How to nerf Mobile Defense without it becoming CAS

Btw about mobile defend always meta.
That is not true. Like when ppsh cons spam worked very well or Lendlease there was not every game mobible defend.

It changed back to mobile defend, because other soviets strategies got nerfed. Like rushing m4c shermans or just spam 6 cosn with ppsh vs wehrmacht ( where axis had to get g32 to counter it / hold in)
But now after all this nerfs, t70 is the way to rule again
--> Puma is great vs t70.

Yeah, mid game rushes being effectively removed from the game definitely added to the fact that soviets need light vehicle rush every single game, its either that or guard spam.

The puma is a completely reasonable and balanced unit. It's a light vehicle killer; if you don't want to fight the puma don't go light vehicles. There is really no hardcounter to the t-70 right now unless they hit a teller mine. You are pretty much never going to get 3 pak shots off on a t-70 unless the opponent completely fucks up.

Command p4 needs to be put in t3. That's all the doctrine needs.

Mobile Defence has always been in the bar for the Panic Puma: it was the Comeback Commander if you got stuck in T2. It was previously considered a tradeoff: you got the Puma but gave up powerful tools from other doctrines.

It's only in the late DBP meta that it overtook the various Tiger commanders as a late-game commander choice and became the go-to for all situations.

Command p4 needs to be put in t3. That's all the doctrine needs.

That'd hurt the other Command Tank doctrines, and they don't need hurting.

Maybe replace the Command Tank in Mobile Defence with something else? Tactical Movement would be thematically appropriate. Or swap Panzer Tactician for the smoke plane so the light vehicles are less survivable?

The puma is a completely reasonable and balanced unit. It's a light vehicle killer; if you don't want to fight the puma don't go light vehicles. There is really no hardcounter to the t-70 right now unless they hit a teller mine. You are pretty much never going to get 3 pak shots off on a t-70 unless the opponent completely fucks up.

Command p4 needs to be put in t3. That's all the doctrine needs.

C p. is also available to other commander it should not be nerf more just because it in M.Defense. The commander should be redesign and the C. P4 removed from the commander since it has both AI and AT vehicle call-ins.

It the same story with Elephant and stuka dive bomb that should not exist in the same commander.

Mobile Defense is one of the few functional commanders in this game.

It augments the core faction in very meaningful and supplemental ways. It counters specific stock allied strategies.

Just because theres not a large community of people trying new strategies to keep the metagame fluid doesn't mean that the existing metagame is wrong or even problematic.

Because what, are we looking at a situation where light vehicle rushes are a problem for axis or that having light vehicle rushes countered a problem for allies?

and what if i want to go t4? Command p4 shouldn't be tied to tech becouse it blocks diversity.

Puma idea on the other hand... Is it even possible to add delay to unit in tier sturcture with 0CP requirement?

Are you aware that most players that go Mobile Defense dont tech?

In my opinion you are all proposing things that are hard to implement and without proper testing that could go really wrong and in my experience those kind of things went really wrong with patches.
People go Mobile Defense because they dont have to tech. The enemy has to tech to get the light/medium vehicle. That puts you in a super big advantage. The solution is quite rather simple, lock the vehicles behind tech. Puma in t2, Command p4 in t3. People will move on and will try to find another form of call in meta till there is no more.

Mobile Defense is one of the few functional commanders in this game.

It augments the core faction in very meaningful and supplemental ways. It counters specific stock allied strategies.

Just because theres not a large community of people trying new strategies to keep the metagame fluid doesn't mean that the existing metagame is wrong or even problematic.

Because what, are we looking at a situation where light vehicle rushes are a problem for axis or that having light vehicle rushes countered a problem for allies?

Can´t agree. It´s super boring to watch every Ost player go for Mobile Defense every game. Can only hope that the bad results Ostheer had in the 2nd GCS qualifier will make people turn away from mobile defense and experiment with other doctrines.

It´s a lot like Lend Lease, it was almost unbeatable at first but after a while people figured out ways to beat it and in the end it wasn´t even that good anymore. Same happens right now with Mobile Defense IMO.

Are you aware that most players that go Mobile Defense dont tech?

In my opinion you are all proposing things that are hard to implement and without proper testing that could go really wrong and in my experience those kind of things went really wrong with patches.
People go Mobile Defense because they dont have to tech. The enemy has to tech to get the light/medium vehicle. That puts you in a super big advantage. The solution is quite rather simple, lock the vehicles behind tech. Puma in t2, Command p4 in t3. People will move on and will try to find another form of call in meta till there is no more.

That's some forward thinking right there. I think the more changes that are made to the game to limit people from playing "wrong" they certainly will be inclined to move on.

Do people not realize that Mobile Defense loses games too? Not teching and spending all your fuel on command p4s and pumas puts ostheer at a heavy disadvantage if they end up needing those tech units.

I have been seeing many games where Mobile Defense backfires and that's not a bad thing for gameplay or the perceived meta.

Can´t agree. It´s super boring to watch every Ost player go for Mobile Defense every game. Can only hope that the bad results Ostheer had in the 2nd GCS qualifier will make people turn away from mobile defense and experiment with other doctrines.

See, it may be boring to watch because yeah, VonIvan did just do the Mobile Defense thing every game. But that spurred on what you describe in your second paragraph :

It´s a lot like Lend Lease, it was almost unbeatable at first but after a while people figured out ways to beat it and in the end it wasn´t even that good anymore. Same happens right now with Mobile Defense IMO.

What you're describing is the process of a metagame trying to be dynamic and survive. It takes players trying to innovate.

Watching a streamer go mobile defense day in and day out is boring. But that's not playing coh2.

Just fucking remove the smoke its really not hard, if ur gonna all brain delay over which part of tech to put it in just get rid of the smoke instead so Puma and P4 are actually killable and you can punish the gorms who pick the commander

Are you aware that most players that go Mobile Defense dont tech?


People go Mobile Defense because they dont have to tech. The enemy has to tech to get the light/medium vehicle. That puts you in a super big advantage. The solution is quite rather simple, lock the vehicles behind tech. Puma in t2, Command p4 in t3. People will move on and will try to find another form of call in meta till there is no more.

Uhm, well, in the case of the Puma this will hardly make any difference. According to my replay analysis tool so far there was no instance in GCS2 where a Puma was called in before T2 was up.

Besides, I think call-ins should be a situational alternative to teching. It only becomes a problem if it turns out to be the go-to solution...

Uhm, well, in the case of the Puma this will hardly make any difference. According to my replay analysis tool so far there was no instance in GCS2 where a Puma was called in before T2 was up.

Besides, I think call-ins should be a situational alternative to teching. It only becomes a problem if it turns out to be the go-to solution...

T2 will be always up because light vehicles (222 and flame halftrack 251) are part of the Mobile Defense strat. Puting it in t2, in my opinion, will be the easiest and less impactful way to "stop" it a little bit. I think the command tank also has a big role here since its a medium tank that requires no tech (it could be compared with ostwind when it was a call in)

OP: CAS died because resource manipulation as a whole was removed. It was not about offmap air support and more about spamming LMG early on.

First of all, the current Mobile defense meta is a combination of historical factors.

1-Call in vehicles are always gonna have a root issue. They are able to skip tech and in a lesser way, they overcome build time construction.

2-Historical OH weakness to light vehicles (which had constantly been nerf).

In case of mobile defense, the biggest issue are not the units themselves, rather than the combination of those units in the same commander AKA having the Puma PLUS a medium tank (more like an Ostwind lite). <Option A> Removing CPIV from the commander.

People saying that not teching and it later backfiring the player been an issue does not remember that the same logic happened with T3485s and more recently with OKW Ostwind.
<Option B> Making CPIV require some level of tech (BP2?).

Slightly improve OH options early on against light vehicles so there's less reliance on panic Puma while not been as strong as an option as the PUMA.
<Option C> This one is more varied as there are a couple of ways to tackle it down.
-You could think about re introducing the 221 as basically the current 222 AI wise and make it so that the 222 is a bit more focused on light AT and not as vulnerable to small arm fire.
-Make PG a bit more popular. Make them slightly cheaper and make them start with 2 STGs. Not sure this could be approved as a design philosophy, but other 2 STGs could cost manpower or a combination with muni (over reliance of OH early on muni). Schrecks could be bought one by one instead of bundle.
-T2 doesn't require BP1 to be built but it only gives access to either 221/Pak and PGs. 222/Pak/251 HT would require BP1.

The playing style of top players is very different from the remaining 95%. As an example, the strengths of the Mobile Defense can only be exploited if you have excellent mirco(like vonivan). I'm sure most players don't have such a micro and will never have one. Should you customize a game just for a handful of players, or the big crowd? I hope Relic will use internal statistics to meet the needs of a wide range of players. Mobile Defense is really just one example, you can extend it to all other things. As long as a unit or a commander is not completely out of line in statistics, it should be kept. The needs of top players are not always those of all others.

Mobile Defense is one of the few functional commanders in this game.

It augments the core faction in very meaningful and supplemental ways. It counters specific stock allied strategies.

Just because theres not a large community of people trying new strategies to keep the metagame fluid doesn't mean that the existing metagame is wrong or even problematic.

Because what, are we looking at a situation where light vehicle rushes are a problem for axis or that having light vehicle rushes countered a problem for allies?

You know, its quite hard to come up with new strats, when balance moders make sure the moment you do something new, its slaughtered by nerf bat, because new = op.

Heavy tanks could be best example here, they used to be dominant meta, sure, but nowadays there is no single situation where 1 heavy would be better or even comparable to 2 meds for effectiveness.

USF is pidgeonholed into 2 strats, both resolve around light vehicle rush, UKF got only single BO and they still are slaughtered, the moment you do anything else, you failed because anything else was nerfed out of the game.

OKW, same as USF.

Sov and wehr have most freedom here, because they both are generalist armies who do not have and massive holes in their armies and are not balanced around gimmicks.

make comp4 buildable in tier 3 n tier 4 is the only way to nerf. since counterattack is a skill. sticking puma to tier 2 is not a good choice to nerf it cuz it can make pumas come out faster (although it comes out fast now). ostruppen:no way to nerf it except its pop.

sticking puma to tier 2 is not a good choice to nerf it cuz it can make pumas come out faster (although it comes out fast now)

Puma would still need 5cp to be unlocked so it wouldn't come out faster. It'd actually be delayed because of a build time. But I don't think it makes any sense to tie it to T2 because that will likely be up anyway.

C p. is also available to other commander it should not be nerf more just because it in M.Defense. The commander should be redesign and the C. P4 removed from the commander since it has both AI and AT vehicle call-ins.

It the same story with Elephant and stuka dive bomb that should not exist in the same commander.

What about ISU, guards and IL-2 bombing strafe? KV-1, ml-20, guards and il-2 strafe in guard combine commnader? Are they fine? becouse i don't think so

What about ISU, guards and IL-2 bombing strafe? KV-1, ml-20, guards and il-2 strafe in guard combine commnader? Are they fine? becouse i don't think so

No they are not.

Super heavy calling should not be combined with strong off maps or weapons upgrades for infantry.

Will post about when I can.

Maybe we should ban the doctrine in competitions to see if Ost players come up with another strategy or their winrate suffers drastically.