Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback

One of the routes with E8 is make it a 'command' vehicle and buff to be strong enough + remove the crew and go the same route as with M26 with reducing actual health, to buff repair speed.

quote post="865148"]
usf pays for self repair by having shit durability on its tanks. why do you think people love the dozer 75mm so much?

Yes. I'm glad you understand. This is why a meatshield unit for USF is a no go. A mini Panther is not congruent with self healing armour.

What if we, and stay with me here its a big one, we just don't give the crew the ability to hop out like the priest and pershing.

I know, i know its impossible and never been done before, but I think if dev team put their heads together they may figure out how to make a beefier doctrinal tank exist without self repair.

And only USF armour can heal itself.

Technically, only Ost can't heal its armor by itself.

Others pretty much can, tho its costly, doctrinal and sometimes has a downside.

What if we, and stay with me here its a big one, we just don't give the crew the ability to hop out like the priest and pershing.

I know, i know its impossible and never been done before, but I think if dev team put their heads together they may figure out how to make a beefier doctrinal tank exist without self repair.

I'm really against this "Remove Vehicle Crews from USF Vehicles" thing. I understand they're powerful, but this is a core element of USF and it seems to be arbitrarily divvied out between random vehicles on a whim based on whatever winds of balance is blowing.

I'd much rather see the Vehicle Crew ability to repair nerfed significantly on a baseline, but the Vehicle Crew themselves given an ability to repair at a faster rate for munitions akin to any normal doctrinal Vehicle Crew Repair rate. That way shit like the WC-51 wouldn't have infinite uptime unless you were flinging munitions left and right which would hurt you in other aspects.

On top of that, I'd honestly like to see a "Light Vehicle Crew" and "Heavy Vehicle Crew" with different vet bonuses and pop cap to fix the ridiculously lazy solution of popcap cheese and give a little more wiggle room for balance. On top of that, iirc the Pershing doesn't have a Vehicle Crew because it would allow you to call another one in if disembarked, so give them a unique Vehicle Crew (Armored Vehicle Crew?) that would also be tied to the Pershing Cooldown if that's such a large problem for repair rate too, lock their Munitions-based VCR behind Vet or just don't give it to them if you don't want a reasonably repairable Pershing, could even extend this to the Ez8 and give them the same crew since it's a different Doctrine.

What the point of creating pottentually broken stuff to begin with? To later discover then when someone finily diside to make them meta and constanly spend time fixing them?

It has completly different reasoning behind it. Bringing back VSL as an example, it was added because the idea behind it sounded "cool", thats it. Ostheer didnt need VSL, but it was added to give a "viriaty" creating only problems. Same with Raid Sections (which is balance team pushing into the game) its been 3-4 patch changes so far and they are still dont know how to make them resonable.
UKF\USF having SPGs are not only very specific units, but the factions from the release had them as an option, same with Elephant. And even considering this SPG\Elephant\ISU are a cancer or team games which imo should have never even existed in the game.

UKF mortar is a different story. USF getting stock mortar has the same reasoning why UKF got one as a commander call-in. An in case of UKF mortar - is nothing more then a bandage faction have, because they dont have proper inderect fire units, except one immobile and expensive. At all.


Again, soviets have Guards\Shocks in every single commander, because originally Relic didnt thought of the UKF like unlocks system. You might aswell count guards\shocks as a part of the core army, just made in a retarded way. Thats the reason why they are presented in almost every single commander.


Still Pershing is the lightiest of all heavy tanks and Dozer just gives you pure armor and durability, which helps but not a full unit changer.

The patch in which the Brit mortar, VSL and Conscript SVTs were introduced were badly thought out. It was partially attempted to fix faction issues with commanders rather than providing a different play style. Nevertheless, I'll sum this up since the arguments of both of us all go into a similar direction:
We have plenty of examples where doctrinal units "break" the original faction intention. Some of these became larger issues in the meta, some completely disappeared from more competitive play, and some others work exceptionally well. This also has been the case with tons of other units in the game, even if they followed the design of the faction. What I initially said and what I am saying is: A unit "breaking faction design" does not as necessarily mean it will break balance as some made it out to be. It might still happen in the end, who knows, but it is not a good enough argument to shut down a potential solution already at the "discussion phase".

Why USF objectively need mini panther for? Its not like Axis mediums compeltly shut down USF shermans, its not like Jackson cant deal with heavy tanks and panthers.

Sure it would be cool for USF to have mini panther, it would be cool for OKW to have sniper and caches, it would be cool for UKF to have snares on tommies. But it should ring the bell, that combining it with other faction advantages\disadvantages it might create problems.

Yes, that's exactly the issue. Why does USF need another AT tank if they have the Jackson? The EZ8 needs a role. AI tank is already done by the normal Sherman on HE. Cheap TD is taken by the Wolverine, heavy TD by the Jackson, premium medium by the 76mm and and Brummbar-like breacher by the 105mm Bulldozer Sherman. Beefed up medium is taken by the Dozer blade upgrade. So what is left? If you can find a proper niche that is really worth filling, propose your solution. Mine is a "Panther-light", because that's the only thing were I could see myself use the unit in this lineup that is already overflowing from different shades of medium tanks. If the aim of this patch is to make all commanders viable - however achievable this might be - the EZ8 needs a new role, because the current one is overshadowed by at least two tanks. If we want to keep some historical authenticity we'll likely have to go with a better armored brawler type, because better armor was one of the main improvements of the EZ8.

Which ones? The only true heavy tank awaible early for allies - KV and its giving a real problems, everything past KV indeed can face counters be it multiple AT guns or Panthers, but what price mini-panther EZ8 should have then? 150 or 160 fuel? Should it main armored of the commander or it should be just and optional addition to the army which is not good at everything?

All premium mediums are still mediums, not heavy armor tanks. They are still vunerable to everything mediums are vunerable to, even to other mediums while having an upper hand.

The complete KV series, the complete Churchill series, IS2, Pershing, Comet. I think that's most of them.

I've made a relatively detailed suggestion how I think the EZ8 could look like, must have been a good week ago with a price point at around 160 fuel.

Yes, that's exactly the issue. Why does USF need another AT tank if they have the Jackson? The EZ8 needs a role. AI tank is already done by the normal Sherman on HE. Cheap TD is taken by the Wolverine, heavy TD by the Jackson, premium medium by the 76mm and and Brummbar-like breacher by the 105mm Bulldozer Sherman. Beefed up medium is taken by the Dozer blade upgrade. So what is left? If you can find a proper niche that is really worth filling, propose your solution. Mine is a "Panther-light", because that's the only thing were I could see myself use the unit in this lineup that is already overflowing from different shades of medium tanks. If the aim of this patch is to make all commanders viable - however achievable this might be - the EZ8 needs a new role, because the current one is overshadowed by at least two tanks. If we want to keep some historical authenticity we'll likely have to go with a better armored brawler type, because better armor was one of the main improvements of the EZ8.


The complete KV series, the complete Churchill series, IS2, Pershing, Comet. I think that's most of them.

I've made a relatively detailed suggestion how I think the EZ8 could look like, must have been a good week ago with a price point at around 160 fuel.

Technically Comet, Churchill and KV series are not true heavies because you can field more than 1. Cost is not in the 200+ fuel range either. Add ISU-152 as a true heavy. Pershing is a fake heavy because it has the same stats as Panther but with the gun of a Tiger but its very mobile for a 'heavy' so theres that.

I think Panther-lite could technically be considered E8s role right now but its too lite especially with the tanks it must face. Its Panther-super-lite and it doesn't really cut it.

Some people complain that having a beefy tank like the Panther and then a Jackson behind would be OP but they forget that its already a thing. Brits can field churchill/comet and firefly, Soviets can field a KV1 and SU-85, OKW have Jagdpanzer and Panther and finally Ost has Stug/Panther combo. Technically USF can have Pershing (which has the same defensive stats as a Panther) and a Jackson although its cost would the highest out of all combos. Now the question of does Pershing and Jackson completely break the game for its cost? It does not. You can still outrange the Jackson and do damage to the tank vehicle with a Panther or AT gun. Retreat is always an option if you've taken too much damage.

E8 with Panther like stats and cost probably won't break the game. It'll make Rifle Commander a lot more fun in the late-game too especially in team games.

