Commander Update Beta 2021 - General Feedback

Please post all general feedback from the Commander Update beta here. Each faction has its own thread for specific feedback related to their commanders, units, etc.

Full notes here

Overview of old versus new line-ups:
Commander Balance Patch 2021 Spreadsheet

Since this is a general feedback thread, I figured this would be the best place to post this. I agree with almost all of the changes, just a few things here and there I would like to see. I would like for commanders that DID receive new abilities to have their description updated for the commander. I'll post a few screen shots as examples.


If the image upload doesn't work, I'll just type it out.

German Mechanized Doctrine

"Mechanized forces had a tremendous amount of organic firepower including artillery and mobile mortars to smash enemy defenses"

With a command tank, a 250/1 with NO Grenadiers, smoke bombs, vehicle repair and spotting scopes, I think the commander could stand to have the description updated to reflect the fact its lacking any artillery, mobile mortars or even a mechanized infantry call in. If the team is going to completely change the flavor of a commander, they should update the description so its inline with the other ones, and to reflect the new abilities.

Here's another example:

Festung Support Commander



Now lacking the leFH, but gaining forward supply station and a command tank, the commander description should be updated to reflect that.

A Soviet one since this is a general, after all.

Tank Hunter Tactics



"ML-20s can shell the enemy from afar" should be changed to B-4 howitzers. The PMD-6M Light Anti-Vehicle Mines ability has been merged with bunkers and tank traps. What happened to the AT Grenade assault where conscripts can throw a bunch of AT grenades all at once? Did that get merged with this ability too?


I hope this is something that the team is keeping in mind throughout the development of this update. I know the beta was just released today, but polish should be something that is always kept as a priority.

The changes are great, for the most part, but I'm more concerned about how it looks at its end state. Good job overall, gents.

All the fast cap abilities need a rethink.

As is, they are extremely underwhelming for a doctrinal point, being lucky to see use even once a game.

I think you could outright remove the munitions cost from them (excluding combat buffs) and balance them entirely around cooldowns.

Alternatively, Combat buffs need to be added/improved to make them more attractive options.

I'll try it when I a get a chance but by reading it I'm really impressed. A lot of useless abilities/replicant got replaced with some fun or interesting things to try. I can only comment on the armies I've played recently (Ostheer/USF). Though counter-battery removal and flare removal are highlights for me.

Ostheer
Personally I'd like to try out some of the new Ostheer commanders, especially the new G43's and try some aggro Ostheer. Seems like they wanted to really get rid of the Lefh/ML-20 on more commanders that didn't thematically really need them. Stug E has smoke now too which can help Assault Grens close the gap with MG's. I agree with the theory of the Command Tank that technically it's purpose should be a support platform and not a shock unit, but I'd argue if we had to pick between the two abilities, the light artillery barrage would just be used far more. Just because most ostheer tanks/at weapons already have a high chance of penetrating allied tanks. Sure if you found yourself in a panther vs comet fight it could give you the edge, but that ability waited a long time finally see use. Basically it just reduces rng chances in a tank fight on accuracy.

USF

I have a hard time arguing with any these change. Rangers always felt like a contradiction with their carbines ranges so seeing them as just "better riflemnen" works out. I like using rifle company so seeing it get love is nice. So the idea is that the e8 is very similar to comet in both AI and AT performance? I thought when I used the mortar half-track it required vet 1 for white prosperous if I'm wrong please correct me, I just feel like that should be baseline for what you pay. Honestly all these changes help in the scale you guys had, looks great.

All doctrines that have the ability to call in off-map artillery and off-map spotting need to be changed.

Is there some way to have the beta side-by-side with the live game?

The 105 sherman immediately fires after performing the 105 barrage, pretty sure that is not intended.

Great work guys been waiting for this patch.

The sheer number of great changes especially for Soviets / Wehr is awesome. If you would sell this stuff as a "creator dlc" I would instantly buy it.
On a personal note I would like to say that it's extremely motivating to see that some of the ideas that were posted 18 months ago in this thread made it to the 1.0 version. https://www.coh2.org/topic/101020/6-changes-to-improve-wehrmacht-commanders-thematically

After so much praise I will pour water into the wine because I'm not so pleased with the OKW commanders. But I will give an detailed explanation in the specific thread.

Thx for the work, guys, this could easily turn into the best (commander) patch in the game's history.

Overall nice changes with couple exceptions:

B4 sadly does not sound as meme-y anymore


How the hell are there no skillplanes nerfs across the board?

And they even buffed the brit ones in Vanguard doc

I'm a bit confused on which part of the changes we can comment on here since the changelog topic that's linked has 2 sections and they are "Commander Changes" and "General Changes", the latter which is faction specific and the reason for the other topics I'm assuming?

Either way, I guess I'll just give my opinion on the Commander Changes section here.

For the British the Counter Battery being replaced by Hold the Line makes sense as it was nerfed into oblivion basically and not very useful however I think there were better alternatives to replace it with that would be better suited for more defensive and static oriented players like for example tank traps and so forth.

I am however very much questioning the mortar section of the Lend-Lease Regiment being replaced as that was the main draw of the commander, the main point on why me and several other people suggested it in the first place all those many months ago.

A lot of people will probably say that I'm biased because of that since I was one of the people that suggested and thus it's my "baby" that I will protect but in reality again as I said already my main idea behind it was giving the British a mobile-indirect fire that didn't cost fuel, thus a mortar team that could actually move.

I guess that's less needed now with the mortar pit being salvageable and less costly to field but still, maybe it could have been replaced by a 4.2 inch mortar using the Soviet HM-38 120mm mortar model or something, perhaps a Priest even?

For OKW again it's nice that the defensive abilities were put into a single one and for the Fatherland gives you something to spend your munitions on but I think something like hull down, a hidden feature of OKW tanks could have been put to good use here for those more static oriented and defensive focused people, similar to the British Advanced Emplacements, since that's the whole team of these doctrines.

The Artillery Flares being changed or replaced was indeed needed so that's a welcome change I guess, they were sadly very abusable.

Ostheer is in a bit of a weird position I would say.

The Commander Panzer IV could be changed up to be a more unique vehicle instead of just replaced like that without being either UP or OP in my opinion. Or hell, maybe it could even be turned into some sort of Ace unit or something with a command mode similar to the OKW Tiger.

As far as the Panzer IV J goes, I really like this tank but the only issue I have with it is that I think the name is wrong. If it's the Ausf J version then it would mean that it lacks a turret rotation motor thus making it cheaper to produce but since the turret is hand cranked it'd be slower to turn obviously as you can read here: https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/panzerkampfwagen-iv-ausf-j/

So the more correct name would be Panzer IV Ausf. H since that's the version of the tank in the game I believe, fitted with the "Schürzen" Armored skirts and the final version of it's 75mm gun.

Festung Support has some interesting changes with the Supply Station which is our real first glimpse of it in real use in the actual game, altho losing it's Artillery support unit is a sort of downside of it as well perhaps.

German Mechanized with the new Vehicle Repair Crew ability might also peak the interest of other tank heavy users like me but to be honest without a tank call in I don't see it being used all that much even with that for just 1 new ability.

Joint Ops again might see some more use from static focused players.

I don't really have an opinion on the rest of the Ost changes since I don't really play those commanders. Sadly Mobile Defense lost it's appeal with the hard nerf to the Puma, maybe something like a King Tiger could bring it back up.

Speaking of which, it actually brings me to a suggestion on how to implement the KT in to the Ostheer as a doctrine unit. It could be modeled after Kurt Knispel who is still the top tank ace in the world with somewhere 168 "confirmed" tanks destroyed, altho some say it could be more like around 200 but anyway, the tank could be an Ace or a Commander variant of sorts with the unique ability of the S mine launcher, similar to the Sturmtiger, which would be completely new for the Ostheer, plus instead of the Panzer Tactician smoke, have Sherman like smoke ability and maybe even an infantry inspire ability? The possibilities are really endless.

I don't play Soviets so I won't comment on them and thus I end my somewhat long post here.

Recon planes:

With the introduction of stock recon sweep planes in 3 faction out of 5 the commander abilities reckon planes value has been diminished.

Not only the plain are stock but in some cases they can do a better job than loiter planes since the can provide vision if there AA asset on map.

Imo stock reckon planes should be removed creating more room for their doctrinal cousins or at the very least see some changes.

Stock recon planes have vision normalized, speed normalized and lower, are limited to 1 and always fly from base sector to a point indicated by the player. The change aims to make them vulnerable to AA and allow counter plane.

Doctrinal single sweep planes allow player to set path.

Loiter recon planes now come in 2 planes. First plane is make a faster circle of field and then leaves but it invulnerable to fire , then a second planes circle that work as now.

The changes aim to make Loiter planes retain some value even in large modes with lots of AA on the field.

Overall nice changes with couple exceptions:

B4 sadly does not sound as meme-y anymore


How the hell are there no skillplanes nerfs across the board?

And they even buffed the brit ones in Vanguard doc

Buffed the JU87 ost one too and nerfed the 947 strafe lmao. clueless.

As far as the Panzer IV J goes, I really like this tank but the only issue I have with it is that I think the name is wrong. If it's the Ausf J version then it would mean that it lacks a turret rotation motor thus making it cheaper to produce but since the turret is hand cranked it'd be slower to turn obviously as you can read here: https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/panzerkampfwagen-iv-ausf-j/

So the more correct name would be Panzer IV Ausf. H since that's the version of the tank in the game I believe, fitted with the "Schürzen" Armored skirts and the final version of it's 75mm gun.

Correct, I believe I talked about this before but the OKW Panzer IV is a Model H though the game calls it a Model J. The real Model J lacked the side doors and view points on the turret, side viewports on the hull, and had the number of return rollers reduced from 4 to 3 on each side. Removing the ports and doors simplified production, and as schurzen was a standard feature of new models, it obscured them rendering them redundant.

any reason why okw flare where removed but not the british ones ?

any reason why okw flare where removed but not the british ones ?

Weren't removed just moved to the command Panther. As for Brits the balance team is super allied biased.

I don't feel good about ost loosing LeFh on it's base 8 commanders. The balance team should find a way to fit the LeFH in the base 8(GI, JA, SR, BK, FA, FS, GM, MD) commanders ost has.

Please post all general feedback from the Commander Update beta here. Each faction has its own thread for specific feedback related to their commanders, units, etc.

I agree with the majority of these changes, but I have some major issues regarding the arbitrary limit on cross-faction units. As many have pointed out, a King Tiger for Ostheer could be very interesting and reuse the current Tiger voice lines (as it was officially just Tiger Ausf B by army regulations). There are also plenty of German skins we can 'force' onto the vehicle, like how the 221/223, Command Tiger, or Tiger Ace handles it.

I think the decision to avoid cross-faction units really hurts this time. The .50 cal for Soviets is the exception, probably justified by it not needing skins, but I really dislike this change as not only is it historically innacurate, but it also doesn't add anything new or interesting - its just a token buff to the firing arc. A Universal Carrier would have been more thematic and far more interesting. Like how the 221/223 is forced to use Panzergrau, the Universal Carrier can be forced to use Olive Drab or something. Many photographs of Soviet Universal Carriers show minimal paint or no paint at all, so the lack of faction camo skins shouldn't be a big deal.

More in-depth explanation for Soviet UC: Show Spoiler

I really suggest a reconsideration of using cross-faction vehicles, especially for Soviet Lend-Lease. As it stands, this limitation will set the precedent that there will never be any cross-faction vehicles for future patches, severely limiting the capability of the balance team to make interesting units/doctrines in the future, especially to the German factions.

I agree with the majority of these changes, but I have some major issues regarding the arbitrary limit on cross-faction units. As many have pointed out, a King Tiger for Ostheer could be very interesting and reuse the current Tiger voice lines (as it was officially just Tiger Ausf B by army regulations). There are also plenty of German skins we can 'force' onto the vehicle, like how the 221/223, Command Tiger, or Tiger Ace handles it.

I think the decision to avoid cross-faction units really hurts this time. The .50 cal for Soviets is the exception, probably justified by it not needing skins, but I really dislike this change as not only is it historically innacurate, but it also doesn't add anything new or interesting - its just a token buff to the firing arc. A Universal Carrier would have been more thematic and far more interesting. Like how the 221/223 is forced to use Panzergrau, the Universal Carrier can be forced to use Olive Drab or something. Many photographs of Soviet Universal Carriers show minimal paint or no paint at all, so the lack of faction camo skins shouldn't be a big deal.

More in-depth explanation for Soviet UC: Show Spoiler

I really suggest a reconsideration of using cross-faction vehicles, especially for Soviet Lend-Lease.

Fully agree with and support this assessment. I also did support replacing the M5 Half-Track with a Universal Carrier in the past. This is a very well thought out post however that goes into much greater detail on how a Soviet Universal Carrier could work.

Weren't removed just moved to the command Panther. As for Brits the balance team is super allied biased.

Why always so salty…the UKF flares will be looked at according to sanders. This is the first beta of the rework.

I agree with the majority of these changes, but I have some major issues regarding the arbitrary limit on cross-faction units. As many have pointed out, a King Tiger for Ostheer could be very interesting and reuse the current Tiger voice lines (as it was officially just Tiger Ausf B by army regulations). There are also plenty of German skins we can 'force' onto the vehicle, like how the 221/223, Command Tiger, or Tiger Ace handles it.

I think the decision to avoid cross-faction units really hurts this time. The .50 cal for Soviets is the exception, probably justified by it not needing skins, but I really dislike this change as not only is it historically innacurate, but it also doesn't add anything new or interesting - its just a token buff to the firing arc. A Universal Carrier would have been more thematic and far more interesting. Like how the 221/223 is forced to use Panzergrau, the Universal Carrier can be forced to use Olive Drab or something. Many photographs of Soviet Universal Carriers show minimal paint or no paint at all, so the lack of faction camo skins shouldn't be a big deal.

More in-depth explanation for Soviet UC: Show Spoiler

I really suggest a reconsideration of using cross-faction vehicles, especially for Soviet Lend-Lease. As it stands, this limitation will set the precedent that there will never be any cross-faction vehicles for future patches, severely limiting the capability of the balance team to make interesting units/doctrines in the future, especially to the German factions.

Entirely agreed on what you've said, the King Tiger would bring the much needed ompf to some Ost doctrines that still really need it.

As for the Soviets, the Churchill could have also been an option since I know the Brits gave the Soviets those as well as Matildas but I guess the doctrine has a more "US Lend-Lease" theme rather than a British one.

Maybe the UKF stuff is being reserved for a new doctrine in the future or something? Can't really say.