Profile of Vipper

the AEC ability is well affected because your firing speed and accuracy is neutered, so you will have a 50/50 on even the first shot, the 2nd one is highly unlikely

Have you actually test it or are just guessing? If so can provide the replay?

the tulips arent affected but only a retard would put it on a firefly

the centaur has been regarded as a good vehicle because you can use the ability but frankly its not worth getting a centaur, much less to put command aura on it

If you think getting a Centaur is not worth it you are gravely mistaken.

Anyway what you quoted was not about which vehicle it should be used with but weather the debuff effect vehicles abilities or not.

He is always trying to be a troll.

I guess that it easier for your to try defame others that to come up with arguments that hold water.

Command Vehicle Penalties :
Penalties to commanding vehicle: +100% reload, +100% cool-down, -50% accuracy

This are all applied to Hardpoint 1 which is the main gun. Some vehicles have multiple weapons under Hardpoint 1 but they are reserved for abilities. If these abilities fall under Hardpoint 1 then it will affect those abilities as well

(command vehicle always doubles the ability reload cooldown time on avre which was stealth added in by balance team)

Churchill Avre's Hardpoint 1 is the hull machine guns on the tank, so its a huge nerf on the avre.

Your conspiracy theory once more hold no water since there was nothing stealth about AVRE.


"Command Vehicle
We have adjusted the Command Vehicle to be more in-line with other aura-based command vehicles. Given that the player must sacrifice a vehicle’s combat potential, we have lowered the direct penalties on the vehicle itself while providing a potent aura to other vehicles to compensate.

- Speed and Received accuracy penalty removed; retains -50% accuracy and +100% reload penalty
- AVRE Petard ability affected by Command Vehicle penalty
- Aura no longer affects emplacements
- Recon Plane cost to 50 munitions
- Recon Plane loiter period from 90 to 45"

In addition the change was completely justified since AVRE's ability is the main weapon and without any penalties to it there would no downside to upgrade.

Now as far as I know (without testing) the penalties do not apply to AEC's "Target Tread", FF "Tulip Rocket Strike" or Centaur's "20mm Strafing Fire".

Calling the hull mg debuff a "huge nerf" is probably an overstatement since its damage is not that great to begin with.

The only annoying thing about the USF/UKF sidetech racks is that you have to manually pick them up in base. Otherwise it's a valid sidetech that does not weaken USF in any way. It would be better if you also had the option like captain/lieutenant to upgrade one/two BARs/Zooks (or just pick them up, your choice). Especially with the pizza base where you shift-click to take up the weapon(or two) and go to the frontline, only to notice 20 seconds later that the extremely annoying/fu**ing PIZZA base is blocking you and each other. If only Relic allowed a pizza base re-design. Aneurysm-inducing.
Other than that, the side techs are completely valid and legit for USF/UKF

Can we get back on topic which is Pathfinders?

yeah because you are supposed to wait their infantry upgrades dipshit

Glad that you finally understood what I posted and thus that your response was simply wrong.

Now PLS try to tone down the personal insults.

Comparing only part of the costs (MP and population) where the Command P4 fares "worse" followed by a comparison of the combat effectiveness of the P4 and Command P4 is misleading to all readers that do not know all the costs by heart. Especially since the combat effectiveness and MP cost are not obviously related.
It is more truthful to at least compare the full costs, that's why I pointed it out.

I havenot compared C.PzIV and PzIV. I have simply pointed out that C.PzIV is more expensive. Once again this is what I wrote:
"Cost more manpower than a normal PzIV."

Please don't reverse this. You were the first comparing it to the normal P4.

Again simply no I made no such comparison.

Anyway: Ostheer has no unit like the P4. The closest unit in CoH2 design-wise is probably the Command Panther, but that's a TD. Any comparison has caveats, it is just important to point them out. The Command P4 shares a lot of characteristics to the normal P4 besides its name: Armor, HP, mobility, AI capability. Even veterancy bonuses and upgrades. Not the AT power though. And that's exactly what I did by saying that you basically trade the AT capability for slightly lower costs and the aura.

If you want to compare it to the Ostwind, go ahead. but the comparison only makes sense if you can put their different characteristics into context. You have a lot more subtle differences though with the Ostwind, so the comparison will likely lead to more speculation and assumptions.

So taken everything together, the comparison to the P4 makes the most sense in my eyes.

You are entitled to your opinion but compact wise C.Pz is much closer to ostwsind which is a AI tank than to PzIV which is mainline tank.

I am not sure how this relates to what I you are quoting.


I don't see how the unit "comparable" to the Ostwind in the sense of that they'd fill the same niche. They don't. They work differently. They are both AI vehicles for sure, but so are Brummbar and Panzerwerfer. They would not be my go-tos for a comparison though. For the reasons explained above, I'd say the most straight forward comparison is to the normal P4, since they share a lot of features.

As I said before, I agree to the point about adjusting XP values. At the very least, the normal P4 and Command P4 should vet at similar speeds given they have the same vet. In the best case, the Command P4 should get its own vet system.

Glad that you agree about XP value and vet bonuse.

I agree to the part that it has a bad gun. What I pointed out what, that this is not due to accuracy.
The same accuracy profile is used across a ton of units in CoH2. Mediums are a major threat to LVs despite using the same accuracy profile. It even has better scatter values, so technically it should hit more than a normal medium. The accuracy is so to say "normal", what drags it down mostly is the low damage and penetration.

Glad to see that you agree it has a bad gun.

I have not claimed that the accuracy is the only problem as I have posted it the combination of factors:
"The gun is simply bad with bad accuracy/bad penetration and bad damage and there nothing to justify that."

But as I said: The Command P4 is a decent unit in team games. If you buff its combat performance, you're also buffing it in the modes it is already good in. So either you increase the price to compensate, or you need to apply another nerf - in the best case one that hits team games harder than small modes, which would probably be the aura.

Imo you are simply over estimating the impact of improving the gun especially for a unit limited to 1. Once more you are entitled to your opinion.

In all comparisons, you've solely been discussing the combat performance. Apart from a suggested rework, you've not even mentioned the aura at all, and therefore neglected the biggest selling point of the unit. That's definitely focusing on combat.
As I already said, the buffs you suggested will also buff the unit in larger modes where it is already good at. They are not balanced, they might lead to a better balanced units in small modes, but potentially give rise to problems in larger modes.

The Command P4 is perfectly capable of fighting infantry. What it needs is a reduction in XP thresholds to reflect the missing damage on vehicles.

Glad to see that you have changed your mind about XP value.

Finally, please don't insinuate things I did not say. I never described the Command P4 as OP, so please don't pretend I did.

That goes both ways.