I've said it before but I really like the current change to the E8 thats given it a better fighting chance against heavies but I'm afraid this ability is going to be an ability thats always active except for rare occasions.

I think a flat stat increase along with speed decrease and then an addition of the "Flanking Speed" ability with munition cost would be better suited for the E8. It makes sense to be slower with heavier armour. Now with Panther like stats and cost, flanking speed can be moved to vet 1 similar to Blitz on Panther.

With every change I feel like we are moving closer and closer to making the E8 an American Panther. I don't hate it but I welcome bringing back the E8 into the current meta.

Some people complain that having a beefy tank like the Panther and then a Jackson behind would be OP but they forget that its already a thing. Brits can field churchill/comet and firefly, Soviets can field a KV1 and SU-85, OKW have Jagdpanzer and Panther and finally Ost has Stug/Panther combo.

You are a bit wrong imo. UKF indeed can have FF+comet\church but FF is a very slow firing TD with low mobility. Soviet can have SU-85+KV1, but KV1 have really mediocre at best in AT departemet + SU85 is turretless low mobility TD. Stug and JP while being a good TDs they are medium counters not Heavy tank countets since their penetration is somewhat lacking in comparison to other TDs when they are facing anything heavier then medium, thats why panther exist in a first place.

Jackson on the other hand isnt suffering from a single disadvantage of other TDs be it speed, penetration, ROF, turret, range. The single disadvantage of Jackson - its not well armored, but you should keep your range with TDs anyway.

then give Ez8 more speed, mobility and Switch-able shell 200 DMG with ammu pay at vet 2.

As Aarotron said, doctrines regularly break the core faction rules and they can still be balanced.
Assgrens make a very defensive Ostheer into an early aggressive faction (same for Assault Sections and UKF), G43s on Grenadiers make them mobile and aggressive as well. Soviets get multiple highly durable tanks on doctrines. There's nothing inherently wrong with USF getting a durable tank as well. The exact design is up for debate obviously, but USF having thin armor otherwise is not reason against the EZ8 being survivable.

You don't seem to understand faction design.
There is nothing to say that ost can't have aggressive infantry, nor mobile infantry they have a few actually, including stock pgrens... but the core of the way OST is played, remains. They rely heavily on combined arms, not single units carrying the game. If say, ass grens had a faust things would be different because they would enable a different form of scaling, and outright replacing grens while being able to maintain pressure without supports into the mid game. THAT would break their rules. As it is ass grens fall off. They offer an alternative opening but in the end ost plays they way they are meant to after gains are made. You sre not removing osts shortcomings while retaining their advantages.

This would not be the case for USF with a Panther type vehicle. Their entire faction is built around rapid regrouping NOT out slugging.

Soviet are not disallowed to have heavy Armour either, there is nothing in their design that makes it a problem.
Their faction trait is durable infantry squads, the offset is damage drop off and lack of centralized DPS.
They are meant to outlast, not out fight.

End of the day, the E8 IS a durable tanks that only falls off against big cats, the Panther in particular is purpose built FOR THAT. You make it so usf has self healing tanks that can fight panthers in s slug fest and the balance is out the window. Players won't be able to out fight in the infantry game or the armour game. Axis will be out fought and out maneuvered and anything the E8 can't fight the Jackson will be happy to eat while the panthers easy 8s and rifles ensure that nothing can get in there to stop it.

The absolute only way I could see a more durable E8 is as a command unit, limited to 1 with the crew removed and even then you are more or less ending up with a Pershing... The ability to mass produce is an absolute no go and with a crew isn't even a reasonable request.

I'd like to see the E8 go back to its roots. Bring back it's mobility that was once taken from it. 100% moving accuracy makes it a unique unit and highlights its premium quality. It's supposed to out maneuver let its mobility shine. Let it be aggressive.

You are a bit wrong imo. UKF indeed can have FF+comet\church but FF is a very slow firing TD with low mobility. Soviet can have SU-85+KV1, but KV1 have really mediocre at best in AT departemet + SU85 is turretless low mobility TD. Stug and JP while being a good TDs they are medium counters not Heavy tank countets since their penetration is somewhat lacking in comparison to other TDs when they are facing anything heavier then medium, thats why panther exist in a first place.

Jackson on the other hand isnt suffering from a single disadvantage of other TDs be it speed, penetration, ROF, turret, range. The single disadvantage of Jackson - its not well armored, but you should keep your range with TDs anyway.

Right so does it break the game if I, as a USF player, give my fellow UKF player with a churchill or Comet my Jackson? Alternately, what if I give my fellow Soviet player my Jackson while his IS2 tanks the frontline. Is that going to break the game in any meaningful way? Barring the fact that I just gave a resource bonus to my team mate, I don't think so. The combination of damage soak and a TD is nothing new despite all the pros and cons of each pairing that you've mentioned. Each have their strengths and weaknesses. Jackson and E8 as Panther-lite will have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Also Jackson has good RoF on paper but it also has a little bit of wind-up time which puts it on par with SU-85. Definitely not as fast as a Jagdpanzer/Stug but not as slow as Firefly. Another disadvantage of the Jackson is its not as responsive as other TDs having a very slow turn and acceleration.

You mention that Jagdpanzer and Stug are not heavy counters and I'd argue that their fast fire rate makes up for the (lower) pen. Along with the fact that most tanks Axis will face will be mediums barring the occasional doctrinal heavy makes Stug and Jagdpanzer capable of being high performing units as with all Axis units.

I see the matchup of Jagdpanzer/Stug vs heavy the same as SU-85 vs King Tiger or Panther. You're going to bounce a lot of shots unless the TD is vetted.

Remember 1v1 kek balans first. Panther-lite is like giving ostheer 60 range td. Or giving Axis Hummel SPG

The issue has less to do with Easy8 and more to do with with the other options. It is the other option that need to change to create room for the Easy8 or there mus some changes in the commander so that one does not expect for the Easy8 to be the selling point of the commander.

The idea that a main battle tank should beat the Panther has been tested with Comet and was proved to flawed.

Show Spoiler

We can make up many "traits" that a faction has. I agree on what yours are as well, but at the same time these are not the "one and only trait that defines the faction". Ostheer has small sized infantry squads and an inherently defensive early game. This is shaken by doctrines via Assgrens and on the squad size part via Osttruppen, as well as by some 'recent' core faction changes like PGrens coming earlier.
Soviet's core vehicles do not have any heavier armor. Any standard Axis tank, ATG and even handheld PSchrecks have guaranteed penetration vs all their stock tanks. The faction has, by design, no stock heavy tanks (in the sense of heavily armored) and they are also supposed to play without one. Soviets are supposed to have worse tanks and compensate this by either using their SU85 to keep Axis in check or by amassing vehicles. The doctrines that give them heavier armor are supposed to shake the Axis advantage and add something absolutely new that they usually don't have access to. It therefore goes against the design of the core faction. And this is fine. Because Axis can deal with heavier armor as well.

And I agree, USF is supposed to get their tanks back in action quicker via crew repairs. The Pershing shows us that it can also work completely differently if necessary. If a unit is balanced and will cause issues does not only depend on the faction itself, but if other factions have a means to properly counter it. And Axis do, so I think a "mini Panther" is worth trying. If it does not work then fine by me, but it is one of the very few niches that is still available for USF tanks without making them either redundant or useless.

Doctrine or not, and what the Panther can do or not has no bearing in the design of USF. That design dictates that they are not to have durable armour, instead they have mobile armour that can heal itself.

Every faction pays for their strengths with weaknesses.
Soviet have durable infantry but lack concentrated dps. They are designed to out attrition the enemy.
Ost has small squads but better than average team weapons and high impact squads. They are meant to outperform not out last.
OKW has no caches but has 5 levels of vet, non-doc elite infantry and armour. They are meant to outlast and out fight but not outproduce- nothing they have is "cheap"
Usf is extremely mobile and VERY aggressive. They are meant to lick their wounds quicker than anyone else be back in the fight before their enemy can. They are meant to keep the enemy on the back foot not to outlast them in a slug fest.

