Soviet - New Commander Mod Official Discussion

1235

Comments

  • #122
    2 months ago
    mustangbronymustangbr… Posts: 13
    edited April 25

    conscripts changing is not enough.first we've all seen that in 1vs1 top 10 soviet players don't even use conscripts but penal squad,even though penal squads are outnumbered by german force which can only be redeemed by game skills.which means conscripts have a even worse early stage performance.(they'd rather use penal)
    so in my opinion,since this conscripts changing is only for late stage game, to conpensate for the early way toooooooo bad
    performance,they need guns,powerful ones like ob,whatever from seven-men upgrading or from their own research(like grenadiers)

  • #123
    2 months ago

    So with the 6.0 changes, does the conscript upgrade no longer give a 7th man, but instead the accuracy bonus akin to the british infantry section? If it still needs to be buffed, I would suggest making them versatile in the late game by giving the option for different weapon upgrades, not a 7th man.

  • #124
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    @freejones12 said:
    So with the 6.0 changes, does the conscript upgrade no longer give a 7th man, but instead the accuracy bonus akin to the british infantry section? If it still needs to be buffed, I would suggest making them versatile in the late game by giving the option for different weapon upgrades, not a 7th man.

    they do get a 7th man plus the stat improvements. Right now it already shows its a bit overkill. Personally, i do not like the 7th man too much, it just eats away popcap and gives you another mediocre soldier, thats not that good for the late game. the stat improvements i find a lot more appealing, boosting the cons without just giving them a lmg like every other sodding core infantry.
    I would be in favour of keeping the stat improvements while removing the 7th man, renaming it from 'mobilize reserves' to 'Improved Combat training' or 'Defensive drill' and rebranding the conscripts as frontoviki after they purchased the upgrade, with both the name and unit icon from the Soviet campaign. it could still take up a weapon slot if necessary..

  • #125
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211
    Yep pretty much, the 7th man is useful to feed more the enemy because it comes in a very squishy infantry unit. However, with the recent buff it might be useful now and worth buying it. It is bad how they can't pick up dropped weapons by wiped squads if they were upgraded with a 7th squad member.

    Same cost Grenadiers w/Lmg > Concripts with late upgrade unlocked (yet to be tested with the Version 6.0 buff)

    Nevertheless, I still believe they need non-doctrinal weapon upgrades (Ptrs Rifles x3 or one Lmg) and Vet1 reworked (better combat defenses) to improve their performance.
  • #126
    2 months ago

    @Romanov @Patrol_Omega I just hate the 7th man because its an uneven number.

  • #127
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    Again i think the lmg upgrade would be a bit too samey for my taste. I would keep going with the buffs to con and mosin performance instead while removing the 7th man. maybe keep the buffs as is, maybe improve them.

  • #128
    2 months ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 417
    edited April 28

    I think this commander should change:
    Crate ppsh doesn't really makes any sense because, if you need it, your guards can have them for free. Therefore if the player goes penals (then guards), he gets svt from the get go and can skip the entire crate as it becomes totally useless.

    i think the commander should replace dskh and the SVT/PPSH crate with incentives to skip t1: i don't have real suggestions here tho because penals are very strong (ai + at) while the rest of t1 is a LV and a sniper.
    -Ptrs/satchel upgrade for conscripts would fall into a "just go penals" dead end. i guess that to make it work and worth then ptrs on penals would need to be replaced with m42 in tier 1. (witch would becomes quite some work as you would need to adapt other commanders)
    -(T0) Partisans maybe ? It would mimick US airborne commander and you could rework them at the same time or a special version of them.
    -Althought a call-in sniper is a bit silly here, Ania is unused. On the other hand it would be unique in the game. The only named special sniper.

    I think crate sould go in any case and be replaced with an air ability: SOV supply drops (same as ost), recon plane, etc.

    Again maybe the theme needs to be ignored, in order to have more freedom like there is a funny -imo- unused commander abilitiy in the game: "Not retreat no surrender!". It's unviable as it is but with a rework it could become a highly skilled ability. Loosing the retreat button is pretty huge and doesn't forgive any mistake. Suppression punish this ability pretty hard as well.

    Edit: "M42"

  • #129
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211
    edited April 27

    You need to actually try this commander @Lnk003 lol
    Some of the things that you are stating were solved several patches ago, and your suggestions are just wacky.

    The Commander is already marvelous as it currently is.

    The only variable that might need to be checked out is the IL-Rocket Strafe ability damage against buildings.
    The ability does very little damage to none damage to structures......

  • #130
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    @Patrol_Omega wasnt that pretty much intentional that it doesnt deal any damage against buildings? Me personally i think the 'skillshot' abilities like manually directed air strikes should be more powerful than loiter attacks so i would agree on that. Just look how luftwaffe Close air support got nerfed, now its probably hands down the worst commander in game.

  • #131
    2 months ago
    LothricLothric Posts: 1
    edited April 27

    @freejones12 said:
    So with the 6.0 changes, does the conscript upgrade no longer give a 7th man, but instead the accuracy bonus akin to the british infantry section? If it still needs to be buffed, I would suggest making them versatile in the late game by giving the option for different weapon upgrades, not a 7th man.

    Agree, conscript already have ppsh to improve there close range combat. But i think they need weapons to improve there long range performance. So i suggest to give them a DP28 upgrade.

  • #132
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    @Romanov Not even close on being the worst commander LOL
    Take your time to compare Allied Commanders to the Axis ones, even while playing on team games, you will read things like:
    "Allies Commanders are trash"
    "Soviet Commanders have nothing really great"
    "Allies tanks are bad"
    "Conscripts on 2019 lol"

    I don't personally agree with everything but several "never used" Allied Commanders due need a rework like the Soviet Defensive Tactic Commander

    Conscripts finally getting non-doctrinal weapon upgrades (Ptr Rifles and/or Dp lmg) etc

  • #133
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    @Patrol_Omega Look, there are many good Axis commanders and i'd agree overall they get better abilities (most egregious one is probably get out of jail smoke canisters) but Luftwaffe CAS is extremely useless for its high munition intensity and lack of call ins or passive abilities.

    Back on topic, the IL-2 sturmovik strike could definately be more usefull against all targets. I know it currently is at least alright vs infantry but as it stands it currently is just a worse Il-2 precision bombing. take the Tank hunter PTAB bombing run as comparison: it does very negligable damage to infantry but amazing against tanks and alright against structures while covering a large area for an air strike. it is distinct enough from the regular bombing run but still is usefull in its own way, the same cannot really be said about the Rocket strike, it should be cheaper or better.

  • #134
    2 months ago
    Lnk003Lnk003 Posts: 417
    edited April 29

    @Patrol_Omega said:
    Some of the things that you are stating were solved several patches ago

    Can you be more specific about the "things" solved?

    @Patrol_Omega said: You need [...] structures......

    You already made clear you think this commander is a "masterpiece" and repeating it over and over doesn't make it true.
    I'll skip the trolling part of your answer but the biggest strengh of this commander is cheese, hardly see how that's masterpiece level.

  • #135
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    Do you mean cheese like the Raketen with instant camouflage?
    Instant light vehicles call in?
    Now instant infantry call in with 0 CP?
    Cheese 100% pen values Panzerchrecks with an instant overly high burst?
    Axis tanks overly high cheese chances of bouncing enemy AT bullets?

    Wouldn't it be a better game if we remove the cheese from the game? @Lnk003 I'm All in to see that

  • #136
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    "Everything i dont like is cheese" . Mind you that allies , especially US, have several 0CP infantry call in units, aswell as call-in vehicles. the only thing i agree on is the Raketenwerfer being a cheesy unit, but thats been a widely held opinion for a while now.

  • #137
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    Given the recent updates to the M-42, we have adjusted its costs to better reflect its current performance.

    -Cost from 200 to 240
    -Reverted boost to first-strike bonus

    So the final version of the M-42 got a nerf to it's firing range when using Canister shots from 60 to 35
    and a reverted boost to the first-strike bonus.

    I might be wrong, but isn't that suppose to mean that the version 7.0 of this unit is worst than before? Before any changes were applied to it but anyway it got its price increased? @Andy_RE

  • #138
    2 months ago

    So the 7.0 still has the 7 man upgrade, except its now just another worse conscript? I understand the train of thought, but wouldnt it not be better to have a more versatile or survivable squad rather than one that takes a little more damage before being killed off?

  • #139
    2 months ago
    FaxFax Posts: 16

    @Patrol_Omega said:

    Given the recent updates to the M-42, we have adjusted its costs to better reflect its current performance.

    -Cost from 200 to 240
    -Reverted boost to first-strike bonus

    So the final version of the M-42 got a nerf to it's firing range when using Canister shots from 60 to 35
    and a reverted boost to the first-strike bonus.

    I might be wrong, but isn't that suppose to mean that the version 7.0 of this unit is worst than before? Before any changes were applied to it but anyway it got its price increased? @Andy_RE

    I do think this light AT could use a Retreat option as well, just like Raks do and these can even hurt medium tanks, get into buildings and have camo, M-42 being smaller can't retreat and can't get into buildings to counter light vehicles, I think they do have camo but won't stand a chance if spotted

  • #140
    2 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,810

    @freejones12 said:
    So the 7.0 still has the 7 man upgrade, except its now just another worse conscript? I understand the train of thought, but wouldnt it not be better to have a more versatile or survivable squad rather than one that takes a little more damage before being killed off?

    wouldnt it not be better to have a more versatile or survivable squad rather than one that takes a little more damage before being killed off?

    you use that term but i think you know not what it means....

    as for versatility, 2 con squads can capture 2 whole crew weapons, and merge them to 6 models AND save the conscripts squads...that is HUGE, hell, even a SINGLE squad being able to FULLY man an entire weapon and still keep its vet is massive

    also, they are keeping the cover bonus as well, it was just toned down due to it overperforming

  • #141
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48
    edited May 1

    Oh boy, what an update. I still am not a fan of the 7th man, i still think they should just get the bigger stat boosts and lose the extra model with the upgrade. the utility of extra merging and crewing potential is alright, but they already have the lower reinforce cost with the upgrade. Cons do not scale well into the late game by bringing more meat the germans can sink their teeth into, its by improving their combat cabability like every other infantry. i like the relatively strong stat buffs, they compensate for the rather poor received accuracy survivability and are a unique alternative to 'just give them a machine gun upgrade',
    The M-42 absolutely needs some new buff, now its just a nerfed version of the live unit which still isnt all thaaaat great outside of some goofy builds.
    The Maxim buff is pretty irrelevant imo since sustained fire needs a reload to activate. the maxim has pathetic surpression potential even against units out of cover, already surpressed squads wont be dealt with any more effectively with it and unsurpressed units can easily evade it, sustained fire also doesnt last nearly long enough to be useful if activated in anticipation since it will have worn off so quickly.

    really not sure what they were thinking this version, allies got some pretty ugly nerfs that arent even related to the new commanders , UK and US probably moreso than Soviets tho.

  • #142
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    240 MP cost for an overall Nerfed AT-gun, 30 MP less than the Raketen that comes with so much more abilities, range and damage to offer, that really shows how balance works around here.

    I don't understand why this AT-gun now cost more if its a nerfed version of the live version lol.

    That just pointed out how cheap and overly efficient the Raketen is in 2019, being totally out of sync and how game phase disruptive it can be compared with any other 320MP cost standard AT-gun unit with worst performances.

    A different but better improvement for the Maxim was increasing its fire rate by 5%, by doing so they were going to be able to suppress enemy units faster, without making it as good as the MG-42 from the Axis, if that was the main problem.

  • #143
    2 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49

    @Patrol_Omega said:
    240 MP cost for an overall Nerfed AT-gun, 30 MP less than the Raketen that comes with so much more abilities, range and damage to offer, that really shows how balance works around here.

    The Raketten has literally one ability, which is to camouflage. It has only 50 range while the M-42 has 60 range. The M-42 can also engage infantry. It's also much more durable at 6 men (and higher range). The Raketten is also generally considered to be the worst ATG in the game because of its low range and low durability and its rockets' tendancy to collide with terrain and objects.

    The M-42 is currently being spammed en-masse (3-4 in a blob) and they ruin (high level) 1v1s. Watch some KOTH replays and you'll see why they have to be toned down.

    And buffing the Maxim at vet 0 risks ruining team games. On corridor maps OKW really struggles against Maxim spam because they have nothing at tier 0 to counter them except for flanking (which isn't always possible on said maps).

  • #144
    2 months ago
    RomanovRomanov Posts: 48

    @Sander93 said:

    @Patrol_Omega said:
    240 MP cost for an overall Nerfed AT-gun, 30 MP less than the Raketen that comes with so much more abilities, range and damage to offer, that really shows how balance works around here.

    The Raketten has literally one ability, which is to camouflage. It has only 50 range while the M-42 has 60 range. The M-42 can also engage infantry. It's also much more durable at 6 men (and higher range). The Raketten is also generally considered to be the worst ATG in the game because of its low range and low durability and its rockets' tendancy to collide with terrain and objects.

    I dont think anyone ever defended or liked the Raketenwerfer on both sides. its gimmicky, on the one hand it has short range and can be surpressed easily, on the other it can cloak, even out of cover and while moving, and retreat with pretty good veterancy and general stats. double cloaked raketen, especially with vet, just dont allow for any counterplay, just sneak up , pound the allied tank with 2 rockets and then then another 2, hit that retreat button, profit.

    At this point, as has been often suggested, i think the Raketen should be replaced with a Pak40 and given to a doctrine or something.

  • #145
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    @Sander93 the 7.0 version of the M-42 is a nerfed version of the live version, however, it got its price increased.
    Now it cost 30MP less than the best AT-gun on the game, the Raketenwerfer so is illogical.

    The good old excuse of a support weapon having 6 men crew, therefore, it needs to be toned down lol ...
    Having a retreat option is a thousand times better for survivability purposes than having 6 men crew, so according to that logic then with more reasons, it should be nerfed or replaced with a Pak40 so every single faction can play on equal terms.

    The Raketen having Panzerchrecks to deal damage means that it will penetrate armor almost 100% of times because this weapon has a different code from the standard AT-guns in the game or when have you seen Panzerschrecks from infantry units getting bounced by Allied tanks? Resulting in extraordinary performance and damage dealt.

  • #146
    2 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited May 2

    @Patrol_Omega said:
    Now it cost 30MP less than the best AT-gun on the game, the Raketenwerfer so is illogical.

    The Raketten is - by far - not the best ATG in the game. The majority of the community despises it and its performance. It severely lacks range and survivability and the retreat does not compensate enough for that. Stealth creep cheese is the one thing that keeps it from being unplayable.

    @Patrol_Omega said:
    The Raketen having Panzerchrecks to deal damage means that it will penetrate armor almost 100% of times because this weapon has a different code from the standard AT-guns in the game or when have you seen Panzerschrecks from infantry units getting bounced by Allied tanks? Resulting in extraordinary performance and damage dealt.

    A different code? What are you talking about? The Raketten has exactly the same penetration mechanics as any other ATG in the game. Only visually is it different as it fires a rocket rather than a ballistic shell. It always penetrates Allied mediums because it has 200/190/180 penetration (Panzerschreck 180/170/160) and the Sherman/Cromwell have 160 armor and the T-34-76 has 150 armor.

    FYI, the ZiS and the 6-pounder (and Pak-40) have equal and higher penetration than the Raketten respectively - but at a higher max range.

  • #147
    2 months ago
    Patrol_OmegaPatrol_Om… Posts: 211

    @Sander93

    And buffing the Maxim at vet 0 risks ruining team games. On corridor maps, OKW really struggles against Maxim spam because they have nothing at tier 0 to counter them except for flanking (which isn't always possible on said maps).

    Same goes for the Wehrmacht faster and overly more efficient capability of spamming Mgs from the T0 HQ in team games, but I don't see you complaining or suggesting changes to reduce those chances, any reason for that?

    They do already hold the best Mg in the game and you don't see too many players asking to nerf it so it can be as good as the Maxim. But we all know what happens when Allied factions get units on same performance terms than the Axis lol

    For some extremely weird reason, I have noticed that the community here is contradictory, especially on the Axis factions, as they will complain until nerfs are applied to Allied units, but they won't even mention how they hold the best units in many cases, starting with machine guns instant suppression. Not acknowledging how they hold units that deserve nerfs to balance gameplay difficulty and performance between all factions, sadly.

  • #148
    2 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited May 2

    @Patrol_Omega said:
    Same goes for the Wehrmacht faster and overly more efficient capability of spamming Mgs from the T0 HQ in team games, but I don't see you complaining or suggesting changes to reduce those chances, any reason for that?

    Uhm, maybe because - as opposed to OKW - all Allied factions have a way of dealing with MGs from early on? USF has the T0 mortar, UKF has the UC and Soviets can get a mortar or M3 clown car in either their starting tech building.

    OKW on the other hand has no way to deal with MG spam (besides flanking) for five minutes until they get their Battlegroup up for an ISG.

  • #149
    2 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,810
    @Sander93 it's sure is a good thing the Soviet don't need blob control in team games I guess. 25%extra Supression on the vet 1 will certainly help against the volks that simply crawl up to it and flame nade it frontally and the deathloop that will reset its exp bar that will allow it to be fixed!

    I'm grateful for the work being put into this patch but penal spam is still the undeniable way to go because the maxim is to remain flaming garbage who will only be able to do its job if vetted and premeditated and cons don't actually start to be attractive until tanks are on the field.

    I sure as shit am not going to pay 260mp for a maxim on top of 160mp teching knowing I need vet 1 to actually function as an MG when Ost can do the same, minus the tech cost and get a VET ability at the first threshold instead of a "required to function" ability
  • #150
    2 months ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited May 2

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @Sander93 it's sure is a good thing the Soviet don't need blob control in team games I guess. 25%extra Supression on the vet 1 will certainly help against the volks that simply crawl up to it and flame nade it frontally and the deathloop that will reset its exp bar that will allow it to be fixed!

    It has nothing to do with needing blob control.

    Deathloop bug requires the crew to be 6 models to compensate.
    6 men crew together with fast setup time means it's going to be very hard for flanking infantry to force off.

    Since OKW doesn't have anything other than infantry in the first 5 minutes of a game, the Maxim can not be buffed any more than its current performance without ruining team games (where on most maps flanking is very hard or impossible) because Maxim spam would easily shut down OKW. Not without extensively reworking it, which is too much for this patch.

  • #151
    2 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,810
    @Sander93 then at least make the suppressive fire ability not require vet. It's got enough drawbacks that it shouldn't be useless withiut vet. That's what I'm getting at. Making a unit that nobody wants to use because it's so bad and only making it better if you slog through using it doesn't fix the core issue.

    This change doesn't do anything for the maxim because it still doesn't do its job what's more is if you didn't happen to click "do your job" in time you have a reload cycle where the enemy is free to ignore it even more than usual. If the wipe it you don't even have a "do your job" button. I can't think of any other MG that will not work unless you invest a load of manpower, require vet and need to have munitions to do literally the only job you bought it for.
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.