftrack)
    > Teller is non Doc / Reigel is Doc
    > Both cost the same 50ammo
    >
    > How to fix: Give Pioneer Reigel mine, make Teller doctrinal for 251, Teller cost 60

    As a Wehr player, I support this as it would make Wehr completely, stupidly overpowered.

    Seriously, though, it's a bad idea. Riegels are good because the fully immobilize vehicles.

    rigel mine destroy track and make armor cant move(not slow, perfectly cant move

    if rigel mine give to non-docrine, it will be OP

  • #270
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,063
    Keep Tellers and reigels where they are. Reduce the Tellers damage to 380, increase the riegels to 400. Now the heavy mine will 1 shot em, and the teller won't.
  • #271
    1 week ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 28

    Totally agree

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.