Profile of thedarkarmadillo

and they still lose to penal while paying more MP and munition, seems a bit contradictory for the price tag

290 vs 295+90 mun

2 free slot and upgrade viable vs 0 slot

make no sense really

Once vet starts racking up fussies are far better than penals due to the increased sight and especially the nade enabling them to tip engagements. Burst damage is nothing to scoff at. 290mp for a purely combat unit vs 295 for a utility packed unit (vision, flare and snare) that can fight the aforementioned 290mp unit is pretty good. You don't get nothing for the 90mu. You get a lot actually...

Also there's no tech requirement for fussies to start rolling out, unlike penals meaning faster map control. Also fussies get 15% faster cap rate and sprint with vet, meaning even more map control and superior positioning.

What you lose at the start you gain with vet.

Fussies also are one of the 3 axis units in the entire game that negate the snowballing of soviet infantry via fire concentration - equal models means more even damage distribution and less chance of models bursting down.

Hell, the fact that were even comparing fussies and penals when penals single job is brute force, support less AI speaks volumes for fussies.....

Penals are DESIGNED to be strong at the start, fussies are designed to be WEAK at the start... Mid game they level out and late game fussies are superior.

Sherman 76mm is not balanced against T-34/85 because it not fighting T-34/85 it is fighting PzIV and it replacing T-34/76.

Even if it balanced against T-34/85 it would mean that T-34/85 needs slight nerf because it one of the most cost efficient main battle tanks.

It needs to be balanced within the soviet roster to be picked over other soviet units. Assuming that core unit is balanced already against its opposition through other mechanics.

If okw and Ostheer both had a doctrinal Panther with 4 levels of vet you can't cost them the same because "they don't fight panthers" as the factions are designed with a certain cost effeciency in mind and the doctrinal unit has to match up with the factions established cost effeciency.
A 4 vet Panther would need to be cheaper for OKW and more expensive for Ostheer despite being the exact same unit-the only difference being the established expectations in the faction.

Such is also so for soviet doctrinal tanks.

The t34 is cost effective, but this is offset elsewhere in the factional design.
The 85 is a great tank, especially compared to the 76mm t34 BUT compared to the stock t34 you sre paying nearly 50% more and THAT is reflected in its performance. Otherwise the Ostheer /okw overlap units would HAVE to be cheaper than the OKW ones due to the lesser scaling if we don't take the surrounding faction into account.
The context of the faction and the establishmented balance therein matters.

Compared to the unit its expected to replace in the soviet faction I'm not certain the new Sherman will be worth its price point with nerfed vet.

Correct, and they're rather too strong. Though you pay an extra premium on population on captured crew weapons, and you can't /build/ the MG42, you have to capture them.

I do think that these weapons shouldn't be balanced around their crew sizes though, if it's a factional trait. Soviet crew weapons should have the same crew size as other factions, or the number of crewmen should be tied to the weapon, not the faction crewing it. Either of these options would leave room for the Maxim to be buffed, and reduce the problems that soviet crews cause.

I feel that crewed weapons should have value regardless of their crew. One may be advantaged recrewing a weapon with soviet, but one shouldn't be disadvantaged capturing a soviet weapon.
This is true for all but the maxim (although frankly the maxim isn't TERRIBLE now that they made sustained fire not require vet)

The real issue in the maxim lies with the death loop now but that's unfixable unfortunately- however this makes it rough when you don't have those 2 extra models to try and get that gun home.
If it were up to me I'd try something outside the box like extended range and a price increase to try and lift the pressure and reduce the chance of getting death looped. It already wins MG duels anyways due to suppression modifiers so that's fine but it would also allow it to support cons a bit better. All that however is more or less unnecessary in the current form.

And that extra model allows you to do what exactly??
Answer this question.
The G43 also has the benefit of mobile close-mid firepower over lmg. But it's considered shit.

Keeps you on the field longer. Let's you plink away longer. Keeps your snare from sitting in base when you need it more often. Iirc it also gives free medkits, see above.

If I have to explain what more health means I don't know why you are posting on the balance forum.
It shifts grens spec from glass cannon DPS to average health support (although it's above average for ost) if you want DPS GET THE DPS UPGRADE if you want durability GET THE DURABILITY UPGRADE. It's a choice, if one does fit with how you want to use grens, then don't use it. It doesn't mean it's worthless.

The best designed upgrades are NOT ones that you uniformly upgrade all your infantry with, because then it's obviously better than the stock option. It needs to be used in conjunction-to replace.

G43 is weak simply because it's on a 4man squad. The mobility is great but the squad is squishy as it's designed to fight at range. An extreme case would be why ass engies needed the extra man to be viable (because y'know, 25% more health makes a difference)

They are the shit at all ranges yes.

Fixed that for ya