Commander Update Beta 2021 - Soviet Feedback
Posts: 772
Also Elefant wasn't nerfed, unlike ISU. And, If I remember correctly, Vipper actually agreed that scope should be removed from it. So I don't get what's all that fuss about.
Posts: 112
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
1) if garrisoned by hmgs Maxxaim/Dshk the main weapon does not fire
2) Once upgraded with Dhsk they can selfspot
From balance point of view one should consider that Soviet have easy access to molotov/satchel while Ostheer do not and should adjust these structures to closer to USF fighting position and not so closer to Ostheer bunkers.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
2) Once upgraded with Dhsk they can selfspot
If its no more then 40 sight range, its in line with other bunkers and there is nothing wrong.
From balance point of view one should consider that Soviet have easy access to molotov/satchel while Ostheer do not and should adjust these structures to closer to USF fighting position and not so closer to Ostheer bunkers.
What does molo have to do with anything?
And if you go T2, you don't have easy access to satchels, while ost always has access to 222.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
If its no more then 40 sight range, its in line with other bunkers and there is nothing wrong.
Go and test yourself.
What does molo have to do with anything?
And if you go T2, you don't have easy access to satchels, while ost always has access to 222.
Molotov is an anti-garrison tool designed to counter ostheer bunkers.
Pls if you need help understanding the how the game works ask someone else and not me.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Go and test yourself.
A whooping 5 range! Outrageous! Still will be normalized, but you've made it sound like it had 55 sight range as old ost bunker.
Molotov is an anti-garrison tool designed to counter ostheer bunkers.
You serious?
Pls if you need help understanding the how the game works ask someone else and not me.
Don't worry, people who see everything as problematic rarely are credible source of insight.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
A whooping 5 range! Outrageous! Still will be normalized, but you've made it sound like it had 55 sight range as old ost bunker.
You serious?
Don't worry, people who see everything as problematic rarely are credible source of insight.
I did not make it sound like it has 55 range that is simply false, I have simply pointed out that it can self-spot:
...
2) Once upgraded with Dhsk they can selfspot
...
Since you agree that the sight should be reduced there is little point in quoting me as if you somehow disagree.
Posts: 112
1. Kv8
2. repair bench
3. Cargo truck
4. Spy network
5. Mark Vehicle
Posts: 1563
Posts: 112
ALso Spy net should give whole team view on minimap
Posts: 15
Posts: 786 | Subs: 1
I feel like too many Soviet commanders have the ppsh upgrade. To add more variance, my suggestion is to replace Conscript Assault Package ability in the Advanced Warfare Tactics with the Weapon Crate Drop ability ( from Soviet Airborne Tactics). With the tweaks to Weapon Crate Drop, I think it won't make the commander too good just better.
they always fail horribly at this, so no thanks.
Posts: 5279
Did you even test the changes?
I did. And maintain. As we continue to nerf soviet doctrinal AT options something has to be done for their non TD AT as well.
The only option being to go nose to nose with an elefant/JT would be like if osts only option for su85s was the stug, except the stug was going to bounce half the time.
This IS slightly off topic given this is a commander rework but care should be taken considering the core is lacking in this regard.
The more we nerf the doctrinal counters for super heavy TDs the more the lacking stock option becomes clear as they take up the weight.
Its good for stock lineups to be capable of performing without need of doctrinal abilities, but in this regard soviet are not well equipped.
I'd much sooner attempt something more like swapping the abilities between the commander and the airborne guards than dramatically nerfing the ability as is in place. Make the AI strafe the global off map and have the vet ability the AT strafe. Then you need to fulfill more criteria to balance the power of the strike. It also has the added effect of shifting the weight of the commander TO airborne guards who are good, but overshadowed by the raw effeciency of SVT cons (granted your changes do alter that dynamic already)
That, however does not alter my view that the soviet are I'll equipped to fight heavy TDs as their doctrinal options become fewer and less reliable
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
I did
I find that hard to believe. If you really did, you would've noticed that the changes only nerfed the IL-2 rocket strafe's damage from 80-90% health to the rear of an Elefant to 70-80% on average (though more against the front armor), and I assume you wouldn't call this "drastically nerfed". The rockets have a high amount of deflection damage. The penetration nerf only took the edge off.
Posts: 919
I find that hard to believe. If you really did, you would've noticed that the changes only nerfed the IL-2 rocket strafe's damage from 80-90% health to the rear of an Elefant to 70-80% on average (though more against the front armor), and I assume you wouldn't call this "drastically nerfed". The rockets have a high amount of deflection damage. The penetration nerf only took the edge off.
Your tests are only true for an Ele at the middle of the map standind still out in the open (labor situation), you are missing two aspects that happen in real game situations:
1) The live version of the IL-2 rocket strike will always come down the best and shortest route that is possible, resulting in a very fast approach. Having to go for the rear of a tank will result in more time for evading at multiple occasions.
2) Good players may even consider positioning the Elephant so that a building can partly cover its rear side, since rockets tend to hit buildings in their way (as we saw at P-47 loiter already) -> take Lienne as a good example
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
snip
I find that hard to believe. If you really did, you would've noticed that the changes only nerfed the IL-2 rocket strafe's damage from 80-90% health to the rear of an Elefant to 70-80% on average (though more against the front armor), and I assume you wouldn't call this "drastically nerfed". The rockets have a high amount of deflection damage. The penetration nerf only took the edge off.
TBH, it's more likely you will miss rockets by trying to hit the rear than the front, as the Ele will be moving against the direction the plane comes from.
Although i agree with both positions. I like either the pen nerf or the swap with the AI strafe for the AT. But with that been done i maintain my opinion that the PTRS Penal change on the last patch was just a band aid solution rather than a long lasting option against heavy TDs.
Posts: 919
I did. And maintain. As we continue to nerf soviet doctrinal AT options something has to be done for their non TD AT as well.
Just to be fair: The new Assault Guards that will be available at two commanders with the option to go for a pair of Super Bazookas per squad is a doctrinal AT buff actually ;-)
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
TBH, it's more likely you will miss rockets by trying to hit the rear than the front, as the Ele will be moving against the direction the plane comes from
How so? You'll most likely use this ability in conjunction with a ram, which will mean the Elefant will be backing up trying to save itself and into the path of the rocket plane targeting the rear armor (and due to collision, it's more likely to get struck then), or when the Elefant is snared and it'll be too slow to (fully) dodge it anyways.
And tripple PTRS was introduced to give Penals more alpha damage against lights. It hardly had anything to do with fighting tanks, let alone heavies/superheavies. They have the AT satchel for that.
Posts: 919
And tripple PTRS was introduced to give Penals more alpha damage against lights. It hardly had anything to do with fighting tanks, let alone heavies/superheavies. They have the AT satchel for that.
May I use your words out of your upgrade changelog #20 against you? ;-)
Reason for the third PTRS:
"The current upgrade lacks power against anything past the light vehicle phase, which means that an AT Penal squad scales poorly into the late game, posing minimal threat to tanks unless they could be satchelled."
It was always sold as scaling into the lategame and doing more damage vs tanks in the discussion as you can see at your own changelog notes. But of course you are right, it is primarly more alpha damage vs light vehicles. If you wanted to achieve what your changelog says it would have to be more penetration or more deflection damage without giving a third PTRS. At the moment they are op vs light vehicles still not a thread for tanks since a halfway decent player won't let you that close to satchel his tanks.
Livestreams
53 | |||||
1 | |||||
23 | |||||
4 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.830222.789+36
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.571211.730-3
- 4.1097613.642+1
- 5.916404.694-1
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.305114.728+1
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.14758.717+1
- 10.266108.711+17
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
6 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, debetexchange
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM