Before you and the balance team do anything drastic with pop cap, please check how many of the GCS games had a USF that was abusing pop cap. IMHO, most of the players who complain about this want to camp until late game, when they can just roll in with their better late-game tanks.
If you have to do something, just make the Priest so that it can't be decrewed. Then put a limit of two of them, but put the same limit on every other howitzer, except the Sexton because anyone bad enough to build that POS deserves to lose faster.
Also, for USF, if you made vehicle crews have higher pop (like 6 or 8), there wouldn't be as much incentive to decrew vehicles unless repairing. Don't know what you would give in return as USF really doesn't need any nerfs right now.
Please be careful when buffing the Scott. Good players are already really good with it. Double Scotts wiping vet 5 Volks is really annoying. Maybe just give them a little longer barrage range.
Lastly, the M10 and M36 were built on the Sherman and should have almost as many hit points. The open-top turret should have given them sight range like a scout car but made them really vulnerable to main gun crits (fixed after recrewing). The M36 should be able to penetrate the front of a Panther most of the time, and probably do around 200 damage.
Popcap fixing goes both ways.
In one way, you have popcap abuse. This is only a factor when USF is still in the game by the late-game (rarely).
The other side of the coin is that you have a lot of garbage units that take up more than a quarter of your popcap, without you noticing. Fancy seeing how much popcap officers/ambulance/AAHT/pak howitzers/scotts take for what they give in return for their performance?
To be honest USF pop cap abuse is never a factor in 1v1s unless the match has already been determined for quite some time. I can see for 3v3 and 4v4 but never for 1s. I always need my vehicles and tanks not just sitting around doing nothing.
Scotts aren't that helpful to be honest. Even in pairs their more of a RNG machine and personally I'd make the barrage have a quicker cool down in exchange for less than effective auto fire.
Jackson should have the same HP as M10 and be faster and/or maneuverable then other medium tanks to really be a quick, hard hitting but fragile tank destroyer. By the way it already does do 200 damage and has 200 penetration which isn't bad by any stretch. Combine it with HVAP and vet 3 it basically has 100% to pen a Panther.
Stuart for attack =good but How long AA Halftrack gonna cost 300 Mp and
AA halftrack for defence - reduce frontal armor of Pz2 to defened itself of rush Pz2 to it.
Why USF should striktly avoid of T1
The main issue with the pz2 vs AAHT matchup is the fact that the luchs never misses against vehicles; even when it's moving.
Defense-wise, the AAHT can bruise an attacking luchs quite badly, and you can finish it off with a follow-up riflegrenade.
The problem is that if the conditions are not perfect, there's no escape for the AAHT.
I really want to see how you'll balance USF late game with all such improvements for the Panther and Elefant.
Panther won't change much, tbh. Ostwind (projectile QoL is a mega-buff) and Brummbar (T4 availability & the fact that you can't predict which vehicle is coming out) buffs will, however. Elefant is almost a buff for USF, if Jackson wasn't such a pile of shit.
- Fix USF popcap abuse
- Fix insane USF popcap requirements on basic units
- Make Jackson not shit
- Rationalise unit pricing for the late-game (officers cost more -> Tier units cost less; 340MP for a minelayer? wtf is this?)
- Improve USF late-game indirect fire options (Pak howie and partly the scott); so that they can break through pak-walls
- Tone down cheese doctrines
We won't do other factions though, until we're sure about the OST vs Soviet match-up.
hmm not sure about bp3 and t4 as ost being so cheap. Like why should you go t3 most of the time with t4 being so cheap, especially with the units like Puma and stug e getting unlocks to cover the gap. Used to be 45 + 50 now 10 + 40, but I guess bp2 being 20 more kinda covers that in a way. Only difference between t3 and t4 is time 60 mp and 10 fuel. I guess though that the brumbar no longer having 120 pen and the panther having no ai offset this.
If people in 1v1 are already thinking about going puma/stug-e & T4, then I think we're in a good course.
One thing we want to shake up is give people an alternative to almost-always going T3 & Tiger.
For 2v2+, where T3 could often be skipped (if a dedicated strategy is followed), we simply want to avoid bringing powerful units too early (to prevent snowballing), and make sure that all units are cost-efficient with respect to their counterparts (to prevent rigging the late-game *cough* OKW *cough*).
Please note my concern about Penals being able to punish cache building much easier than other factions - later in games commandos with their demos will provide a quick hit and run on these expensive caches. The concept is good though - much more decision making about where/when to build caches in team games with a distinct penalty to your fighting ability when doing so early and haevier blow when they are destroyed
That's Penal's niche. If Penals had no niche people would never build them; they would build Conscripts instead.
Don't build caches too early (you can't anyway), and you will be OK.
Late-game harassment should be encouraged; not discouraged.
I think that t34-85 and ez8 should be changed in order to become stronger tanks so that they could fight against something like Panther. Now they're somewhere in between p4 and p4j and that's not good for a doctrine tank. And also the ability "hul down" needs attention 'cause it's free increase of survivability and power of vehicle. For example if you take the doctrine festrung armor or fortried armor the tank will become very hard to kill
We're aware that T34/85 E8 might be in a bad light atm. However, we first want to figure out the right spot for the OST Panther before we start considering what advanced mediums should bring to the table.
When the Panther hulls down, you will probably have to use AT guns or artillery or infantry pushes to make it move.
Instead of building a cache, could those be replaced with a resource truck? Have the truck cost 200mp but make the resource gained equal to 5 munitions/number_of_players or 3 fuel/number_of_players? In a 4v4, being the lone Ost and having to build 2000mp of caches will be less fun than playing Sim City.
In addition, possibly consider letting OKW make resource trucks also. If allied players think that is unfair, then give USF RE's a non-doctrinal 30mp mine and maybe (just maybe) adjust OKW costs.
While what you describe is a nice idea, we can't input that logic into our mod.
I think that the expensive-cache idea will lead to more aggressive/play harassment to shut down people that are trying to hoard resources too early.
Anecdote: it might not be worrisome due to now having only a single available ability which affects acc (FHQ aura been removed) but doesn't this make things like FMR (for mother russia) irrelevant at some points? Basically if you are not engaging high vet low size squads, the bonus is not doing anything? (Just like Valiant Assault).
FMR gives the fastest sprint in the game, technically. It goes up to 11!
Flavour: i like been able to maneuver early on with Cons while using Hoorah. It's kinda prohibiting if the cost is increased. I mean, if the numbers presented are right, you are not increasing by much the close DPS, molotovs are only faster thrown at vet2 and nothing crazy has been done in other aspects.
Close DPS was indeed upped by 5%; that's only to make the curve less retarded (live Cons trade best at range 25).
The biggest buff was far DPS which was upped by 25%. That & the vet bonuses (and green cover, of course) make Cons the go-to defensive infantry for Soviets.
My approach. I still think they are losing some value, even if they get a mp cost decrease since they lose the capabilities of fielding both light AT (which it wasn't bad AI defensively) and AI (DPs) and now they even have to buy back the PTRS.
Option "l33t" piñata dudes:
-Keep the current live version status quo. 360mp-4slots-PTRS on spawn-Drop rate
-Apply mosin/nade changes
-PTRS with old pre WBP performance
-Hit the dirt > changed to "Hold the line" or any cheesy defensive like name. IF anything this goes more to the old "Defensive Stance" approach
Only activable while outside of combat. Can the range bonus be increased to slot weapons to +5 (what Pathfinders, JLI and Falls get). NVM just increase the range to +5 in all since it's a defensive ability mostly (not passive or WOWSHITTOGGLE it during combat)
Basically a slight improvement on their current state.
That could kinda work. The question, though, is why would you pick a generalist squad that's meh-ish, when Shocks are so sexy now. Being forced to start with a PTRS kind of gimps you.
It appears that pre-nerf Guards really worked because of their ultra-high received accuracy & the speed they were attaining that. Low casualty rates meant the squad didn't have to juggle 4 slot items among them.
On other hand, if we reduced their firepower instead of RA, then all squads in the game would just a-move walk up to them.
Option EFA Revamp 2.0
-Cost to 330mp (old cost)
-MAYBE: weapon slots to 3. I think it might cause issues but i can't let it go♪ ...RIP piñata dudes with stuff.
-Spawn with mosins.
-Double weapon upgrade. Either double DPs or Double PTRS. Drop rate to 0.1 or middle ground.
-DPs keep the button effect, the pseudo CC/Snare.
-PTRS gives a different ability. First 2 shots applies a RoF reduction. From the 2nd volley (3 shots onwards), it applies the turret lock crit (you can still shoot). Keeps refreshing if the target stays on target.
-"Defensive stance" see point before.
We though about making guards start with 0 guns and have 3 slots.
However, the thought of 3 DP's kinda scared us. We could make Guards come with 1 forced PTRS to have a middle ground between uniqueness, customisability and good performance. However, we're going to wait and see how the upcoming improvement to Guards will make the unit feel.
I want to think that these have been forgotten, any ideas to improve? HTD, Tank traps, AT grenade assault, Personal AI/AT mines
Feel free to brainstorm.
I wouldn't want to buff HTD yet. This is because how much better Conscripts are at long-range now (they beat G43 grens with Vet). The fact that you no longer have to close in that much means that they might already be able to take MGs down frontally (I haven't tried it!)
PPSh might require nerfs. It's too early to decide though (we want to fix the Mosin first).
AT nades and AI/AT mines, I've absolutely no clue about
-From BP2 to get all tech, it requires 660mp/220f.
-Getting only T3, it's 360mp/120f
-Skipping T3 to T4, it's 400mp/145f
-EFA Patch to get all tech, 560mp/170f (also discount on call in)
PERSONAL CHANGES v1:
Call in discount requires BP3 (it's hard to make it free without purpose IMO).
Tiers 3-4 are independent from BP and BP from Ts. BP unlocks units.
T3 gives Stugs. T4 gives PW. BP2 gives PIV and Ostwind. BP3 unlocks Brumbar, PV and Call in tank discount.
-Getting only Stugs, 260mp/60f
-Getting T3 complete, 360mp/120f
-Getting PW, needs Stugs, 460mp/135f
-Getting T4 complete, n. stugs, 560mp/160f (which also gives call in discount)
-Unlocking only call in discount, 200mp 85f
-All tech 660mp/220f
TBH i don't want to expand on this cause it was already a mess of swapping values to present this "simple" idea which doesn't mess with current timings too much.
That could help.
ATM, we're trying to non-linearise OST tech again by throwing costs around.
We didn't think of BP unlocking specific units, so that would actually be a good idea.