Profile of Omega_Warrior

Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2013, 12:22 PMkafrion

1) I came to this conclusion for various reasons the primary ones being the RAM and the fact that mark target gives 50% extra damage , that means that its supposed to be used by uits with relatively small damage and relatively good penetration like atgs su76s , guards and even at grenades ( the 2 latter used from behind ) . Other than that there were many more cooler ways to give a hard at unit on this commander other than the 34/85s (like is2 for example or kv1 ) but they didnt want any because the commander is supposed to buff many aspects of your army but not by much

2) I think you are using the commander in the wrong way . 1st of all guards are soft antiinfantry , hard antilightvehicle and soft antitank (though with good micro they get a lot better against tanks and infantry ) and the 120mm hits light vehicles like a ton of bricks . Regardless of that you are supposed to have early game dominance using this commander , that is what i told you in the first place , that is why you have the 120mm and the guards and since you dont have big munitions abilities you are supposed to spam mines and flares like a madman in order for your cons guards mortar atg etc to kille even more germans . Under those premises you should have a large combined arms force kicking ass long before you call in the t34/85s , you aslo should have a fuel and manpower advantage over your opponent which will allow you to call the 34/85s and creaTe a really big combined arms force that can deal with anything , you cant be on the back foot all game relying on just t1 or just t2 and expect to turn around the situation with that ability .

All that said , i do think the 34/85s need a small buff and definitely same fire rate as t34s , i said so before .

But if you want them to beat p4s head on , then you need to have the ram removed and they cant be a call in , they should be recruited like normal units and the mark target and crew repair need to take a hit with the nerfbat as well . Or go the way nullist proposes with a munitions cost upgrade , allthough imo you should also need to upgrade it from the t3 building in order to use

Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2013, 08:18 AMNullist

The sheer volume of valid suggestions for T34/85 improvements speaks to the issue being real.

I side with a non-Commander upgun for muni solution that specialises the T34 from AI to AT, at roughly PIV equivalency in penetration and RoF, for the following reasons:
-This doesnt upset PIV balance because its still a superior chassis.
-The cost is laterally diverted to Muni, which is a largely voluntary resource pool that doesnt directly screw with tech speeds, but rather diversifies each respective tier internally. Basically allows a 0.5 tier progression.
-I think its crucial, that this is non-Commander. This kind of dedicated AT is needed to reinforce Sov roster UNIVERSALLY vs more AT dedicated armor options, which, as someone very validly pointed out recently, and damn that I cant cite the writer, is a systemic problem for Sov, that basically Ost armor, throughout, is always a Sov armor counter, because it is almost all AT centric, whereas Sov armor has an AI impetus it doesnt even really need.
-I model this largely on the 222 precedent. Its a 0.5 tier muni upgrade that makes Ost vapable of responding to, primarily, T70s.
-For the T34 to be the "workhorse" it is touted as, it needs this AT upgrade option. It used to be argued that Ram provided thr necessary slack, but that is now an outdated notion due to Ram changes and indirectly AtNade/Faust changes.
-Let Sov specialise its T34s for AT, at muni cost, and relative detriment to AI. Atleast give Sov the choice to do so.

The next is radical, but I still suggest it for future and larger meta consideration. It concerns ATGs.
-Im a huge proponent of imprpving MP and infantry specific AT options, specifically the ATG. I cant speak for 2v2+, but in 1v1, I want to see infantry/MP builds extending further in the meta, rather than the game incentivising teching, hard, to armor. Imo 1v1 has TOO MUCH ARMOR as is, and the nature of this armor, as AT centric on Ost, systemically creates a problem for Sov.
-PaK is graced with a better RoF, ZiS gets Barrage. But wtf, Sov doesnt NEED AI Barrage, it NEEDS better MP AT!
-Give PaKs the Barrage, and ZiS the better RoF.
--Ost lacks indirect fire options vs larger Support teams, Sov lacks better T2 AT. Swap them, and both units fit their meta role better.

Now for the really radical part:
-Move ZiS to T1.
-Move T70 to T2.

Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2013, 02:23 AMsir muffin

honestly if it was up to me, i'd remove AT nades and panzerfaust damaging engines, and just give them a damage increase, like coh1

Jump back to quoted post15 Oct 2013, 15:27 PMAppleseed

compare to the 240MU german heavy strafe, the soviet heavy strafe is bit OP. at least i don't see german strafe kill T34 and it don't kill infantry