Nerf Ranger Commander

#1
3 months ago

It is far too strong compared to any other commander.

Constant green cover sandbags and mines - check

Magic smoke from the sky, negating mg's - check

OP Rangers with mid range thompsons - check

Ability no one uses but is really strong if you remember - check

OP pershing whose anti infantry is just far too much, even on retreat - check

Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • #2
    3 months ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 209

    OKW with no commander
    Volk have greencover sandbags & Stg44 + grenade with no Fuel non doc - check
    Magic Walking stuka from the sky negating a whole defensive position - check
    OP Ober with long range LMG - check
    Light tanks that no one used because only Volks to victory - check
    OP King which non doc - check

    Quit OST and play OKW, thing will be solved

  • #3
    3 months ago

    @C3Tooth said:
    OP King which non doc - check

    King Tiger OP? Rofl ok nice joke

  • #4
    3 months ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 209

    If having non-doc Panther 960hp or non-doc King 1240hp cant find a way to fight a single commander unit Pershing 800hp. Im sorry.

  • #5
    3 months ago

    @C3Tooth said:
    If having non-doc Panther 960hp or non-doc King 1240hp cant find a way to fight a single commander unit Pershing 800hp. Im sorry.

    You don't play 1v1's do you?

    Elefant and Jagtiger, to an extent KT, are not used in 1v1's because they aren't worth it - yet they all got nerfed to facilitate team games. In 1v1's, the Pershing is too strong. And I see no reason why is shouldn't be nerfed if team balance dictates all balance it should work vice versa. It's veterancy can be a start.

    But most of all, I'd actually prefer all call ins to be in tech.

  • #6
    3 months ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 209

    I have a team of 2v2 with a Soviet.
    Pershing can pen,damage like a Jackson with blast like Sherman, its armor may be equal to Panther and HP of T34-85. Pershing has low hp as its weakness, Jadtig/Ele/Pak43 just shoot only once and Pershing will have to retreat because it lost 2/5 hp.

    Beside, some commanders are designed to play small battles, some are to play big battles. Currently OKW Fortification is too Op in big battles.
    As now, USF is** the only faction** with worst teching, while OST/Brit all access to MG,ATgun, mortar. Soviet back tech is really cheap. OKW back tech rewarded with King. USF has to pick between MG & ATgun make it defenseless either mass infantry or light tanks. USF needs work.

  • #7
    3 months ago

    @C3Tooth said:
    OKW with no commander
    Volk have greencover sandbags & Stg44 + grenade with no Fuel non doc - check
    Magic Walking stuka from the sky negating a whole defensive position - check
    OP Ober with long range LMG - check
    Light tanks that no one used because only Volks to victory - check
    OP King which non doc - check

    Quit OST and play OKW, thing will be solved

    Have you ever played OKW?

    Volks lack AT ability. Faust is only useful against noobs, because even universal carrier's flame thrower has longer range than Faust, every experience player could kiting Volks.

    Stuka works better than other rocket launchers against team weapons, but worse against UKF fortifications. It requires more skills to utilize Stuka than other rocket launchers, you need to predict enemy's retreat path.

    Obers are good but not invincible. You can wipe than with rangers, smg paratroops, shocks and even ppsh conscript at close range. And they are no match to lmg paratroops and dp guards at long range.

    No one use Luchs? I think your rank is not high enough.

    King tiger is liability in most cases, I only use it if I lost my Panzer HQ for some reason.

  • #8
    3 months ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 209

    Volk lack AT ability, tell that to InfantrySec. Volk has the highest utility, Cons was the only core infantry can build sandbag for they're too weak, no gun upgrade, later Volk gained sandbag since 2016 due to lack of AI gun upgrade(as they can only up 1 Panzerschrek & flame nade before), then they gain Stg44 + faust with zero Fuel/Manpower required, and sandbag for Volk is still there make them outclass both RM & Cons.

    Lack AT ability? Sturm have Panzerschrek, double camo ATgun strategy. British doesnt have snare to slowdown tanks, Soviet doesnt have Bazooka/Panzerschrek. USF sure have everything, but go for Captain and will be dominated with Volks.

    With currently Volk's whole upgrade. Light tanks arent required in build since Volk can handle everything.

    And you're comparing Obers nondoc with every Allied doc close range infantry.


