Profile of JibberJabberJobber

Early Cold War era is the most I could handle.


I'd rather see CoH3 based on early WW2 where factions like Italy and Japan wouldn't feel out of place. Could give it some more emphasis on infantry gameplay, like coh1, to make the game feel fresh again.

Additionaly I think a change in tec and building cost should be made with the new patch. Increase the cost for the first Tec from 100MP to 200MP, because now it gives you Pgrens without the building and reduces the risk of a T1-T3 rush (You can use the shrecks to survive until your mediums hit the field). To balance things out reduce the cost of the T2 building from 200 MP to 100 MP, because it lost the Pgrens and I fear many will skip it if it costs 200MP.

Just my opinion.

I agree that something like this should be done, altough this way it interferes with things like the Infantry Doctrine 250 and strategies were the Kampenya is skipped.

I personally think Shrecks should be locked behind the actual T2 building, except for Panzergrenadiers in the Mechanized Assault Group. I fear Pgrens into Ostwind rush will become very popular otherwise.

Green cover as sand-bags (so same effect) but extra aura for infantry in it, to get 30% less damage. So also in close comabat units IN the trench have a benefit.

How about giving the trenches yellow cover and an aura of -50% received damage? That would essentially make it green cover at a distance and yellow cover up close, but always reduce damage of explosives (as a trench should).

I don't know if you could do that workaround with green dots tho.

Another thing is, why ost should get recon infantry?
And why should it be PGs, which most certainly aren't anywhere near recon infantry?
Not having something is bad reason to get it.
Otherwise all 5 factions would have stock super heavy by now and ost is hardly only faction without recon infantry but still their recon stock options are above what soviets have for example.

The suggestion is for doctrinal G43 pgrens, which currently have no clear role. The sight bonus they get is small, they get a considerable close/mid range dps nerf and their long range dps is not enough to compete with upgunned mainlines. 50 sight with 4 G43's (with nerfed moving dps) could make the upgrade distinct enough to be worth sidegrading your pgrens for. This is in my opinion a better solution than keeping the upgrade as awkward as it is, but making it dirt cheap.

I also don't agree that Soviets have inferior recon options:
- Vet 1 Mortar and Sniper flares.
- Focus sight, which gives +40 sight to the SU85.
- Vet 1 tracking for SU76/85/ZIS that gives +40% sight and reveals units on the minimap at 70 range
- T70 with 45,5 sight at vet 2 and up to 68 sight in recon mode.
- (M3, M5, sniper, tripwire flares)

Meanwhile Ostheer, while having good recon options, are definitely less late game focused:
- Pioneers with 42 sight range.
- 222 with 50 sight at vet 0 and 65 sight at vet 2.
- Vet 1 infantry awareness for 222/251 that reveals infantry on the minimap at 80 range.
- (251, sniper, upgraded bunker)

Without spotting scopes, Ostheer actually doesn't have many lasting unit-based recon options. That's why I think 50 sight for G43 pgrens could be a useful addition for Ostheer.

Doesn't G43s also come with interrogation ability?
The literal conditional map hack?

I'd gladly trade interrogation for 50 sight range.

Interrogation is not a reliable ability in my opinion. You need to find a crawler first, which only has about a 5% chance of triggering when a model gets shot down. The interrogation itself takes about 5 seconds. If the crawler dies before these 5 seconds, the fow will not be revealed.

Interrogation does provide very useful information, but with the fow reveal being only 10 seconds long and the appearance of crawlers being based on RNG, it's hard to time it with anything.

Additional sight range is however always applicable and always useful, especially when attacking.