USF extremely mobile? In what way? Their tanks are not any faster or more agile than axis counterparts. AT gun does not have any sort of sprint. Pak howi also has agility of a turtle. I mean, USF having an 800 hp/235 armour premium medium with OK penetration and OK AI would not break anything. Especially if you would make the E8 mobile and pricey.
USF Aggressive? Sure, that they are. They don't really have any sort of durability to slug it out.

Using faction traits as an argument is a double edged sword. If you say:
Faction X is Y, then you have to provide the proof of Y and how the proposed change would violate the Y trait.

Technically Comet, Churchill and KV series are not true heavies because you can field more than 1. Cost is not in the 200+ fuel range either. Add ISU-152 as a true heavy. Pershing is a fake heavy because it has the same stats as Panther but with the gun of a Tiger but its very mobile for a 'heavy' so theres that.

That was unclear wording on my part. What I meant was heavily armored and durable, not heavy in the sense of a "heavy tank" like Tiger, IS and the lot. Axis have options to fight durable Allied tanks, therefore they could probably effectively deter a durable EZ8, thus it might not be a balance issue to design the EZ8 as a durable tank. That was the point I was trying to make.

Right so does it break the game if I, as a USF player, give my fellow UKF player with a churchill or Comet my Jackson? Alternately, what if I give my fellow Soviet player my Jackson while his IS2 tanks the frontline. Is that going to break the game in any meaningful way? Barring the fact that I just gave a resource bonus to my team mate, I don't think so. The combination of damage soak and a TD is nothing new despite all the pros and cons of each pairing that you've mentioned. Each have their strengths and weaknesses. Jackson and E8 as Panther-lite will have their own strengths and weaknesses.

It wont create problems, but you cant compare it like this. Because firstly you need UKF\Sov teammate(s) to begin with to pull this off. Meaning that they have their own faction to play with, with advantages\disadvantages and so on.

To make it as simple as possible, lets say faction X has strongest inf in the game, but weakest tanks, faction Y has weakest inf but strong tanks. If you combine them, its more or less fine because X can support Y early, for Y to carry in late game.
If you go double X to capitalize on snowballing, in late game you will be left without strong armor. If you go double Y you will end up with strong armor, but you have to survive before you can get it.

Now if faction X is getting strong armor then X+X combination in team games have no main disadvantage.

I'm really against this "Remove Vehicle Crews from USF Vehicles" thing. I understand they're powerful, but this is a core element of USF and it seems to be arbitrarily divvied out between random vehicles on a whim based on whatever winds of balance is blowing.

I'd much rather see the Vehicle Crew ability to repair nerfed significantly on a baseline, but the Vehicle Crew themselves given an ability to repair at a faster rate for munitions akin to any normal doctrinal Vehicle Crew Repair rate. That way shit like the WC-51 wouldn't have infinite uptime unless you were flinging munitions left and right which would hurt you in other aspects.

On top of that, I'd honestly like to see a "Light Vehicle Crew" and "Heavy Vehicle Crew" with different vet bonuses and pop cap to fix the ridiculously lazy solution of popcap cheese and give a little more wiggle room for balance. On top of that, iirc the Pershing doesn't have a Vehicle Crew because it would allow you to call another one in if disembarked, so give them a unique Vehicle Crew (Armored Vehicle Crew?) that would also be tied to the Pershing Cooldown if that's such a large problem for repair rate too, lock their Munitions-based VCR behind Vet or just don't give it to them if you don't want a reasonably repairable Pershing, could even extend this to the Ez8 and give them the same crew since it's a different Doctrine.

Fuck that, USF needs LESS units with muni costing abilities that you have to pop just to get baseline or slightly above baseline performance. Seriously, stop doing this devs.

Us doctrines have always had the issue that they need to supplement base army due lacking specialised units. They have no rocket arty, heavy armour, elite infantry or more traditional arty. Player has to always balance around what of these he can afford as most doctrines only provide one of these, wrong choice will put usf in disadvantage in more ways that say ostheer do.

This is reason heavy cav was popular before as it provided 2 of these, durable tank and elite infantry and reason urban assault was meta, both and rocket arty for good measure. With factions base strengtgs it is sure to cause balance issues if they get them non doc, but i feel like one of these should be given to factions base unit, durable tank being easiest if you ask me, to balance out.