Profile of TheGentlemenTroll

Can we not devolve this thread into a pissing match please.

For my input: having great vet isn't an ideal way to balance a unit if it comes as a lump at the end with no aid to get there. Once enemy weapon upgrades hit the field cons have an uphill battle, and once the enemy gets vet as well all hope is lost. And locking any capability behind vet 3 means losing the squad is beyond catastrophic since there is no weapon upgrade to dampen the blow.

Powerful vet 3 was a cop out and didn't fix the core issues with the unit. We could slap a 0.2 damage modifier on the KTs vet 5 but that's not going to make it a good unit.

I agree that the vet isn't an ideal way to balance a unit. Not to mention how problematic it was back when we had the old Brits drop vickers for con terminators. Even now if Cons are lucky enough to pick up any dropped weapon they become really powerful but I would rather not have to rely on picking up weapons to make a squad useful.

I think either cheaper cons or a buff to their mosins might help them a bit. If the mosins make their vet 3 too strong then a nerf to the vet 3 is fine by me for some more consistency throughout the game.

I play 3 different factions on both sides equally. You have admitted that you only play 1 like an absolute moron. Stop trolling, play the game more.

I'm personally immensely salty that people actually think the Brummbar got overnerfed.

snip.

Personally, I think a mix of features from both series would make a better game.

I liked the frontline of SD44 much more than the WG modes, feels like its prevents stagnation.

The logistics in wargame was much better and I'd prefer if they returned to that.

The division/Battlegroup templete is a mixed bag for me. I agree that you can kinda expect what is coming from certain divisions and certain divisions are much better than others but in the WG battlegroup certain units almost never got used because there were better options. Like you would almost never go the captured french tanks in a panzer battlegroup if you could just get panzer 3+4s, Tigers and Panthers.

The surrender mechanic and vet mechanic are both interesting and debatable. The surrender mechanic made it very punishing for over extending without support and both the vet and surrender mechanic made command squads/vehicles very important to succeed in the game. Maybe if suppression was lower or it wasnt so easy to suppress surrender squads or vehicles than it would feel less gamey.

SD44 also felt slightly smaller scale and much slower. I also found it more difficult than WG in my opinion.

Another issue was core unit diversity, as WWII simply doesn't really offer much diversity. Wargame was fun because every type of vehicle had a multitude of different weapons.

AA for example could have short range missiles, medium range missiles, long range missiles, autocannons, or any combination of these. Even countering them was diverse as some could be killed by SEAD and others could not, arty was accurate enough to barrage known or suspected location, and it became a cat and mouse game with baiting and hunting. Meanwhile in SD44... AA simply is either autocannon or long range cannon and the counters are also too simple.

There was also a big old angry pushback by the WG crew who were upset the game wasn't WW2 WG reskin. Game played surprisingly different than WG and I feel like a lot of WG vets were upset about it.

Hopefully they provide more divisions for multiplayer to keep the game fresh. IMO they didn't provide new units and divisions quick enough in SD44 to keep people interested in the long term.

I will likely be preordering since I enjoy these types of game even against the AI so even when the multiplayer died in SD44 I still enjoyed playing against the AI.

I also wont preorder until I can preorder from steam.