I just did. Paks are able to survive, as are all AT guns, walking across the whole patch of fire whether it lands directly on them or if you make them move through it. This is with about 80% success rate.
If the Pak is entirely stationary (ie: no attempt to dodge) survivability drops massively but is still possible but much more dependant on RNG of where strikes land.
That seems pretty reasonable to me. Not sure how you could consider that OP.
now test again without friendly fire.
The ability might or might not kill a crew but they are left with so little health that they die during an attack. |
I don't think it has much to do with the HE Sherman. The M10 competes with the Jackson for AT duty as a cheap and more spammable alternative. At least in that way, it is slightly similar to the StuG/Panther matchup.
Yes the m10 does not have to do with HE Sherman, I am simply pointing out that stock Sherman/M36 cover most roles very effectively leaving little room for doctrinal USF vehicles.
The 76mm Sherman found a spot as well despite that combo and despite the Jackson, so there should be room for the M10 as an even cheaper alternative. But in the current design it does not work outside of the mentioned 1v1 vs Ostheer T3.
The 76mm is in live simply OP and is a tank not a TD. M10 is a TD and M36 is so good vs all vehicles from kubel to Tigers that leave little place for M10.
The UKF M10 even has a way better niche since the Firefly occupies a heavier TD role than the Jackson, leaving even more space for a light TD. Yet, the commander is among the least picked despite bringing Assault Sections, a mortar and self repairs. This commander fills a lot of holes in the UKF lineup, still it is only average in the loadout picks even in 1v1. This should really tell us that something is wrong with it, and the M10 is part of it.
I don't think that the M10 should take the blame for that. There are simply better commander for 1vs1 and the commander does not have arty or even of map so bring very little in 3vs3/4v4.
The changes to Cromwell also have limited the need for a "flanker" TD.
Generally speaking the M10 is a victim of combination of change like:
call-in tech
Rush to last tier
1 TD vs everything (m36) |
I did not compare it to top tier TDs though and I still think it is pretty bad.
It might work okay in 1v1, but if a unit is only okay in one single mode there is probably reason for a redesign. At least that's what this patch should be aiming for: Make more commanders appealing in general, including more modes. The M10 is not the single way to fix those two commanders, but since it doesn't work well against anything else than an Ostheer T3 spam in 1v1, some changes should be done.
With HVAP it performs well for its price, which is one reason why I can see it to be gated behind vet1. On the other hand it makes building a late M10 uninteresting because it does not properly perform.
It's only late game purpose is to use it as a throw-away tank, which is something the game is usually moving away from.
And the problem here is not the M10 but how cost effective the HE Sherman/M36 combo is leaving little room for other unit to fill. |
I see the intent here. This may work, and I think that veterancy should be looked at, but I think there's a design issue within the unit.
See, when you get the 221, you get the chance to upgrade it for 15 more fuel to a 223.
You get additional armor, health signal relay and lockdown mode. The problem is that when you upgrade it to a 223 you spend quite a lot of fuel because of the chance to have the car double any sector income. This is a disincentive to using it as combat unit, because the unit doesn't have enough dps potency to pay back the resource increase it would grant by sitting in a sector.
What I proposed is to split the upgrade in 2. The first one, the radio set, costs 5 fuel and grants the armor and health bonus, as well as radio relay. The second, call it "logistic car" for example, would cost 10 fuel, is a further upgrade that adds the lockdown ability. This would allow who wants to use the 221/223 offensively and try to reach Riegel mines a chance to do so without fully paying an exorbitant price. 20 fuel for a 223 without lockdown mode after the first truck set up would keep it in line for timing and cost with similar light vehicles, the m20 for example.
Or one can simply make the separate vehicles and balance them separately... |
The unit is designed as flanker. Only think it need is higher base turret rotation speed and lower vet bonus. |
Thread: RK 43 10 May 2021, 15:54 PM
Sure, but remove retreat then.
And the shield mechanic is buggy AF. Not really something that is detrimental when trying to defend the AT gun. Retreat is still the best feature on raketen, one that saves it more times than all the gun shields combined on all factions.
Gun shield is buggy when it comes to small arm fire, ut can still collide with tank shells so that the crew can take less damage. |
I don't believe the Vet needs to be changed, either the vet rate or the bonuses themselves. It's not particularly difficult to vet and is consistent with the standard P4 and the Stug G/E. Not only that but it provides bonuses that do still positively affect the P4 Command Tank (Or rather, it doesn't provide any irrelevant or quirky buffs in it's veterancy.)
The C.PzIV is closer to Ostwind than it is to PZIV. Pop/XP/Value should reflect that.
Vet bonuses should tailor made for the units role instead of generic bonuses.
Honestly I think the best solution would to simply improve the firing rate of the main gun by a small amount. Adding a brand new ability is messy and requires a lot of work that can be solved in a much easier way while also intruding on the role of the Stug-E. Considering the absolute negligible impact of the Command P4 in an armor fight (Terrible Pen, halved damage) I can't imagine this would impact armor fights too much and would probably be fine, especially if traded for the irrelevant infantry damage reduction.
The gun is identical to that of Stug-E it is quite easy to implement. |
...
One can start by lowering Pop/XP value and changing vet bonuses to better feet the role.
The gun could use changes. One could try to firing mode indirect firing similar to Stug-E (with less range) and oen direct firing hollow charge rounds. |
Well the downside is that the Forced Retreat isn't 100%. Most of the time you use it you're hoping to force some retreats - there is still a chance that you'll get bad RNG and just get other effects or no effect. In those cases it's not too hard for your opponent to just ride out the propaganda.
No effect is no longer possible.
The probability of not effect from all shell in live is extremely low.
The Sturm Officer changes were more a lateral move IMO going from buffing opponents infantry to increased Racc on officer. At least now your opponent has to micro and focus fire your officer to get any benefit instead of just getting a free buff for munitions YOU spent. (In that regard I don't know if Officer really needs a penalty given how expensive the ability is)
Glad that you see my point. |
You have posted about forced retreat.
Actually no, I have posted a comparison between "force retreat" and "propaganda barrage". In the patch "propaganda barrage" is simply more cost efficient, so you original post was irrelevant.
I have posted in replay about changes to forced retreat.
Actually no you have cherry picked only the buff to force retreat and "forgot" that is also received a nerf and that "fear propaganda" also got buffed.
"When activating Forced Retreat, the Officer receives +20% Received Accuracy for 10 seconds."
It couldn't be any more relevant, regardless of your mental gymnastics why it wouldn't be.
That is what you do and not what I do.
Prop arty is:
-delayed
-unreliable
-now comes with flares
The ability got buffed and become more reliable.
Even if the Commissar version come with flare is make very little difference you can hear the arty falling before it lands
Officers forced retreat is instant. Don't expect such powerful skill to come without any downsides, it already got pretty hefty buff.
It already comes with downsides since it more expensive than propaganda barrage and propaganda barrage can be be more powerful since it has AOE.
If there a need for a downside there should also be one for "fear propaganda" |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
