|
Osttruppen have created a number of issues since they allow Ostheer to skip T1 easier. On the other hand the unit lose most of it useful in late game. Here are some suggestion that imo might improve things:
1) Unit now build from HQ
Reasons:
slow down unit production
deployment speed more consistent across maps
2) Reinforcement time to similar to pioneers
Reasons:
imo reinforcement times should normalized according to units status (support/mainline/elite/crews)
3) Medit kit vet ability replaced by "hit the dirt"
Reasons:
There is no reason for another Ostheer unit to have the same ability and "hit the dirt" fit the units defensive role.
4) LMG upgrade removed, when T4 is built unit can be "refitted" for 40 manpower with Osttruppen legion starting target size 1, that can also merge, without cover mechanism.
Reasons:
Unit to weak in late game.
Changes to the commander:
Supply drop now provides mortar or leig instead of hmg and/or pak replaced by RW.
Gustav brought inline with other similar abilities
Osttruppen reserves replaced by AT Osttruppen armed with PTRS/panzerbushe
|
Maybe making bolster take up 1 weapon slot for Tommies would be a good change. Therefore you either get 5 man squads with 1 bren or 4 man squads with 2 brens? Might create a trade off for bolster instead of it being a must get after t1 tech.
Imo it should simply increase the entity number but not provide the extra model which would have to purchased separately. That would fix the pricing of Tommies/Sappers |
Was that really unintended? Cause if they had only given that to the 34/76 I think it would be better against infantry than the 85 which would be odd
The 85s main gun isn't that much better against infantry so the mgs put in a lot of work
Yes it was unintended and T-34/85 was supposed to be worse vs infatry. T-34/76 only received the buff because of the "high" tech cost.
Both units simply used the weapon file so when one was buffed so was the other. |
... If you don't get the Katitofs and Vippers of this world going with a provocative edge a thread like this will most likely just fall by the wayside.
...
Pls leave my name out of it. |
....
On the opposite side, the Churchill is absolutely shit at 19 pop. It should definitely lose some pop cap, 1 or 2, and get some repair speed back in the form of damage reduction and less HP, like the KV1 got. Cromwell should also be made cheaper, 110 fuel is far too much for what it brings to the table.
BRENs I don't disagree, but some touches on sections are needed imo, buffs and nerfs.
You are aware that Churchill comes with heavy sapper right? |
Actually the Command P4 fares very well vs infantry. I just ran a quick test with 6 Valentines/P4/Cmd P4 vs either 6 Volks or Rifles in 1v1 engagements. Although it's hard to tell how much error this test has, Valentines needed between 23-45 seconds to kill the enemy squads, the P4s were both at 20-30/35-ish at range 30.
The Command P4 does not seem to be worse than the Valentine against infantry, rather even better than it. And the P4s themselves did not seem to differ that much.
Interesting experiment.
Even if PzIV AI is slightly better Valentine has a better gun due to superior AT.
As I pointed out the problem has more to with call-in requirement than the performance. |
Do you have the right stats here? is the "C.Panther" a typo on your end?
stat are correct its typo.
If the stats are correct, it seems like the command P4 would be more consistent in its damage with the higher near radius and lower scatter. Not sure what RoF is for either but CP4 doesn't seem that bad on paper.
It problem has more to do with ridiculous requirement than performance since the tech and CP make it come late in all modes and one is better off building some other tank.
It it was me I would change the gun to have switchable munition, HE be similar with Stug -E(with sorter range) and a hallow charge mod as AT.
Its buff is really good though, right? Is it still -20% received damage? I feel like it was changed a while ago but to something less powerful but still good.
Aura is 0.9 |
I think I phrased it ambiguously, but I was mostly comparing to the normal P4. The Valentine is not an option as Ostheer, so this info does not help you if you need something to deal with enemy infantry.
As ostheer one is better off building an ostwind since it comes earlier and is deadlier.
The main reason to build a C.Pz as a fighting unit imo is is one skipped T3 and went straight to T4. |
AT yes but AI?
Reload and scatter area are very good on the Command P4. Plus it has the same MGs like a normal P4, so overall it probably does perform decently vs infantry.
valentine
AOE
AOE Radius 2.5
Distance near 0.25
Distance mid 1
Distance far 1.5
Damage near 120
Damage mid 48
Damage far 24
80 DMG distance 0.67
Scatter
Scatter angle 6
Distance offset 0.3
Distance ratio 1
Distance max 6.2
C.panzer
AOE
AOE Radius 2.5
Distance near 0.75
Distance mid 1.25
Distance far 1.875
Damage near 80
Damage mid 28
Damage far 4
80 DMG distance 0.75
Scatter
Scatter angle 5.5
Distance offset 0.25
Distance ratio 1
Distance max 5.4
Damage drop off for PzIV is simply to high compared to the Valentine, damage mid 28/48 far 4/24
Other thing worth noting although not related:
Penetration CP
Penetration near 55
Penetration mid 50
Penetration far 45
Val
Penetration near 120
Penetration mid 100
Penetration far 80
And valentine has 0.75(vs0.5) moving accuracy, XP value 1050 (1970) and shared veterancy. |
Are you sure about this?
Stat wise the Command P4 gun is quite good vs infantry compared to a normal P4, also MMX's simulation shows that. Can't remember though when I last used the Command version. And while the gun lacks AI power compared to the Valentine it also has another MG.
Valentine has a superior gun both in AI and AT and vet faster.
The only thing C.PzIV guns has is reload. |
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
