I find the raketen to be better than a pak 40 for most of the game. It only becomes worse when theres multiple tanks or allied vehicles that have higher armor values. You can't build 2 at guns and be safe like ostheer, but you do threaten early light vehicles a bit more effectively
I also dont understand the poll but i voted the first b/c i think thats keep it the same?
Units that can move while clocked should not be able to use devastating off-map and on-map attacks. The counter play is too hard compared to the play and response time is too sort.
That includes I&R, UKF sniper, cloaked PG/stormtroops, partisan, commandos....
Camo should be used for recon and ambush (static), not for cloaked hunting.
Pathfinders in general seem like they have the best camo for this purpose(recon and ambush) they suck when moving, lose it if 1 guys out of cover and only have 4 guys with RA 1.
The artillery should be the same as on the WC51, locked behind major and on a global cooldown.
Aside from that Maybe delay it a couple seconds, but I think its nice that this and the mechanized artillery are actually useful vs vehicles, I would like them to retain that property.
4 men doesn't mean you get shot to death as you can usually retreat from those situations, they more often die b/c of explosives so RA doesn't really matter as much for many of the wipes they may endure.
4 man squads using 3 guys to recrew support weapons does suck though.
Hopefully next patch the 251 can be improved so its more useful without the flamer, that would proably help the faction be more aggressive with the support weapons in the mid game, when they have no light tank to rely on.
So far they seemed to get as many kills as my volks with stgs when i used them in tandem. I thought they would be bad but i think the RA really helps and the smoke is very useful.
The smoke nade range is very poor, perhaps that could be improved with veterancy, as i think most other units with smoke have that bonus
Considering these guys get free upgrades they are under priced, but I think doctrinal units and abilities should be better than vanilla squads, to encourage using diverse armies, so it seems fair to me.
The smoke nade on these guys is really nice too but not too strong if your just gren spamming(better with pgren support), and like the volk stg, now everybody has smoke nades
In retrospect it seems like they realized 4 man squads are a bad idea after ostheer since everybody else has 5-6 man options. If grens/pgrens "performed" the same but resisted wipes like 5 man squads wher could go from being the worst to the best faction.
Is there any justifiable balance reason for this unit and the pack howitzer not being able to retreat?
Like Would they be too strong if they could retreat? I certainly don't think so. It seems like they just wanted to make them different for the hell of it.
That have the very same target size of any other mg crew...1.25...
Its my understanding that holding an mg increases RA by 25%, so thats like 1.25*1.25 = 1.56 RA
thats a vet 0 230 mp unit facing 3 vet 3 units with a value of 770 + munitions upgrades. Mg34 is terrible vs brits, but at some point throwing enough resources at an mg should let you win.
If a vet 0 mg could stare down multiple units of vet 3 upgraded infantry the game would be so broken, only mgs would ever be built.
Mgs don't do much at all vs blobs which is bad, but its not like that mg should ever win that fight
Tanks in coh1 weren't wipe machines like in coh2. In coh1 it seems fairly common to not rely on tanks and many builds may not include vehicles altogether.(Moreso for US and Brits) Lategame there is often fuel float.
In coh2 you need tanks to win games. They are just more manueverable and potent.
So vehicles costing only manpower is ok if they aren't game ending death machines like the old tiger ace as the most egregious example.
When they make coh3, they need to make sure they design the resources understanding - how important manpower, fuel, and munitions will be. Should you win if you have more fuel and munitions from map control? or is manpower ultimately more important?
What should the costs and benefits of teching (to vehicles for example) be and what sort of time delay or investnment should there be to reap these rewards(Map control, vp lead, mp bleed, ect).
Either system can work, so long as they go through the process and ask all the pertinant questions and flush out whatever system they choose to implement. In coh2 they said "well it was like this in coh1 lets just copy pasta" even though the economy is different and units have different levels of effectiveness.
TLDR- If they have a comprehensive and well thought out and tested design and review process for the economy, tech and unit timings they will suceed, if not you will have nonsense and imbalanced units, tech choices or strats
United States
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
