I dont like the change on the STUKA vet 1 ability:
...
The only problem with sutka is that because of weird penetration values it was given extra damage vs emplacements. Think thing will allot better once these modifier are removed. |
It will make everything even worse. Considering 1 gren = 1 cons and 1 gren < Rifles\Tommies.
You would either need to skip T1 and pios completly and back your first gren with other grens squads, to hold this key objectives, or somehow play with 1 gren squad, while your pios are beeing build, while they build T1 and while MG42 is being build.
Grenadier can hold an important building, the second grenadier will slight delay but that is less of an issue.
Take for instance rails and metal south right. Now you can either sent the pio to defend the house or run the risk of losing the house. If the grenadier is the first unit it can defend the house until either a hmg is build or T1 and more grenadiers. |
Ostheer
Tech issues
There seem to be some timing issues with certain units and an inconsistent in costs. With the patch system only T2 has a fuel cost.
Suggestions:
Fuel cost of T2 removed building can be build without BP1. New tech required for access to 222 and 251 after BP1 is build. This change can help delay the timing of FHT and 222.
"All out war" icon move to HQ more player friendly. "All out war" now unlock by BP3 not T4. Reasons, slight buff, consistency since most things are unlocked by BP, diversity in buildings.
Early game
Many player avoid grenadier builds and use alternatives since it seems the faction has a small early presense since pio has to build T1 before mainline becomes available. Many people have suggested buff to grenadiers.
Imo buff the grenadier is not a step in right direction since, leads to power creep, they already have been buffed, there 3 version of them (vanilla,5men,g43) complicating the problem, VG are not doing great either. The problem seem to have more to do with allied infatry than with grenadier particularly.
Suggestions:
There are number of step that can be taken for soft buffing Ostheer early game and one of them or a combination of them can be used:
1) Replace staring pio with grenadier.
The change will allow Ostheer to defend important buildings/position since the will be able to reach the at similar times as enemy infatry.
2) Swap grenadier with HMG from T0 and T1.
3) Increase the power level of pioneer.
Pioneer now cost 220-230 but comes with 5 entities. This can solve the issue of grenadier being overrun by earlier infatry since the pioneer will be able to defend them.
4) Allow a early offensive play by giving access to either 221 or 250. Both vehicles would need some changes. 221 should become more durable less lethal suitable for flanking hmg, chasing sniper, countering micro light. 250 could have the power level reduced to be closer to m3 while losing the hull-down/reinforcement utility.
T0
pioneer
Although the change in received accuracy is good it will probably make not allot of difference since reaching vet3 is an issue. Move the all of some of the received accuracy to vet 2 and the vet 2 accuracy to vet 3.
Improve the medic so that it no longer locks units into place and make the ability scale with veterancy so that cost is reduced. Maybe add a recommencement reduction at vet 3 (or an extra entity).
HMG42
Is there a recent new bug that prevents the unit from firing?
Panzer grenadier
The timing of the unit seem to be a early. If the timing remain the same I would suggest to reduce cost to 280-300 and replace 2 ST44 with either K98 or MP40. Upgrades available could become 2 shcrek replacing the ST44 or 2 ST44.
|
The rof range and pen of the jp4 vs allied td armour will allow the jp4 to out dps allied td's handely. Esp once vetted.
Allied td's them self have med hp and armour. The jp4 will trade well vs them since its fires faster.
stug and jp4 are medium td's indeed. Why should the panther also cover medium tanks? Right now the panther put both out of work. Cuz as you say its more reliable. Its turret higher pen better mobility and higher hp and armour makes it so.
And why does the panther that already puts both stug and jp4 on the side line need a buff of any kind?
Allies cant use their med vs med as effectively cuz of the armour difference.
Watch the last tournament. |
The tests say otherwise but ok...
Why don't you start a game with FalixTHM and you can operate the T-34/76 he can operate the PzIV and see what happens after a sufficient number of fights. |
... But maybe i misunderstood you...
Maybe I was not clear enough.
The idea is the ST 44 for VG use semi auto mod. So there default mod use a profile that is similar to M1 garrand.
How ever they have the option to use "full auto" mode (could even be locked behind tech and/or upgrade). In this mode they work closer to ST ST44.The catch here is that "full auto" mode is not an always on mode but is restricted either as timed with MU cost attached or with no MU cost but long CD so one has to be make wise use of the ability.
This design can be used to keep VG performance average but able to be boosted to good but for a limited time.
The design can work regardless if the ST44 is stock or doctrinal. |
I agree...
Nice to see that you agree. Any comments on a redesigned MP44 for VG?
It could work with "carbine profile" in semi auto mode and with elite Thompson profile (good close to mid DPS) (adjusted to cost and timing of coarse) in the full auto mode. |
no one - at least not me - claimed that the ability to properly lead shots via ground attack has been implemented to reduce the performance of the brummbär. it's a neat feature that you can squeeze out a bit more consistent damage, especially against moving targets as in the scenario you mentioned, but it is by no means necessary for the unit to perform well. the same applies by the way to other tanks, such as the KT, KV-2 or IS-2, which also benefit from manually targeting the center of a formation rather than engaging some stray entity very far away via auto-attack.
not to mention there are a lot of other situations, like groundattacking with at-guns or flamers into the FoW or through hedgerows, vehicle crushing or pushing, etc., where a bit of extra player input can get you some advantage. but none of these are essential - they're optional.
and while you are of course entitled to agreeing to disagree on whether this is an elegant design feature or not, it seems at least that you're pretty much alone with your view and are fighting windmills at this point.
Just to get some perspective on brummbar performance in auto attack:
https://www.coh2.org/file/19305/conscript-vs-brummabr.jpg
This is a simply test, conscript walking straight to brummabr and using AT grenade and retreating after the grenade was thrown, no ourah was used.
out of 9 attacks a total of 4 conscripts kills.
You can try the same if you like iwth KT or IS-2 and see if there is any difference. |
it was your ideal after all, i tried a lot of set up but still went back to it.
in the newest version, i change the scope rifle pair to a pair of M1 garand. i think it fit more into the moving accuracy buff. The cover bonus is also made exclusively for weapon section.
M1 when not really used by UKF infatry in combat.
You can always create a "new version" of the weapons and give it historic name like:
Rifle, No. 4 Mk I
Rifle No. 5 Mk I (although that looked different)
one also has to note that there is an used weapon already in game, although the weapon saw little action (mayby and idea for infiltration commandos):
De Lisle Commando carbine |
True, accuracy is the balancing knob that traditionally have been used. But balancing by accuracy is balancing by RNG. Tuning damage will lead to a more consistent result.
It does not have to be one or the other it can be both accuracy and damage for better results.
That is an option. But again, this leads to multipurpose tank destroyers.
Point here is only some vehicles would get that option.
For instance many claim that M36 has to OP because the USF do not have a second TD stock. By giving toggle munition the unit can be separately balanced vs mediums and vs Super heavies. For instance vs medium it could have its range,accuracy,RoF... reduced |