British - New Commander Mod Official Discussion

#1
6 months ago
Andy_REAndy_RE Posts: 269 admin

Hey all,

Please use this thread to discuss the New Commander Mod and provide any feedback you have in relation to the Brits.

Current version notes, and instructions for how to play the mod are here: http://www.companyofheroes.com/blog/2019/03/19/new-commander-update-commander-rosters-and-test-mod

«134

Comments

  • #2
    6 months ago
    BazookaDreBazookaDre Posts: 31
    edited March 20

    Quickly just a few things I noticed.

    Bugs:

    Assault Sections

    • Thompson machine guns don't show up so Tommy's are holding invisible guns.
      (really amusing with the imaginary guns and pretend recoil)

    M3 Halftrack

    • Missing medical supplies.

    M10

    • Still has an American crew inside.

    Balance:

    Assault Sections

    • They retain their two empty weapon slots for Bren and PIATs after the Tommy gun upgrade, they should at least lose one of these.
  • #3
    6 months ago
    • UK - Lend Lease Assault
      The Assault section is a good addition, in my opinion. It gives the UK a more potent close range infantry section without relying on sappers, who in my experience are somewhat fragile. The mortar is very good as it finally gives the UK mobile indirect fire that isn't the land mattress, meaning that hopefully mortar pit spam will go down. M3 half track is fine but nothing to write home about, and the M10 may be an interesting choice, but the British already have the firefly for powerful mobile AT, albeit with a slow fire rate.
  • #4
    6 months ago
    BazookaDreBazookaDre Posts: 31

    Honestly, the M10 is a smart choice as it gives the British a vehicle that's cheap/cost effective/ and fast, which to be honest the British lacked. To me, it was between the M10 and the Sherman tank from the Americans that would make the most sense. The prior for the reason I spelled out before and the Sherman because...well the Cromwell just falls short of expectations, which to be honest, is more about the Cromwell than the flavor of this commander.

  • #5
    6 months ago
    BloodygoodBloodygood Posts: 74

    All of the other factions are getting non-doc units reworked in addition to these changes. It appears that the devs are using these new commanders to address balance issues, but it's so odd that they're not touching Brit units like the Comet, or the sniper (how about a t1 unit that's a good marksman but cheaper than tommies, for example?). UKF were thrown a tiny lifeline with engineer snares, but their meager unit selections need buffs or additions. This commander would work better to address balance if it wasn't a commander, but non doctrinal in its entirety.

  • #6
    6 months ago
    maxhewittmaxhewitt East Sussex, United KingdomPosts: 6

    Hi all! Loving the new commanders. Noticed the following bug for UKF commander:

    British forward base retreat disabled even with company command post built

  • #7
    6 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    I really like this commander, don't think i have much i would change aside from the bugs and aesthetic errors like the US crew for the Achilles. Probably the most well designed of the new commanders so far.

  • #8
    6 months ago
    Aiborne82Aiborne82 Posts: 17
    edited March 22

    I've said this once and Im gonna say this again. The Achilles is great but I really do think it needs to be changed to the M4A3 Sherman. It makes more sense for the commander and the British already have an exhausting amount of AT capabilities between Piats, AT Sniper, AEC, 6 Pounder, 17 Pounder, and the Firefly. Give us a durable tank that can dish out a little bit of both without having to rely on the AA tank please. I mean if people disagree that's fine but the Brits already have more AT options than any other faction in the game and now we are just adding on more here

  • #9
    6 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Had an absolute blast with this commander.
    Assaukt Tommies are monsters! Put one assault and one medic in the halftrack and roam around Killin shit.
    The WP grenade is great. Non wasp anti garrison was a blast!

    The mortar was a real nice option, although I ended up using it like a mortar pit (set and forget) because I was spending all my micro playing with my Tommy assault group. But mobility is fun

    The halftrack I feel was the weak point of the commander just because it really didn't feel special. Don't get me wrong it was a blast, but idk. An improved vet 1 might be nice. I saw someone suggests the repair kit from AA campagn. That could be cool. Really focus on mobility that way...

    M10 was great. Being able to roll out AT that is so mobile as ukf was a blast. Ended up teching hammer just to see it fly! Plus hammer tracking recally helped it shine

    Smoke operation is well suited for the commander and was alot of fun the few times I popped it.


