I really don't see how this would improve VG performance against allied infantry mid- to lategame. Please explain.
1) Currently one has to choose between upgrading with ST44 and MP-40 so they are currently "competing". Change would remove the upgrade would remove "competitions".
2) Timing, pricing, reinforcement cost, abilities, vet bonuses will become allot easier to balance on separate unit. |
And that's the problem with your definition of cost efficiency.
There no problem with the definition.
Initial impact is not the only thing to consider with ambush units, or units in general - long term cost efficiency also matters.
Never said it was stop "imagining" things.
This is why cheap abilities can be cost effective, but cheap units we've had in the game needed tons of buffs to be cost efficient.
Partisan had a tons of buff already.
Just go over history of SU-76, conscripts, osttruppen and M-42 if you struggle to understand the concept of unit cost efficiency.
You are the one struggling to understand things not me.
Your claim is simply false. SU-76 and osttrupppen had actually be nerfed because they where too cost efficient when in numbers.
Finally you have countless time repeated that conscript are not cheap so at this point you are simply contradicting yourself. |
Well i'm not the best one to talk about this doctrine, but seperate units seems just easier to balance with veterancy and I saw people asking for it, that's why I put this poll.
That's why it happenned to this UKF counterpart,no?
MP-40 VG becoming a separate unit would be improvement but I would rather have Mp-40 become stock and ST44 redesigned and doctrinal. |
I define cost efficiency as impact, which you get from the investment.
It seem we use the term cost efficiency differently. For me it has to do with if what you get comes at the right price. And for me AI partisan bring at least enough for their price.
AI Partisans are cheap to call-in, on level or so with Engineers, and little bit lower than Conscripts. But their survivability and overpriced reinforce (for model with so bad stats) makes then unpleasant choice. Investments in AT-partisans or Conscripts/Penals will give more effect. In long term as well. Because one of the main core mechanics in the game - units preservation, and AI partisans barely match with it.
Survivability and overpriced reinforce is true for AT partisans as well, but it is specialist unit with unique role on the field and without any counterpart in soviet roaster. So it's save investment, because panzerschreck is always usefull, as well as AT grenade.
Since Partisan no longer come at 40 HP imo one should allow merge. |
You was suggesting replace PO with CB, my point is it is not that of a good way. Instead of 1, now we have at leat 2 ability that need to be worked on. Not to mention the 2 commanders will also need to be tweak. Like, how to make CB useful, where will PO go, or what to do with emplacements regimen ?
Perimeter Over needs a rework and that is that is point of this thread.
So does the Emplacement commander. So it is not me who creates this, the problems are there.
The Ro. Artillery commander can simply deliver too much volume of fire. |
But it is close to useless as it is now, in team game. Like in red ball, counter battery cant event reach the front line. It is a badly design ability in a badly design Commander, which is leftover from a badly design faction, which either should get a major revamp or left dead.
Put CB in royal artillery regimen without reworking is as like remove an ability from from Commander. The Commander itself is not event hard counter LEFH spam.
This is about perimeter over-watch so I will not go into the commander. If you want to debate how good the Ro. Artyllery commander is you probably need to start another thread. |
Once they fix the range problem on Counter Battery, as it only shoots out to 250. if the leFH can't shoot your base, you can't shoot it. Also, it will need a special high accuracy version to actually hit the artillery its shooting at.
The ability does not need to be stronger. A one click counter to Lefh costing 30 munition would simply be OP, especially with little counter play. |
PAK43 shooting through walls and sightblockers is intended due to its lower survivability in comparison to the 17pounder.
It has also to do with fact that Ro.E can clear terrain allow both the 17p to build in more places and to clear a line of fire. |
|
AT weapon are superior to that of soviet crews (about x2.8 better max range).
AT Partisan also get some of the best AT vet bonuses out there like:
+10% penetration
+30% accuracy
+50% accuracy when firing from camouflage
+10% accuracy
+20% reload speed
that are a lot better than AT Storm-trooper vet bonuses. |
I get your point, but please, don't put it in my mouth or trying to elaborate my words in the way, like i am agree with you. AI Partisans are UP, and that's one of the main reasons, in my opinion, why commander is not popular.
The part that I agree with you was the one I underlined:
"Doctrine needs some adjustments"
to which I wrote:
"That is correct."
So I did not mean to twist anything you posted.
(I have edited the reply to make it more clearly thou.)
When you say "AI Partisans are UP" do you mean that they they are nor cost efficient or that they do not bring enough to carry the commander? |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
