You could make the m10 the nondoc medium counter (High DPS lower pen) and the Jackson the nondoc heavier counter (Lower DPS high Pen).
Other factions typically have 2+ units that counter tank unit types, IE Light/medium counter (Su76, Stug jp4) and a Heavy Counter (IE Firefly Su85 Panther). Issue is right now that USF only has one so it has to take up 2-3 tank type slots (Light/Medium Counter, Heavy Counter, Brawler(ish)). Therefore you get a TD that has high dps, high mobility, and high pen making good against literally everything. If USF had another Medium TD option than the jackson could be made to solely focus around counter heavy tanks and be more similar to the Firefly/Su85.
If you just added the m10 than USF would have 0 nondoc options against Panthers Tigers etc.
Why not just make the normal AP and HVAP shells a toggle with different attributes and long change over time? That would promote combined armored pushes against jacksons but still allow it to perform all the roles it needs to in the usf roster, just not at the same time (think isu152) |
I like that you specified that rifles will win mid close with no cover but when volks sand bags are brought up you call foul... |
Tank destroyers hardcounter tanks.
That's their one and only job.
Big tanks are still tanks.
You want Tiger to counter its own hardcounter.
You're running into a wall here.
The point is that a tiger IS a big tank, an expensive tank, but is no more effort to counter than a little one. It takes a few hits more. That's it. Allied TD pen is too high. It should have a chance to bounce, because it's not a panzer 4, it's a tiger. It's not 120 fuel, is 230. The counters shouldn't be the exact same with damn near the exact chance to pen. THAT'S the issue. Not that it has a counter, but that the counter invalidates it.
Also usf tanks can heal themselves, a tank that can take a beating then pull back and heal itself would be broken beyond belief. You can't have it all. |
Armour on a case mate TD is quite useless, I mean it's nice to have but penitration mobility or a turret is better.. Either you are fighting other TDs in which case armour doesn't do much, or it's fighting other mediums in which case if they are in range and you have messed up.
For its role the jp4s armour is plenty a boon.the way I see it is its for mediums and more importantly enemy TDs, only the enemy TDs have too much pen so it mostly relies on its target size and ROF against them.
A turret would be better of course but it's armour against properly balanced allied TDs would be perfect vs what could return fire |
The problem I see with rifles is, as with balancing most allied infantry, Volks. Double gunned rifles are better than volks, but at a massively inflated cost. Rifles cost more off the hop, then need a side tech to unlock racks, then double the munitions to be able to be confident against volks which is absurd. Volks are handed everything they need to tackle anything while somehow remaining cheaper than the competition, and the only competition they are comparable in price ALSO need to side tech for basic tools and will get Absoultly roflstomped by volks anyways.
The match up of rifles and grens feels right, grens win at range, rifles up close and both their weapon upgrades reflect that relative balance, but for volks of course they get to retain (and actually slightly improve) their long range dps while massively improving their close range which tosses everything up in the air. |
Buff it through the roof like overwatch and armor co
"in an attempt to reduce the over use of JLI, which as you can see by not bothering to even hot fix a price increase we totally stand by the 250mp building spawning 4 man sniper squads effect on balance even though we decided that even non sprinting 2 man sniper squads were OP but enough of that *ahem* we have made some adjustments to the volks mp40 package"
changed from granting a 10% reduction in target size to a 100% reduction scaling with vet (instead of reducing target size that "reduction" now becomes a chance to reflect the damage back at the shooter)
Also now grants 5 weapons
Also no longer mp40s but instead the okw release Ober lmg34
And instead of costing munitions it grants them I guess?
And the opel blitz is now a maus but no longer provides an ability cooldown buff to keep it balanced
Price unchanged. |
Why not do a global upgrade like in COH1?
Pay 300 manpower, 30 fuel and all present and future Riflemen come equipped w 2x BARs
for free. In COH1, all Sherman 75 present and future changed to Sherman 76 this way, too.
Plus, they had the + bonus (Sandbag armor on the tank) when buying the overpriced top .50 cal pintle.
If you think that's too much, throw in grenade upgrade there too
BARs for all rifles for less fuel than soviet pay in just getting basic tools for their "core" infantry? one of which is the worst grenade in the game, yet still more expensive than it is for ost to unlock 3 entire units and a snare idk...
especially given how powerful double armed BAR rifles are
and would they retain weapon slots to pick up guns on the ground? if so THAT wont be OP /s
if so you are removing the players ability to adapt to battlefield conditions
and also destroying the weapon rack system entierly
and USF intended design of flexibility
id go with no on this one from the ground up... |
I don't think that people claimed that RW should be as good as Zis while being cheaper.
I personally was responding to a claim that RW is as good or even better than Zis. It is not, it an unreliable weapon that can be killed by one shot.
but there is not point in even bothering playing a numbers game to compare the 2 as they are incomparable due to costs and techs. the most they have in common is that they shoot at tanks and sometimes the zis can cloak. it would be like comparing combat engies and obers because they are both 4 man infantry squads that are at the mercy or armour. there is no point in even engaging the comparison.
id lose the moving cloak, slap an extra model on the rak and try and fix its infatuation with shooting the ground. i dont think the okw need a proper AT gun (especially from the word go) when they already have so many AT options, and were even given a snare.
|
i agree that the isg flame rounds are awful, slow firing, high scatter and low damage combine for a rather lack luster ability that for its intended role falls way short of grenade assault s
i also like the idea of buffing the opel blitz, as a slow moving, weak halftrack its really nothing to rave about, maybe low key aura effects like cooldown or rof would work? (synergize with both the isg and its flame rounds as a passive player or with mp40 volks as an aggressive one?)
idk
i also like the idea of a 120mm, that would be dope and allow going mech instead of med which would do wonders for the commanders flexibility. |
So one faction should be completely reliant on munition to have a chance late game? Doesn't make sens. No more munition then surrender?
If the enemy rolls out heavy armour and you have nothing to deal with it you might consider turning the bot down from standard to give you a little more wiggle room.
But ideally, I would have HVAP as a toggle instead of a timed vet ability with more exaggerated properties that truly make it designed for heavy armour--characteristics would include a longish aim time/reload/cooldown delay between shots so that despite the higher damage DPS is generally slightly lower and slightly lower accuracy (mitigated by heavy tanks target size) so that using HVAP full time would be inadvisable. Normal shells would have more dps and accuracy making them prime mediums killer shells. There would be a time between switching shells (kinda like the isu) so that the jackson would do well against one or the other, but a combined force of medium and heavy would trip it up slightly as it would only be properly armed to target one or the other at a time instead of whichever might die soonest.
The idea is that it's still a single TD designed to fill multiple levels of role, but not all at the same time with 100 % effeciency regardless of target. |