    Let me tell the time line as a USF vs OKW
    1min: Rear, RM vs Sturm,Volk
    3min: Rear, RM, RM, Mortar vs Sturm, Volk, Volk, Volk
    5min: Rear, RM Bar, RM Bar, Mortar, Lieu or Cap vs Sturm, Volk stg44, Volk stg44, Volk, Lunch or FlakHT and another Volk (because USF has to pay 40 fuel/400mp to upgrade)

    Let me point out another fuel resource
    If Allied upgrade their weapon/grenade, their 1st Sherman,T34,Cromwell comes later than Axis's 1st Panzer.

    Here are some images of Volks to victory


    Think about without MG34, stg44 with sandbag like OKW was 1st designed, Sturm was the only squad for AI, a Light tanks in mid game is a must for OKW. Not anymore today.

  • #9
    3 months ago
    addvaluejackaddvaluej… Posts: 43
    edited December 2018

    @C3Tooth said:
    Volk lack AT ability, tell that to InfantrySec. Volk has the highest utility, Cons was the only core infantry can build sandbag for they're too weak, no gun upgrade, later Volk gained sandbag since 2016 due to lack of AI gun upgrade(as they can only up 1 Panzerschrek & flame nade before), then they gain Stg44 + faust with zero Fuel/Manpower required, and sandbag for Volk is still there make them outclass both RM & Cons.

    For Cons, they are cheaper. For RM, try get closer.

    Lack AT ability? Sturm have Panzerschrek, double camo ATgun strategy. British doesnt have snare to slowdown tanks, Soviet doesnt have Bazooka/Panzerschrek. USF sure have everything, but go for Captain and will be dominated with Volks.

    I am talking about Volk itself not the whole faction.

    With currently Volk's whole upgrade. Light tanks arent required in build since Volk can handle everything.

    Have you faced mg spam, penal spam or rm spam before?

    And you're comparing Obers nondoc with every Allied doc close range infantry.

    Obers comes later than Allied elite infantry. If you can't gain 3 command points before OKW's Panzer HQ, there is something wrong with your play style.


    Let me tell the time line as a USF vs OKW
    1min: Rear, RM vs Sturm,Volk
    3min: Rear, RM, RM, Mortar vs Sturm, Volk, Volk, Volk
    5min: Rear, RM Bar, RM Bar, Mortar, Lieu or Cap vs Sturm, Volk stg44, Volk stg44, Volk, Lunch or FlakHT and another Volk (because USF has to pay 40 fuel/400mp to upgrade)

    There are two problems here:
    First, it is impossible to build Luchs or FlakHT in 5 mins. Could you please at least play a few rounds of OKW before comment?
    Second, your build order is terribly wrong. OKW has no mg at T0, why do you build motor? The correct order should be Rear->RM->RM->RM->Lieu->Bazooka for Rear or .50 (depend on how many volk your enemy had already built).

    Let me point out another fuel resource
    If Allied upgrade their weapon/grenade, their 1st Sherman,T34,Cromwell comes later than Axis's 1st Panzer.

    It's Ost's Panzer, man... Aren't we talking about OKW here?

    Some advises here:
    Frist, try to play 1V1 to improve your skills.
    Second, enable team color in settings.
    Third, build Sherman instead of Jackson if you can't handle enemy infantry.

  • #10
    3 months ago
    XlossXloss Posts: 235

    I don't know why this is still in balance forum.

    But i think its not the commander is your problem.

    OKW need non-doc NUKE that can be use in base.
    Using 30 munition that will wipe out all units and buildings.
    It would make sense to counter RANGER COMMANDER.

  • #11
    3 months ago

    @Xloss said:
    I don't know why this is still in balance forum.

    But i think its not the commander is your problem.

    OKW need non-doc NUKE that can be use in base.
    Using 30 munition that will wipe out all units and buildings.
    It would make sense to counter RANGER COMMANDER.

    Lol. Maybe give Volk 5*STG upgrade?

  • #12
    3 months ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 209

    @addvaluejack
    This is the math
    OKW: SupplyHT 15fuel + BattleHQ 25fuel + SupplyHT 15fuel + PanzerHQ 120fuel + Panzer4 140fuel = 315fuel
    OST: Tier1 10fuel + Phase1 40fuel + Tier2 20fuel + Phase2 90fuel + Tier3 15fuel + Panzer4 120fuel = 295fuel

    USF: Lieu 50fuel + Weaponrack 15fuel + Grenade 25fuel + Major 120fuel + Sherman 110fuel = 320fuel
    Soviet: Tier1 10fuel + Grenades 35fuel + Tier3 90fuel + Tier4 90fuel + T34 90fuel = 315fuel


    Riflemen get a LMG1919 for 70ammo
    Conscript get 3 Ppsh for 60ammo
    Volks get 5 submachingun and 2 various of grenades upgrade in Fuersturm doc, for the cost of 45ammo, amazing right?

  • #13
    3 months ago

    @C3Tooth said:
    @addvaluejack
    This is the math
    OKW: SupplyHT 15fuel + BattleHQ 25fuel + SupplyHT 15fuel + PanzerHQ 120fuel + Panzer4 140fuel = 315fuel
    OST: Tier1 10fuel + Phase1 40fuel + Tier2 20fuel + Phase2 90fuel + Tier3 15fuel + Panzer4 120fuel = 295fuel

    USF: Lieu 50fuel + Weaponrack 15fuel + Grenade 25fuel + Major 120fuel + Sherman 110fuel = 320fuel
    Soviet: Tier1 10fuel + Grenades 35fuel + Tier3 90fuel + Tier4 90fuel + T34 90fuel = 315fuel


    Riflemen get a LMG1919 for 70ammo
    Conscript get 3 Ppsh for 60ammo
    Volks get 5 submachingun and 2 various of grenades upgrade in Fuersturm doc, for the cost of 45ammo, amazing right?

    Oh, man you forgot to include the starting resource. OKW starts with 340 manpower and 5 fuel while USF starts with 400 manpower and 15 fuel.

    You think MP-40 is good? Try that by yourself.

  • #14
    3 months ago

    Also also, the USF doesn't HAVE to tech for grenades and they can build caches while OKW can't.

  • #15
    3 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,999
    edited December 2018
    Whatever your beef with OKW this isn't the thread for it. Keep it about the Ranger commander.

    I think in terms of adjustments this commander will be a lot more balanced if there's a small delay on the smoke call in and if they finally remove the 0.9 damage modlifier Rangers have
  • #16
    3 months ago
    > @Lazarus said:
    > Whatever your beef with OKW this isn't the thread for it. Keep it about the Ranger commander.
    >
    > I think in terms of adjustments this commander will be a lot more balanced if there's a small delay on the smoke call in and if they finally remove the 0.9 damage modlifier Rangers have

    Wait. Rangers have a DAMAGE modifier? Like the ones that used to exist but were patched out because it fuvks with balance? What the fuck relic....
  • #17
    3 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,557

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > @Lazarus said:
    > Whatever your beef with OKW this isn't the thread for it. Keep it about the Ranger commander.
    >
    > I think in terms of adjustments this commander will be a lot more balanced if there's a small delay on the smoke call in and if they finally remove the 0.9 damage modlifier Rangers have

    Wait. Rangers have a DAMAGE modifier? Like the ones that used to exist but were patched out because it fuvks with balance? What the fuck relic....

    They don't, just 0.8 rec acc.

  • #18
    3 months ago
    > @Katitof said:
    > They don't, just 0.8 rec acc.

    OK good.
    The sad thing is I wouldn't put it past em for such a Shiney new commander...
  • #19
    3 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,999
    edited December 2018
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > > @Lazarus said:
    > > Whatever your beef with OKW this isn't the thread for it. Keep it about the Ranger commander.
    > >
    > > I think in terms of adjustments this commander will be a lot more balanced if there's a small delay on the smoke call in and if they finally remove the 0.9 damage modlifier Rangers have
    >
    > Wait. Rangers have a DAMAGE modifier? Like the ones that used to exist but were patched out because it fuvks with balance? What the fuck relic....

    They certainly do.

    https://www.coh2.org/topic/82783/the-dilemma-with-paratroopers

    Post #4, confirmed by Jae for Jett in the same thread.

    To clarify - rangers get 0.8 rec acc and 0.9 rec damage. Unless they've been nerfed between Spetember and now.

    Edit: Confirmed it's still the case. Go ahead and throw a frag grenade at a Ranger squad. Even if they're popping a squat right on top of it, you won't drop a single model.

    It's one of the things that made them so easy to blob back at release, because even on negative cover/over grenades you weren't fully punished.
  • #20
    3 months ago
    The fuck....
  • #21
    3 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,709
    edited December 2018

    I tested in cheat mode and I can confirm that Rangers have around 10% damage reduction.

  • #22
    3 months ago

    3 Bar RM + 1 Lieutenant charging under the cover of smoke is too difficult to counter. Delay the call-in smoke is a reasonable adjustment.

  • #23
    3 months ago

    Does damage reduction equal armor? I know Shock Troops have armor, but that only affects small arms I think. I can't remember how much armor they have though, or how much damage it makes them take.

  • #24
    3 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,626
    edited December 2018
    > @Yoghurt said:
    > Does damage reduction equal armor? I know Shock Troops have armor, but that only affects small arms I think. I can't remember how much armor they have though, or how much damage it makes them take.

    Armour is a chance to not receive damage from small arms, it's a dice roll on top of getting hit (might get hit but not pen the armour) they take full damage when it pens. Think like tanks but smaller scale.
  • #25
    3 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,999
    edited December 2018
    > @Yoghurt said:
    > Does damage reduction equal armor? I know Shock Troops have armor, but that only affects small arms I think. I can't remember how much armor they have though, or how much damage it makes them take.

    I'll run through the entire damage matrix.

    First there's chance to hit. This is the most basic defense vs small arms and everyone has it. It's a single dice roll that either comes up with hit (full damage) or miss. This chance can be raised or lowered by utilizing the cover mechanics (red cover makes you easier to hit, green much harder).

    Then there's armor. A select few units still have it (as far as I recall only shocks and anvil sappers) because it's *very* powerful in terms of defense. It's a % chance to negate all damage recieved - as thedarkarmadillo pointed out much like tanks and their armor. This is a strong defense because it doesn't matter where you stand or what your enemies accuracy - unless they are firing LMGs at close range they generally will have an armor pen of 1 and you will *always* be able to roll the dice to save yourself.

    At this point I'll note flamethrowers and explosions *do not* roll a chance to hit. If you're in the AoE you take damage regardless.

    This brings us to bullshit rangers damage reduction. Damage reduction is just flat negating damage. No dice rolls, no guess work, doesn't matter if you're being shot by combat engineers or king tigers - you will negate some of the damage flat out. It's why Vipper and I confirmed it using frag grenades. Grenades do 80 damage (enough to kill a full hp model). If it was just rec acc or armor, the grenade would still work.

    Because it's damage reduction, it takes the 80 damage and multiplies it by 0.9 - in this case reducing the damage to 72 - not enough to kill a model. This reduction applies to *everything*. You can do nothing to mitigate it except bring 10% more firepower then you ought to need.
  • #26
    3 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,243
    edited December 2018
    It's definitely strange but I don't see it as much weirder than shocks armor. Maybe they should have armor instead but they are more expensive than shocks AND they need the upgrade. Maybe remove the RD modifier and give some increased survivability with the tommy upgrade?

    Don't cite me as defending the commander. Combined arms is his "worst" ability and it can be very strong with the right timing. The smoke should be a plane with a delay identical to the Ost version, rangers should maybe be locked behind major tech in their current form.

    I think exploring the transition of ALL call-in units (not just tanks) into teching would be interesting/good for the game.
  • #27
    3 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,999
    Honestly I find Rangers to be too durable as is and I'd like to see how they stand with the 0.8 RA - keeping in mind that while they are more expensive than shocks they also have a much longer effective range + a better mix of abilities (and lets not forget they can triple zook if they opt out of AI upgrades).

    The reason I find it so bizarre is we've made numerous patches to emphasise positioning between units and a RD modifier just ignores it all completely - and has been removed previously because of this.
  • #28
    3 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,243
    edited December 2018
    > @Lazarus said:
    > - keeping in mind that while they are more expensive than shocks they also have a much longer effective range + a better mix of abilities

    After this patch none of that will be true IMO. Shocks will be even cheaper than now, and they will actually perform at mid-range.

    What do you mean by better mix of abilities? Shocks have smoke and grenades, rangers just grenades. The shocks smoke and grenade will be on seperate cooldowns again too. They also are a CP earlier than rangers.

    In full agreement that the RD modifier has no place. But they should get some more RA or something with tommy upgrade if they aren't going to made cheaper with the change.
  • #29
    3 months ago
    . 8 target size is pretty strong for a 5 man squad tbh. The damage modifier in unnecessary. They have 3 slots too which is pretty huge.

    Maybe experimenting with non durability buffs like more grenade options (cooked?) or something else
  • #30
    3 months ago
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > . 8 target size is pretty strong for a 5 man squad tbh. The damage modifier in unnecessary. They have 3 slots too which is pretty huge.

    I don't really disagree with any of that. Important here IMO is that I want current rangers behind major tech, and definitely without the RD modifier.

    It's .8 for a 5 man CQC squad that's 400 mp and 90 muni. That seems okay to me, especially if it's tier locked. Maybe bonus RA with tommys is unnecessary. A unique vet 1 ability would be cool, rather than just grenade recharge
  • #31
    3 months ago

    OP pershing? lol

    he just 800hp

    Use command panther and problem will be solved

    Ranger? they are 400mp unit and need upgrade thompson for 90muni

    u think heavy calvery company is OP?

    play heavy calvary and know the truth

«1
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.