Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback

Also, Pathfinder vision IS being nerfed.

What about WP smoke pots for the E8 to offset its lower cannon AI? then you could free up a slot for something else like forward observers or maybe refit and rearm (which could actually be not awful given the Sherman overlaps). It does put more weight on the E8 though and less on rifles... Combined arms would also be an interesting ability replacement

Also, Pathfinder vision IS being nerfed.

The sight of the squad stays the same its only the individual sight of the entity thatg ot reduced so that a 50.cal drop crewed with pathfinders has no selfspot anymore. I do think that is the goal of this change.

What about WP smoke pots for the E8 to offset its lower cannon AI? then you could free up a slot for something else like forward observers or maybe refit and rearm (which could actually be not awful given the Sherman overlaps). It does put more weight on the E8 though and less on rifles... Combined arms would also be an interesting ability replacement

I personally think that alone wouldn't be so much of a gain since it has smoke launchers already, which need some foresight of course (but smoke pots / Panzer Tactican should have that delay too).

I do think E8 needs either an AOE buff around Cromwell level (that is still below AI of PZIV/T34) or a skill shot like WP. The main problem of E8 is that it is far behind HE Shot of M4A3 at AI performance and far behind AT performance of M36. So having two E8s instead of one M4A3 and one M36 (wich are cheaper in addition) isn't worth the doctrinal choice. It gets even more obvious at late game. One M4A3 and two M36s are just plain better than three E8s. While HE shells will force the infantry away, two M36s are a match for pretty much any armored unit axis can field in lategame.

I personally think that alone wouldn't be so much of a gain since it has smoke launchers already, which need some foresight of course (but smoke pots / Panzer Tactican should have that delay too).

I do think E8 needs either an AOE buff around Cromwell level (that is still below AI of PZIV/T34) or a skill shot like WP. The main problem of E8 is that it is far behind HE Shot of M4A3 at AI performance and far behind AT performance of M36. So having two E8s instead of one M4A3 and one M36 (wich are cheaper in addition) isn't worth the doctrinal choice. It gets even more obvious at late game. One M4A3 and two M36s are just plain better than three E8s. While HE shells will force the infantry away, two M36s are a match for pretty much any armored unit axis can field in lategame.

Not even counting Dozer Blade, which makes the M4A3 rugged enough to take a few hits.

Giving E8 the Cromwell's no-bleed, high damage AoE might be a good way to give AI without the brutality of wipes.

The sight of the squad stays the same its only the individual sight of the entity thatg ot reduced so that a 50.cal drop crewed with pathfinders has no selfspot anymore. I do think that is the goal of this change.

They still can self spot at 45 range instead of 50 when recrewing.

They still can self spot at 45 range instead of 50 when recrewing.

So whats the goal of the change then if it is still 45?

So whats the goal of the change then if it is still 45?

Adjustments to their sight have been made to make weapons recrewed by Pathfinders slightly less potent.

I guess someone on the balance team had a bad game vs USF and wanted to nerf it but realistically nerfing it more would without any real argument wasn't possible.

I guess someone on the balance team had a bad game vs USF and wanted to nerf it but realistically nerfing it more would without any real argument wasn't possible.

I hope you realize how infuriating and powerful self-spotting AT Guns are. Especially when you can 100% guarantee it to happen with Airbourne Company.

Spotlight is incredibly obnoxious too. dirt cheap for crazy line of sight in many maps.

M4A3 HE shells >> PZIV > T34/76 and T34/85 > Cromwell >> E8 > M4A3 standard shells = M4C
(wheras the difference between PZIV and T34 in both versions is neglectable since it is so small)

Odd that M4C and 76mm shells are rated so low. It definitely does not feel that way. The shells do have some AoE to them but its not much but it makes up for high fire rate (as you've mentioned). The 76mm normal shells are definitely better than Sherman AP shells. At least to me.

I don't think an AoE buff is the way since the fire rate can still be buffed with radio net and combined arms. Lower fuel cost to compensate for lower fire rate might be better.

I'm still in favour of a HVAP fire rate buff though. HVAP shoots too slow and sometimes misses, I would rather have the high fire rate of the normal round over HVAP in most cases.

I think this is pretty much the case. If you factor in ROF and penetration only, the normal rounds perform roughly the same in terms of TTK vs a Panther compared to the HVAP shells (median is 45.5 s and 44.5 s at 10 m and 50.1 s and 50.8 s at max range for AP and HVAP, respectively, so HVAP is slightly better up close but things are pretty even at long range).

However, HVAP rounds also have much better accuracy than the normal AP shells and you actually gain an up to 40% higher chance to sore a natural hit (accuracy roll, not scatter hit) at max range. That's IMHO their greatest benefit and it's easily worth to switch to HVAP during most long-range tank engagements because of this alone. The ROF decrease in the beta widens the performance gap even further, so I'd expect to see HVAP being used even more frequently if these changes make it into the live game (if the M4C will still be viable then, that is).

That being said I'm still kind of on the fence towards the ROF change, though after running the numbers the effect on the AI performance isn't all too great (mostly only a ~8-10% loss). Guess we'll have to wait and see how this turns out after a bit more testing.

Thanks for the math! I knew something was up and that explains it.Odd how HVAP is better up close. You would think it would be the other way around.

I still think HVAP needs a pen boost to give it the edge over normal AP instead of this RoF nerf.

I personally think that alone wouldn't be so much of a gain since it has smoke launchers already, which need some foresight of course (but smoke pots / Panzer Tactican should have that delay too).

I do think E8 needs either an AOE buff around Cromwell level (that is still below AI of PZIV/T34) or a skill shot like WP. The main problem of E8 is that it is far behind HE Shot of M4A3 at AI performance and far behind AT performance of M36. So having two E8s instead of one M4A3 and one M36 (wich are cheaper in addition) isn't worth the doctrinal choice. It gets even more obvious at late game. One M4A3 and two M36s are just plain better than three E8s. While HE shells will force the infantry away, two M36s are a match for pretty much any armored unit axis can field in lategame.

This really nails it. I've written about the E8 so much for so long too but it all boils down to the E8 not having a defined role. It does everything badly and nothing good making it not worth the cost.

Several options exist for the E8 but the balance team never full sends anything which keeps this tank at a gimped state. Heres a thread I made a year ago on the subject: https://www.coh2.org/topic/105224/winter-patch-current-state-of-doctrinal-armour/page/1#post_id830328

1. I think the best possible option is to make the E8 the Allied Panther. Make the E8 have the same cost, MG stats, HP, armour stats (high front, low rear), same pen and same range. The E8 can already take on any medium tank but struggles against Panther or better armoured tanks. Making it a Panther equivalent puts more focus on microing the tank effectively to counter Panthers. It doesn't change the tank all that much except give it better power vs heavier tanks. Compared to the Panther, the E8 is in a tougher position because it has to fight Axis big cats.

2. Give it the ability to change ammo like the normal Sherman so its basically a full upgrade of the normal Sherman except with better armour and HVSS suspension. This choice is pretty boring though because its like dozer upgrade.

3. Give it higher pen, range and lower AI power so it can act as a replacement to the Jackson. Again, the main difference between E8 and say the Pz4 is the tanks that it has to go up against. Higher pen and range isn't going to change the game all that much except having a harder to kill 'Jackson'.

These changes aren't going to change match ups that the E8 currently has. It will still win against other lights/meds but it becomes a threat vs big cats like Panther/Tiger/KingTiger. This is significantly better than the spot that the E8 is in right now. Its not much of a threat to those big cats unless its flanking which is a very high risk, high reward scenario which favours the defender. Whats most important is the E8 costs so dang much for mediocre performance. This is why the E8 sucks to use.

Also I do agree that buffing the E8 wont save this commander but it'll make it a lot better to use. If it doesn't have a chance in 1v1s at least give it a chance in 4v4s. ToT would be a great idea or even the new 225 muni arty barrage.

I hope you realize how infuriating and powerful self-spotting AT Guns are. Especially when you can 100% guarantee it to happen with Airbourne Company.

You mean like scope on tank with jaeger armor doctrine? what's most OP, tank that can self spot or atgun that can self-spot?

You mean like scope on tank with jaeger armor doctrine? what's most OP, tank that can self spot or atgun that can self-spot?

Elefant

The following change prevents the Elefant from being capable of self-sighting.

Can no longer be upgraded with spotting scopes

Your point?

Your point?

far from yours, wasn't referring to the elefant.

far from yours, wasn't referring to the elefant.

In that case Mediums vs AT Guns operate differently since for the Spotting scopes to be active you can't be moving and vehicles are best used to poke and prod around the frontlines without hanging in an area too much lest you attract AT attention. So effectively using Scopes on tanks generally results in either having a less effective vehicle on your hands in order to have better sight which might be a lateral trade off at best or putting your vehicle in a dangerous position for this extra sight which while effective has it's own risks, while an AT Gun generally wants to be centralized and any maneuvers are often slight to put into position to support infantry vs vehicles. The extra sight range gives your AT gun more operating room without support, better heads up if infantry is coming to pressure it, and is ultimately better in every situation you can use to take advantage of the sight since you have no drawbacks to go with the additional vision.

Unless I'm missing the point I don't get it. If we're talking Tank vs Tank if you stop chasing to get spotting scope vision you're going to have the target leave your range where you'd have just been better off chasing to clean the kill up in most instances. At Guns can't chase so vision is significantly better there.

Problem with Turing the E8 into a Panther is you will STILL have a Jackson along side it. So then you have a durable meatshields that can punch at heavy cats AND a 60 range powerhouse that can outrage, brawl and chase. It's no contest between being in the shit or outside of it shooting in with no risk of return fire. That's the problem with the E8. It's got no purpose because the Jackson makes it obsolete.

There is no scenario where USF Sherman variants work while the Jackson is the perfect AT machine in every single scenario.
The only way the E8 could find a nich is as a command vehicle with extra abilities that make its unneeded role irrelevant. Sorta like the command panzer where the tank itself is next to useless but the abilities it brings have value.

In that case Mediums vs AT Guns operate differently since for the Spotting scopes to be active you can't be moving and vehicles are best used to poke and prod around the frontlines without hanging in an area too much lest you attract AT attention. So effectively using Scopes on tanks generally results in either having a less effective vehicle on your hands in order to have better sight which might be a lateral trade off at best or putting your vehicle in a dangerous position for this extra sight which while effective has it's own risks, while an AT Gun generally wants to be centralized and any maneuvers are often slight to put into position to support infantry vs vehicles. The extra sight range gives your AT gun more operating room without support, better heads up if infantry is coming to pressure it, and is ultimately better in every situation you can use to take advantage of the sight since you have no drawbacks to go with the additional vision.

Unless I'm missing the point I don't get it. If we're talking Tank vs Tank if you stop chasing to get spotting scope vision you're going to have the target leave your range where you'd have just been better off chasing to clean the kill up in most instances. At Guns can't chase so vision is significantly better there.

A tank that can self spot isn't doing it only for itself, with scope you know where is your opponent.
I keep my opinion that this nerf has no serious backup and have been decided unilaterally to please someone. Have it been made stronger this would impact the balance around scout units recrewing team weapon such as pioneer, something nobody wants to touch.

There is no scenario where USF Sherman variants work while the Jackson is the perfect AT machine in every single scenario.
The only way the E8 could find a nich is as a command vehicle with extra abilities that make its unneeded role irrelevant. Sorta like the command panzer where the tank itself is next to useless but the abilities it brings have value.

I do think Sherman variants will only work if they are a straight upgrade of M4A3 the same way the T34/85 is a straight upgrade of T34/76 (with more cost/population too of course). T34/85 has same AI but more AT and more survivability. Although it struggles more versus axis heavies than the SU-85 it still does something.

76mm and E8 either need a buff to their standard shell AOE or a shell switch to an AI shell. If E8 and 76mm both would have the same AI shell (same RoF, same acc, same AOE, same low to medicore penetration), 76mm could be the cheaper and more spammable one with 640 hp and an AT shell with higher RoF while E8 could be the one with higher survivability, more range and more penetration but lower Rof. You could further differentiate by giving different vet1 abilities (for example HVAP for E8 / Flanking Speed for 76mm).