Login

russian armor

Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback

PAGES (44)down
1 Apr 2021, 07:07 AM
#41
avatar of Chukiki

Posts: 112

Yeah no shit they are like 5 man Obers with 5 Panzerfusillier g43's. at vet 0.

I find 10 pop too much only
1 Apr 2021, 07:21 AM
#42
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563


I find 10 pop too much only
So 4 men Ober's with 9 pop are not much but somehow 5 man Obers with 5x PF g43's are. Insane maybe we should just make all axis squads have 3 models.
1 Apr 2021, 07:36 AM
#43
avatar of Chukiki

Posts: 112

So 4 men Ober's with 9 pop are not much but somehow 5 man Obers with 5x PF g43's are. Insane maybe we should just make all axis squads have 3 models.

its both different units with different strenghts, none is better than the other. So no, 9 pop for both it should be.
1 Apr 2021, 07:51 AM
#44
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563


its both different units with different strenghts, none is better than the other. So no, 9 pop for both it should be.
Are you fking high.
1 Apr 2021, 08:29 AM
#45
avatar of Tygrys

Posts: 103

maybe we should just make all axis squads have 3 models.


I'd like that. You should suggest that to the balance team.
1 Apr 2021, 09:57 AM
#46
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

What a complet joke of patch for USF. Is there anyone that play USF in the balance team? That's a serious question.

The faction remains completly dependant on Calliope doctrines on team game which has been generously nerfed.

Basically only the rangers and 105 sherman see some relevant buff (and I don't really know why for the rangers)

- Pershing: I don't beleive the change is going to make much difference for it.
- Sherman 105: the barrage is a nice addition on paper, to see if it reflect well in game
- Ez8: Range buff is nice but still make the unit a mid-game gamble upon going M4A3/jackson, not a viable strategy. The doctrine is still dead as it is and soft buffing its minor abilities isn't going to cut for it.
- Rifle nade: do you remember it cost 60 munition to upgrade? Do you even know it? If the ability has to become a skill shot then reverse it. Make it an automatic upgrade to ALL Rear Echelon and cost 5 munition per use. Oh and the 15 seconds cooldown, like the cheery nerf on the cake, hilarious, How long is the CD actually, between 8 and 9 seconds, to 15. :clap:
- M8 Greyhound: Lol. What can we say more Who's going to select this doctrine anymore with last patch pakhowi nerf and then Pathfinder nerf and this "buff" to compensate it.
- I&R Pathfinder: Nice double nerf, increasing the delay and putting flare sooner. You've just kill the doctrine removing the cheese in it (which is good move) but leaving the doctrine helpless.
- Ranger: to be tested but I don't know why this change.
- Calliope: no even a price reduction associated to the nerf, not even a CP reduction. Pure and plain nerf to the only unit that make USF late game relevant. The nerf is deserved but the failure to give USF other late game abilities to make the faction viable is a problem.
-244 change: Who call that a buff for a 240 munitions abilities, 1 over 8 shell will not hit randomly.

-No change for airborn is huge deception. Not even putting the P47 price in match with other similar abilities.
-Recon support completely nerfed to the ground in two patches.
-Maybe see a reborn for armor company with the 105m sherman buff but the barrage is still shitty and
-Calliope heavy nerf but still not a single idea how to make USF less dependant on it on team game.
-M4A3 dozer blade removed from mechanized like "USF don't need it anyway everyone pick the 74m"

Aside from that some minor buff to minor abilites that isn't going to make those associated doctrine more interesting to use.




1 Apr 2021, 12:20 PM
#47
avatar of NorthWeapon
Donator 11

Posts: 615

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Apr 2021, 01:46 AMSpoof

It's deserved. The RE rifle grenade takes zero micro and denies cover, both of which are important mechanics of the game.


Wait... you can't be serious. April Fools joke? LOLOLOLOL

I'll only take you somewhat seriously if you say:

"I have a hard time countering rear echelons with rifle nades."

