The only faction out of five where the changes feel somehow underwhelming. Still a step into the right direction but there is missing something. There were many good ideas about Recon or Airborne floating around for example, but overall only one commander ability was changed at all (dozer upgrade removed). Sad
Armor Company:
- changes to 105mm Sherman and 240mm offmap are a good thing -> thumbs up
Rifle Company:
- buffing E8 slightly in Range, Speed and turret rotation won't make this commander work suddenly, i don't think this will be enough
Overall real great changes. Some points I want to remark:
Assault Guards:
- they are missing the elite Bazooka indication (the one Rangers and Paras have in the lower right corner)
- if I want to call them in it says my population limited is reached
- great that they come without M5 now at 2 CPs and have the option to equip Super Bazooka
- they are not trash (-> #8 blancat) because they are more versatile and have access to decent AT weaponary
- if they have to much AI value with upgraded Super Bazookas (-> #4 Vipper) think about giving them six PPsH from the start again, that way they can be stopped by mid to long range infantry units like Obers or Grens
Partisan Tactics:
- Your changes won't make them work, because their only shining moment was the initial moment they were called in to wreck a heavily damaged vehicle or kill weapon crews from behind. With the two upgrade paths this moment is gone now, absolutely wrecking the Partisans commander beyond repair. Their real problem was always their combat value after this initial moment. Too squishy, too much bleed. Maybe they should get a fifth man with the T3/T4 upgrade for Conscripts and Penals? But keep the two different call-ins please and change them in a different way.
152mm-howitzer-Strike
- finally a decent general damage dealing offmap for Soviets, was overdue -> nice one
ZiS-6 Supply Truck (-> same as Opel Blitz)
- the fuel drop was quirky and inconsistent -> great change
Advanced Fortifications
- I do miss the new bunker, can't find where it gets constructed at engineers
- the light AT mine seems to be not worth it, it would be more interesting if this ability would grant a heavy mine to M5 (same as Riegel mine / M20 mine)
Its a versatile tank that has the option of acting as a flanking tank or deep diver to take out enemy rocket artillery. Even if you don't use it as such, the option is there. I don't recall how much the M10 was (85 fuel maybe?) for 85 fuel, good speed and one shot killing rocket artillery is very powerful.
Yeah you can use it as a diver if you have recon informations. Imo the difference to flanking is to get a tank to the rear side of enemy tanks since there is no side armor. But for that you need speed + fast turret rotation. The Cromwell is a good example for a real flanking tank. The M10 is sort as a diver as you said. Its penetration is good enough frontally while its turrest rotation is too slow.
The fact that you can get 2 M10s out for the price of 1 M36 +some odd fuel (?35) fuel is a testament to its strength.
The original post I responded to wanted to change the M10 drastically but I argue that it is already very powerful.
Similar to StuG it is very cost effective (MP/FU) in countering armor. As you said you get almost two for one M36, but they have a time window where they are effective. In late game their population value will make them less desirable compared to Jacksons.
The M10 is more of a cheaper version of the M36. With less range and pen but also at a significantly cheaper fuel cost. I think its in a good spot right now as an expendable flanking tank.
M10 isn't a flanking tank although "Flanking" Speed tries to make you believe in that.
They will still kill JU87's before they can do a single pass. No axis AA can stop P47's from doing their first pass because the JU87's need to get close enough to their target to actually fire and is not a projectile, p47's are projectiles and is fired from a longer range and can hit even if the plane is taken out.
Seems you think balance patch was worthless in that compartement. Allied AA was way op before and is op now? I personally think they did a good job. They carefully used different AA values to find the right one as you might have seen at the balance updates.
No. Allies have superior anti air. Neither the Flak HT/base, 222, Ostwind or the myriad of pintles mgs can not stop the p47's from doing their first pass. While ju87's will get shot down before they even have the chance to do so.
So if you chain the cost to the capability of the opponent to counter what should we do after...
- Soviet M5 Quad AA kill chance went from 10% to 5%
- M15 AA HT kill chance went from 15% to 8%
Beeing cheap and affordable (cost+population) this two vehicles were always the main source of allied AA. So shouldn't the MU cost go up now by your logic?
But then either price of P47 should go down to 200 or the OST ability to 240
The price should be just exchanged. If tank is standing still on plain ground both will bring down a full health Tiger/IS-2 with their last passing plane. But if the target is moving too fast, is behind cover or driving in hilly territory (wrecked by artillery), P-47 performs worse.
So just exchanging cost without touching performance should be fine.
[0CP] M2 Flamethrower for REs
[2CP] Designate Command Vehicle
[6CP] Vehicle Crew Repairs
[8CP] Flame Mortar Support
[9CP] Specialist Avre
I would like a few changes to strengthen the theme and make the Regiment a little bit more appealing for team games. I don't think it can be changed in a way that i will be a common pick at 1vs1 without turnig it upside down. So I won't even try.
[0CP] M2 Flamethrower: Bundle with construction of tank traps and sandbags for REs [6CP] Vehicle Crew Repairs: remove and add [3CP] Advanced Assembly instead [8CP] Flame Mortar Support: Swap with [10CP] Precision strike of Advanced Emplacement Regiment (which gets Flame Mortar Support in exchange)
Tank traps and sandbags would fit this commander very well. Advanced Assembly is weaker on first glance (I really like Vehicle Crew Repairs bringing your vehicle back to combat in no time) but it adds just more team game spirit, since you can repair the vehicles of your mates with your Forward Assembly.
Precison Strike gives the ability to delete howitzers and should be a further reason for a pick in team games.
Btw. Advanced Assembly upgrade should cost about 75 MU instead of 200 MP. But that is just a personal opinion.
Giving an onmap howitzer to UKF would be a nice addition. But you shouldn't put it in one commander with Precison Barrage that kills howitzers of opponent 100% for sure (+nondoc recon plane). I would suggest to swap the ability with Royal Engineer Regiment.
- Flame Mortar for Advanced Emplacement Regiment
- Precision Barrage for Royal Engineer Regiment
Since this is a flanking vehicle maybe unit that design for it flanking should have lower threshold for engine damage (so that 1 snare is not enough for engine damage)
In addition one could add extra critical damage for rear shots.
Possibly remove AP round but increase duration for flanking speed that now also provides faster turret rotation.
I always thought USF M10 /UKF Achilles has a weird design. On one side Flanking Speed at Vet0 tries to tell you to use the tank as a fast flanking tank. On the other side there are only 540 HP, a low turret rotation, a range of 50, paper armor, a decent penetration that can take most tanks frontally and HVAP at Vet1. The later tells you to use the tank as a weaker but cheaper replacement to M36/Firefly in pretty much the same combat role.
Usually this tank is pretty much dead if it runs into infantry since it has no smoke or AI capabilities. Every time I played it and tried to use it as a flanking tank it usually does some decent damage to armor only to get destroyed by a Shrek mob just coming around the corner which penetrates M10/Achilles at any range. So you are better of to use it as part of your frontline while using Flank speed for quick relocation and better received accuracy.
If this should be a flanking tank with such low hp and paper armor there have to be some changes. Your changes are definitely interesting, i agree about most of them. A flanking tank doesn't need HVAP for sure, Imo 50 range are not needed either. Instead it needs turret rotation as you said and some more survivability, especially versus handheld AT and snares. PAKs are less of a problem since they can be circled.
Something like a temporary immunity to engine damage while Flanking Speed is active for example. More received Acc and/or longer duration of Flanking Speed could be options too. Smoke shot/smoke pots/smoke launcher at Vet1 (instead of HVAP) is one more option that comes to my mind.
I would like to see a shift to the role of flanking tank, because it would add more versatility to the doctrinal tank roster of USF/UKF.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
