I know that this commander was recently revamped but i felt from the beginning that something was very odd.
I am talking about the Howitzer, this unit does not fit at all in this commander.
Suggestions instead of the Howitzer: Tank traps, armoured vehicle detection, M42 light AT gun.
I know its only one ability but isn't it the point to use all 5 of the commander?
I am not convinced that players use the Howitzer when they use this commander.
And i know this commanders was already revamped but my suggestion is a small one so this could be done easily on the next patch.
What do you think, is it a good suggestion? Do you have other ones for his ability?
Lets chat
Tank Hunter tactics suggestion!
18 Jul 2018, 12:58 PM
#1
Posts: 1355
18 Jul 2018, 13:28 PM
#2
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I know that this commander was recently revamped ...
Ml20 does not fit theme of the commander at all. Strong AI abilities do not fit a Tank hunter commander theme.
Mark vehicles make more sense to me although the combination with AT bombing will probably be too much.
(At bombing should also be looked at since it too effective vs OKW tucks and has allot of AI. Bombs should probably do little damage to targets other than vehicles)
Actually there are a number of issues with the revamp of the commander Imo.
For instance PTRS conscripts is one of the most cost efficient AT infantry basically because they overlaps with PTRS Penals. Imo a better solution would be to move everything available to PTRS Conscripts as an extra upgrade to PTRS Penals instead.
The camouflage is too low CP and it if far more effective for increasing T-70/T-34 AI than increasing the AT of SU-76/Su-85. Imo a better solution would be to be available only for SU-76/SU-85 and to actually increase their rotation instead of decreasing it.
PMD AT mines could easily be combined with tank traps, the scavenger ability could easily make it back in the commander with a few tweaks.
18 Jul 2018, 14:14 PM
#3
Posts: 3260
The reasoning behind putting the ML-20 in Tank Hunter was that the redesign is based around ambushing tanks: you use mines and cloaked units to create traps.
A trap needs bait.
A trap needs bait.
18 Jul 2018, 14:20 PM
#4
Posts: 1355
The reasoning behind putting the ML-20 in Tank Hunter was that the redesign is based around ambushing tanks: you use mines and cloaked units to create traps.
A trap needs bait.
As an idea this sound good but would you build an expensive unit mainly for bait?
18 Jul 2018, 14:22 PM
#5
Posts: 3260
It's still a howitzer. Either they come at it and into your traps, or they don't attack your howitzer. Both are good outcomes.
18 Jul 2018, 14:25 PM
#6
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
It's still a howitzer. Either they come at it and into your traps, or they don't attack your howitzer. Both are good outcomes.
Or simply use counter fire with artillery and not risk their tanks
Or simply use an off map and not risk their tanks
Justifying the Ml20 as bait holds little water as an argument.
Imo strong AI abilities have little place in an AT themed commanders. (and that includes Elephant and stuka and ISU-152 and IL-2 bombing)
18 Jul 2018, 14:33 PM
#7
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
I don't know why they scrapped replacing ML-20 with B4 in the last patch. I mean nobody ever uses the vehicle direct fire ability unless they are trolling (usually) but at least it would make sense. Plus I hate abilities that are only available in one commander - IMO every ability should be in at least 2 commanders.
18 Jul 2018, 14:44 PM
#8
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
ML20 is a non issue...the doctrine sees very little play anyways. If you make it even worse it will become complete garbage. ML20 offers a bit of AI firepower, but that´s badly needed because as said before the doctrine has no other AI tools to it. Maybe the howi could be replaced by T34/85 or KV 1/2/8 so it suits the "tank" theme a bit better while keeping an AI option in the doctrine.
18 Jul 2018, 15:53 PM
#9
Posts: 3260
I don't know why they scrapped replacing ML-20 with B4 in the last patch. I mean nobody ever uses the vehicle direct fire ability unless they are trolling (usually) but at least it would make sense. Plus I hate abilities that are only available in one commander - IMO every ability should be in at least 2 commanders.
Mostly because the B4 is garbage. Otherwise yes, it'd be a good fit.
19 Jul 2018, 10:30 AM
#11
Posts: 26
Or.. make it have ability to be a poor man Pak 43 (or 17pdr)
without the world piercing or at least special ability to the commander that the ML-20 able to have direct fire mode (just like the B-4 but reduce damage but quicker recharge) it fit the theme of the soviet and also fits the commander itself...
and for the balance purpose i think the ability is locked ONLY for this commander
or replace it with ISU 152 for more fit and easy way to add~
imo~
without the world piercing or at least special ability to the commander that the ML-20 able to have direct fire mode (just like the B-4 but reduce damage but quicker recharge) it fit the theme of the soviet and also fits the commander itself...
and for the balance purpose i think the ability is locked ONLY for this commander
or replace it with ISU 152 for more fit and easy way to add~
imo~
PAGES (1)
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
22 | |||||
897 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.1109614.644+10
- 4.608220.734+2
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.261137.656+2
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
VS
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1235
Board Info
840 users are online:
840 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49113
Welcome our newest member, Dedek545
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Dedek545
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM