Tactical support company

This thing.

It was what i remember decent commander at least for 2v2s and bigger team games, but i have not seen it in a long time. Calliope nerfs limited its usefulness and other abilities do not perform well.

It did not make it to the current commander revamp, but i'd like to discuss how it could be made better in future perhaps.

Calliope might need some buffs for its effectiveness. Im fine with its health nerf, as 640 hp rocket launcher was pain to destroy.

M1919 is decent, but i think it would be better if it was merged with infantry field defenses. It would allow extra utility to company, free up slot in infantry company to have something new there and heavy cavalry could have lmg rangers as new thing. I can see it being maybe bit too radical change but what do you think.

Recon flight and 50 cal strafe are decent in themselves but i think strafe's cost/ time to arrive makes it hard to utilize. I do like the fact that it is capable of killing light vehicles, but there are more cheaper ways to do it. Id say small cost decrease would work, or potentially change it into rocket strafe that is targeted like the current strafe.

for m5 i can't say how it could be better. I do like choice of mobile reinforce platform and the quads are decent, but there is already aa halftrack in lieutant tech and the cp causes it to come sometimes bit late. Possibly if it was tied to either captain or lieutant tech or to both.

Tell me your ideas or how mine could be improved.

The Calliope is the biggest offender, Something that doesn't hit anything and cost 140 fuel is a no-go.
Then the M5 is too slow, too clunky, it is not valuable without upgrade. I tried it with 2xRE/M1919 inside, the dps is good but too subject at being snare to death. In comparison, the M3 let you do the same thing but is way faster which is essential when you need to disengage.
The Strafing run is too situational and does too little to be an ability you really need in your roaster.
The reco loiter is nice and helps a lot with the Calliope to increase its poor damage output.

At the moment, infantry company is better in any aspect.
Priest > Calliope
M5 HT > M5
Arty barrage > Straf run
Only saving grace is the reco loiter but I think Field defense is equally nice...

Reason why i sometimes chose this commander is halftruck because when i go captain stil have acces to aa and decent superess platrform

I think everyone here has the right idea. Tactical support isn't used so rarely because its necessarily bad, but because infantry just does everything better. I think minor changes to the plane offmap, and major changes to the m5 would be the way to go. Ideally the doctrine would be able to capitalize on the "support" aspect with its offmap, and possibly other aspects.

I think that for 140 fuel (and being doctrinal) calliope should really be able to fire the pasively hanging main gun. But not when it's barrage is on cooldown.

For now 140 fuel for a medium efficiency rocket arty is way too much.

Calliope costs so much because it also has high health and armour. Should just decrease its armour and health and give better fire power to its rockets

1. Replace p47 strafe with loiter like ost and soviet ones

2. Let Calliope switch between sherman HE shells and current rocket barrage with 10 sec cooldown

3. Decrease halftruck aa upgrade cost to 60 muni

Everyone who says this doctrine isnt used because stuff like P47 strafe/M5 is basically ignoring elephant in the room. It's not used because Calliope was overnerfed, put into a dumpster and then forgotten there. Priest is better at dealing with blobs than Calliope, that thing is so awful it makes matress look godlike in comparison.

2. Let Calliope switch between sherman HE shells and current rocket barrage with 10 sec cooldown

I dont think that the sherman in WW2 was able to rotate his turret after a calliope rocket launcher was installed on top.



About M1919:
Double lmg on riflemen was OP, but I really dont understand the sense of this weapon since it got limited to 1. Why should I spend 70mun to get a squad that is pretty meh at all ranges? 4 models of the squad have a M1 Garand which performs horrible on long range. A single M1919 squad will lose a 1v1 vs lmg grenadiers and you cannot charge in anymore for CQC. 1 or 2 BARs fit 10x more to riflemen IMO, even on super open maps.

Im wondering if it would be a good idea to replace the M1919 from infantry and tac support doc with something like a 2x thompson upgrade for riflemen which consumes both weapon slots, to give them access to a cheap but effective mid/closerange upgrade, similar to 2x STG44 from volks.

About the rest I agree as well, the quad flak upgrade should be a bit cheaper but still remain cuz it's MUCH better AA than the normal AA halftrack from Lieutenant (soon Captain) tech. And Calliope sucks hard right now. The HMG strafing run is a bit too overpriced but it's definitely not a horrible ability. It even destroys Stukas and Panzerwerfers if the enemy doesnt pay attention.

The AI strafe of the P47 needs to be completly reworked. As it is, it´s utterly terrible and more of a noobtrap for unexperienced players to burn their munitions. It´s actually the worst off-map plane/arty in the entire game IMO. Hard to hit and if it does hit it´s not going to do anything that even comes close to justifying the amount of muni it costs.


Calliope itself is also not good in terms of value for money. It´s solid rocket artillery but 140 fuel is just a bit too steep because it´s making having enough Jacksons hard.

About M1919:
Double lmg on riflemen was OP, but I really dont understand the sense of this weapon since it got limited to 1. Why should I spend 70mun to get a squad that is pretty meh at all ranges? 4 models of the squad have a M1 Garand which performs horrible on long range. A single M1919 squad will lose a 1v1 vs lmg grenadiers and you cannot charge in anymore for CQC. 1 or 2 BARs fit 10x more to riflemen IMO, even on super open maps.

Im wondering if it would be a good idea to replace the M1919 from infantry and tac support doc with something like a 2x thompson upgrade for riflemen which consumes both weapon slots, to give them access to a cheap but effective mid/closerange upgrade, similar to 2x STG44 from volks.

LMGs are really good vs okw volks spam and they actually make riflemen perform good in the lategame. Obviously they are still worse than lmg grens but you cant expect usf units to be truly good with current axis biased balancing crew.

LMGs are really good vs okw volks spam and they actually make riflemen perform good in the lategame. Obviously they are still worse than lmg grens but you cant expect usf units to be truly good with current axis biased balancing crew.

In which way are LMG Grens better than LMG Riflemen? You are talking non-sense and you know it.

I dont think that the sherman in WW2 was able to rotate his turret after a calliope rocket launcher was installed on top.

Quite positive it could.
Its the gun that was more limited, but turret could rotate, the launcher was firmly attached to the turret sides and sides only, no element was attached to the hull.

In which way are LMG Grens better than LMG Riflemen? You are talking non-sense and you know it.

I am rank 1 USF in 3v3 right now, so my opinion matters more than yours. Case closed

Ok seriously now: I am pretty positive that lmg grens will win most long range fights vs a M1919 riflemen squad

I dont think that the sherman in WW2 was able to rotate his turret after a calliope rocket launcher was installed on top.

Quite positive it could.

The main gun could not be used, because the rocket launcher was attached to the barrel to aim it (elevation of the gun = elevation of the launcher). The gun couldn't be fired because its recoil would obviously break this construction.

I think the turret could still move but I assume it was manditory to only fire it with the turret/launcher facing forwards, so the recoil of the rockets wouldn't tip the tank over.

The main gun could not be used, because the rocket launcher was attached to the barrel to aim it (elevation of the gun = elevation of the launcher). The gun couldn't be fired because its recoil would obviously break this construction.

I think the turret could still move but I assume it was manditory to only fire it with the turret/launcher facing forwards, so the recoil of the rockets wouldn't tip the tank over.

You've got data on that, or just assuming much greater recoil on 75mm then it actually was?
The gun could fire after you jettisoned the launcher, but again, it was one time barrage deal, not a "cooldown" based weapon.

For gameplay purpose, it could just as well simply fire regularly, because obviously recoil isn't an issue.

Ok seriously now: I am pretty positive that lmg grens will win most long range fights vs a M1919 riflemen squad

M1919 long range dps: 6.138
rough dps with vet: 7.9794

LMG 42 : 6.517
rough dps with vet: 9.1238

Riflemen target size: .97
Vet 2 RA: .23
vet 3 RA: .15
Effective health: 630.0552...
Time till death: 69.05622 seconds

Grenadier's target size: .91
vet 3 ra: .23
Effective health: 456.6861...
Time till death: 57.2331 seconds

I did not calculate vet cool down. Both have a vet cool down bonus of 20% but it can be hard to calculate seeing the 1919 has a longer burst duration. This results in a slight favor for the grens but I do not know by how much.


Average burst duration:
LMG 42: .75
M1919: 1

Granted this is only looking at the slot weapons themselves, not looking at an additional BAR, and with stock riflemen, vs grens long range damage is usually a 50/50 toss up, the differences between these units are quite similar but riflemen do have slight advantage.

You've got data on that, or just assuming much greater recoil on 75mm then it actually was?

If necessary, the rocket launcher assembly could be jettisoned in case of emergency, or the main gun had to be employed. The 75mm main gun could not be fired with the rocket launcher attached. The launcher could be jettisoned with or without all the rockets being fired first. Once jettisoned, the M4 could return to operating as a normal gun tank.

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2-us-calliope/ (their sources are highly rated books on Shermans)

From the same article:

Rocket Launcher T34E1 & T34E2

This was an upgraded version of the T34 which incorporated fixes to address the concerns of crews in the field, and was basically a serialization of the popular field-mod that had arisen. Modifications were introduced to allow the 75mm main gun to fire with the launcher attached and retain its original elevation range. To achieve this, the elevation arm was attached to the small metal extensions near the base of the gun, found on the M34A1 pattern mantlet.

The E1 also replaced the plastic tubes with magnesium ones and was equipped with an easier system cut-off for simpler jettisoning. The T34E2 was almost identical to the E1, but had an improved firing system. It was one of these models that received the nickname ‘Calliope’ when it was witnessed firing, and from there, the name stuck.

So it depends on the model. But having it be able to fire its main gun is definitely justifiable. Not saying it's a good idea though - I'll leave that to the balance experts.

In that case I stand corrected, but gameplay wise I would strongly disagree about implementing it. It was in CoH1 for some time and it was pretty terrible. There should be a strategic choice to divert resources into either tanks or (rocket) arty but not both at once. I'd rather see a minor buff to performance and standardized armor/health/price.