Profile of Vipper

If it's not a viable way to vet your engineers, why add it?

I did not say it was not viable I said that spamming bunker will probably not help win. On the other hand once upgrading with sweepers collecting some XP from base buildings, bunker, mines and other structures would help.

Actually years ago I had pointed out that engineer should have 2 different paths combat oriented with weapons upgrades and slower repair rates and "support" oriented (once sweeper have been upgrade that take all weapon slots) with alternative ways of gaining veterancy (that could include lower XP value).

I kinda feel like that'd just encourage spamming more bunkers to vet your engineers.

Paying 150/60 munition to gain veterancy on pioneer does not sound a a recipe for success and your opponent will get more XP for destroying them.

On the other UKF/USF can slap a weapon for the just for munition cost...

One needs to be very carefully with the wording in poll questions.

"3. Should the Heavy Gammon Bomb be an AT satchel instead?"

I have suggested something similar to that and even I would say no to this question.

I don't know the exact range of a satchel. 10? But it's about that, there is no huge difference.

Yes satchel has a range of 10. 20% is not huge but considerable.

I compared the HGB to Penal satchel as they are basically the same abilities. The satchel ability is not OP, so unless the HGB synergizes extremely well with IS or any of their abilities, there will be no problem (I already addressed the smoke twice).
Also I am talking about the HGB in it's current implementation, which should be clear from my post. Please read it carefully, I never suggested that it should be a homing snare with stun lock and everything.

As I clearly pointed out comparison with Penal satchel are pointless because of the assumption that Penal satchel are fine. They are not. The questions one should be focusing is what is this weapon designed for, is it useful, is it available to correct unit?

Penal do not have grenade infatry section do. IS have little reason to have Satchel on top of grenades

The HGB is basically a normal satchel. Make it a normal satchel then. No stun, just engine damage. If you get stunned/snared by a normal satchel, you very well deserved that because you did not react to the squad closing in, the whole duration of the throwing animation and a >3 seconds fuse.

Penal satchel should not have engine damage to begin with it should had been removed the moment At satchel become available.

And in addition normal satchel should be removed by penal once they upgrade with PTRS.

(Imo it should not even cause one shot engine damage since this feature has been removed from other weapons and for good reason and it should work more like a soft snare.)

Finally the AOE should be lowered so that one does not drive his vehicle on the Penal to blow them up.

I have stated thrice now that I do not think it will become a huge issue for multiple reasons. You have not addressed anything of this apart from repeating that they can be used together with smoke.

And I have explained many time that weapon in its current form is simply cheesy and not suited for IS and imo it should be changed.

Yes I just completely disagree on that. Balance team should fix the glaring issues and not spent their limited time on minor things unless they are very easy and unlikely to cause issues.

You are assuming that they actually fixing the big glaring issue but for every "major" problem the fix they tent to create a couple more. Take for instance Super Heavy tank changes they tried to "fix" the issue and they created more.

On the other hand persisting issues like XP values, vet bonuses, reinforcement times, costs, doctrinal vehicle spawn options get occasional attention when the fix are simply, straight forward and lasting.

What you are suggesting here is
1. A complete rework of the ability
2. followed up by a change of the unit that has access to it

This is not an easy thing to do and requires a lot of time and testing for honestly little gain. Nothing about is "simple and easy". What makes you so sure about your idea not having to be fixed "again and again" (which is an overexaggeration, many things have been quite fine after the first patch and potentially a small hotfix) as well?

What I am suggesting is revering to original design with minor change since the "solution chosen did not work and will work even worse with coming changes.

Simply this, simply that. There is nothing simple about this suggestion, as I've already told you. Turning it into a sticky AT satchel for IS would be a huge gameplay concern for obvious reasons and "in the worst case" having it replace the Sappers AT grenade is not a straightforward solution either as it'd force players into getting low range snares which they might not want (amongst other things).

This is not what I have suggested.

It is my opinion that weapon should be single purpose and not dual...

If it is "anti garrison/structure tool" remove stun and move it Ro.E. because there is little reason for a smoke and a "anti garrison/structure tool" combo on IS.

If it is AT make homing.
In the worse scenario make it Ro.E. available only, replacing the AT grenade offering extra range or damage.

Having it replace the AT sections' AT grenade doesn't make any sense because it's stock tech that would then only do something for a singular doctrinal ability in 1/9 doctrines. I didn't see any proposed alternative to replace it with.

Again this is not what I have suggested.

Furthermore I have no idea why you think Gammon Bombs and smoke are such a huge issue in the first place. Almost all British tanks already have access to smoke anyway (so barely anything changes there with the addition of the Pyro smoke barrage) and using them to kill a Schwerer (which is rare anyway) requires
1) end stage tech
2) a boat load of munitions
3) an enemy that isn't defending it
4) massing all your infantry squads in one location which can have consequences for map control
and 5) a possibly dangerous overextention
which seems like a fair risk/cost & reward situation to me.

A single Pyro squad can move into any bunker/AA gun frontally smoke it and blow it up even the ones defending the base.

There no reason for IS to have the utility of anti structure weapons.

Now allow to repeat the suggestion:

Route A the weapon has a new designed to become "anti garrison/structure tool".
Changes:
loses immobilize affect
Is moved to Ro.E. a unit far more suite for such role.

Route B the weapon returns to its origin as an AT weapon.
Changes:
Becomes homing
has immobilization swaped for other temporary critical
has AOE damage rolled back to original values

Now if a "soft snare" prove to be to much for IS the following changes can be implement:
Moved to Ro.E. and replaces the AT grenade, work similar to AT grenade but has longer Range (or more damage)

TH. IS. get also access to this weapon depending on how it is designed, if it is a superior AT grenade then they start with it.

None of these changes are complicated or difficult to implement and they will improve the game by removing the cheese and either making gammon bomb used more or making Ro.E. more attractive.