Login

russian armor

Airborne.

31 May 2017, 02:08 AM
#21
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

-Pathfinders need to be less of a Manpower sink!
-Paras are fine, but I wouldn't mind a CP reduction, 2CP
-Weapon drops to Muni costs, to reduce MP usage of the commander
-P47s increased lethality buffs

Yes
Yes
But p47s are really lethal when they hit something. They just need way more consistency, so less width between the rockets. Mostly they are bad because they miss their rockets on both sides of the target almost all the time.
31 May 2017, 03:39 AM
#22
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

-Pathfinders need to be less of a Manpower sink!
-Paras are fine, but I wouldn't mind a CP reduction, 2CP
-Weapon drops to Muni costs, to reduce MP usage of the commander
-P47s increased lethality buffs


2 CP Elite infantry with 2x M1919 or 6 thompsons making it the absolute highest DPS squad in the game in CQC. No thank you. That'd be around the level of current panzerfusiliers. I.e. if I decide to spam them and upgrade them all I win all infantry engagments.
31 May 2017, 03:42 AM
#23
avatar of ClassyDavid

Posts: 424 | Subs: 2



2 CP Elite infantry with 2x M1919 or 6 thompsons making it the absolute highest DPS squad in the game in CQC. No thank you.


That are extremely expensive in MP and munitions costs not to mention their durability is poor in terms of having 1.0 received accuracy. Reason why paratroopers can be bleed quite badly is due to that poor RA. I'm not saying they could be 2 CP either but it could be tested.
31 May 2017, 04:12 AM
#24
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



2 CP Elite infantry with 2x M1919 or 6 thompsons making it the absolute highest DPS squad in the game in CQC. No thank you. That'd be around the level of current panzerfusiliers. I.e. if I decide to spam them and upgrade them all I win all infantry engagments.


Compare costs between Paratroopers and Panzerfusiliers, also they only get 4 Thompsons as 2 models maintain their M1 Carbines, you can't spam Paratroopers... Most people who even use them field at most 2, one of each, most of the time.
31 May 2017, 04:27 AM
#25
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4



Compare costs between Paratroopers and Panzerfusiliers, also they only get 4 Thompsons as 2 models maintain their M1 Carbines, you can't spam Paratroopers... Most people who even use them field at most 2, one of each, most of the time.


Currently yes you cannot spam them because they arrive at 3 CPs which is fairly late to rely on for backbone infantry. Also at 380MP they're expensive however only cost 28 to reinforce, same as rifles. It's like calling in an Obersoldaten squad at 2 CPs with lower reinforce cost and better durability since they have 6 men. I think the doctrine needs a little push in the right direction, mainly the p47s and the support drops but paras are pretty alright. They can even be equipped map situationally which is something obers do not have the luxury of doing without spec ops.
31 May 2017, 05:28 AM
#26
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



Currently yes you cannot spam them because they arrive at 3 CPs which is fairly late to rely on for backbone infantry. Also at 380MP they're expensive however only cost 28 to reinforce, same as rifles. It's like calling in an Obersoldaten squad at 2 CPs with lower reinforce cost and better durability since they have 6 men. I think the doctrine needs a little push in the right direction, mainly the p47s and the support drops but paras are pretty alright. They can even be equipped map situationally which is something obers do not have the luxury of doing without spec ops.


Dropping in blind is a huge gamble, you might end up losing quite a few models or landing on top of enemy units that can get free shots at your squad, but yes they are pretty fine for elite infantry that is fun to use.
The rest of the Commander however could use some help though.
31 May 2017, 05:42 AM
#27
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053



Currently yes you cannot spam them because they arrive at 3 CPs which is fairly late to rely on for backbone infantry. Also at 380MP they're expensive however only cost 28 to reinforce, same as rifles. It's like calling in an Obersoldaten squad at 2 CPs with lower reinforce cost and better durability since they have 6 men. I think the doctrine needs a little push in the right direction, mainly the p47s and the support drops but paras are pretty alright. They can even be equipped map situationally which is something obers do not have the luxury of doing without spec ops.

Have fun trying to hold out with like 2 rifles or rear echelons till 2cp. Okw can get away with it because they can either kubelspam until they hit 2cp, or mix volks and pfusies because they are both cheap and cost effective, and okw is strong late game. Nonetheless, I still believe that paras need to be 3cp, because they are on a higher tier than pfusies or jaegers. About that last point, obers are nondoc, so it's kind of an unfair comparison.
31 May 2017, 06:27 AM
#28
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



Currently yes you cannot spam them because they arrive at 3 CPs which is fairly late to rely on for backbone infantry. Also at 380MP they're expensive however only cost 28 to reinforce, same as rifles. It's like calling in an Obersoldaten squad at 2 CPs with lower reinforce cost and better durability since they have 6 men. I think the doctrine needs a little push in the right direction, mainly the p47s and the support drops but paras are pretty alright. They can even be equipped map situationally which is something obers do not have the luxury of doing without spec ops.


Para doctrine should be a early-middle game doctrine because there is nothing left late game in it. The P47 can be buff as you which, unless you make it OP it will always only be a stop-gap.

Currently the doctrine is inexistant early on and half viable mid-game. We say Para need to come earlier but we didn't say Para+LMG need to come earlier. LMG could be stick to tiering or unlocking weapon rack.
Except for the P47, everything should come 1cp earlier in it, actually it is faster to tech than getting CP4 for that damned Atgun.
31 May 2017, 06:29 AM
#29
avatar of ruzen
Patrion 15

Posts: 243

:romeoHype: wow clearly I didn't know about that minimap. Going to try that sometime.

...but I don't understand how people say It's manpower sink. They are pretty good. They can counter obersoldaten or fallshims IF you use them correctly. Both units are absolutely doing their job fantastically IF you use them correctly and their cost isn't high at all. People trying to replace them as front line army idk?
31 May 2017, 09:31 AM
#30
avatar of Hater

Posts: 493

P47 works worse than Stuka support (mb feels so because of worse allied armor) and costs too much for just a deterrent (can kill something only if you forget a unit in it's area - stuka kills jackson in one strafe).
31 May 2017, 13:37 PM
#31
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954



This problem with rifles is actually the result the delay in weapon teams. If the M2B HMG was not locked behind a 50 fuel upgrade/60 second, this can also be described volks and OKW just with a longer deploy time. With weapon teams more accessible it will help increase the need of elite inf along with reducing blobbing.



In related to the poll I voted Abstain due to the lack of an option of "rework." (Different than buffing) I have created mods that involved changing the MG drop to 75 Mun, and AT Gun to 100. Additionally replacing the JU 87 and P47 Loiters with strafes. (AT loiters are on the strong side.) The P47 strafe width is changed from 10 units to 4ish. Paths, I adjust the reinforce cost for now from 37 to 30 that may be enough for now.


Mostly this. Also:
Lower CP of Paras to 2 from 3 (usually have 3 rifles before 3cp)

Modify Pathfinders (no need for 2 "elite" infantry in one Commander) My suggestion:
Change initial cost to 260
Allow either infiltration or stealth like OST sniper
Change pop cap of Pathfinders to 1/model (from 2)
Allow them to plant mines and booby traps (no demos or people will whine hard)
Allow only one weapon upgrade (RIP barfinders)
31 May 2017, 14:13 PM
#32
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post31 May 2017, 13:37 PMGrumpy


Mostly this. Also:
Lower CP of Paras to 2 from 3 (usually have 3 rifles before 3cp)

Modify Pathfinders (no need for 2 "elite" infantry in one Commander) My suggestion:
Change initial cost to 260
Allow either infiltration or stealth like OST sniper
Change pop cap of Pathfinders to 1/model (from 2)
Allow them to plant mines and booby traps (no demos or people will whine hard)
Allow only one weapon upgrade (RIP barfinders)

You know, I do like that idea about paths. 1 pop/model (and lowering reinforce cost) is a no brained, but I like the idea of planting mines and stuff. They already do get improved camo at vet3. I don't remember if it's like the soviet sniper camo or the ost sniper camo tho.

I'm kind of on the fence about paras being 2 or 3 cp now. 2cp would definitely make them more viable, and a player who forgoes rifles will be shooting themself in the foot in the early game, and will not have smoke or snares. The weapon upgrades could, if possible be locked behind one additional cp or tech if paras are 2cp. This is considering that rangers are actually way more durable than paras too, since that means they would come a cp later.
31 May 2017, 16:42 PM
#33
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

i always wonder why usf dont have commnder something like wermaht cas. Okw is
somehow historical with all that AA options but usf ? They dominante air right ? So where is commander with only off maps like CAS or that second one forget his name
1 Jun 2017, 00:41 AM
#34
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

i always wonder why usf dont have commnder something like wermaht cas. Okw is
somehow historical with all that AA options but usf ? They dominante air right ? So where is commander with only off maps like CAS or that second one forget his name

Yeah it'd be cool if airborne got a muni drop instead of one of he paradrops, and had both the at gun drop and mg drop consolidated into one cp requirement/ability given to paths, and p47 was made a strafe. That'd be my dream situation, and probably pretty balanced as well.
1 Jun 2017, 00:44 AM
#35
avatar of stalinqtxoxo420mlg

Posts: 54

rebuff the p47 attack, make pathfinders on-par with JLI and the doctrine's fixed
1 Jun 2017, 05:55 AM
#36
avatar of GhostTX

Posts: 315


Yes
Yes
But p47s are really lethal when they hit something. They just need way more consistency, so less width between the rockets. Mostly they are bad because they miss their rockets on both sides of the target almost all the time.

And bring back self-scouting, too. Lord knows Axis gets more free scouting than I can count.
1 Jun 2017, 06:48 AM
#37
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

Today I learned that P47 is sucky.

I still have the images in my head from WFA release where P47 was the ability that killed everything in its circle in seconds. That's why I never even tried to test it out how strong it is currently. If I hear those planes and see the red circle on the map, I am going to evacuate as fast as possible.

Times seem to have changed.
1 Jun 2017, 14:07 PM
#38
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053


And bring back self-scouting, too. Lord knows Axis gets more free scouting than I can count.

I think they do self scout. Their circle is just so tiny that by the time that enemy tanks are outside your line of sight, they're already outside the ability's zone.
1 Jun 2017, 14:32 PM
#39
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1

While I agree that Paras are the highlight of the doctrine currently and are in a good spot I always am perplexed at their performance compared to Rangers who for 40 extra MP get .8 RA and an extra weapon slot whereas Paratroopers only get super niche stuff that you don't see utilized all that often (Drop-In, Beacon Synergy, Timed Demo) - so in most cases Rangers are almost always a better choice unless you're in a LMG favored map like Crossroads. In addition to making Pathfinders more viable it might be nice if REs could construct beacons as well so that Paratroopers can be further incentivized over Rangers by more easily making use of the Paratrooper unique abilities. Additionally maybe Beacons could be used as Forward Retreat Points as an upgrade? - They are super fragile so it wouldn't be that OP I think.
1 Jun 2017, 14:36 PM
#40
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

P47 can´t hit mediums and its targeting is pathetic. Needs to be able to hit mediums reliably.
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

573 users are online: 573 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM