Well, there are in the All Units mod tho.
No proper animations then. The gun / rocket rack support clips into the mantlet in that mod which looks pretty bad.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Well, there are in the All Units mod tho.
Posts: 1515
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Posts: 772
Posts: 133
Posts: 359
The Greyhound is close to a T-70 in terms of AI power. Its 4 CP timing is fine in 1v1. It needs that gate otherwise it would become too powerful. It was heavy meta before Mechanized took over. It's too bad that 4 CPs is too late for teamgames, but you can't buff its timing without potentially breaking it in 1v1. So there's not much to be done. Some units are simply only good in one mode.
Posts: 359
It would come pretty much at the same timing as Luchs or Stuart. Since it would have to fight directly versus Luchs, which has same AI performance as Greyhound with 50.cal and since it looses to Luchs in its current state I don't see a problem. Where do you see a problem?
Posts: 179
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
No proper animations then. The gun / rocket rack support clips into the mantlet in that mod which looks pretty bad.
So this may be crazy but what about possibly trying to fit the Pershing into Armor Company? It kind of fits well with the other units and abilities in the doctrine. Assault Engineers help to repair the Pershing, Elite Crews help the Perishing get it's important vet faster, and most importantly the M10 now has a worthwhile reason to use as it saves fuel to help get the Pershing out faster compared to the Jackson.
Also has the benefit of getting the Pershing into a second commander while not overlapping pretty much anything between the two.
Posts: 615
So this may be crazy but what about possibly trying to fit the Pershing into Armor Company? It kind of fits well with the other units and abilities in the doctrine. Assault Engineers help to repair the Pershing, Elite Crews help the Perishing get it's important vet faster, and most importantly the M10 now has a worthwhile reason to use as it saves fuel to help get the Pershing out faster compared to the Jackson.
Also has the benefit of getting the Pershing into a second commander while not overlapping pretty much anything between the two.
Posts: 615
I've honestly never noticed it.
I just know he somehow made it a 105 at first and then changed it to a regular 75mm gun which makes sense to me.
Might do a test one of these days tho, record it to see how it looks but I doubt it's very noticable.
Funny you mention that, I had another suggestion for a new commander when they were doing those about an year ago that included the Pershing mixed in with other Armor/tank type units.
Now it has nothing do with changes specifically for the Armor Company but I just decided to mention it since it's somewhat of a rehash of the old CoH Armor Company:
I really think the Pershing, E8 and Greyhound all deserve to be in other more uh, "practical" let's just say doctrines/commanders.
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
That commander is going to make the other commanders dead. Not going to solve our dead commander problem
Posts: 93
Posts: 772
Wow. Incredible youve compared a greyhound to a t-70, like, lmao what???
The greyhound is bad in 1v1 and in larger modes sanders, Its just bad. You're not going to break anything by giving a CP reduction or cost reduction for a subpar LV.
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
It would be funny if they brought back Allied War Machine from vCOH where you could replace the lost tanks with muni.
The Pershing is a joke for a "heavy" tank.
Issues with the Pershing:
1. Skill shot sucks - windup seems longer than Tulips and even Tulips stun and act as a snare allowing more AT shots on the opposing tank.
2. Barely wins against a panther on a one v one.
3. Lackluster performance against infantry.
4. Commander it comes with lacks no off-map artillery ability to harass or punish ENY heavy infantry and AT gunplay.
5. No get out of jail abilities/smoke or blitzkrieg (must be nice to have that vet one ability)
6. Can not act as a mobile pillbox
Honestly, a big problem with USF is it lacks endgame units that allow it to have a competitive advantage over the axis fraction.
Combined Arms play with T1 and T2 is punished hard by STOCK axis rocket artillery
Stock riflemen are destroyed by long-range shooting axis infantry before they can get close to get good damage (BARS) Grens, Obers, and even PGs augmented with G34s.
Stock Anti-Tank capabilities are moot.
1. AT Gun that requires MUNI to consistently PEN
2. Bazooka bounce
3. M36 offers reliable AT but is easily countered by 2x ATGs with screening axis infantry, also can be chased down and killed by PV4 and panthers quite easily if caught out of place.
4. Lack of decent mine-laying capability (If you want something decent has to go T1 for M20 and invest in it but mines can be negated by a single sweeper. Also limits on the number of BARs equipped on units)
Stock Artillery unit capabilities are now moot.
1. All stock units outclassed by Axis rocket artillery
2. Pack Howi Nerfed - more micro intensive.
3. Scott Nerfed - more micro intensive.
4. USF Mortar useful at times but again outclassed in the end game.
5. USF Major - great for cheap arty call-in but requires LOS and the major to be in proximity to guide onto the target.
Stock Armor
1. Is PENNED by every axis AT platform from stock units.
2. Must use a combined arms approach in deal with heavy tanks and at times including medium tanks.
Honestly, USF Commanders should be designed to assist the USF player in the late game. The commander selections provides the player with a slight competitive advantage in the end game. At least the commander should augment some of the shortcomings of the USF fraction previously listed.
Just my opinion and again yes I am USF biased.
Posts: 359
If the second Rear Echelon squad is redundant (which it typically is), why not just let the flamethrower and minesweeper be compatible with each other? We're already seeing that on Sturms.
I also retract my previous statements. The RE rifle grenade doesn't need to be nerfed this hard, maybe just a range decrease to fit around the flamethrower's range.
Posts: 359
It actually kind of is, except it has ubiquitous innate sight range from a get go. T70 seems like has better AOE tho. It is honestly not that bad. Probably not t70 level good, but not bad either. And the doctrine it is in - top notch.
Posts: 615
Posts: 772
Probably not as good as the t70? Probably?
Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2
No proper animations then. The gun / rocket rack support clips into the mantlet in that mod which looks pretty bad.
45 | |||||
11 | |||||
1 |