...they get a stronger snare...
I agree it's stronger, situationally. The downside is that it doesn't lock like other AT abilities. So it's only very strong in an ambush. Or after using a sightblocker. |
|
+1 |
Watch the video again. Mass disorderly retreats are the officer's responsibility, which is what 227 covers. Individual retreats is classified as desertion. If it's down to the individual, then it falls under desertion, which is court-martialing and potential execution, just like any other army. In CoH2, the officer (you) is ordering the retreat. It's not desertion or disorderly mass retreat.
No other faction requires any misunderstood historical precedents to justify an FRP. Why should the Soviets need one?
Because it fits with the wording of the order. I will yet again explain to you that in the context of the game, the commissar will act as a forward retreat point, but also preventing a full retreat back to base which completely fits within the idea of the order itself.I.E. giving up as little land as possible to the enemy.
Yet again, nobody had suggested any exaggerated depictions of the order like commissar squads shooting at retreating squads to halt them in their place, so I have half a mind to think that you just dislike it when people mention the phrase "Not One Step Back".
|
The key point of that link was that Order 227 is that it was directed towards officers, not enlisted men. The other key point was that orderly retreats are allowed, and since you order all retreats in the game (sans Sturm Officier, but there's no way to differentiate that with the game tools) none of the retreats in the game are disorderly retreats.
Justifying a retreat-stopping ability with Order 227 plays much more into the stereotype that no retreats were allowed. I'm not disagreeing that an FRP on commissar would be nice, but leave 227 out of the justification.
That's not even completely true. It was partially directed at officers, but who do you think was doing the retreating? The soldiers. So, using a commissar to halt a retreat all the way back to base does in fact fit with the spirit of Not One Step Back. Which, again, nobody had implied that the commissar would be shooting the troops, just that they would halt them from retreating further. And that, again, fits wholly within the verbage of the order. |
Just going to leave this here...
I don't disagree with FRP, but this whole 227 stereotype needs to die.
Aside from FRP, having the revolver change into a PPSh at vet 3 akin to Sturm Officer's StG44 would be awesome since the Commissar literally has a PPSh ammo pouch on his model.
Except that would fit with the verbage of order 227. Did he say that the commissar would shoot troops when they retreat? No, he said the commissar should have a retreat point, preventing troops from retreating past him. Soviet soldiers themselves called order 227 the "Not One Step Back" order, and those words were used in the order itself. |
Go choke on it.
 |
What do you guys think about switching the received accuracy bonus from Vet 3 to Vet 2 for all officer type units?
I think that all officer type units would benefit receiving their received accuracy bonus from Vet 3 to 2
And swap the accuracy buff that is currently in Vet 2 to 3
This will help the officer units support better since they’re more utility than raw dps units. This will help them fulfil their supportive role.
Currently USF officers and OST artillery field officers already have this Vet 2 received accuracy buffs
The Soviet Commissar, OKW Sturm officer, UKF Assault Officer don’t have the Vet 2 received accuracy bonus.
I can't speak for the other officer units, but I personally think that's waay too much for the commissar squad. Not only does it become a 6 man squad at vet 1, it's got AoE healing (and of course it has the squad buffs and force retreat). If it gets recieved accuracy buff so early in vet, I think it will be able to stay on the field for waay too long and just make OST life hell. |
dropping soon  |
Uhh... Penal flamers again? We had those quite a while back and it didn't exactly work out too well in terms of balance. IMHO it's better to stick to the current implementation which works decently enough without producing major balance hiccups.
Like I said, just some fanciful ideas. |
Either or, I just want Penals to get the option so that all the commanders with the assault package have multiple possible openings instead of conscript spam.
I really personally like the idea of penals benefitting from both con repair and assault upgrade.
Imagine if it allowed penals to be upgraded with a single DP28, or a flamethrower. I think it would be badass. I mean, guards troops upgrade with 2 DP28s, and they come in at 2cp. Considering how penals will bleed more than cons because of their extra reinforce cost, maybe it would balance out.
The flamethrower is probably a bit much. And DP wouldnt fit an assault role either. Just a fanciful idea. |
0
United States
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