    All in all my favorite of the new commanders hands down
  • #10
    6 months ago
    EPDBroncoEPDBronco Posts: 1

    @Aiborne82 said:
    I've said this once and Im gonna say this again. The Achilles is great but I really do think it needs to be changed to the M4A3 Sherman. It makes more sense for the commander and the British already have an exhausting amount of AT capabilities between Piats, AT Sniper, AEC, 6 Pounder, 17 Pounder, and the Firefly. Give us a durable tank that can dish out a little bit of both without having to rely on the AA tank please. I mean if people disagree that's fine but the Brits already have more AT options than any other faction in the game and now we are just adding on more here

    This^

  • #11
    6 months ago
    BazookaDreBazookaDre Posts: 31

    Post update.

    • Infantry sections still don't have their Thompson machine guns, so invisible gun firing hilarity continues.

    • Intantry Sections can still pick up one weapon post assault upgrade. I thought they weren't supposed to get any, but one is far better than the original 2.

      • M3 Halftrack still missing medical kits.

    As for the M10, I think its a great mobile choice for the commander. If its changed to the Sherman, at least call it the M4A2, even though it is essentially the same as an M4A3 in any regard the game cares about. M4A3 was never given as lend lease. However, I'm of the opinion the M10 was an inspired choice.

    As for the halftrack, I like it but it would be better if it had its medical kits. However, what if they got the M5 instead of M3 halftrack...just food for thought.

  • #12
    6 months ago
    Aiborne82Aiborne82 Posts: 17

    They could just designate it the "Sherman V" like they designated the M10 "Achilles"

  • #13
    6 months ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 418
    edited April 29

    Brits mortar have a mouvement speed issue where models are just walking

    The commander lack abilities to uses amo on, it's a bit meh to have 2 slots usage for 2 vehicules and i would rather have a bundle and another ability on top of raid operation. I love raid op but spamming it after you've upgraded all your squads gets old really fast.

    The commander isn't really exciting:
    -IS assault pack doesn't really punch much (don't know if the bug decrease their stats) and idk if it's that an attractive and compelling upgrade as it locks out healing, IS are expansive as well and (To confirm - couldn't try much) the upgrade doesn't unlock grenades independantly from the side upgrade.
    -No stuart as alternative to aec, no aaht, no ambulance (as alternative to forward emplacement w healing), no bars or zooks or 50cal etc. M10 is like "ok..", pretty sure VonIvan gonna abuse m3 w REs (kappa) and that's it. There is so much that you can do here.

    Please do some core changes aside of the commander:
    Please address bofors. Limit them to one and remove exclusivity for ex.
    And please allow Sappers to build caches

  • #14
    6 months ago
    WAAAGH2000WAAAGH2000 Posts: 81

    M3 halftrack useless,at least give new commander M3 supply halftrack(that can put LMG and PIAT)

  • #15
    6 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    I'm probably just repeating what others have already said but, I'll say it anyway.

    The Lend-Lease Assault commander is pretty good but, it has some flaws.

    The Forward Assembly Retreat Point doesn't work so, that part of the mod needs to be fixed.

    The Halftrack isn't worth having. The advantage of having 2 troop slots and a .50 cal MG is off-set by the lack of the self-repair and upgrade abilities that the Carrier has. I'd rather just use a Carrier if I need transport.

    Right now, this commander feels very "low-end" with no items coming after 3 CP so, I'd prefer to have the Halftrack replaced by a strike, such as Concentration Barrage (4 CP) or Strafing Support (12 CP). That would make the doctrine feel a bit more balanced.

    On a pedantic note, the M-10 with the M7 3" gun was called "Wolverine" by the British (who coined all the names for American vehicles); the "Achilles" was the version equipped with the 17 pdr. Either change the name or make it perform like a 17 pdr.

  • #16
    6 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    Yall are crazy for not seeing the potential in mobile reinforcement with assault Tommies... An assault Tommy and a medic Tommy with the halftrack is a mini mulit range assault force. At 5 men they are formidable as all hell.
  • #17
    6 months ago
    DarjeelingMK7Darjeelin… Posts: 244
    Assault section is nice but thompson still invisible. Forward assembly still cant upgrade to retreat point after company command post.
    M3 HT is useful but not enough to take a separate slot.
    Drop M10 and M3 HT into 1 slot and add an off map strike will be nicer.
  • #18
    6 months ago
    MartevallMartevall Posts: 108
    > @DarjeelingMK7 said:
    > Drop M10 and M3 HT into 1 slot and add an off map strike will be nicer.

    Maybe offmap strike sounds nice but the M10 with M3 in one slot , Are you serious? There is M10 as a solo slot in american's armor company. Maybe a good idea will be to simply replace sth does not work for sht which will be better
  • #19
    6 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited March 26

    @PanzerFutz said:
    On a pedantic note, the M-10 with the M7 3" gun was called "Wolverine" by the British (who coined all the names for American vehicles); the "Achilles" was the version equipped with the 17 pdr. Either change the name or make it perform like a 17 pdr.

    The vehicle in stock configuration (3in gun) was designated either "3in SPM M10" or "Achilles I/II" by the British.

    Converted ones (to 17 pdr) were designated "17pdr SP M10" or "Achilles Ic/IIc".

  • #20
    6 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    @Sander93 I'll start by saying nice work on your OKW new commander submission. I voted for Anti-tank based on your proposal; it's a pity it wasn't chosen by more people.

    As far as vehicle names go, it's all pretty obscure. Different sources say different things; quite a few say these names were a post-war invention by model-makers and never existed during the war. I'm not sure I believe that. Whether or not they named the M10 "Wolverine" or "Achilles" seems difficult, if not impossible, to determine for sure at this point. However, it does seem to fit with their practice of naming American vehicles (or renaming them in the case of the F4F Wildcat, which the Royal Navy called "Martlet").

    My understanding is that, when the British started receiving Lend-Lease Vehicles from the Americans, the first batch were all called M3's (M3 Light Tank, M3 Medium Tank, M3 Halftrack and M3 Scout Car). The British found this to be needlessly confusing so, they named the various tanks after US Civil War Generals (Stuart, Lee, Grant and, later, Sherman) to make it easier to differentiate them; as far as I know, they didn't bother naming the Halftrack or the Scout Car.

    My position is that in all the WW2 games I've played, the M10 with the 3 inch gun has always been called "Wolverine", while the version with the 17 pdr has always been called "Achilles". I see no reason to break from that nomenclature just because this game doesn't include an "Achilles" with a 17 pdr. I don't really care where the names come from; I just like consistency.

  • #21
    6 months ago
    YorgoYorgo Posts: 3

    I feel that the assault section, the M10 ( wich could be replace for a Jackson in late game) and the mortar are ok but the halftrack could be replace by comandos or stuart, or something else ! This commander is great for mid game but in late its not that good

  • #22
    6 months ago

    @PanzerFutz I agree. For better or worse, the M10 is always the wolverine, and the 17 pdr version is always the Achilles.

  • #23
    6 months ago
    DarjeelingMK7Darjeelin… Posts: 244
    Let me make myself clear here, mobile reinforced is great and M3 bring it on desk for UKF, but still, To take 1 slot, the M3 should at least have some more ullity, like AA package.
  • #24
    6 months ago
    DarjeelingMK7Darjeelin… Posts: 244
    If M3 have AA package, it will become more useful late game, give UKF AA options without have to pay more cost and pop on centau.
  • #25
    6 months ago
    AzurewrathAzurewrath Posts: 11

    M3 is pointless for the Brits at the moment. For light harassment, UKF already has UC. Also at the same tier there is AEC, which has a great anti-vehicle gun. For the reinforcements though, I'd rather use the M3 re-supply truck for the Special Weapons Regiment, which also has weapons drop. I suggest that remove M3 and replace it with some off-map arty strikes to give this commander some more potential for the mid-late game.

  • #26
    6 months ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 418
    edited May 1

    Hot take here on the changes:
    Great changes but plz merge assault sections and m1 and plz merge m5 m10 so we can get more out of this commander.

    About M1: Brits opening is basically a weaker penal opening w mg support. So much so that it's probably better to just spam mgs instead of building IS. Lss IS cost so much & MGs is so close to IS costwise that i don't really see why players would build m1 right away , if it's buildable from t0, and delay their IS/MGs. So i would really experiment m1 being unlock and buildable in T0. That way it would be passive and merged with assault package.

    About the ability slot: crew repair is a nice change that makes commander more ammo hungry in mid late. Lots of utility as well.
    Guess we could have an offensive one as well

    Thompson upgrade still leave one weapon slot. i guess i would rather have another thompson. Bren doesn't fire on the move so it goes against smgs and vice versa.
    You could do it the way the 3rd penal ptrs was implemented (in a previous patch mod) w double upgrade

    This upgraded m5 can reinforce i wonder if it's part of the other intended changes. Maybe you reverted this changes so people start building m5 again.
    (Tbc) Company command post doesn't unlock forward retreat
    (tbc) handbrake doesn't work anymoren(at least on m5)

    Editted to make it more clear.

  • #27
    6 months ago
    AzurewrathAzurewrath Posts: 11

    Just checked the new update and did some tests.
    1. Assault Tommies Thompson still invisible. Also they're still able to pick up 1 weapon from the weapon racks.

    1. In the ability slot it's 'Achilles 1' but in the production button and unit name it's 'M10 wolverine'. Is this intended?
  • #28
    6 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    > @Lnk003 said:
    > Hot take here on the changes:
    > Great changes but plz merge assault sections and m1 and plz merge m5 m10 so we can get more out of this commander.
    >
    > About M1: Brits opening is basically a weaker penal opening w mg support. So much so that it's probably better to just spam mgs instead of building IS. Lss IS cost so much & MGs is so close to IS costwise that, if it's buildable from t0, i don't really see why players would build m1 right away and delay their IS/MGs. So i would really experiment m1 being unlock and buildable in T0. That way it would be passive and merged with assault package.
    >
    > About free slot: crew repain is a nice change that makes commander more ammo hungry in mid late. Lots of utility as well.
    > Guess we could have an offensive one as well
    >
    > Thompson upgrade still leave one weapon slot. i guess i would rather have another thompson. Bren doesn't fire on the move so it goes against smgs and vice versa.
    > You could do it the way the 3rd penal ptrs was implemented w double upgrade
    >
    > This m5 can reinforce i wonder if it's part of the other intended changes. Maybe you reverted this changes so people start building m5 again.
    > (Tbc) Company command post doesn't unlock forward retreat
    > (tbc) handbrake doesn't work anymore

    Wait. This commander disables mgs?!?! You should probably report that in the bug section. Unless of course you just didn't build any mgs and are choking that up to a commander weakness... But that would be weird...
    Also... I'm not to alarm you, but penal spam ACTUALLY is void of mgs (they are in a different tech building entirely)
  • #29
    6 months ago
    PanzerFutzPanzerFutz Melbourne, OzPosts: 346

    Mod 2.0 Forward Assembly Retreat Point is still not working; please fix it in the next patch.

    The new halftrack is better, especially with Vehicle Self-repair. It still seems a bit redundant to me, doubly so with the AA upgrade, but it is something different. I would have preferred a strike but, I can live with the commander as it is now.

  • #30
    6 months ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 418

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Wait. This commander disables mgs?!?!

    No there isn't any issues with mgs, i've changed my text to make my suggestion more clear (aka M1 is a call in at 1cp that i want to get in building t0 allowing the merge with the other passive ability)

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Also... I'm not to alarm you, but penal spam ACTUALLY is void of mgs (they are in a different tech building entirely)

    Yes i know but i meant fielding IS or penals is a bit of the same. It's slow, expensive, exposed to LV and very aggressive tactics can shut them off before they even start. So delay your ISs or MGs or mix of the two to build a mortar seems risky -imo-.

  • #31
    6 months ago
    HyguyHyguy Posts: 1

    @Aiborne82 said:
    I've said this once and Im gonna say this again. The Achilles is great but I really do think it needs to be changed to the M4A3 Sherman. It makes more sense for the commander and the British already have an exhausting amount of AT capabilities between Piats, AT Sniper, AEC, 6 Pounder, 17 Pounder, and the Firefly. Give us a durable tank that can dish out a little bit of both without having to rely on the AA tank please. I mean if people disagree that's fine but the Brits already have more AT options than any other faction in the game and now we are just adding on more here

    I'm not much of a forum warrior but on this one I have to agree that the Brits should get the Sherman over the M10. The M10 is just too fragile and doesn't do enough output for the Brits. The Cromwell preforms better against tanks than the M10. It'd probably be better to give them another generalist Medium tank that can actually bolster the roster a bit

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.