Login

russian armor

Anyone worried new USF commander will make others obsolete?

23 Oct 2015, 09:21 AM
#21
avatar of Unshavenbackman

Posts: 680

It will be as with Shock rifle with soviets, if you go anything else its because of how bored you are with that commander. Imo commanders should be a strategical choice, relic has failed in that department.
23 Oct 2015, 09:29 AM
#22
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

It will be as with Shock rifle with soviets, if you go anything else its because of how bored you are with that commander. Imo commanders should be a strategical choice, relic has failed in that department.

The commander doesn't have spammable armor or good off-map.
2-3 ATGs, 2 MGs and some basic inf and the commander is hardcountered.

It will be used purely because of hype, if you struggle vs comet, you'll struggle vs pershing, if you know your shit vs comet, pershing will be only a resource dump.
23 Oct 2015, 09:33 AM
#23
avatar of AngryKitten465

Posts: 473

Permanently Banned
And here I am loving OKW Elite Armor, Soviet Counterattack Tactics and USF Airborne company. Why can't you people appreciate these wonders?!

It boggles the mind!
23 Oct 2015, 09:34 AM
#24
avatar of AngryKitten465

Posts: 473

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post23 Oct 2015, 09:29 AMKatitof


It will be used purely because of hype, if you struggle vs comet, you'll struggle vs pershing, if you know your shit vs comet, pershing will be only a resource dump.


The man is hated, yet he strikes with facts time and time again!
23 Oct 2015, 10:00 AM
#25
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

This doctrine in fact has nothing to overshine other commanders.
It has pros anc cons, like all of them.
Good medium/heavy tank and rangers but on the other hand infantry has LMGs, Off map and on map arty, Rifle has E8 and flamers, armor is always good with demos and M10 spam, Airborne give you Paras with thompsons as well + P47.
23 Oct 2015, 10:38 AM
#26
avatar of F1sh

Posts: 521

Rangers don't seem all that good, just Riflemen with some more armor. They can upgrade to get 4 Thompsons, and have 3 weapon slots, but the only ability they have is to throw a grenade.
23 Oct 2015, 11:00 AM
#27
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Oct 2015, 10:38 AMF1sh
Rangers don't seem all that good, just Riflemen with some more armor. They can upgrade to get 4 Thompsons, and have 3 weapon slots, but the only ability they have is to throw a grenade.

TBH rangers are basically thompson paras who cost more. Slightly less dps for slightly more durability.
Both have nade, but thompson paras have much more(on field reinforcement by beacons, ability, less attrition, air support).
23 Oct 2015, 11:00 AM
#28
avatar of Kubelecer

Posts: 403

As long as usf doesn't have calliope, infantry commander will be always viable.
23 Oct 2015, 11:42 AM
#29
avatar of SpaceHamster
Patrion 14

Posts: 474

Rangers cost too much to be of any use. 400 MP for a squad that basically has airborne stats but are worse in almost every imaginable way? No thanks.

Maybe if they had something more than grenades I'd take them but with their current standing no.

Pershing is good though. Don't really care if it's not the damage sponge I needed it to be. As long as it can tank a few hits for jacksons to throw in shots without dying it's good in my book.

Plus, combined arms looks like the most useful ability in that commander. Will have to see how much of a buff that extra range, accuracy, and reload rate is ingame.
23 Oct 2015, 11:45 AM
#30
avatar of Qbix

Posts: 254

They put themselves in a dilemma situation by including both the Rangers and the Pershing in one Commander. Make them both useful and you could end up with a slightly overpowered doctrine.

Therefore I doubt the stats and properties we already know will change much for the better. Splitting them up into two Commanders would have allowed for a Pershing with some kind of Tiger status and Rangers with Shockrifle properties.
23 Oct 2015, 12:03 PM
#31
avatar of Cultist_kun

Posts: 295 | Subs: 1

I think allies can finally play with overpriced inf with overpriced upgrade, which not even close to be cost effective.

Hi Obersoldaten.
23 Oct 2015, 12:05 PM
#32
avatar of Jewdo

Posts: 271

I think allies can finally play with overpriced inf with overpriced upgrade, which not even close to be cost effective.

Hi Obersoldaten.


IS?..
23 Oct 2015, 12:40 PM
#33
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

I think allies can finally play with overpriced inf with overpriced upgrade, which not even close to be cost effective.

Hi Obersoldaten.


Good thing that obersoldaten are doctrinal unit that overlaps with another doctrinal unit that have more utility and can be replaced by stock main line infantry anyway.

Oh wait! Someone decided to completely ignore these things, because 'selective facts' based argument is best and most valid argument :sibHyena:
23 Oct 2015, 12:51 PM
#34
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

You have to imagine playing Rangers + smoke ability.

=> You smoke the area + you rush the area with your 4 Thompsons squad to bast anything in range.
23 Oct 2015, 12:56 PM
#35
avatar of Muxsus

Posts: 170

whatever, I'm just gonna continue using the more durable and powerful and cheaper commandos
23 Oct 2015, 12:58 PM
#36
avatar of Cultist_kun

Posts: 295 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Oct 2015, 12:40 PMKatitof


Good thing that obersoldaten are doctrinal unit that overlaps with another doctrinal unit that have more utility and can be replaced by stock main line infantry anyway.

Oh wait! Someone decided to completely ignore these things, because 'selective facts' based argument is best and most valid argument :sibHyena:


Since when "doctrinal" means "best and the most powerful"? Or probably you have to pay for obersoldaten more because their cost "include fact that they are non-doc unit". Or you think that its fine for unit to be overpriced crap because its stock unit and only doc units should be cost effective?

If unit if underperforming its underperforming and if its doctrinal or not its not an argument what so ever.

Only units from ambient building cost more then unit itself because of their deployment. Thats it.
23 Oct 2015, 13:02 PM
#37
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

You've changed the forum, but are equally dense as on the official one :snfBarton:

I could go on here about different armies, different unit relations and accessibility, but I'd be talking to a wall anyway.

You're trying to compare apples to oranges without even having a clue about any of them.
23 Oct 2015, 13:04 PM
#38
avatar of Kisiel
Benefactor 115

Posts: 90

Only units from ambient building cost more then unit itself because of their deployment. Thats it.


Units that are paradropped and the ones that come in a glider also cost more for thier deployment.
But I guess only allies have them :snfPeter:
23 Oct 2015, 13:06 PM
#39
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Oct 2015, 13:04 PMKisiel


Units that are paradropped and the ones that come in a glider also cost more for thier deployment.
But I guess only allies have them :snfPeter:

He wouldn't know :snfPeter:
He'll make friends quickly with other one army heroes who never played other side here, because thats how former official forum acolytes roll :snfPeter:
23 Oct 2015, 13:21 PM
#40
avatar of AngryKitten465

Posts: 473

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post23 Oct 2015, 12:51 PMEsxile
You have to imagine playing Rangers + smoke ability.

=> You smoke the area + you rush the area with your 4 Thompsons squad to bast anything in range.


And you suddenly encounter STG 44 Obers or triple lmg 42 Grens. Good luck with that.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

572 users are online: 1 member and 571 guests
Valeran
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49184
Welcome our newest member, Eastman04
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM