Can we revive Mechanized?

I do think it is really sad that Mechanized got pretty much entombed by commander patch. Since 16th of june it ranks at USF ninth commander loadout place of nine in 2vs2/3vs3/4vs4 for the categories "all" players and for "top200" players. In 1vs1 it ranks at 6th place of nine for "all" players and "top200" players.

It is sad because this commander has 3 unique units (WC51/76mm Sherman/Cavalry Rifles) and two more units that you get only at a few USF commanders (M3/Mortar HT).

I do think the basic problem that lead to the nerf was a timing push in 1vs1 of the first two 76mm Shermans with Combined Arms activated and some infantry nearby (of course). WC51 already was nerfed at that point, there was no problem with it anymore.

Removal of Bulldozer Blade and reduction of 76mm RoF of normal shell seems to be too much. I argued that way before the patch was launched already. Looking back now I do think I was right about it.

As I said before I still think either take back 76mm RoF nerf or give more AI damage to AOE to compensate (larger OHK or more damage in outer AOE). I personally don't mind the removal of Bulldozer Blade upgrade for normal Sherman, but the 76mm as the core of this commander deserves some attention.

In addition to address the timing push in 1vs1 remove combined arms and replace with some offmap howitzer ability. That way it should get somehow more interesting for multiplayer games incidentally. Two problems solved with the exchange of one ability.

it'd be fun seeing the 76mm get a small rof buff

i dont think we should take it to pre-nerf levels, but it'd be interesting to see what the rest has to say

To elaborate this further: I do think three changes would help a lot to make the commander more viable without opening a new opportunity for 76mm timing pushs in 1vs1. The third one is something that I just thought off:

1) Revert 76mm RoF nerf or if you want to keep the standard shell less useful vs low armored vehicles (which was part of the intention to nerf RoF) buff AOE instead
2) Change Combined Arms with some sort of howitzer offmap
3) Bring Cavalry Rifles down to 0CP call-in on cooldown but lock their upgrades/abilities behind tech

Reason for third change: Once you get to 1CP you have already 3 regular rifles on the field. This makes this unique unit way less viable because they act as some kind of replacement for Rifles. If you could build them at 0CPs and unlock their abilities with tech, you really could use them as an alternative build to standard Rifles right from the start or just mix them.

The Cavalry rifles at 0cp shouldn't even be considered a buff. It literally makes them part of the build just like every other assault unit that starts on cooldown.
What about just giving the 76mm HE/AT shells like the regular Sherman but the AT has better stats. That way you play it the same way as a regular Sherman but better similar to the T3476 vs 85.

even OKW mechanize sees rare play these days, i wish they would lower all units' pop by 1, there arent enough units compared to Sov at 100 pop

even OKW mechanize sees rare play these days, i wish they would lower all units' pop by 1, there arent enough units compared to Sov at 100 pop

If you are talking about OKW tech, that in no way shape or form help the tech choice. The main issue for 1v1 and 2v2 is the lack of Luchs lethality. It does great health damage but does not drop units with ok range. The Luchs needs to perform well enough to encourage the OKW player to forego base healing for muni based healing since lack of healing can lead to MP bleed which is what you are attempting to do to the enemy.

I think any easy fix would to give it stock the 5 range it gets from Vet. That way it can provide a bit more bang for buck and allow it to chase down retreating units a bit better. A cost increase would probably be warranted to make it the same price as all the other LV tanks.

As for POP, I think they should go the other way and increase POP for all units. The current Meta is pretty much to blob up units. 2AT guns, 2MG and so on. Increasing cap would make each unit more impactful and require more tactical use.

They shouldn't have done 2 straight nerf to WC51.
Range nerf + welding to remove crew?

Come on. Just do one thing and see how it goes.

WC51 double nerf
Dozer upgrade removed
Combined arms nerfed
76mm nerfed

So only Cav rifles didn't receive any nerf. No wonder this commander has low pickrate.