Say it!
1 Apr 2021, 13:12 PM
#48
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Apr 2021, 08:29 AMTygrys


I'd like that. You should suggest that to the balance team.
Maybe I will.
1 Apr 2021, 13:22 PM
#49
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359

Mostly pretty terrible changes imo

Just to begin: There are no entries under "commander changes" for AEF, why? Why is USF the only faction to not get a different ability slotted in or something swapped around in a commander update? Secondly, all the changes you made to commander abilities (outside of Rifle Company and protip: its still going to be garbage) are nerfs. W H Y ???? USF is not overperforming anything. Rear Echlon rifle grenades SURELY werent overperforming anything. All of this reads so arbitrary, its really saddening.
1. Why are you gutting RE Rifle nades? Theyve been nerfed twice already and now theyre a point and click ability adding more micro tax to the heaviest taxed faction already? Seriously, who thought this was balancing anything? Theyre already the lowest lethal grenade in the entire game. You guy cant remove CB from all static howitzers but a 30 range autofiring grenade every 10 seconds is too much? Wow

2. If youre going to gut the survivability of Calliope for literally no reason other than "its not fair it doesnt die in one hit" than for the love of god lower its cost. The only reason its costs that much is because of the survivability.

3. Youve effectively made the Pershing worse. Im not sure how you made changes to a unit in all the irrelevant spots. The pershing does nothing for your army when its on the field, thats the issue, not repair speed jesus christ.

4. The bulldozer needs a cost reduction as well. Like someone said up thread, this is a DOCTRINAL equivalent to a brumbar or assault weapon and its pure garbage and over-priced. Fix at least ONE of those people. With these changes, its both still garbage and over-priced.

5. You've gutted combined arms. This was one of the most unique commander abilities the USF had that synergized with the playstyle and you just gutted it.

6. Why the IR PF changes? Seriously, how was the barrage overpowered in anyway? It was one of the only reliable off maps the USF has. You REALLY just want a 3 model, squishy ass squad have to call down a worse artillery barrage.

So those are the absolute bonkers, what are you thinking changes, below is the obvious "mail it in, we need to get some changes for these units on paper but we don't really want to actually try anything"

1. M8 Greyhound Canister Shot - 5 muni decrease lmao. Thats what you think is wrong with this unit, canister shot price? Lol

2. Pershing - Just lol, repair speed help? Really?

3. "The dozer blade has been removed from Reserve Armor due to the effectiveness of the 76mm Sherman." - Lol, who in balance team just enjoys nerfing the hell out of every commander and unit. Seriously, why was this necessary at all lol.
1 Apr 2021, 13:30 PM
#50
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359

I guess Rangers weren't OP enough. Not like that a 5 man squad with near Ober levels of RA + 5 PF g43's wasn't enough. They need to be even stronger. Wow you know not just make all the axis squad have 3 models and increase their cost by 20% and lower their reinforcement speed by 33% aswell.


No one, and i mean NO ONE that plays this faction, asked for Rangers to be able to trade at long range with upgraded M1 Carbines. Literally no one. Just like I assume literally NO ONE on this forum, asked for the third RE rifle nade nerf in a row. Seriously, I have no clue what balance team is smoking on this one.
1 Apr 2021, 13:32 PM
#51
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

3. Youve effectively made the Pershing worse


Please elaborate how these changes make it worse.

The DR will be adjusted to reach 960 hp again.
1 Apr 2021, 13:33 PM
#52
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Just like I assume literally NO ONE on this forum, asked for the third RE rifle nade nerf in a row. Seriously, I have no clue what balance team is smoking on this one.

Well, I do understand the reasoning behind that change, but I'm also completely confused by the origin of that change.
Is it so prevalent in 4v4 for it to be an issue, despite not a single living soul complaining about it?
1 Apr 2021, 13:44 PM
#53
avatar of SpadeAce999

Posts: 44

Here are some suggestions for this Commander patch.
First, let's start with thanks to the modding team for making the patch.

However, it is a feedback that I think we need to make some additional suggestions, so I would like you to look at it.
And this opinion is not 100% my opinion, but rather as a reference to the opinions of the Coh2 players around me.

1. Additional buff proposal for Easy Eight tank

First of all, I think it is very encouraging to approach the concept of premium tanks like the Comat tank.
As a result, buffing the tank's gun range from 40 to 45 and improving the vehicle's speed and turning speed seem to be good intentions.
However, I am concerned that the penetration power will decrease as the range of the tank increases.
In fact, I think the reason why Easy Eight is not used compared to the 76 Sherman tank is the low medium-to-long penetration compared to the Hvap.

So I would like to suggest an additional buff.

It seems we need a way to buff the conventional tank gun penetration from 200/165/155 to 200/185/170.

If you do this, I think you can make sense even if you nerf the fuel requirement for the current Easy Eight tank from 140 to 150.

2. Rifle Company's skill integration and addition.

Currently, Rifle Company has two skills for Advanced infantry equipment and Riflemen field defenses.
To be honest, these two skills need to be integrated. Although they look different, the two skills with the same intention exist as obstacles that prevent the riflemen company from adding the necessary skills.
I think the addition of Ranger Squad is necessary as an assault infantry to maximize the fire up skill of the rifle company.
I think it's definitely something that can extremely boost the aggression of a rifle company.
Of course, there may be buffs for infantry companies and heavy cavalry companies while integrating the two skills, but I think it is very trivial.

3. Exchange between Rangers and Assault Engineers of the Urban Assault Company.

I think this opinion is probably the most difficult to understand from the perspective of users who read it. But I think this is absolutely necessary. According to the current patch, the units to support Calliope and armored battles are rather than Rangers.
Assault Engineers is good. Because it is much easier to conduct defense operations as explosives or mine operations that Rangers do not have, they are helpful in repairing tanks and Calliope, equipped with flamethrowers necessary for urban operations, and are the core of repelling enemies in buildings than Rangers. I think it can play an important role.

You may not like the above 3 kinds of feedback. However, I am convinced that this combination fits the AEF company concept of maximizing the character of the commander. Also, if you consider the elements of the game balance, I think that it is neither excessive buff nor excessive nerf. That's all the feedback I thought of. Thanks for reading. And thank you to the modding team working on better content.
1 Apr 2021, 13:52 PM
#55
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359



Please elaborate how these changes make it worse.

The DR will be adjusted to reach 960 hp again.


Because any type of ability that has a multiplicative damage is going to eat through it like it doesnt have DR right? So it seems like we traded being weaker against stuff like Mark Target for a faster repair speed? And even if thats not the case, the reason pershing was underperforming and needed help was because it wasnt effective at any one thing. It couldn't soak shots, its not the AI machine it used to be, its AT is l0l worthy, there is just no place for it in your army. This unit won't see any more play than previously with these changes and if that is indeed the case, this was a bad change as it didnt accomplish its goal.
1 Apr 2021, 13:57 PM
#56
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359


Well, I do understand the reasoning behind that change, but I'm also completely confused by the origin of that change.
Is it so prevalent in 4v4 for it to be an issue, despite not a single living soul complaining about it?


At launch it was overperforming and they brought it in line. Then after that they hit it with another range nerf. Now the grenades you have to micro lmfao WHAT???? Literally no one asked for this, no one had a problem with the single largest MEME upgrade for USF and now its just gutted. Its like they dont want USF to have any unique or fun units, even when theyre not even strong. Like seriously, saying the former RE rifle nades required no micro is like saying sniper required no micro lmao.
1 Apr 2021, 14:04 PM
#57
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359

Here are some suggestions for this Commander patch.
First, let's start with thanks to the modding team for making the patch.

However, it is a feedback that I think we need to make some additional suggestions, so I would like you to look at it.
And this opinion is not 100% my opinion, but rather as a reference to the opinions of the Coh2 players around me.

1. Additional buff proposal for Easy Eight tank

First of all, I think it is very encouraging to approach the concept of premium tanks like the Comat tank.
As a result, buffing the tank's gun range from 40 to 45 and improving the vehicle's speed and turning speed seem to be good intentions.
However, I am concerned that the penetration power will decrease as the range of the tank increases.
In fact, I think the reason why Easy Eight is not used compared to the 76 Sherman tank is the low medium-to-long penetration compared to the Hvap.

So I would like to suggest an additional buff.

It seems we need a way to buff the conventional tank gun penetration from 200/165/155 to 200/185/170.

If you do this, I think you can make sense even if you nerf the fuel requirement for the current Easy Eight tank from 140 to 150.

Snip 2nd bullet

3. Exchange between Rangers and Assault Engineers of the Urban Assault Company.

I think this opinion is probably the most difficult to understand from the perspective of users who read it. But I think this is absolutely necessary. According to the current patch, the units to support Calliope and armored battles are rather than Rangers.
Assault Engineers is good. Because it is much easier to conduct defense operations as explosives or mine operations that Rangers do not have, they are helpful in repairing tanks and Calliope, equipped with flamethrowers necessary for urban operations, and are the core of repelling enemies in buildings than Rangers. I think it can play an important role.

You may not like the above 3 kinds of feedback. However, I am convinced that this combination fits the AEF company concept of maximizing the character of the commander. Also, if you consider the elements of the game balance, I think that it is neither excessive buff nor excessive nerf. That's all the feedback I thought of. Thanks for reading. And thank you to the modding team working on better content.


I really like these two suggestions a lot, ESPECIALLY swapping rangers out of UA and adding Assault engies. They thematically fit the doctrine far better and the unit synergizes with the other commander buttons like Calliope that doesnt have a crew to repair like other USF vehicles and their ability to actually assault garrisons with rangers aren't exactly made for.

The EZ8 mid penetration is the buff we've all been waiting for to make the "premium medium" in the USF roster actually viable. +1
1 Apr 2021, 14:07 PM
#58
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



Please elaborate how these changes make it worse.

The DR will be adjusted to reach 960 hp again.


Why is this nickpicking on comment?

You always do that, cherrypicking a comment that may be not true to avoid engaging discussion on far more consistent points that have been made above. Pershing could be worst or not with this change this is so insigniant and so far from what make the pershing a bad unit that you're just adding insult over the insult.
We're waiting for your comment on all the points that have been made, not just the pershing change that is going to change nothing because the pershing isn't a damage sponge as the KV1 and what it need isn't repairing faster but taking less damage. We know that you know that but for some reason you don't want to do anything about it.

So say it: The balance team don't want to make the Pershing more relevant and that's it... Fuck, Joder, Putain. Stop being a dick.
1 Apr 2021, 14:35 PM
#59
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Apr 2021, 14:07 PMEsxile


Why is this nickpicking on comment?

You always do that, cherrypicking a comment that may be not true to avoid engaging discussion on far more consistent points that have been made above. Pershing could be worst or not with this change this is so insigniant and so far from what make the pershing a bad unit that you're just adding insult over the insult.
We're waiting for your comment on all the points that have been made, not just the pershing change that is going to change nothing because the pershing isn't a damage sponge as the KV1 and what it need isn't repairing faster but taking less damage. We know that you know that but for some reason you don't want to do anything about it.

So say it: The balance team don't want to make the Pershing more relevant and that's it... Fuck, Joder, Putain. Stop being a dick.


Yeah and he literally ignored the entirety of my comment except for that one line so he can try and act like we're not credible. Typed all that up to give feedback and its just like "NOPE". Maybe what we should do is act like some other forum posters and just continually spam threads for buffs.
1 Apr 2021, 14:43 PM
#60
avatar of Olekman
Modmaker Badge

Posts: 208



Because any type of ability that has a multiplicative damage is going to eat through it like it doesnt have DR right? So it seems like we traded being weaker against stuff like Mark Target for a faster repair speed? And even if thats not the case, the reason pershing was underperforming and needed help was because it wasnt effective at any one thing. It couldn't soak shots, its not the AI machine it used to be, its AT is l0l worthy, there is just no place for it in your army. This unit won't see any more play than previously with these changes and if that is indeed the case, this was a bad change as it didnt accomplish its goal.


Received damage is multiplicative, not additive.

If you have 800 HP tank with 0.84 received damage modifier, it has effectively aprox. 941 HP.
There is an ability that makes target takes 20% extra damage, which means that it gives the target 1.2 received damage modifier.

For a tank that has 800 HP and 0.84 received damage modifier you get:
800/(0.84 * 1.2) = 793 effective HP (aprox.) when targeted by said ability.

For a that has 960 HP and no modifiers to received damage, you get:
960/1.2 = 800 effective HP when targeted by said ability.

From what I know, in Company of Heroes 2 there's nothing that ignores received damage modifiers. It's a straight buff that makes the tank just as durable, but 16% faster to repair.
PAGES (44)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

894 users are online: 894 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50026
Welcome our newest member, cpbigshipnet
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM