Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback
12 May 2021, 03:27 AM
#741
Posts: 133
Historically the M10 was commonly loaded with a large amount of smoke rounds to provide support when not killing enemy armor. Maybe that could be something? Give it a smoke shot like the Command panzer 4 so it can flank enemy armor without being fired on.
12 May 2021, 06:11 AM
#742
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
I'm not sure if it is the right thing to give up on the flanking mechanic because it just don't works out at the moment
Flanking doesn't just not work at the moment, it doesn't work in general because of the core design of the game. No side armor means you always have to overextend to get rear armor shots, which in turn means making your tank highly vulnerable to (double) ATGs, AT infantry, mines and snares. Hell, even to getting stuck on narrow terrain.
You could slap a ton of flanking buffs to the M10, which you couldn't justify with its low cost by the way, and it wouldn't matter. Flanking is just not efficient in the majority of engagements. Who would want to risk suiciding M10s in a dive when the 76mm, E8 or Jackson can all fight from max range in relative safety.
12 May 2021, 06:35 AM
#743
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
You could slap a ton of flanking buffs to the M10, which you couldn't justify with its low cost by the way, and it wouldn't matter. Flanking is just not efficient in the majority of engagements. Who would want to risk suiciding M10s in a dive when the 76mm, E8 or Jackson can all fight from max range in relative safety.
This is why I think m10 should be stock and the Jackson should be less amazing against all classes of armor. Bring it back to being truly specialized against heavy armor. M10 fights medium armor and flanks heavy TDs
Just a theory though. I know practically speaking it would be a big change to test, even if any of you guys agree with the idea in the first place
12 May 2021, 07:05 AM
#744
Posts: 563
Wolverine would pretty much be su 76 for usf as both were used in same style funnily enough.
"Pain is almost euphoric sam!"
12 May 2021, 07:05 AM
#745
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
This is why I think m10 should be stock and the Jackson should be less amazing against all classes of armor. Bring it back to being truly specialized against heavy armor. M10 fights medium armor and flanks heavy TDs
Just a theory though. I know practically speaking it would be a big change to test, even if any of you guys agree with the idea in the first place
Practically it would be a failure. At the moment you need 2 dedicated tank destroyer in a normal roster. How do you get your 2 jacksons to counter panthers/tiger if you already have 2 M10 to counter the pz4?
---
M10 in its current state should be immune to snare or having the threesold for snare lowered to 20/40% at least when activating the speed. That's the only way to make a flanker working.
Making the M10 a mini Jacksons is just leading to failure, you're not building a tank destroyer only to counter Pz4 as USF, you can't that's a non sense. Not vs 2 factions that can easily build each 2 Pz4 into Tiger/KT/panther.
12 May 2021, 08:21 AM
#746
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Making the M10 a mini Jacksons is just leading to failure, you're not building a tank destroyer only to counter Pz4 as USF, you can't that's a non sense. Not vs 2 factions that can easily build each 2 Pz4 into Tiger/KT/panther.
What do you mean only p4? M10 can fight anything in ost t3, brumbarr, jp4, and two of them can definitely kill a panther if you can block it. Also good for diving after rocket arty if you get the chance. Flanking heavy TDs which are guaranteed in some team maps
I'm saying change the Jackson so it's bad against medium armor, stronger against heavies. Wouldn't change much about m10, i like the snare idea though
12 May 2021, 10:21 AM
#747
Posts: 772
Making the M10 a mini Jacksons is just leading to failure, you're not building a tank destroyer only to counter Pz4 as USF, you can't that's a non sense. Not vs 2 factions that can easily build each 2 Pz4 into Tiger/KT/panther.
If m10 was a mini jackson, then 80 fuel to create a lot of problems for p4 is a decent investment. Keep in mind that sherman + m10 is 190f. That is almost the price of a single panther.
12 May 2021, 11:06 AM
#748
Posts: 1515
Well, if you go reworking Jackson just to rework M10, then you'll have a broken faction. Either OP or UP. And besides, it's idiotic at best to go reworking Jackson just to touch another unit. Not to mention how much USF depends on it, especially in teamgames. It's already hard to include 2 jacksons and a sherman into the standard roster in teamgames. Not to mention the absolute need for a calliope (unless you're into sadomasochism). There's only so much pop one can fit.
Is it so hard to make a unit special in some way? I mean, it's f****** doctrinal so there is not really a danger of being picked in every game/mode
Is it so hard to make a unit special in some way? I mean, it's f****** doctrinal so there is not really a danger of being picked in every game/mode
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
https://coh2stats.com/players/76561198031032150
https://coh2stats.com/players/76561198031032150
12 May 2021, 11:43 AM
#749
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
I'm thinking about switching around Flanking Speed and HVAP. So HVAP would become the standard ability like on the 57mm. Because flanking generally sucks in CoH2. Then it can have better frontal engagements against mostly the OKW P4J, but not really anything bigger, and it would be behind an additional pay wall to keep its 80 fuel cost in check.
This solution would probably fix the bad performance of a "fresh" M10 in the late game. Design wise, it still brings the Jackson and the M10 functionally closer together, but in the end I think USF AT units can only be fully overhauled at the same time.
Alternatively, smoke canisters or a smoke ability like Panzer Tactician would help the M10 along with a target size reduction to 20 that could also strengthen its role. However this does not fix the bad performance of a newly build unit. I personally also feel the POP should go down to 9 in the case of HVAP staying at vet1. If HVAP is vet0, 10 POP should be fine.
Thinking about all of this, the M10 could maybe use it's own ability that both boosts speed and penetration, with vet1 reducing the muni costs to around 30-40. This could also give it a slightly more distinct role from the 57mm. Otherwise (with only putting HVAP to vet0), it would just be the 57mm on tracks.
HVAP will help but it's not a straight up improvement (which could be dangerous with a vehicle this cheap). As it stands it needs to reload the HVAP shell, so unless you time it perfectly after a regular shot it will cost you some DPM, and can then fire only 3 of them at vet 0-2, before needing like a 10 second reload to revert to normal shells. The latter is because it will load the fourth HVAP shell for about 4 seconds before the ability runs out and then it will have to reload a regular shell on top.
Weird bandaid idea: Shorten the ability and add a veterancy bonus that prolongs it?
12 May 2021, 11:53 AM
#750
Posts: 919
Flanking doesn't just not work at the moment, it doesn't work in general because of the core design of the game.
And thats a totally sad thing because "True Sight" is perfectly made for flanking moves. I completely agree that it is pretty hard to get a successfull flank because you have to get to that small 90 degree area behind that tank while there are a lot of other units around. This gets especially hard because both M10 commanders have no form of rocket artillery or good offmap that helps to strip that support. Abilities like Fear Propaganda Artillery or White Phosporous Barrage would be a good addition to a commander with flanking tanks to supress/slow/conceal that support. Alternatively any form of rocket artillery could work. A partly snare immunity and more received acc for M10 would help a lot. You can always bind it to an ability to balance it.
I do think at directly fighting the StuG G the M10 sucks, compared to M36 it sucks too. Lets not speak about Panther. You can't make it viable in frontal combat without a lot of buffs. But there is still some room to improve M10 for flanking as long as it looses the frontal fights.
12 May 2021, 13:56 PM
#751
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
What do you mean only p4? M10 can fight anything in ost t3, brumbarr, jp4, and two of them can definitely kill a panther if you can block it. Also good for diving after rocket arty if you get the chance. Flanking heavy TDs which are guaranteed in some team maps
I'm saying change the Jackson so it's bad against medium armor, stronger against heavies. Wouldn't change much about m10, i like the snare idea though
How is that relevant with M10?
If m10 was a mini jackson, then 80 fuel to create a lot of problems for p4 is a decent investment. Keep in mind that sherman + m10 is 190f. That is almost the price of a single panther.
I'm not saying M10 wouldn't be decent vs Pz4, I'm saying that your 2 M10 suddenly become a burden once a tiger/panther hits the field and you crying with your investment and pop cap that can't do shit vs it unless your opponent gave you the adecquat veterancy boost for it.
12 May 2021, 14:10 PM
#752
Posts: 772
I'm not saying M10 wouldn't be decent vs Pz4, I'm saying that your 2 M10 suddenly become a burden once a tiger/panther hits the field and you crying with your investment and pop cap that can't do shit vs it unless your opponent gave you the adecquat veterancy boost for it.
Because of this exact reason its penetration can be safely buffed. If you want to fight panthers and tigers - get an m36.
12 May 2021, 15:22 PM
#753
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Because of this exact reason its penetration can be safely buffed. If you want to fight panthers and tigers - get an m36.
How do you get an M36 if you're already popcap full with 2 M10? Where do you get the manpower or fuel from?
Also the most important question, while your opponent is getting units that can both damage your infantry and tanks alike, you're investing a lot of manpower and fuel into units that can only damage pz4 tanks and need to be replaced once a tiger/panther hit the field.
12 May 2021, 17:50 PM
#754
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
How is that relevant with M10?
?
How do you get an M36 if you're already popcap full with 2 M10? Where do you get the manpower or fuel from?
Why do you need 2 m10s every game? I would only build 2 or more if there's a Jagdtiger/Ele
you're investing a lot of manpower and fuel into units that can only damage pz4 tanks and need to be replaced once a tiger/panther hit the field.
Idk why you're saying this, it's not just P4s. They can fight all of the casemates too, and if you choose to get that 2nd m10 then they can absolutely kill a panther if you can get one of them behind it
12 May 2021, 18:19 PM
#755
Posts: 772
How do you get an M36 if you're already popcap full with 2 M10? Where do you get the manpower or fuel from?
Also the most important question, while your opponent is getting units that can both damage your infantry and tanks alike, you're investing a lot of manpower and fuel into units that can only damage pz4 tanks and need to be replaced once a tiger/panther hit the field.
Why would I build 2 M10s? I'd rather have 1 sherman and 1 M10. 2 M10s is pretty pointless tbh.
Also the most important question, while your opponent is getting units that can both damage your infantry and tanks alike, you're investing a lot of manpower and fuel into units that can only damage pz4 tanks and need to be replaced once a tiger/panther hit the field.
If this logic was true, building light vehicles and light tanks would have been pointless, because they are really hard to operate once medium armor hit the field.
12 May 2021, 19:07 PM
#756
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Why would I build 2 M10s? I'd rather have 1 sherman and 1 M10. 2 M10s is pretty pointless tbh.
If this logic was true, building light vehicles and light tanks would have been pointless, because they are really hard to operate once medium armor hit the field.
Didn't know TDs were following light vehicle logic. Anyway you probably forget the initial statement which was making the M10 a mini Jackson and Jackson dedicated heavy tank destroyer, so yes in that case you'll be ending needing more than 1 m10 if your opponent is getting various Pz4s and since both axis factions can also complement them with a panther or a tiger/kingtiger you're ending fighting 3 tanks that can definitively fight off your own M10s but also infantry and the later being vastly superior to your m10.
UKF not using their own version while already be in this configuration with the Firefly should ring a bell.
12 May 2021, 19:50 PM
#757
Posts: 5279
Didn't know TDs were following light vehicle logic. Anyway you probably forget the initial statement which was making the M10 a mini Jackson and Jackson dedicated heavy tank destroyer, so yes in that case you'll be ending needing more than 1 m10 if your opponent is getting various Pz4s and since both axis factions can also complement them with a panther or a tiger/kingtiger you're ending fighting 3 tanks that can definitively fight off your own M10s but also infantry and the later being vastly superior to your m10.
UKF not using their own version while already be in this configuration with the Firefly should ring a bell.
the idea is the the 80 fuel m10 FORCES your enemy to get a panther or KT. giving you an armour advantage or at least lets you lean on your infantry advantage. it creates an arms race type situation and you will always have the Jackson to escalate to. the issue more lies in needing some alternative scaling to the m10 for when its AT role is slightly lost its luster. something like a smoke shell would be fantastic for this type of scaling.
units with a "window" simply require an alternative way to generate value once that window is closed.
take the puma for example. its got utility to lean into the make sure its investment isnt lost once its primary window is closed. something similar would help the M10 be a more attractive choice.
#stalinwept
12 May 2021, 19:57 PM
#758
Posts: 772
Didn't know TDs were following light vehicle logic. Anyway you probably forget the initial statement which was making the M10 a mini Jackson and Jackson dedicated heavy tank destroyer, so yes in that case you'll be ending needing more than 1 m10 if your opponent is getting various Pz4s and since both axis factions can also complement them with a panther or a tiger/kingtiger you're ending fighting 3 tanks that can definitively fight off your own M10s but also infantry and the later being vastly superior to your m10.
UKF not using their own version while already be in this configuration with the Firefly should ring a bell.
I don't see how p4 can fight off M10, when m10 is faster and has more range and 1 is more then enough, especially when you have an AT gun. As the match goes on, of course m10 is pointless, regardless of a buff. Also I did not make any suggestions about balancing Jackson.
Didn't know TDs were following light vehicle logic.
Most TDs do not, this does, because of 50 range tigers and a panther.
UKF not using their own version while already be in this configuration with the Firefly should ring a bell.
That rings only 1 bell, and it is the same bell as with USF - it is a gimmick TD, that does not perform well at all.
Imma head out, this is getting quite toxic
12 May 2021, 20:37 PM
#759
Posts: 5
Can anyone justify the existence of elite vehicle crews to me? I really don't understand why it's included at all.
12 May 2021, 20:45 PM
#760
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Can anyone justify the existence of elite vehicle crews to me? I really don't understand why it's included at all.
Faster vet?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
77 | ||
 |
|
|
64 | ||
|
|
|
|
14 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
34 | ||
|
|
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
14 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.611220.735+5
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
869 users are online:
869 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49120
Welcome our newest member, truvioll94
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, truvioll94
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM