I have not claimed that C.PzIV is more expensive than PzIV.
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.
Why are comparing a AI tank with main battle tank? if you want to compare it with something you need to compare it ostwind which is also an AI tank and cost 60 manpower less and same fuel.
Please don't reverse this. You were the first comparing it to the normal P4.
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.
Cost does matter especially in small modes since it make the unit less attractive than stock options.
I am not sure how this relates to what I you are quoting.
The should vet with similar speed which they do not. PzIV vets faster, way faster. The unit is comparable to ostwind and it should have an XP value that adjusted to how it compares with ostwind.
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.
Its accuracy is bad because it can not hit light tanks especially on the move. Combined with low penetration it makes the AT performance one of the worse in game for cost. Its AT capabilities even against a light tank like Stuart is inferior to that of an ostwind.
On average it needs around a minute of chasing around a Stuart to kill (range 35/moving)
Currently it has one of the worse guns in game and other units with similar guns had their weapon improved (like the valentine and KV-8). There is no real justification of a gun this bad.
Should it be able to fight medium tank and win? obviously no but is should brought inline with other vehicles.
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.
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.
I am not focusing on anything, I am simply pointing out the issue with performance of the unit, if in your opinion the aura is too strong I suggest you make the suggestion to nerf and provide your arguments. I have already explained my point of view on auras.
If the unit is not cost efficient in fighting role there is little reason to use it in 1vs1. In addition if the unit can not fight it can not gain veterancy. It end up being something left in the rear with little reason for player to actually move it the front line.
Imo units should allow player that use them better get more out of them and that should including gaining veterancy with bonuses that help it support role (currently only applies to mark target).
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.
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.