The real problem is Brits getting bolster at the 5min mark. They're literally unwipeable with small arms fire. The only thing grens have is the rifle grenade to see if opponent is paying attention. Bolster should be locked behind the cromwell tech.
I’d agree but sections don’t get snares, have an arguably less useful grenade locked behind a separate sidetech (considering that they’re terrible on the move and therefore have no business closing to grenade range with anything, don’t get me wrong it’s still a good grenade) and have worse lmgs that are also locked behind sidetech.
I could see an argument for maybe locking the bolster sidetech behind t3 or something but it does delay a first tank pretty decently as it is now if you get it beforehand. |
|
USF commander actually looks interesting now, provided that calliopes aren’t trash anymore (haven’t had time to test it or anything).
Has the new Brit commander had that bug with the Thompsons just not appearing fixed yet? Really weird and annoying bug from the one game. I was able to play with it a while back. Really couldn’t tell if they were working or not lol.
Also, in the previous version of the mod, the WP grenade that assault sections get access to wouldn’t get its range reduced by being suppressed (probably a bug) and the squad also wouldn’t vet from inflicting damage with it. Both things that would be nice to see fixed. |
If nothing else, these threads he makes are a good source of entertainment.
I think we should keep a contradiction counter for each thread and see how high it goes.
We’d have to start coming up with new names for numbers pretty soon. Not sure I know what anything past 1,000,000,000,000,000 (quadrillion?) is.
Edit: thought you were talking about people on this site in general, my comment seems a bit excessive for one person lol. |
Yeah the Tac Support Regiment already has the dropped mortar but historically speaking I don't think the Brits actually used the variants of the US Halftrack, or hell even the M1 81mm mortar itself. The 4.2 inch mortar is a pretty interesting unit in itself as RoastinGhost proposed/designed it but then again it doesn't fit the theme of the commander since it's not lend-lease.
I think bundling would be the best option here, you'd have a Light Vehicle bundle with the M5 Stuart and one of the Halftracks and a "heavier" vehicle option where you'd get the M10 and a Sherman of some sort since the Brits did use quite a number of Sherman variants but I don't see much of a reason in an M4A4 for them since it'd basically fill the same role as the Cromwell but having an MG instead of a commander and some different abilities.
Similar to how the USF Mech Company was done but balance is a bit finicky and you don't wanna overload it with units/features/abilities obviously but it's quite the problem of trying to make it work as a commander that gives the Brits a more aggressive playstyle and yet still fits to the theme of a "lend-lease" commander while not feeling underwhelming in certain elements like it's call in units.
I think the problem lies in the fact that the Brits in general lack any sort of vanilla mobility so even the little which the American mortar, M3 and M10 provides for them seems both a lot but when compared to others seems quite not enough.
All in all in hindsight it's a commander designed to fill the holes in the British roster of units, unlike the USF for example which doesn't need indirect fire units that don't cost fuel, or a fast and reliable TD, or have problems fighting enemy when their own infantry isn't in cover. To the USF all of these and whatever their commanders provide are simply alternatives, not something that would entirely change how they would be able to play.
Really when you look at it the only thing that the Brits have over the USF is their tanks like the Churchill that can take a punch compared to anything American, even the Pershing, of which you can only field one.
Yeah I know that the British didn't really use the mortar halftrack ,but that'd be a way to make the call-in aspect of the commander a bit more appealing without overbloating it like you articulated in the portion I bolded, and would giving the brits a unit that actually has more value in and of itself rather than just simply making up for design flaws by being the bare minimum and existing. Why you should get a vanilla team weapon with no benefits as an entire commander slot is beyond me, and just goes to make the commander less competitive IMO. It's a waste of a slot in a sense since it doesn't actually offer anything that powerful on its own compared to almost any other ability or call-in.
And we all know how historical accuracy kinda goes out the window in this game anyway. It's not totally historically accurate, but it's not super far fetched or immersion breaking or anything like that. |
What do these things have to do with Tactical Movement and Panzerschrecks?
Having concerns about Panzerschrecks on Panzerfusiliers is fine, but we weren't talking about that.
That's great when the enemy player is afk. If they are reversing their vehicles however, you'll find that the sprinting Panzerschrecks can not keep up and won't fire properly most of the time because by the time they are done turning around the vehicle will be out of range.
Tactical movement is riskier with pgrens since they're 4 men, meaning they're more vulnerable to tank guns and other explosives, and are a significantly more expensive squad, both to produce and to reinforce, and are available later, meaning you can't have as many of them. There's a world of differences between the two units, and that makes sprint much better on pfusies than tactical assault or sprint (from ambush camo doctrines) is with pgrens. Heck, it makes them a better AT unit in general, which is fine, but giving them sprint too is a bit much.
Sprinting pschrecks can still keep up with vehicles a lot better than non-sprinting pschrecks. I have noticed that bug though. Happens sometimes with other units too, like commandos. |
Problem is that the whole idea of the commander is to remain mobile and not have to hunker down somewhere in your own territory in order to heal and reinforce.
You're investing quite a bit in offensive power so needing to stop and halt your momentum is a big no-no as far as the playstyle of the commander is concerned.
Yeah I was just pointing out that option.
IMO it'd be interesting if they were given a self heal ability with vet if possible (but only usable on themselves for balance reasons). There's already tons of cqc inf that gets passive heal with vet, although I'm not sure if coding that for the specific upgrade is possible (which is why I suggested it being an ability instead, since I know that can be added).
And I'd still rather see a mortar halftrack than the US mortar. It also fits the theme better and is much more worth a doctrine spot than the US mortar. I'm just worried that the commander might be a bit on the lackluster side seeing as how it already has so many call-in units and one of them being the US mortar really doesn't help. |
|
Conscripts with the SVTs seem pretty damn strong from the one game I played with some friends. I'm a bit hazy as to how exactly they work (since my teammate was the one using them) but even just conceptually a cons squad with SVTs is miles more cost efficient than a penal squad and has better utility. |
|
Sprinting 5 man double schrecks seem a bit concerning to me. Probably shouldn't be able to sprint.
Also teller mines are cancer in every game mode. No mine should be able to 1 shot light vehicles. It'd be beter IMO if it was a 30 muni mine that only hit vehicles for normal damage or a 40 muni mine that does more damage but not as much as the teller. There's really no reason okw should have tellers IMO. |
Uh, I'm gonna have to respond to your post. SU Tier1 doesn't need support weapons. U have aggressive penals for map control and sniper + clown car for clearing support weapons. Whereas T2 gives maxim,zis for map control and mortars for clearing support weapons. The only thing you're "sacrificing" for going T1 is a defensive style gameplay but otherwise T1 and T2 perform the same goddamn tasks. I can say by going T2 you're sacrificing an aggressive style gameplay. Plus allies don't need at guns early game since the only bulletproof axis light is Luchs which can still be fended off by any handheld AT. U don't even need to snare it. Just damage it and buy time until u get a hardcounter.
Ost has a lot of (weak) doctrines so having Storms in only 3 of them is like 15-20% of all doctrines while
USF has like 7 doctrines and at least half of them have CQC doctrinal inf?
You don't get any suppression or indirect with sov t1. Granted you don't usually need it if you play your penals/sniper well but it's a tradeoff. Don't pretend it's not.
Meanwhile ost gets pgrens nondoc. They're not precisely cqc inf but they're very cost efficient if you use them right, and don't require muni upgrades. Allies don't really have any nondoc analogues and brits and usf only have 1 combat infantry squad nondoctrinally. Asymmetric balance I guess. Volume doesn't really matter either since you only get to pick one commander anyway. |
how about command E8 from LimaOscarMike's company lel
I'd rather have that than dozer blades for sure. |
Relic Entertainment
Heartless Jäger 
