Commander Update Beta 2021 - Ostheer Feedback

Commandos can't snare your vehicles.

Why do you think PTRS cons don't have detection range of 4?

As far as I know grenadiers are not moving in camouflaged like commandos to snare your already hurt vehicles. For the case of diving with an already hurt vehicle, you are already doomed to get a snare whether if there is camo or not.

Commandos can't snare your vehicles.

Why do you think PTRS cons don't have detection range of 4?

PTRS Cons have both a snare and AT weapons so the comparison is really of mark.

PTRS Cons have both a snare and AT weapons so the comparison is really of mark.

Irrelevant.

Units with camo can't have snares and short detection range.

Just like units with mobile camo can't have AT snare either.

Irrelevant.

Very relevant actually.

Units with camo can't have snares and short detection range.

Those rules are simply made up (by you).

Just like units with mobile camo can't have AT snare either.

Once more simply wrong. AT partisan have have both a snare and mobile camo. Can even plant mines.

Very relevant actually.

Grens do not get AT weapon, still can't have short range camo now that it is meta and lives up to full potential.
So again, irrelevant.

Those rules are simply made up (by you).

And they are perfectly in line with changes that happened in game over time.
Time to accept and cope.

Once more simply wrong. AT partisan have have both a snare and mobile camo. Can even plant mines.

Exception only confirms the rule.
Plus, AT partisans aren't exactly potent compared to [insert a unit with AT snare or AT weapon that isn't partisan here].

Oh, and AT partisans do not have 4 detection range either.

Exception only confirms the rule.
Plus, AT partisans aren't exactly potent compared to [insert a unit with AT snare or AT weapon that isn't partisan here].
.

What even is this ? You are literally proving our point here and yet still continue to actually defend the uncalled unreasonable nerf.

I guess that is what not playing the game and being a forum troll is like.

I'm pretty sure it's the G43s combined with the offmap abilities that make Jaeger Infantry doctrine so popular, not the camo. I mean on the 3rd place we find Lightning War which also has G43s and stuka loiter, while the next commander with camo, Storm, is on the 14th place (1v1 ostheer).

If the partisans become meta, would their stealth be nerfed too? I mean AT partisan have assault camo (which means they can move around stealthed, unlike grenadiers that are only invisible while standing in cover) and a snare, as well as their very own AT weapon to deal enough damage for an engine critical.


Ya, JCS is very combat oriented, but it does provide recon, both passively with their insane sight range and actively with flares, as well as smoke nades. These abilities are otherwise not available, or at least not easily (you would need a mortar for smoke, which is not meta in 1v1).

On the other hand these are already available in Storm doctrine in the form of Stuka Smoke drop, that's one of the reason why I have been suggesting to add Stormtroopers instead.

One thing I do want to see tho regarding the JCS is a unique unit icon and portrait. Currently the JCS, JLI and Stormtroopers all share the same portrait.

Yeah, personally, I think JCS is fine as a 1 squad limit on the field and I think it has a good amount of utility and combat power. My opinion on this is unrelated to the camo nerf

In regards to the portrait, if you ever look at the match stats for JCS after a game, it shows a portrait of an Artillery Field Officer

__edit*

I saw some of the last minute changes to Jaeger Armour Doctrine, and while the removal of the anti-tank strafe is certainly a nerf, the addition of breakthrough package for pioneers and panzergrenadiers is a nice change, in my opinion

Grens do not get AT weapon, still can't have short range camo now that it is meta and lives up to full potential.
So again, irrelevant.


And they are perfectly in line with changes that happened in game over time.
Time to accept and cope.


Exception only confirms the rule.
Plus, AT partisans aren't exactly potent compared to [insert a unit with AT snare or AT weapon that isn't partisan here].

Oh, and AT partisans do not have 4 detection range either.

Grenadier are not AT squad and you keep comparing them with PTRS conscripts and AT partisan.

You seem determined to go down the rabbit hole, claiming things that are simply not true and I am not really interested in following you.

Jaeger Infantry has been the most dominant pick for 1v1 by far since the Osttruppen nerfs.

I believe it was also the most vetoed commander in ML. Behind the scenes there have been many complaints and worries about it, in particular about camouflaged fausts, so that aspect has been addressed.

I have a stupid question.

When will you actually start listening to the community at large making up the majority of the player base instead of the few "elites" in your little closed group?

Currently what you're doing is alienating A LOT of people and after the recent release spectacle of the update right after a free weekend is just going to dissuade more and more people from actually playing the game.

Iron Harvest might not be the CoH killer some had thought it would be but there will be games down the line that will eventually succeed, no doubt with your help and also the fact that the game has limited modding capabilities while something like the Men of War engine games for example ones do not.

So no harsh feelings towards the community dev team and I am sure you're getting a lot of undeserved hate right now. I am also sure that a lot of us appreciate the continued support for this game especially when taking into account that you've done it for free or so I assume at least, but there are just some things that don't make any sense and there's especially an obvious lack of transparency of what is thought and done behind the scenes which has been pretty obvious with the last few updates and I don't think I'm the only one sharing that sentiment either. The last few weeks without a public testing of the beta being a fine example of what I'm talking about while you've most probably had a new internal testing version.

Again, I am not attacking the community dev team or what they've done. But as a CoH fan since 2006 that grew up with the game and learned to love RTS and strategy games as well as history because of it I feel like I needed to voice my concerns about my, and I think others', favorite strategy franchise.

I just think that some more transparency behind the scenes and actually trying out some genuinely good community ideas during the testing phase of an update instead of shooting down almost everything and closing off the public from the last weeks of the development of the update would go a long way, that's all.

Exception only confirms the rule.
Plus, AT partisans aren't exactly potent compared to [insert a unit with AT snare or AT weapon that isn't partisan here].

Uh, that isnt how that works. You're just wrong in this case.

I don't get how Grenadiers camo allows for ambush fausts. Realistically you should keep a squad in cover stationary waiting for enemy tanks, and the camo isn't even commando style camo allowing it to sprint between covers undetected.

I have a stupid question.

When will you actually start listening to the community at large making up the majority of the player base instead of the few "elites" in your little closed group?

Currently what you're doing is alienating A LOT of people and after the recent release spectacle of the update right after a free weekend is just going to dissuade more and more people from actually playing the game.

Iron Harvest might not be the CoH killer some had thought it would be but there will be games down the line that will eventually succeed, no doubt with your help and also the fact that the game has limited modding capabilities while something like the Men of War engine games for example ones do not.

So no harsh feelings towards the community dev team and I am sure you're getting a lot of undeserved hate right now. I am also sure that a lot of us appreciate the continued support for this game especially when taking into account that you've done it for free or so I assume at least, but there are just some things that don't make any sense and there's especially an obvious lack of transparency of what is thought and done behind the scenes which has been pretty obvious with the last few updates and I don't think I'm the only one sharing that sentiment either. The last few weeks without a public testing of the beta being a fine example of what I'm talking about while you've most probably had a new internal testing version.

Again, I am not attacking the community dev team or what they've done. But as a CoH fan since 2006 that grew up with the game and learned to love RTS and strategy games as well as history because of it I feel like I needed to voice my concerns about my, and I think others', favorite strategy franchise.

I just think that some more transparency behind the scenes and actually trying out some genuinely good community ideas during the testing phase of an update instead of shooting down almost everything and closing off the public from the last weeks of the development of the update would go a long way, that's all.

yep. behind the scenes is great and all, but arnt forums a place to get those otherwise hidden thoughts out in the open? like the many now against the change... really doesnt bode well for community discussion if changes are getting slapped in without warning AND the people in the open are against it.

personally i dont care one way or the other about the camo change, but its leaves a bit of a bad taste that its just shoehorned in without a discussion, then that its such a HUGE nerf makes it even worse...

i agree the continued support of such a unique game is fantastic, but who exactly is the support for? the many on the forums trying to shape it or the unknown. is this US politics where we can slip some cash into the mod team reelection fund and we get to buy lobby for what we want into the patches regardless of what anyone else thinks?

I saw some of the last minute changes to Jaeger Armour Doctrine, and while the removal of the anti-tank strafe is certainly a nerf, the addition of breakthrough package for pioneers and panzergrenadiers is a nice change, in my opinion

Well, not for the camo nerf, I might have complained about that. I mean repair, satchels and smoke nades are nice, but on the other hand the doctrine no longer has an offmap now. It went from having a strong offmap that could take out anything static (stuka 50kg bomb) to an AT strafe that could take out mobile artillery to no longer having an offmap at all. Instead it has 3 recon options now in the same doctrine.

Fortified Armor now may be a bit better choice, it has no offmap either, but it has CP4, panzer tactician and hull down, all the tools that can improve your vehicles and reduce the damage they take. And while JA now relies on its Ele alone to deal damage, in FA you can hull down panthers (now super easily, thanks to no longer requiring infantry) to outrange allied TDs.

Well, not for the camo nerf, I might have complained about that. I mean repair, satchels and smoke nades are nice, but on the other hand the doctrine no longer has an offmap now. It went from having a strong offmap that could take out anything static (stuka 50kg bomb) to an AT strafe that could take out mobile artillery to no longer having an offmap at all. Instead it has 3 recon options now in the same doctrine.

Fortified Armor now may be a bit better choice, it has no offmap either, but it has CP4, panzer tactician and hull down, all the tools that can improve your vehicles and reduce the damage they take. And while JA now relies on its Ele alone to deal damage, in FA you can hull down panthers (now super easily, thanks to no longer requiring infantry) to outrange allied TDs.

I see where you're coming from. Personally I like the change since I think it adds some level of improvement to your infantry's capabilities. But you're right... It no longer has a call-in besides aerial recon. Maybe they're looking to change the meta up a bit and like you said, encourage more people to use FA Doctrine, which as far as I'm aware, is a pretty unpopular commander currently

Also yeah the camo nerf is questionable

I have a stupid question.

When will you actually start listening to the community at large making up the majority of the player base instead of the few "elites" in your little closed group?

Currently what you're doing is alienating A LOT of people and after the recent release spectacle of the update right after a free weekend is just going to dissuade more and more people from actually playing the game.

Iron Harvest might not be the CoH killer some had thought it would be but there will be games down the line that will eventually succeed, no doubt with your help and also the fact that the game has limited modding capabilities while something like the Men of War engine games for example ones do not.

So no harsh feelings towards the community dev team and I am sure you're getting a lot of undeserved hate right now. I am also sure that a lot of us appreciate the continued support for this game especially when taking into account that you've done it for free or so I assume at least, but there are just some things that don't make any sense and there's especially an obvious lack of transparency of what is thought and done behind the scenes which has been pretty obvious with the last few updates and I don't think I'm the only one sharing that sentiment either. The last few weeks without a public testing of the beta being a fine example of what I'm talking about while you've most probably had a new internal testing version.

Again, I am not attacking the community dev team or what they've done. But as a CoH fan since 2006 that grew up with the game and learned to love RTS and strategy games as well as history because of it I feel like I needed to voice my concerns about my, and I think others', favorite strategy franchise.

I just think that some more transparency behind the scenes and actually trying out some genuinely good community ideas during the testing phase of an update instead of shooting down almost everything and closing off the public from the last weeks of the development of the update would go a long way, that's all.

1.What are your basing your claim about alienating a lot of people on?

2. Who exactly are they supposed to listen to when creating a BALANCE patch other than good players? It's not like there is any kind of consensus among the casual player base that could be used for a patch. Now I grant you that BALANCING the game might make it less enjoyable for more casual players because certain fun elements (like the B4 for example) are taken away. But from what I understand the BALANCE team has a clear mandate to create a BALANCE patch. They never set out to make the game more fun for comp stompers or anything like that. You can critizize the mandate given by relic but you can't criticize them for fullfilling it.

3. What community ideas are you talking about? They can't realistically test every idea articulated in this forum for example. They have to select somehow. And btw from what I can tell they have picked up on ideas by people who are definitely not part of the "elite".

As far as I know grenadiers are not moving in camouflaged like commandos to snare your already hurt vehicles. For the case of diving with an already hurt vehicle, you are already doomed to get a snare whether if there is camo or not.

Katitof is right here.

Realistic ingame scenario: I'm coming back onto the map and I wanna do harrasment with a medium tank. I know there's a pak somewhere but I can safely poke my nose into unkown territory because I can take a pak shot and then reverse. UNLESS there's a gren hiding in the bushes who will sprint towards me out of nowhere (this will still be possible after the change) or already be close enough and faust me right after the pak shot hits me. My medium tank is now a sitting duck. Cloaked snare squads squads kinda function like "mobile" mines if you will. It's pretty nuts. Partisans are a completely different story because they come with massive trade offs unlike grens which you will build every single game anyways.

Would much rather the PGrens to come with Tier 2 and wreck infantry like it did back then rather than the current iteration where it literally comes 2 minutes into the game smashes everything for the 2 minutes of its arrival and is meh compared to other elite infantry for the rest of the game.

I'm there. I really miss old Panzergrenadiers. They're so lackluster now in comparison.

Partisans are a completely different story because they come with massive trade offs unlike grens which you will build every single game anyways.

Partisans have now vehicle detection, mines, snares and a Panzerschreck. They are a much better AT ambush unit than Stormtroopers with Panzerschreck. AT partisans will easily be able to single handily take out any unsupported light vehicle, and render any medium tank a sitting duck without any supporting AT unit and even without using mines. On top of that they'll be able to keep infantry off with concussive traps and use the stun status to retreat safely
Since we are talking about "real" scenarios Jägers camouflaged and snaring tanks is far from a mine because it needs a supporting unit to connect a penetrating shot and will be easily countered and punished by keeping basic infantry near the tanks. Chances are the Grenadiers at snaring range, bunched up in cover, will get obliterated by the combined alpha strike of the tank and any supporting infantry fire.
Even if your tank is a sitting duck you made the ostheer player bleed heavily and he will keep an infantry squad off the battlefield.
Sorry, maybe I'm being short sighted but I can't see this being a viable strategy

Partisans have now vehicle detection, mines, snares and a Panzerschreck. They are a much better AT ambush unit than Stormtroopers with Panzerschreck. AT partisans will easily be able to single handily take out any unsupported light vehicle, and render any medium tank a sitting duck without any supporting AT unit and even without using mines. On top of that they'll be able to keep infantry off with concussive traps and use the stun status to retreat safely
Since we are talking about "real" scenarios Jägers camouflaged and snaring tanks is far from a mine because it needs a supporting unit to connect a penetrating shot and will be easily countered and punished by keeping basic infantry near the tanks. Chances are the Grenadiers at snaring range, bunched up in cover, will get obliterated by the combined alpha strike of the tank and any supporting infantry fire.
Even if your tank is a sitting duck you made the ostheer player bleed heavily and he will keep an infantry squad off the battlefield.
Sorry, maybe I'm being short sighted but I can't see this being a viable strategy

Well it's not really a specific "strategy". It's just what happens automatically if grens are camouflaged.

This nerf was nonsense, literally ambushing a vehicle is the point of camo lel. Commandos can ambush succesfully and murder infantry without effort, but Wehr is not able to snare a vehicle without support?