Feedback for Commander Revamppatch

Or, here's a crazy idea... make all 221s/222s ACTUALLY ARMORED like EVERY other "armored car" in the entire game.

But no, it's only Allies who get to drive around and into melee range of enemy infantry and instawipe them as long as there's no AT on the field. Why should all factions have the same threat and lethality? Clearly, all those Axis players don't deserve to pose a real threat.

M20.

Show Spoiler

Or, here's a crazy idea... make all 221s/222s ACTUALLY ARMORED like EVERY other "armored car" in the entire game.

Make them also over 40 fuel and make sure they won't appear before 2CP too, right?

But no, it's only Allies who get to drive around and into melee range of enemy infantry and instawipe them as long as there's no AT on the field. Why should all factions have the same threat and lethality? Clearly, all those Axis players don't deserve to pose a real threat.

I assume you aren't aware of existence of FHT?

Make them also over 40 fuel and make sure they won't appear before 2CP too, right?

Again, price literally means nothing. You can pay any price as long as you save up for it. The objectively unbalanced aspect of 222s is that they take damage from bullets. Less now, but they still get demolished by machine guns.

Meanwhile, Allied light armor gets to literally drive into your base, stand there and murder every single unit you have, and there is absolutely nothing you can do until you can bring out some kind of AT weapon. That is a HUGE THREAT to Axis players that Allied players absolutely never experience.

I assume you aren't aware of existence of FHT?

The OKW Flak Half-track? Yes, it's armored. It's part of the "EVERY other armored car in the entire game" that I mentioned. Which is why all 221s/222s taking bullet damage while being "armored cars" makes absolutely no sense.

What is so hard to understand about this whole scenario?

Being able to bring out vehicles that are COMPLETELY IMMUNE to bullet damage at a time in the match when literally not a single unit has any anti-tank damage capability on the field is an enormous, cataclysmic threat. It allows a single armored car or light tank to completely wipe the entire map clean of every single enemy infantry squad and lets the player take every single control point while the opponent sits in base waiting for an AT weapon.

And even when said AT weapon arrives, you can only barely claw back a single victory and fuel point with it, since bullet-immune armored cars and light tanks are fast and can patrol the entire map in no time at all, denying enemy infantry access to literally every other area not covered by an AT weapon while constantly devouring enemy munitions and being repaired over and over, then rinsing and repeating.

Do people just not understand the dynamics of the game? OKW has Raketenwerfers that can't be built early because you have to build enough infantry to hold ground, and Ostheer has absolutely no AT early. Meanwhile, every single Allied faction has handheld AT that allows all infantry units to be universal anti-infantry and anti-tank powerhouses that are never threatened by anything.

Making 221s/222s actually armored would be a tiny step in the direction of fixing this blatant imbalance.

Again, price literally means nothing. You can pay any price as long as you save up for it. The objectively unbalanced aspect of 222s is that they take damage from bullets. Less now, but they still get demolished by machine guns.

Meanwhile, Allied light armor gets to literally drive into your base, stand there and murder every single unit you have, and there is absolutely nothing you can do until you can bring out some kind of AT weapon. That is a HUGE THREAT to Axis players that Allied players absolutely never experience.



The OKW Flak Half-track? Yes, it's armored. It's part of the "EVERY other armored car in the entire game" that I mentioned. Which is why all 221s/222s taking bullet damage while being "armored cars" makes absolutely no sense.

What is so hard to understand about this whole scenario?

Being able to bring out vehicles that are COMPLETELY IMMUNE to bullet damage at a time in the match when literally not a single unit has any anti-tank damage capability on the field is an enormous, cataclysmic threat. It allows a single armored car or light tank to completely wipe the entire map clean of every single enemy infantry squad and lets the player take every single control point while the opponent sits in base waiting for an AT weapon.

And even when said AT weapon arrives, you can only barely claw back a single victory and fuel point with it, since bullet-immune armored cars and light tanks are fast and can patrol the entire map in no time at all, denying enemy infantry access to literally every other area not covered by an AT weapon while constantly devouring enemy munitions and being repaired over and over, then rinsing and repeating.

Do people just not understand the dynamics of the game? OKW has Raketenwerfers that can't be built early because you have to build enough infantry to hold ground, and Ostheer has absolutely no AT early. Meanwhile, every single Allied faction has handheld AT that allows all infantry units to be universal anti-infantry and anti-tank powerhouses that are never threatened by anything.

Making 221s/222s actually armored would be a tiny step in the direction of fixing this blatant imbalance.

Do you not know what a faust is?

Do you not know what a faust is?

He likely wastes his munitions on desperation rifle grenades, it seems like it's very easy to basepin this guy, leave him without resources and thinking the Germans are underpowered.

Stormtroopers can literally turn invisible. Have fun not taking advantage of one of two units that have this extremely potent ability. They also get an ability that improves their dps output by a ton. Definitely useless, especially with useless camouflage that only lets you infiltrate behind enemy lines completely undetected. But of course you’re right, -10% RA is much much much better than that.


Hey that’s mean. Don’t make fun of people who can’t do basic math.

Quote me saying they are useless..remove the bias all over your face and maybe you can properly read a post before answering.

Point is they overlap with panzergrens with very minor differences, like it or not they are cqb units at the end of the day.

Point is they overlap with panzergrens with very minor differences, like it or not they are cqb units at the end of the day.

The new Stormtroopers are indeed CQC units.

Panzergrenadiers aren't. They're midrangers like Penals.

The new Stormtroopers are indeed CQC units.

Panzergrenadiers aren't. They're midrangers like Penals.

Their dps curve is slighly different, but they are still cqb units and really pay their price when used as cqb troops.

Hell they technically ARE ambush units that require smoke or sightblockers to avoid being countered by mainlines with upgrades, trading camo for better dps curve.

Pretending that BOTH can have a role in your build order at the same time is nonsense. One is going to be the top dog, the other a waste of a slot (or half), period.

I don't agree.

Panzergrenadiers are good at mid-range cover fights.

Stormtroopers are not good at mid-range cover fights, but they can cloak and ambush like Commandos.

Their dps curve is slighly different, but they are still cqb units and really pay their price when used as cqb troops.

Hell they technically ARE ambush units that require smoke or sightblockers to avoid being countered by mainlines with upgrades, trading camo for better dps curve.

Pretending that BOTH can have a role in your build order at the same time is nonsense. One is going to be the top dog, the other a waste of a slot (or half), period.

That's like saying BAR rifles serve the same role and overlap with thompson paras/rangers.

Its plain wrong.

Yeah, I'd agree there is some overlap between pgrens and storms. That said, the new storms are much more effective at CQC than pgrens, considering:

- They have ~15% more dps at near range. (Pgrens overtake them rapidly at around 14 range.)
- They have double the near range at 10 vs pgrens' 5.
- They have a lower base received accuracy at 0,75 vs pgrens' 0,8 (difference becomes 0,03 at vet 3).
- They get commando camouflage and smoke nades.
- They cost 1 less popcap and take 33mp to reinforce vs pgrens' 37mp (= less bleed).

Pgrens do get a bit better supportive role now, with their repairing and mark target (for infantry doc), but I'm not sure yet if this justifies getting both. You could get storms as a pure ambush unit and to spam booby traps, while getting pgrens as a midrange support unit to fend off CQC units or to upgrade with shrecks. I'd probably choose only one or the other, based on my most pressing needs.

That's like saying BAR rifles serve the same role and overlap with thompson paras/rangers.

Its plain wrong.

Absolutely wrong, rifles cost much less and are much less effective in dealing dps. They get a snare and mainline arrives much faster and reinforce is cheaper.
Both panzergrens and sturm are cqb 4 men AI focused infantry with relatively high reinforce cost that comes around the same time.

I'd probably choose only one or the other, based on my most pressing needs.

More likely that the meta will stick with one or the other, and leave the other.

Sturmtruppen perfectly makes sense in a doctrine that DOES NOT upgrade the AI capabilities of non doc infantry.

More likely that the meta will stick with one or the other, and leave the other.

Sturmpioneers perfectly makes sense in a doctrine that DOES NOT upgrade the AI capabilities of non doc infantry.

1 of each will be strong.
Storms for CQC, PGs to help pios with repairs and do I really need to remind benefits of 5 man shreck squad?

1 of each will be strong.
Storms for CQC, PGs to help pios with repairs and do I really need to remind benefits of 5 man shreck squad?

Pgrens (and storms) can't be upgraded with a 5th man, only grens and pio's.

Pgrens (and storms) can't be upgraded with a 5th man, only grens and pio's.

Ah right, I made a dumb.
Gonna blame it on bad sleep and lack of coffee again.
Would be op if they could..

Honestly, I think I'd just get an extra pio + gren squad if I already have storms. That seems more efficient than getting a second CQC squad. Also, the last thing I need is a 340mp unit to repair 45% slower than a 5 man pio squad (but it's a nice extra if you don't get the storms).

But then again: I'm not sure yet. Maybe the extra utility does make it worth getting both.

1 of each will be strong.
Storms for CQC, PGs to help pios with repairs and do I really need to remind benefits of 5 man shreck squad?

That alone says how much you actually checked the patch.
Arguing for the sake of being a keyboard warrior.

Oh yeah """typo""" or what this time again ?

Honestly, I think I'd just get an extra pio + gren squad if I already have storms. That seems more efficient than getting a second CQC squad. Also, the last thing I need is a 340mp unit to repair 45% slower than a 5 man pio squad (but it's a nice extra if you don't get the storms).

But then again: I'm not sure yet. Maybe the extra utility does make it worth getting both.

Nobody knows already how meta for this doctrine will set, but putting two doctrinal units (sturm and upgraded panzergren) both CLEARLY AI focused, is bad design IMHO.

Different would have been if the upgrade emphasized the at role of Panzergrens (something like super bazooka upgrade PARA for recon USF doctrine), rather than cqbish role. Then sturm could take their role of cqb ai.

Airborne Paratroopers can get ELITE Bazookas from the weapon racks, all the Package gives them is stealth to first strike enemy armor, nothing else.