Login

russian armor

Suggestions poll for Soviet Airborne Guards

18 Jan 2020, 12:41 PM
#21
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jan 2020, 05:51 AMSerrith


I feel like button with the AT rocket strafe would be too good, you already get good value sacrificing a T-34 ram with it.
40 munitions instead of 300mp and 90fuel would be a complete steal.

Give the DP guards "Fire superiority" since it synergizes better with them, and give the PPSH guards sprint- or a "Reload" ability which would force a reload and readies them for the next engagement. The potential for such an ability is quite good.

40mu ontop of the 90(?) for the upgrade ontop of the at strafe. It's cheaper on paper, but more expensive in the sense it's competing for the same resources in a commander that also has SVTs which are great. All about economy my dude.
18 Jan 2020, 12:42 PM
#22
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

But now it really doesn't make sense. Since without Relic there will be no parachutes, you need to proceed from the current spawn system.

In the current system, the Guards Paratroopers are just an Guard that can appear from home. If leave the current spawn, then need to change the unit to an ambush style. Give camouflage, give something like the destruction of a point until the engineer fixes it, maybe give a bazooka to hunt for the Panzerwerfer or Stuka.
Or radical changes - remove the unit from the game, My thoughts here are - to remove the Guards Paratroopers and the SVT drop. to make the ability to "Transfer your Conscripts to Paratroopers" you spend MP and ammunition for training and equipping Conscripts - they begin to shoot more accurately, get a sniper rifle and can make a sniper shot for ammunition, get a fragmentation grenade instead of the Molotov. Change the icon to the Air Force symbol used by paratroopers in uniform.

Replace the remote SVT drop with another ability, maybe on the T-34-85.
18 Jan 2020, 16:52 PM
#23
avatar of Acidfreak

Posts: 281



When the paratroopers were only being designed and it was supposed that he would be parachuted, I indicated that the unit had no thought in the drop, they did not have any abilities for operations in the rear. Need to give them explosives or make them like for example: Pathfinder artillery spotters, who can cause an artillery strike. This is a big cost - the cost of a unit (men power) + the cost of an artillery strike (ammunition), a big risk - it is vulnerable when parachuting and there is no camouflage when important objects are built near the main base or AA HQ. But it gives a big reward - the destruction of Howitzers, PaK-43, attacks on OKW Tiers. But no. As a result, we got a slurred unit without a specific goal.


Yes you're right. I wonder what balance team thinks about all these suggestions.
18 Jan 2020, 16:54 PM
#24
avatar of Acidfreak

Posts: 281

But now it really doesn't make sense. Since without Relic there will be no parachutes, you need to proceed from the current spawn system.

In the current system, the Guards Paratroopers are just an Guard that can appear from home. If leave the current spawn, then need to change the unit to an ambush style. Give camouflage, give something like the destruction of a point until the engineer fixes it, maybe give a bazooka to hunt for the Panzerwerfer or Stuka.
Or radical changes - remove the unit from the game, My thoughts here are - to remove the Guards Paratroopers and the SVT drop. to make the ability to "Transfer your Conscripts to Paratroopers" you spend MP and ammunition for training and equipping Conscripts - they begin to shoot more accurately, get a sniper rifle and can make a sniper shot for ammunition, get a fragmentation grenade instead of the Molotov. Change the icon to the Air Force symbol used by paratroopers in uniform.

Replace the remote SVT drop with another ability, maybe on the T-34-85.


I think svt drops are really the only good thing about this commander.
Adding t34 will be a waste. In current game an su85 does a better job IMO.
18 Jan 2020, 17:32 PM
#25
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



I think svt drops are really the only good thing about this commander.
Adding t34 will be a waste. In current game an su85 does a better job IMO.


This is really the best thing in the commander, but at the same time it is not very good designed (PPSh for Penalties). I think the ability "Transfer your Conscripts to Paratroopers" should be at 2CP - the airborne training was very intense and serious - the paratroopers have excellent shooting training: shoot accurately and economically, because of the specificity of their tasks. Therefore, I think for training they spend MP and ammunition - but their statistics becomes close to the Guard statistics.

 Yes, I also think that the SU-85 is better than the T-34-85. But paradoxically, the tanks are closely related to the Paratroopers. The fact is that according to the Soviet "Deep Fighting Tactics or Theory of Deep Operation", which began to be created back in the 1920s, the role of the strike force was assigned to the tank forces, but in combination with the airborne forces to maintain high speed forward movement of the strike groups. And the main tank for quick operations is a medium tank, and self-propelled guns are just support for medium tanks.
18 Jan 2020, 18:14 PM
#26
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
agree, the first thing they should do is buff brumbar then we can talk about soviet aiborne


I know you're trying to be sarcastic but this is EXACTLY what people should be doing. Soviets are batshit op, no need to accidentally make another SU unit op then having to wait ages for the balance team to admit they fucked up and nerf it back.
18 Jan 2020, 18:35 PM
#28
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

I really don't like 85s in the airborne commander. I'd rather see more commanders that make use of the Soviet core rather than replacing as much of it as possible every time.
18 Jan 2020, 18:46 PM
#29
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

I really don't like 85s in the airborne commander. I'd rather see more commanders that make use of the Soviet core rather than replacing as much of it as possible every time.


For truly airborne abilities, we need new tools to add things to the game like:
- real skins
- other weapons like PPS-43 and DT-29
- T-38 or T-40 tank which were in the airborne tank battalions
- 37 mm airborne gun
- 76 mm mountain cannon
Without new tools, these are just attempts to somehow fit the theme with existing abilities.
18 Jan 2020, 21:00 PM
#30
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



For truly airborne abilities, we need new tools to add things to the game like:
- real skins
- other weapons like PPS-43 and DT-29
- T-38 or T-40 tank which were in the airborne tank battalions
- 37 mm airborne gun
- 76 mm mountain cannon
Without new tools, these are just attempts to somehow fit the theme with existing abilities.

We don't necessarily need a "true" airborne commander, but the 85s would take away from the spirit of the commander. Which is decidedly not armour
18 Jan 2020, 22:08 PM
#31
avatar of Musti

Posts: 203

If half the people seriously think that this unit deserves to hipfire their DPs, there should only be 2 DPs handed out.


You give statements without any Stat backing you up. Give some substance to your argument. Convince us why it shouldn't be given on the move lmg when obers and paratroopers can have that? Commandos and falls. Its not like this commander has any heavy tank which makes it OP.
If USF can have paras and riflemen so can sovs hav dp guards (which are good) and svt cons

Edit: these 3dp have the comparable damage of 1 Ober lmg 34 if i am not wrong. Im open to correction.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jan 2020, 09:35 AMKatitof

You do realize that DPs are much weaker then any other LMG and all elite units with LMGs can use LMGs on the move?

Boys, do I have a surprise for you
Airborne Guards already CAN fire DP-28s on the move, just like Commandos, Paratroopers and Obersoldaten,
I'm not exactly sure on the performance though (I'm conviced DPs don't get the "elite weapon profile" like MG34/M1919/Bren)
They are also the only units considered "elite" for the purpose of firing LMGs on the move (PGrens, Shocks, Rangers, Guards, Assault Guards aren't "true elite" i guess)
All LMGs can be fired on the move by these units, apart from the Vickers K.

Balance wise, DP28 are weak AF, there's a reason why they get 3 of them.
18 Jan 2020, 22:41 PM
#32
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jan 2020, 22:08 PMMusti



Boys, do I have a surprise for you
Airborne Guards already CAN fire DP-28s on the move, just like Commandos, Paratroopers and Obersoldaten.


Well, if that's the case, I wonder why Acidfreak, a clear Soviet fanboy, is asking for something that is already true.
18 Jan 2020, 23:12 PM
#33
avatar of Acidfreak

Posts: 281



Well, if that's the case, I wonder why Acidfreak, a clear Soviet fanboy, is asking for something that is already true.


Wow. At least i know how to conduct a poll.
18 Jan 2020, 23:26 PM
#34
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned


Wow. At least i know how to conduct a poll.


Actually you don't. You forgot to have the option about agreeing to 2 or more of your proposals. Because if you added that option, you'd see that there would be quite a few allied fanboys who'd probably like to see ALL the buffs implemented. Because right now, the members who want to see all the buffs voted yes on every single question but people won't be able to see that in the final results.

Ever since you joined the forums, Acidfreak, you've done nothing but proposed Soviet buffs or say pathetically Soviet biased stuff such as thinking the KV8 right now is actually underpowered. And this is, I believe, your third poll about the airborne guards? And you probably ignored the fact that everybody and their dog said SU is the strongest faction right now, and hence even if there was a random SU unit that needed changing, it isn't a priority.

Well, at least you admitted you're a huge Soviet fanboy.


And in regards to my poll, the logic in my poll was entirely sound. EVERYONE who thought my poll somehow didn't work is because they got triggered by the wording of it. So in summary, was my poll logical sound? YES. Was the poll insulting to a bunch of allied sheep? YES. Was it meant to be insulting. YES. bEcUAsE fEeLinGs mATter, fAcTs dO nOt.


18 Jan 2020, 23:46 PM
#35
avatar of Kirrik

Posts: 573

They are fine as unit but come too late and in muni heavy doctrine, meaning you have to forget about svt cons and dshks if you want to field them... which is why nobody gets them first place.

They more of a doctrine issue, if Para-Guards were in tank hunters doc for example they'd be seen a lot more often
18 Jan 2020, 23:49 PM
#36
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783


40mu ontop of the 90(?) for the upgrade ontop of the at strafe. It's cheaper on paper, but more expensive in the sense it's competing for the same resources in a commander that also has SVTs which are great. All about economy my dude.



That's like saying if you buy an mg34 for obers you won't have enough munitions for spec ops flares and a bundled grenade.
19 Jan 2020, 01:19 AM
#37
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Actually you don't. You forgot to have the option about agreeing to 2 or more of your proposals. Because if you added that option, you'd see that there would be quite a few allied fanboys who'd probably like to see ALL the buffs implemented. Because right now, the members who want to see all the buffs voted yes on every single question but people won't be able to see that in the final results.

Ever since you joined the forums, Acidfreak, you've done nothing but proposed Soviet buffs or say pathetically Soviet biased stuff such as thinking the KV8 right now is actually underpowered. And this is, I believe, your third poll about the airborne guards? And you probably ignored the fact that everybody and their dog said SU is the strongest faction right now, and hence even if there was a random SU unit that needed changing, it isn't a priority.

Well, at least you admitted you're a huge Soviet fanboy.


And in regards to my poll, the logic in my poll was entirely sound. EVERYONE who thought my poll somehow didn't work is because they got triggered by the wording of it. So in summary, was my poll logical sound? YES. Was the poll insulting to a bunch of allied sheep? YES. Was it meant to be insulting. YES. bEcUAsE fEeLinGs mATter, fAcTs dO nOt.




You may wanna buy a mirror lol

I really don't like 85s in the airborne commander. I'd rather see more commanders that make use of the Soviet core rather than replacing as much of it as possible every time.


Agreed



40mu ontop of the 90(?) for the upgrade ontop of the at strafe. It's cheaper on paper, but more expensive in the sense it's competing for the same resources in a commander that also has SVTs which are great. All about economy my dude.


IL2 rocket strafe should be nerfed/removed, not buffed.
19 Jan 2020, 02:40 AM
#38
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Jan 2020, 23:49 PMSerrith



That's like saying if you buy an mg34 for obers you won't have enough munitions for spec ops flares and a bundled grenade.

Its saying that if it's going to be used they would need to make it count and it certainly isn't spammable. They would be competing with resources with - the DP28s, SVTs, DSHK drop, med crates, Supression strafe, oorah, mines, at nades ect ect. This is a muni heavy commander, which is why the ppshs are attractive when using the guards--no extra munitions cost.
It's one of the Soviets most muni thirsty commanders adding more to it wouldn't make it less thirsty but it would make a MUCH more expensive upgrade more attractive. Yea it would make the strafe stronger, but to do so it would be taking 130mu out of the bank first.
19 Jan 2020, 06:24 AM
#39
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2


We don't necessarily need a "true" airborne commander, but the 85s would take away from the spirit of the commander. Which is decidedly not armour


What spirit are you talking about? The mere absence of a parachute and skins for Paratroopers kills the spirit of the Airborne Forces. There is nothing in the commander of the Airborne Forces, neither in spirit nor in ability..
19 Jan 2020, 08:40 AM
#40
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



What spirit are you talking about? The mere absence of a parachute and skins for Paratroopers kills the spirit of the Airborne Forces. There is nothing in the commander of the Airborne Forces, neither in spirit nor in ability..


When falls didn't Para in their commander was still a fallschirmjäger commander. Just because the Soviet paras don't airdrop in doesn't mean this isn't. It's a video game. Use your imagination. At any rate, like ALL of the Airborne commanders, this one focuses on infantry combat with air support. Not premium armor. You can complain about a detail caused by dev limitations all you want but that spirit is still there
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

551 users are online: 1 member and 550 guests
mmp
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49064
Welcome our newest member, cablingindfw
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM