Winter Balance Preview Changelog

If we lock smoke behind Vet1, how are Puma and the AEC ever going to be able to get enough vet to use the smoke?

Hurting vehicles?

Both are now on a similar level with respect to infantry-hurting. Thus, they would never, ever, gain vet, until the enemy fields a vehicle.

With a purpose to only counter vehicles, then that does seem fitting. AT guns don't get vet until they start hitting vehicles either.

The situation you describe only applies to live-version AEC. In the mod-version, the AEC is not able to swoop-in, score a few kills and swoop-out. Thus, there is no need for Pak guns to be so tremendously lethal against either vehicle.

Technically it's able to swoop-in and swoop-out though, just not score those few kills though, right?

Seems well suited for spotting for some offmap artillery still, at the very least.

Hurting vehicles?

Yeah, I personally never really had a problem vetting with Pumas since they can kite mediums easily if you have to. AEC would definitely be on stricter timing with the basic 40 range though.

Hurting vehicles?

What if the enemy doesn't field a vehicle for a long time, if you field your AEC first?

Yes, the Puma has the acceleration and range and sight to kite medium tanks. It does require a bit of effort though, and it's not all roses. The Puma is the most expensive light vehicle in the game (for a good reason; since it can nullify all other factions' light vehicle investment).

The AEC has neither the acceleration nor the range to kite medium tanks. If the AEC doesn't have the smoke when the medium tank the field, then it can do absolutely nothing. You might as well never build the AEC in the first place, which is what will precisely happen.

I would be up for swapping the veterancy requirements of Treadbreaker with Smoke. However, doing so means that the AEC would never, ever be built before fielding a Cromwell. Although, that would make a late-game AEC a very interesting proposition, and would address some of the issues Brits have with snares, in a *buzzword* asymmetric *buzzword* way.

Again. I thought that the issues that people had with light vehicles is their shock value, and how they can force/wipe squads off the field.

The AEC and Puma can do neither of these. What is the issue with letting the AEC and Puma be more survivable than their murder-oriented counterparts?

Live and let live.

are you guys thinking about making the stg44 upgrade for okw volks not taking their weapon slots or is this out of scope aswell? It is a real pain in the a** to not be able to get dropped weapons from the enemy

are you guys thinking about making the stg44 upgrade for okw volks not taking their weapon slots or is this out of scope aswell? It is a real pain in the a** to not be able to get dropped weapons from the enemy

It'd obviously be a much bigger pain to have STG volks with LMGs as well.

are you guys thinking about making the stg44 upgrade for okw volks not taking their weapon slots or is this out of scope aswell? It is a real pain in the a** to not be able to get dropped weapons from the enemy

dont upgrade all your vols squads.

and do you know that almost all allies infantry got some nerfs in in this patch to bring thems to wher infantry scale.

that mean after this patch okw infantry will be the strongest for some time.

It'd obviously be a much bigger pain to have STG volks with LMGs as well.

you have never seen concripts with mg34, have you?
im not voting for the option that they can build them, but if one spams LMGs on his rifles and looses one, i think its only fair that normal okw inf can pick it up

dont upgrade all your vols squads.

that is a bad idea for several reasons:
-unupgraded volks suck terribly in late game
-your unupgraded squad might not be nearby

and do you know that almost all allies infantry got some nerfs in in this patch to bring thems to wher infantry scale.

that mean after this patch okw infantry will be the strongest for some time.

i have played two matches on the mod and as far as i experinced it, allied infantry is still REALLY strong

it doesnt have to be two slots

you have never seen concripts with mg34, have you?
im not voting for the option that they can build them, but if one spams LMGs on his rifles and looses one, i think its only fair that normal okw inf can pick it up


that is a bad idea for several reasons:
-unupgraded volks suck terribly in late game
-your unupgraded squad might not be nearby

i have played two matches on the mod and as far as i experinced it, allied infantry is still REALLY strong

it doesnt have to be two slots

it is a good idea. keep the ammo for mines. upgrade thems alte game.

Just a sheer question. Is it possible to make infantry pciable weapons (like schrecks) to have healthbar and be destroyable like normal weapons (hmg, at guns ...)


Also I found one (rather old) bug, that should be fixed. Dushka and USF hmg are not targetabble with attack move command and thust almost indestructable except by unreliable attack ground command

you have never seen concripts with mg34, have you?

I don't think the MG 34 should be droppable anyway. The damage is so high it's like capturing a Sniper Rifle on your infantry squad. Obers get away with it because they're designed for it and have counters. Conscripts with that though, are downright overpowered. I once had Vet 3 MG 42 Grens grab an MG 34 and proceeded to melt Vet 3 BAR Riflemen like it was nothing.

He's not really talking about the axis LMG. He is talking about if the Allied enemy drops one of its many weapons: BARs, M1919, Vickers K, Bren, PIATs, DPs, PTRS, Bazookas, then STG44 Volks can't steal them. It is not balanced as other squads with upgrades can continue to pick up weapons even though their upgrade involved more than two weapons (for example fusiliers with 3 g43).

I don't believe this would have been Relic's intention for the upgrade. It was part of the sloppy translation of Miragefla's mod ideas.

What if the enemy doesn't field a vehicle for a long time, if you field your AEC first?

I would hazard a guess of not rushing for a light vehicle because the metagame apparently demands everyone rush Light Vehicles.

What would you say to an OKW player that builds raketens before any vehicles hit the field? It's a matter of building the wrong units to counter the opponent's options.

That said, an early AEC still performs as a deterrent as a vehicle that can handle axis vehicles up until the p4. Or even still, the AEC could sit behind the frontlines at the ready for what the opponent thinks is a surprise luchs. I can't recall if the AEC can get the commander upgrade, but that would be another great option that doesn't necessitate getting veterancy when you rushed an AEC to counter vehicles that aren't there (yet).

I feel like a proper component of veterancy is using the unit correctly. As in, competent usage of a vehicle should result in veterancy, instead of usage of a vehicle should result in veterancy that makes it competent.

Yes, the Puma has the acceleration and range and sight to kite medium tanks. It does require a bit of effort though, and it's not all roses. The Puma is the most expensive light vehicle in the game (for a good reason; since it can nullify all other factions' light vehicle investment).

It's a mobile turreted AT gun. It does it's job well , but the Puma for Ostheer necessitates a limited edition commander and a doctrine choice. For the OKW its a bit better, but putting out a Puma works best as a counter to a fast T70 or Stuart. Once tanks hit the field, the Puma has to take a supporting role, and it's presence alone means a fuel investment taken away from real armor.

Raketen projectiles ignoring terrain like the T70 might go a long way to break OKW's crutch on the Puma, especially now that their old crutch is wielded by Sturms.

The AEC has neither the acceleration nor the range to kite medium tanks. If the AEC doesn't have the smoke when the medium tank the field, then it can do absolutely nothing. You might as well never build the AEC in the first place, which is what will precisely happen.

You're forgetting a major component of the AEC: it is a side tech choice between it and the bofors. You can ask yourself if it is alright for there never to be a bofors (A hint, the answer is yes. ) for the same reason. If the AEC is clearly the superior choice 100% of the time, there's actually a problem.

Right now the AEC is what keeps OKW from being able to use a fast Luchs to their advantage, which is usually a good decision. Against Ostheer it's more about the Cromwell and handling the sniper than it is about light vehicles. But nonetheless, the AEC remains a sidetech unit that UKF can keep in its back pocket unless they really want that bofors. That's very noteworthy when trying to see how it fits into the greater UKF faction design.

Again. I thought that the issues that people had with light vehicles is their shock value, and how they can force/wipe squads off the field.

With the T70 and Stuart. The AEC is entirely different in function, and so is the Puma. The Luchs has never really enjoyed the same kind of shock value or squad wipeability, but the Luchs has to chase allied squads. The 222s are a strange and special case in their own right. Both the 222 and Puma have risen to prominence because they are the best bets to counter the T70 and Stuart.

The AEC and Puma can do neither of these. What is the issue with letting the AEC and Puma be more survivable than their murder-oriented counterparts?

Well first off: is it absolutely necessary to do this? And again, what exactly are you equating as 'counterparts' to the AEC and the Puma simultaneously?

I don't think every light tank and vehicle should be conflated together and scrutinized. Especially if you consider the various reasons that light vehicles are so prominent in the metagame.

Yes, the Puma has the acceleration and range and sight to kite medium tanks. It does require a bit of effort though, and it's not all roses. The Puma is the most expensive light vehicle in the game (for a good reason; since it can nullify all other factions' light vehicle investment).

in my experience it is lacking the pen to reliably counter medium tanks, especially at long range

and one question i havent tested: does the puma win vs the stuart with stun shot in the preview? because in vanilla the stuart won that battle

and one question i havent tested: does the puma win vs the stuart with stun shot in the preview? because in vanilla the stuart won that battle

Stuart wins easily in preview if using shell shock stun shot.

in my experience it is lacking the pen to reliably counter medium tanks, especially at long range

and one question i havent tested: does the puma win vs the stuart with stun shot in the preview? because in vanilla the stuart won that battle

Stunshot doesn't stun anymore. Thus, if you get harassed by a stun-shotting stuart, you just move away and come back when the debuff is gone.

Of course, if you stay still and eat Stuart's attacks like a chump, the result between live version and preview version will be indistinguishable.

The UKF could do with some slight changes to the 25pdrs to make them more appealing, and they could do with having a smoke barrage available to them. The rest of the patch is fine.

Personally I think the UKF emplacements need a fairly drastic overhaul: I'm not sure why Relic designed them the way they did. Given they eat popcap and fuel I think Sappers should be able to dismantle them out of combat for their resource cost (or resources proportional to their remaining health) so they can be moved or so that UKF can transition to more mobile forces.

Outside of the scope of this patch though.



On the actual matters of the patch:

• I really like the edited StuG-E although I think it should have a new ability instead of Target Weak Point: doesn't make much sense to have a precision AT strike on an AI vehicle.
  
• Infantry non-clumping seems to be working great.
  
• Not sure how I feel about Penals as an AT squad and there's a bit of a disconnect when Guard PTRS works as an AI and AT weapon but Penal PTRS is only AT. Without the potent AI penals and their eventual flamethrower I actually ended up going T2 more. T1 used to be an infantry advantage in the form of Penals and the sniper in exchange for more AT vunerability. Using T1's AT option by converting Penals sacrifices its AI strength: it's essentially an emergency conversion into an inferior T2.
  If T1 needs an AT option for the window where T0's AT is insufficient and neither T2 or T3 AT is available I'd rather see it in a way that doesn't neuter T1's strength. Perhaps you could put the doctrinal baby AT gun in T0 as a worse raketenwerfer or provide more effective method of munitions-killing vehicles? If the AT satchel was standard then snaring with a Conscript squad and satcheling with a Penal squad might be a workable light vehicle counter. Maybe even make the T0 AT grenade available to Penals too in place of Oorah.

I see problem with new pure AT AEC.

If the newly conceived AEC meant as only light vehicle counter, then can not intervene in time to fight.
Unlocking side tech and long building period not-allow respond quickly for enemy build.
Instead will always be better rush Cromwell and deal enemy light vehicles with mines, AT guns and piats.

In my build i dont count with AEC anymore. 75 fuel which slows you at getting Cromwell.

I was testing the AA capabilities of the different AA halftracks in the cheat mod and it appears that the USF M15A1 halftrack will aim its guns at strafes but won't fire on them at all.

I was testing the AA capabilities of the different AA halftracks in the cheat mod and it appears that the USF M15A1 halftrack will aim its guns at strafes but won't fire on them at all.

Could you tell me which strafe ability you used, and what angle of approach you took?