Profile of Hon3ynuts

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?

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.

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.


Show Spoiler

just play the new patch and found that PAK 43 don't have priority vehicle button now. is this intend or bug?

It always has prioritize vehicles on so theres no need for a graphic, it's intended

Regarding callins,

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