Mechanized company nerfed. Ostruppen got banned from 1v1 Tournament.
Legit

Mechanized company nerfed. Ostruppen got banned from 1v1 Tournament.
Legit

This is how the game has been balanced for a while now and its pathethic.

76mm has standard shell of Sherman with better RoF and penetration. Instead of the M4A3 HE shell it has an AP shell. I thought about two variations which could make the 76mm more tempting to take:

1) What if 76mm would have HE shell and AP shell instead, of course seperated by the 5 seconds shell switch? Would be interesting to have two specialized shells that need some foresight (and recon) plus user input to be used effectively versus the right targets.

2) Or let 76mm have HE shell and its already better standard shell but with AP mun as an ability that cost munition to activate.

Both variations would be more of a straight upgrade of the M4A3 similar to T34/85 beeing a straight upgrade of T34/76. Atm I do think 76mm isn't that attractive because M4A3 is just better at infantry killing while 76mm is no match for M36 at killing tanks. A 76mm that has the M4A3 stats versus infantry plus the option to be better versus tanks could be more interesting and would justify a higher cost and maybe the doctrinal choice too.

Just bring back vehicle crews to WC51, it got nerfed too hard

Regarding the M4 76mm
buff the pen of the APCR(or whatever it is), add HE or increase the AP's effectiveness against infantry.

want dozerblades back, they are needed.

Jeep is clowncar, i feel its fine.

Cav rifles, if put down to 0CP, it think it would need to start as 4 man unit until later, or suggestions above

regarding ''least picked commander'', some commander is bound to be at the bottom.......

Regarding the M4 76mm
buff the pen of the APCR(or whatever it is), add HE or increase the AP's effectiveness against infantry.

want dozerblades back, they are needed.

Jeep is clowncar, i feel its fine.

Cav rifles, if put down to 0CP, it think it would need to start as 4 man unit until later, or suggestions above

regarding ''least picked commander'', some commander is bound to be at the bottom.......

Even better idea would be to buff the reload to the HVAP because as it stands, its much better to use the generalist round than the armour specialty round. I think the only situation where the high pen round is better is at max range which doesn't happen often. The fire rate of the generalist round is too good. The math is somewhere on this forum, I'll try to find it soon.

regarding ''least picked commander'', some commander is bound to be at the bottom.......

Yeah sure, someone has to be. But have a closer look:

Ostheer/Soviet: Their abiliites get used multiple times at a "hundred" commanders. The one with the least appealing mix of the recycled abilities lands at bottom. I don't care, because they add nothing to the game I can't get elsewhere.

UKF: Advanced Emplacement is ranked least. Emplacements never fitted this games, were either op or up and are somehow disturbing game mechanics. Good that this commander is ranked last place.

OKW: Scavenge Doctrine is at bottom. Youg get JLI, that you get at Overwatch too. Only unique OKW unit ist Ostwind, but of course it is just a direct copy of the Ostheer unit. Boring, deserves to be last.

USF: Three unique units and two units you only get at one other company in each case. One of the unique units (WC51) would allow different openings if it wouldn't have been nerfed that harsh (WC51), a second one (Cav Rifles) should allow different openings by getting CP requirement lowered to 0 (and upgrades bound to tech). Company adds five units to a roster which really needs some variation. No other company does that. Sad, that this one is last.

I can't find the math on this forum so I'll do the quick maths right here.

Preface: The HVAP round has a slight but negligible increase in accuracy compared to the AP round. It probably doesn't matter when you're shooting at a big cat though.

The stats look like this:



AP round = Standard 76 Sherman round. Generalist round, works like the default Pz4 round.

HVAP round = High pen, long reload. Useful for fighting heavy armour. Same name as the Jackson timed munitions ability.

There's a lot of math to cover so I'll start with everyone's favourite premium med, Panther.

When a 76 Sherman fights a Panther, what round is better?

A standard Panther has 260 armour in the front and 960 health. Speaking from the front only as shooting the rear will always be better with the faster firing round (AP).

At max range (40).

The HVAP round has a pen of 165 at far ranges. 165/260*100 is 63.5 so the HVAP round will pen 63.5% of the time. The reload time on the HVAP round is a static 6.1s. It takes 6 shots to kill a Panther with 160 damage so on average, it will take a minimum of 6.1 * 6 = 36.6s to kill a Panther assuming all shots hit. The Panther will bounce some shots though, 36.5% chance to bounce. So that means our 6 shots to kill averages to 9 shots to kill a Panther at long range (6 * 1.365 = 8.19 or rounded up to 9). 9 shots to kill would mean 6.1 * 9 = 54.9s to kill a Panther in a light box. The Panther is expected to bounce 2-3 shots.

AP round has a pen of 120 at far ranges. 120/260*100 is 46.2 so the AP round will pen 46.2% of the time. The reload time on the AP round is averaged at 4.3. It takes 6 shots to kill a Panther with 160 damage so on average, it will take a minimum of 4.3 * 6 = 25.8s to kill a Panther assuming all shots hit. The Panther will bounce some shots though, 53.8% chance to bounce. So that means our 6 shots to kill averages to 10 shots to kill a Panther at long range (6 * 1.538 = 9.2 or rounded up to 10). 10 shots to kill would mean 4.3 * 10 = 43s. The Panther is expected to bounce 3-4 shots.

As you can see, in a light box. HVAP is still bad at long ranges.

What about mid range though (20)?

HVAP pen is at 180. Pen chance is at 69.2%.
Average shots to kill is 8.
Time to kill (TTK) is 48.8s.

AP pen is at 130. Pen chance is at 50%.
Average shots to kill is 9.
TTK is 38.7s.

Near range never happens since you'll be attacking the rear but here's the math anyway.
HVAP TTK is at 42.7s
AP TTK is at 38.7s (same as near)

As you can see. At all ranges, AP outperforms HVAP in TTK at least for the Panther frontal armour. This is all in a lightbox though. It doesn't take into account moving inaccuracy where HVAP round would come out slightly ahead. In small engagements where tanks would not be on the field for long periods of time, the HVAP round might be better due to its slightly higher pen although using AP you would be able to fire 3 times where-as firing 2 HVAP which makes the differences negligible.

Shermans have radio net so what with radio net?

Assuming you don't have double Shermans. If factoring in radio net, HVAP gets a higher bonus due to its longer reload time.

HVAP reload with radio net from 6.1s becomes 5.5s.
AP reload with radio net from 4.3s average to 3.9s average.

At far range (averages).
HVAP TTK = 49.5s
AP TTK = 39s

At mid range.
HVAP TTK = 44s
AP TTK = 35.1s.

What about 2x Shermans with radio net?

Alright, so you're spending more resources to take out a Panther and two vet 1 boys at that too. How does double the HVAP and double the AP compare?

At far range.
HVAP shots to kill = 9, 2 shots every time so still need 5 from each Sherman. 5 * 5.5s = 27.5s TTK.
AP shots to kill = 10, 2 shots every time so need 5 from each Sherman. 5 * 3.9 = 19.5s TTK.

At mid range.
HVAP shots to kill = 8, need 4 from each. 4 * 5.5s = 22s TTK.
AP shots to kill = 9, still need 5 from each. Time does not change. 19.5s TTK.

Alright so thus far this is some pretty dumb math. It's all averages and in CoH2, due to RNG chance, you should always take the route that gives you better odds. In the long run, using AP over HVAP is always the better choice. You can stack combined arms on top of the radio net bonuses or use it as it is but I doubt TTK differences between AP and HVAP will change much even if you fire faster. AP is always better.

