Login

russian armor

USF Airborne Commander Revamp

22 Mar 2021, 12:49 PM
#21
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



No chance in hell. Paras are bordeline broken and you want USF to have the equivalent of Obers at the 5min mark?

Fuck no



Do you really have to be such a jerk in your responses or is it a deep part of your personality?

That was a list of proposals, I fully agree that some may be not realistic.
22 Mar 2021, 13:23 PM
#22
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2021, 12:49 PMEsxile


Do you really have to be such a jerk in your responses or is it a deep part of your personality?

That was a list of proposals, I fully agree that some may be not realistic.


How am I a jerk? You propose something absurd and game breaking, what do you want me to say?

"I see your point, dear sir. Though if I may, I do believe such a change could have unforeseen consequences on the game considering the timing benefit is extravagant and would lead to worrying circumstances down the line on par with such older changes as the WC51 changes."

Like if you're ready to say something completely absurd be ready for someone to react loudly upon reading it. No dude, you won't get minute 5 Obers. It's stupid, absurd, dumb, whatever synonym you want.
22 Mar 2021, 13:56 PM
#23
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



what do you want me to say?

"I see your point, dear sir. Though if I may, I do believe such a change could have unforeseen consequences on the game considering the timing benefit is extravagant and would lead to worrying circumstances down the line on par with such older changes as the WC51 changes."



That's effectively a more appropriate answer. Why is it so difficult for you to formulate it? No need to reply I'm not your therapist.
22 Mar 2021, 15:53 PM
#24
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

Guys, get back to the topic. And yes, you can fully expect a grown up adult to decline something in a at least somewhat polite manner.


On-topic (team game perspective mostly):
-I think both Paths and Paras are fine.

-The P47 are slightly weird. They do decent damage, but sometimes they just decide to not hit much at all. Not sure if this is really worth 240 mun. Also, at least one plane seems to stay for an eternity. I have had it multiple times (both as USF and Axis) that I thought the ability has been over for ages, just for one last strafe to come in once a tank gets spotted. This is just weird. When comboing this ability in team games with other off maps, it can in total really wreck units.
Overall I think this ability should get small changes for a bit more predictability, balanced at around 200 mun.

-The team weapon drops:
So this is the hard one, because this was the previous selling point of the commander until USF tech got reworked. I also do not get the pricing. The browning drop costs less mun than the 57mm drop. When building the units via normal tech, the 57 is suddenly a tad cheaper. Why?
While I get that the main point still is that you don't need to tech back into the second officer, I think the cost is still slightly disproportionate. Officers have become decently affordable, especially late game when you need to replace a Rifleman anyway. This hugely diminishes the return you get from team weapon drops. On the other hand if they become too cheap they will just get spammed. Maybe more of the cost should be moved towards mun and away from MP. So that even if you teched the unit already, you have a decision which resource you want to spend. Currently your trade off for an Echolon recrewed 57mm is ~50 MP saved for 60 munitions spent.
22 Mar 2021, 16:17 PM
#25
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

Currently your trade off for an Echolon recrewed 57mm is ~50 MP saved for 60 munitions spent.


The main point of these drops is not cost effectiveness compared to the standard cost, but compared to not having to get the second tech. One officer tech into Major is significantly cheaper than having to get both officers, which would also leave less room for Paratroopers.

Also one of the other main selling points is being able to crew them with Pathfinders, which makes the M2HB self spotting and the 57mm almost self spotting. A huge advantage for both.
22 Mar 2021, 16:52 PM
#26
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



The main point of these drops is not cost effectiveness compared to the standard cost, but compared to not having to get the second tech. One officer tech into Major is significantly cheaper than having to get both officers, which would also leave less room for Paratroopers.

Also one of the other main selling points is being able to crew them with Pathfinders, which makes the M2HB self spotting and the 57mm almost self spotting. A huge advantage for both.


For a huge cost.
22 Mar 2021, 17:30 PM
#27
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2



The main point of these drops is not cost effectiveness compared to the standard cost, but compared to not having to get the second tech. One officer tech into Major is significantly cheaper than having to get both officers, which would also leave less room for Paratroopers.

I know, I wrote exactly that only a couple of sentences before the quoted section. It was a huge benefit back when you had to shell out 55 fuel for the officer. But the better availability has diminished that. I am not saying there is no benefit anymore, but the main selling point of this commander has been reduced quite a bit.
I also noted that in the late game, a lost Riflemen squad can be decently replaced with the second officer for back tech. At least I regularly do that when I am floating a bit of fuel but don't have much MP. At this point both weapon drops are not worth it instead of just one. Again, all this is team game perspective of 2v2 and 3v3, 1v1 surely looks different.

These are small points, but in sum all the USF tech changes have indirectly hurt this commander, while other USF commanders could now rely on a complete team weapon roster. The benefit of choosing this commander over another one has reduced, that probably sums it up the best.



Also one of the other main selling points is being able to crew them with Pathfinders, which makes the M2HB self spotting and the 57mm almost self spotting. A huge advantage for both.

I know, I thought about addressing that but left it out. This is basically intended cheese. Team weapons are build around main line infantry screening for them. That the commander lets you circumvent this need is less of a strong point for it, but more an example of weak design.
22 Mar 2021, 17:54 PM
#28
avatar of ltaustinpowers

Posts: 69 | Subs: 1

Looking at some options that were discussed within this thread, what about something along the lines of:

combining HMG/ATG paradrop into 1 commander ability at 2 or 3 cp: Paradrop Crew Weapons Package. As far as having two drops from 1 slot, perhaps make each of those weapon drops (HMG and ATG) a selectable option from within the paradrop beacon UI. It would limit the ability to drop these crew weapons just anywhere on the map but the commander would also be receiving an extra ability to help balance.

Add p47 strafing run from tactical company.

Lower p47 rocket strike to 220 munitions.

Edit: if munitions are too wide spread for this commander, perhaps adjust the hmg/atg paradrop from mp/muni to mp/muni/fuel. I am not sure what the specifics should be but ex: HMG 125mp/15muni/10fuel (-45 muni over current but +10 fuel)
22 Mar 2021, 18:18 PM
#29
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359

Never had an issue with Airborne commander as a USF main(outside of the loiter, its a joke ability l0l). Its a little boring but it has its niche, especially in 1v1 and 2v2
22 Mar 2021, 19:06 PM
#30
avatar of IntoTheRain

Posts: 179

Airborne is one of the few USF Commanders I think I wouldn't make any doctrinal changes to. It can be used with either tech path and adds 2 excellent units besides.

The only thing that needs to be looked at is the P-47 Airstrike, which costs more than its peers and is less accurate to boot.
22 Mar 2021, 20:22 PM
#31
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



The main point of these drops is not cost effectiveness compared to the standard cost, but compared to not having to get the second tech. One officer tech into Major is significantly cheaper than having to get both officers, which would also leave less room for Paratroopers.

Also one of the other main selling points is being able to crew them with Pathfinders, which makes the M2HB self spotting and the 57mm almost self spotting. A huge advantage for both.

TBH USF tech split changes really diminished that advantage the drops gave.
They still are excellent in team games, to drop soviet ally what he does not have.
22 Mar 2021, 20:28 PM
#32
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2021, 20:22 PMKatitof
TBH USF tech split changes really diminished that advantage the drops gave


You still save 35 fuel while getting to use both team weapons, and save population to use on elite infantry. That's still a very big advantage. And yeah, allied drops are also really great in teamgames.
22 Mar 2021, 21:00 PM
#33
avatar of Spoof

Posts: 449


Pershing lol

The Pershing is fine. It's got great penetration, good speed, and very good HE.
22 Mar 2021, 21:22 PM
#34
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2021, 21:00 PMSpoof

The Pershing is fine. It's got great penetration, good speed, and very good HE.


You're kidding, right?
22 Mar 2021, 22:56 PM
#35
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053


I know, I wrote exactly that only a couple of sentences before the quoted section. It was a huge benefit back when you had to shell out 55 fuel for the officer. But the better availability has diminished that. I am not saying there is no benefit anymore, but the main selling point of this commander has been reduced quite a bit.
I also noted that in the late game, a lost Riflemen squad can be decently replaced with the second officer for back tech. At least I regularly do that when I am floating a bit of fuel but don't have much MP. At this point both weapon drops are not worth it instead of just one. Again, all this is team game perspective of 2v2 and 3v3, 1v1 surely looks different.

These are small points, but in sum all the USF tech changes have indirectly hurt this commander, while other USF commanders could now rely on a complete team weapon roster. The benefit of choosing this commander over another one has reduced, that probably sums it up the best.



I know, I thought about addressing that but left it out. This is basically intended cheese. Team weapons are build around main line infantry screening for them. That the commander lets you circumvent this need is less of a strong point for it, but more an example of weak design.

This is basically the main issue I have with airborne now. Having flexible access to stock team weapons is no longer as attractive a choice over having something USF actually lacks like a flamethrower, various call-in vehicles, or rocket artillery.

That and P47 rocket loiter issues.
jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2021, 21:00 PMSpoof

The Pershing is fine. It's got great penetration, good speed, and very good HE.

Not worth it over jackson + sherman anymore. That will be a much more efficient use of your fuel than a pershing since the heavy nerf.
22 Mar 2021, 23:09 PM
#36
avatar of CreativeName

Posts: 281

There is seriously nothing that needs rework in Ariborne, not even the p47. For real, are we using the same skill button? Its pretty stong and i will never understand the complaints about it

23 Mar 2021, 00:54 AM
#37
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



You still save 35 fuel while getting to use both team weapons, and save population to use on elite infantry. That's still a very big advantage. And yeah, allied drops are also really great in teamgames.


35 fuel for a commander slot? could the soviet with supply drop make use of some of this magic? remove the airdrop that's going to get shot down anyways and knock 35 fuel off t4 instead?

(also officers no long take up unwanted pop as you can just send em home)
23 Mar 2021, 06:49 AM
#38
avatar of Spoof

Posts: 449

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2021, 21:22 PMTygrys


You're kidding, right?

It doesn't need a stat buff. Maybe cost buff.
23 Mar 2021, 07:35 AM
#39
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Mar 2021, 21:22 PMTygrys


You're kidding, right?


Pershing is fine
Real problem is Ez8


I still don't understand why the mod team separated the ez8 from the 76mm Sherman
The 76mm Sherman occupied an excellent position with higher penetration and faster rate of fire than the ez8, but the ez8 doesn't.
The priority is to integrate the two.
23 Mar 2021, 09:59 AM
#40
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103

Pershing is not fine. It's a more expensive Comet. It either needs a cost reduction and no unit limit or a buff to justify it's stupid price.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

899 users are online: 899 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49989
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM