Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback

Unfortunately, they have always been boring design wise and one of the few unique elements (dmg modifier) was removed for balance purposes.

As far as abilities goes i would like to think about something that changes whether the unit goes AI or AT but the modular upgrade design of USF works against it. Maybe a stun/white phosphorous nade which is mutually exclusive with the HE one?

Rangers are 5 men. They are only more durable per model, but not on a squad basis.

Are they even more durable per model when taking into account Shocks' Armour?

USF doesn't have any SMG units with camo right? Why not rework Rangers into an ambush unit.

Are they even more durable per model when taking into account Shocks' Armour?

not at vet0, but at vet3 ranger models have slightly more EHP

Snip

Giving them commando stealth with Tommies would be sweet.

Giving them long range stationary stealth would be... interesting. No one would like triple zook stealthed Rangers, but it would let them get shots off before bleeding like crazy.

Are they even more durable per model when taking into account Shocks' Armour?

Very slightly. 153 vs 145 EHP.


Back on topic:
Rangers are really a bit boring design wise. They are functionally better Riflemen and that's it. But they are good, any ability they get must be a real trade or their base performance must go down.

Their unique features/abilities are integrated into their core stats; very low TS/RA, 3 weapon slots, really high close range DPS with a mid range profile too and cooked grenades. Anyways Rangers vet 2 and 3 will be swapped around, primarily so they will receive their RA bonus earlier. Similar to most if not all other assault infantry. Then they won't bleed as much trying to get to vet 3, and then they should become a real menace. We didn't want any other changes because of how good tripple elite Zook Rangers are. This change will also coincidentally nerf those a bit I guess.

Their unique features/abilities are integrated into their core stats; very low TS/RA, 3 weapon slots, really high close range DPS with a mid range profile too and cooked grenades. Anyways Rangers vet 2 and 3 will be swapped around, primarily so they will receive their RA bonus earlier. Similar to most if not all other assault infantry. Then they won't bleed as much trying to get to vet 3, and then they should become a real menace. We didn't want any other changes because of how good triple elite Zook Rangers are. This change will also incidentally nerf those a bit I guess.

So, part of the problem with Rangers from my perspective is that they don't do anything I wouldn't rather want to do with other squads. If I want an SMG Squad I'm going to call in Paratroopers and put Thompsons on them because they give me the ability to walk onto your retreat path and "Tactical Wipe" your squad. Zook's on the other hand, I already have Jim and Frank, local line cooks for the barracks on Panzer duty, same with Major Tom and his 2 lackeys'. Hell even Lieutenant Dan is joining the fun. I don't need 3 more Bazooka's, even if they are superzooks, unless something has gone catastrophically wrong.

USF has too many trash squads that can only gain value by making them tank hunters which invalidates the need for Superzooks, and are just inferior to Paratroopers otherwise (Who also still get 2 Super zooks anyway). The problem isn't that they're a bad squad that needs buffs, the problem is that they're an irrelevant squad that does what other squads do but worse and they don't have a niche to fill.

Tripple elite Bazooka Rangers are far, far superior to any other Bazooka squad. They also have superior durability compared to SMG Paratroopers (548/770 vs 505/676), making them much better at brute forcing in maps where you can't flank onto retreat paths that easily. Both their doctrines even come with offmap smoke for frontal charges. They are far from irrelevant in either role.

Tripple elite bazooka Rangers are far, far superior to any other bazooka squad, they are very far from irrelevant in that role.

I'm not saying they're irrelevant at the role itself, but the fact is I already have 5 Bazookas on 2 squads who can't fight infantry (Rear Echelon (0MP) The Major (Tech Bonus) and have effectively no other purpose in combat, and one squad who needed the Bazooka as an LV deterrent where most of his damage comes from his Thompson anyway. I don't need to be spending 350 Manpower on even more Bazookas on top of that, even if they're superzooks.

It's a matter of the role being filled more efficiently and cheaper by squads you just passively already own rather than having to dedicate tons of resources into a role that you already have fulfilled. The manpower is just better spent elsewhere.

I don't have any problem with spec of ranger. Yes it does not have any utility with it, but it's raw power compensate in a way.

However, because of the nature of USF(tier up = one more squad), it's really hard to fit in ranger to your army with cp 3.

If any thing, I'd like to see it changed to cp2. (also applies to para troopers)

I don't really see why USF & UKF are having cp3 inf.
Others have cp1 & cp2 call-in inf. are they not?

So, part of the problem with Rangers from my perspective is that they don't do anything I wouldn't rather want to do with other squads. If I want an SMG Squad I'm going to call in Paratroopers and put Thompsons on them because they give me the ability to walk onto your retreat path and "Tactical Wipe" your squad. Zook's on the other hand, I already have Jim and Frank, local line cooks for the barracks on Panzer duty, same with Major Tom and his 2 lackeys'. Hell even Lieutenant Dan is joining the fun. I don't need 3 more Bazooka's, even if they are superzooks, unless something has gone catastrophically wrong.

This is gold ... I am thinking about putting this in a signature. May I?

I'm not saying they're irrelevant at the role itself, but the fact is I already have 5 Bazookas on 2 squads who can't fight infantry (Rear Echelon (0MP) The Major (Tech Bonus) and have effectively no other purpose in combat, and one squad who needed the Bazooka as an LV deterrent where most of his damage comes from his Thompson anyway. I don't need to be spending 350 Manpower on even more Bazookas on top of that, even if they're superzooks.

It's a matter of the role being filled more efficiently and cheaper by squads you just passively already own rather than having to dedicate tons of resources into a role that you already have fulfilled. The manpower is just better spent elsewhere.

Until lieutenant Dan gets his legs blown off by a KT. Or Major Tom gets shot up into deep Space by a Brummbar. If the balance team could buff the major to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTAaosUQqPY levels, that would be great.

Rangers are quite fine. If it were up to me, I'd either give them some utility or decrease pop to match guards or falls or other elite infantry and reduce price to 340.

I'd much rather see the Pershing get an armour buff to 300. Played another couple of games in the current Beta and the repair reduction is not that big. I think on average 15 or so seconds. The speed buff is good. Other changes are really not really that influential. Haven't noticed any difference with the reload buff on vet 3 (if the Pershing even survives the 3v3 masses of raketen, Panthers, paks and elefants).

Sander says he plays Pershing "a lot" and "feels" it's performing well. I'd very much like to see that "performing well" part and the "feel" part. I doubt it can perform well against non-braindead players. Mediocre performance at most.

I'm not saying they're irrelevant at the role itself, but the fact is I already have 5 Bazookas on 2 squads who can't fight infantry (Rear Echelon (0MP) The Major (Tech Bonus) and have effectively no other purpose in combat, and one squad who needed the Bazooka as an LV deterrent where most of his damage comes from his Thompson anyway. I don't need to be spending 350 Manpower on even more Bazookas on top of that, even if they're superzooks.

It's a matter of the role being filled more efficiently and cheaper by squads you just passively already own rather than having to dedicate tons of resources into a role that you already have fulfilled. The manpower is just better spent elsewhere.

I agree with this. By the time I have enough CP to call in Rangers, I will usually have 2-3 Rifleman already plus Lt/Captain and I don't really need any more infantry on the field especially expensive Rangers which will drain/bleed your MP dry with the high pop/reinforce cost. If I feel like I need AT, I will get a second Rear Echelon for a total of 2 with double bazookas which is enough to soft counter vehicles. Something like Guards/Shock Troops works because you can start off with Maxims and have all of your support weapons ready at the start of the game so you can use those as your main infantry. Unless USF gets the ability to start the match with Machine Guns, I don't really see Rangers being a useful fit in any build. If you end up getting your Rifleman squads wiped, then yeah it would make sense to make Rangers instead of Rifleman as a replacement but by the time they hit the field I already have Rifleman with vet and possibly bars which means I don't need Rangers.

I would probably use Rangers with Bazookas more if they had more range. Pathfinders make rather good Bazooka carriers due to the extra +5 Range that they get with Bazookas once they gain veterancy and they can stealth, which can be more effective at the Bazooka Role than Rangers. Sure rangers will do more damage but if the enemy knows you have rangers with Bazookas they will just run away. While I can bait an enemy tank into over extending just for invis pathfinders to pop out of nowhere and hit them with Bazookas.

Idea for Heavy Cav Commander:

In case the Pershing needs better repair and/or the current repair buff does not work out:
The Field defenses could be swapped out with the Urban assault kit. This way there would be proper benefit in having two REs on the field if one gets the grenade launcher.
However this change implies multiple other changes (less defensive to more offensive layout) that affects the whole commander just to "fix" the Pershing. So not sure overall, just a thought.

I would like to see Rifleman Field Defenses Swapped out with the Urban Assault Kit. It feels kind of shitty to have a commander slot wasted to get something that is baseline with every other faction (being able to drop mines and make sandbags). Personally I think merging Field Defenses into Rangers would be good since it would free up a commander slot for something else that isn't standard with every other faction and at the same time give Rangers some desperate needed utility that would make them worth making since any buff or rework is unlikely.

Pathfinders make rather good Bazooka carriers due to the extra +5 Range that they get with Bazookas once they gain veterancy

The range increase doesn't apply to Bazookas.

not at vet0, but at vet3 ranger models have slightly more EHP

Do you mean per model EHP or squad EHP, cause squad EHP wise they are less than vet 3 6-man Ass Grens (801 vs 771)

Their unique features/abilities are integrated into their core stats; very low TS/RA, 3 weapon slots, really high close range DPS with a mid range profile too and cooked grenades. Anyways Rangers vet 2 and 3 will be swapped around, primarily so they will receive their RA bonus earlier. Similar to most if not all other assault infantry. Then they won't bleed as much trying to get to vet 3, and then they should become a real menace. We didn't want any other changes because of how good tripple elite Zook Rangers are. This change will also coincidentally nerf those a bit I guess.

Why not distribute their 0.71 RA + 25% acc bonus across vet2 and vet3(something like +15% acc vet 2 and +8.7% acc in vet 3) like with PG's.

Do you mean per model EHP or squad EHP, cause squad EHP wise they are less than vet 3 6-man Ass Grens (801 vs 771)

per model, that is.

The range increase doesn't apply to Bazookas.

As far as I know that is incorrect. Bazooka benefits from the extra range as any other weapon.

As far as I know that is incorrect. Bazooka benefits from the extra range as any other weapon.

I tested it, and it did not have 40 range.