Any buff for HVAP would be good and welcomed. HVAP pen average TTK at far range is 9 shots and if pen of HVAP was buffed then it could be 8 shots to kill like mid-range HVAP. If its at 8 shots to kill, double HVAP Shermans would be much better requiring 4 shots from each instead of 9 which would require 5 shots from 1 and 4 shots from the other, which at that point you get 10 shots from each. This is only comparing the Panther with 960hp though.

Reload time would need to be buffed to AP round times to have better performance since its the same amount of shots to kill. A damage buff without a reload buff would be better but overpowering when fielded in numbers.

Of course any buff to the 76mm Sherman would be ruin the balance of PZ4's since they would often face off against that. Perhaps removing the HVAP ability all together in favour of a timed HVAP ability like M10 or M36 with +damage is the right move here?

Tough decision to make.

...

Thanks for putting so much effort into it. The math you just showed lead to the nerf:

- Standard shell reload from 4.1/4.5 to 4.85/5.25

So the math isn't the actual one.

Together with previous WC51 nerfs and the removal of Dozer blade, this seemed to be too much to cover the weak spots of this commander anymore.

Yeah sure, someone has to be. But have a closer look:

Ostheer/Soviet: Their abiliites get used multiple times at a "hundred" commanders. The one with the least appealing mix of the recycled abilities lands at bottom. I don't care, because they add nothing to the game I can't get elsewhere.

UKF: Advanced Emplacement is ranked least. Emplacements never fitted this games, were either op or up and are somehow disturbing game mechanics. Good that this commander is ranked last place.

OKW: Scavenge Doctrine is at bottom. Youg get JLI, that you get at Overwatch too. Only unique OKW unit ist Ostwind, but of course it is just a direct copy of the Ostheer unit. Boring, deserves to be last.

USF: Three unique units and two units you only get at one other company in each case. One of the unique units (WC51) would allow different openings if it wouldn't have been nerfed that harsh (WC51), a second one (Cav Rifles) should allow different openings by getting CP requirement lowered to 0 (and upgrades bound to tech). Company adds five units to a roster which really needs some variation. No other company does that. Sad, that this one is last.

Yet the problem with commander seem to have little to do with the units themselves and more with abilities avaialbe. For instance Soviet lend lease that also comes with the 76mm is quite high in preference for 1v1.

Commands has no self propelled artillery (Calliope/Priest), no super heavy (Pershing), no normal off map (counter to static artillery pieces), no area off map (loiter/artillery), no Elite infatry (paras/rangers). That makes the commander unattractive from 2v2 to 4v4.

In 1vs1 the commander from 3/8/2021 to 9/11/2021 (commander was patched 26/2021) to 5 place right next to rifle company. (even if one looks at last patch it is in the same level as tactical infatry/tactical/mechanized with 4.099/4.087/4.081)

Jeep is clowncar, i feel its fine.

Except that you don't put engineers with flamer into it to get a fast building/cover cleaning tool with cheap repairing squad onboard.

Thanks for putting so much effort into it. The math you just showed lead to the nerf:

- Standard shell reload from 4.1/4.5 to 4.85/5.25

So the math isn't the actual one.

Together with previous WC51 nerfs and the removal of Dozer blade, this seemed to be too much to cover the weak spots of this commander anymore.

Hm, I was pulling stats off the CoH2 Mod Builder tool but I guess mine is outdated? Or perhaps those changes never made it in.

I can re-do the math averages quickly with 4.85/5.25.

Unbuffed max range (40). AP reload average at 5.05s.
HVAP TTK = 54.9s (unchanged)
AP TTK = 50.5s.

At mid range (20).
HVAP TTK = 48.8s (unchanged)
AP TTK = 45.5s

You still win more in the long run with AP than you do with HVAP. Of course one missed shot could make all the difference but to beat the odds and win with averages, you always take what gives you better odds which would be AP in this case.

Edit: Also because of how missed shots work. A HVAP missed or bounced shot would be more devastating than an AP missed round because of the reload difference between the two. Because of the shorter reload on AP, its always better to stay using AP than to use HVAP simply because misses will be less devastating.