What about something like this:
Swap m10 and jackson
Jackson reverts to its old glass cannon design
M10 gets bumped to 60 range but turret rotation gets slowed to firefly levels.
HVAP rebalanced to scale with vet with reduced cost and cooldown.
Pen increased slightly.
Adjust price as needed but still keep it on the cheaper side of things.
This ends up that the m10 is a squishier but more mobile and affordable firefly that has a faster fire rate. Good dps and mobility but still requires a modicum of planning to make use of like other TDs.the Jackson returns to a high micro but extremely powerful TD and sherman variants take the role of in your face and up your ass AT.
I don't think munu for Calliope barrages is a good idea for USF. They burn through muni more than everyone else already
Making their rocket arty require doctrine and muni seems like too much of punishment
Its an avenue for balance at least. What's more, munitions should be strained for all factions and choices should be made like they are for fuel imo. If the calliope is a doctrinal rocket arty that can also be a tank I think a muni cost is acceptable. It would be a trade off to giving every single infantry squad you build BARs.
I don't think they need to be stock, the issue is that they fill roles that stock units fill better. You will never see heavy usage of either AT sherman when you have a faster, harder hitting, longer ranged Jackson that can take just as many hits to knock out. There's no need. Even with a non doc 76mm you won't see it ESPECIALLY if it locks out WP for the regual sherman. What's more having a non doc 76, even if it never gets picked absolutely removes the m10 even further from the game than it already is.
I like the idea of specialized Sherman's seeing some play but the faction isnt set up for such a thing primarily because of the Jackson.
Dozer could probably find a home though for some more durable mediums play but frankly it FEELS like a doctrinal upgrade.
You're acting as if games lasted a grand total of 10 minutes. Back when stall for IS2 was popular/viable it was my second vehicle after T70, and would usually get to vet 3 before stuka CAS was even unlocked. It's fundamentally a very good light vehicle, and I like it way better than the USF AAHT, which I find horribly unintuitive to use. I'm not even joining the debate on "is its AA capability OP" - just pointing out that it is way more than just AA.
Admittedly I don't use/see it very often these days, but that's mostly because Ostruppen/5 man grens = no stuka CAS and few OKW commanders have a loiter. And because, you know, T70 exists.
So you don't get the vehicle that's not just religated to AA most of the game because there's plane meta is gone but it's totally worth it for more than just AA? I'm not convinced especially since I still see ostwinds, the occasional centaur and both flak traks.
To me it seems that without the AA component the quad is a dead unit.
Now there are things we could do to open up its window of use that might make it more attractive--nerfing the T70 is certainly an option (I suggest turret rotation and buff that at t4)
or making it come sooner. T3 contains one must buy, never buy and 1 only get to shoot down planes. Make t3 cheaper. Make an unlock for the T70. Perhaps gated behind mobilize reserves? Make t4 require the side grade so that t4 timing remains the same.
Also, an option could be to reneable reinforcement off it when upgraded when t4 is built so that there is some sort of reason to actually ever have a quad near the front in a time when tanks can ohk it.
Could replace its vet with an Aura ability.
There's options but removing its only desirable trait imo isn't one of them.
That is an aspect you have to consider though. The pop cost of the M5 is only 5, and thats just incomparable to the centaur bofors or ostwind. In fact the only AA vehicle to take up less or even EQUAL pop is the 222 at 4 and the m5 is vastly superior to the 222 though proportionally more expensive.
In 1v1 where supply cost is a huge deal, the M5 quad is the single most pop efficient AA unit. That is more important then its ability to do other duties.
Put another way, if you could buy a 4 man squad for 120mp and 3pop that could minesweep, repair and cap but have no combat capability, would it be worth getting? Would it be too cost efficient for what it does? To me the answer is yes.
Not saying the M5 as a whole is overpowered though, just that its too good at AA for cost by a long shot. I understand that soviets have a lack of AA options-I main them after all, but that is not good enough justification for its current performance.
the thing is though, it isnt going to be doing anything at all but AA. the 222 retains scout ability and if still armoud probably already earned its keep 10s of minutes ago when it was serving as a LV hunter/shcok unit for its timing. the quad has no such luxury. its the most cost effecient because thats all it is full stop. if there is a quad out it was a move to do that and that alone, all other AA from the 222 to even the emplacements generaly are built for more than just AA aas they bring more than just AA to the table.
you more or less created vehicle crews aside from wanting sweeping too and they exist.... without the additional cost.
every faction has a few boons and areas they are cost effecient in, the only AA the soviet can muster hardly seems an issue being one of those things when its so easily taken out imo. for example that 222 we mentioned from earlier can be used to dive and take out the m5 should the time come but i have yest seen anyone dive an m5, despite the similar costs to take out even something greatly more valuable like rocket arty.
Well yes, and at the same time its honestly feels kinda unfair to airbased abilities.
Speaking about single strafe leiter I can care less, considering they are cheap. Abilities like fragbombing and IL-2 bombing requre balansing asweel in my opinion, because they drop bombs quite far away from the targer so its usually impossible to deny them.
But abilities like CAS where planes are flying over specific area are easy to deny, considering that other circle base arty abilities, do pretty much the same and just as deadly, but they cant be denied completly.
This is my concern, some of the most powerfull air-strike abilities are un-countarable, while Okish abilities are easily counterable and all of them cost the same.
Its whole another topic really, point being at least other AA units have somesort of a gamble when you face them, you can try and use airbased abilities and maybe they do at least some damage, M5 in its correct state simply pretty much disables them, there is no point of using them if one is around.
stuka close air can eat a regular 640hp tank in a single pass and you would like the ability to prevent that to be up to RNG because it would be unfair that the player clicked 2 times while there was a hard counter around and stopped it?
it seems like your issue is more in the design of off maps and not specifficly the quad.
AA should by definition make air based abilities ineffective (thats what the AA stands for) IMO he AA of all factions shoulkd do its job and air based abilities should be the damage dealers and arty abilties should be the area denial type ones as there should be counter play present for the powerful ones. you wont find me defending encounterable abilities. quite the opposite actually.
ther should be no RNG involved with AA while there exists the ability to instantly remove a tank from game with an air ability. perhaps the required avenue is a toggle for AA mode with a finite range available on all AA units but having a hard counter not do its only job to make the 2 click no work abilities be able to eat tanks or pin all your enemies infantry is an absolute no go from me.
Here is where problem lies, it feels like a lot of ppl, including you, sees any kind of nerf as a "nuke". Lets say any other AA unit requares around 4-5 seconds of attacking the plane, while Quad requares ~1 second, why it cant be toned down to be ~2-3 seconds? It still would be x2 better then any other AA unit, without being ridiculous. Thats my point, and I thought that was oblivious.
Even if an army has a single AA unit, even if its not the cheapest one and fastest one, this still dosent justify it being broken in its perfomance. And it is broken in AA, there is no point arguing with that.
Nothing in M5 justifies its capacity to solely counter 200+ mini abilities, without them even delivering at least some damage, by staying AFK and not even controlling M5.
It can be strong, it can best but in a sane way.
perhaps i misread your tone. it read as "other AA cant shoot down planes so the quad shouldnt either"
also the quad itself costs half as much as those 200mu abilities and takes up pop cap, if buying upgrading and positioning is afking and not even controlling idk what clicking twice and having the planes obliterate enemy infantry or armour is. and it remains that the quad is the easiest of all AA platforms to remove from play, especially since by design it reduces the number of mines the enemy is laying.
until now there has not been a quantifiable nerf proposed aside from "it does and it shouldnt" now that we have a direction we have a discussion. people, myself included get defensive when peopl broadly suggest bringing units inline by one metric while largly ignoring everything else. i remember when an army of quads couldnt shoot down planes if it was the last thing they did, and in the case of SCAS it usually was. there is no alternative for soviet AA. it needs to be efficient.
the least forgiving with absolutely no alternative or support is good at its job when compared to its counterparts isnt shocking... people use the same logic for the jackson, despite it also being the most forgiving and superior in every other metric...
What Ostwind has to do with Quad? I dont get it, you was shown a comparison of Ostwind vs Quad in AA, you can replace ostwind with any AA unit you want, results will be the same.
I said, if you take ANY AA unit, from ANY faction, ALL of them like: Centaur, M15, bofors, Ostwind, AA HT, Mech HQ. Perform on the SAME lvl in their AA capabilities. Some might be better some might be worst, but they are still comparable and there are no clear winners.
What is this retarded aurgument that Oswind can do X thing thats why Quad has to do Y thing, more over Y thing has nothing to do with X.
In regards to your claims that ostwind has armor and can counter bla bla. It has nothing to do with unit AA capabilities. My reply was addressed to Angelus, who claimed that lowering AA perfomance to have same general lvl as other AA units, suddenly would make Quad useless and pointless to have.
It can still be best AA unit hands down, but it shoudnt shot down planets in a blink of the eye using communist laser beam tecnology.
All other factions with all their other AA have alternatives or suplimentary AA.
USF has pintles.
OST has pintles and the 222
Ukf could build a bofors
OKW has free AA on their base, can build multiple 2cm pits and has pintles
Soviet can have 1 pintles on field max, and they are attached to the most expensive tanks in their entire roster AND are doctrinal, limited to 1.
ALL other AA is also more durable or survivable.
USF can disembark and screw up tracking (can also use this to generate vet for other tanks or give themselves a Vetted AAHT)
UKF centaur can bounce shots and has a large health pool making it impractical to dive
Ostwind can bounce shots, has health and has mobility
OKW has smoke and again that free AA on their base which can't be stressed enough as bonus AA
Soviet AA not only lacks durability it also lacks any way to escape from a bad situation.
I've also never seen a kraut mower used as a shock vehicle like I have for both halftrack AA variants (not since it got its mobile suppression and retaining reinforcement after upgrade removed anyways)
Odd for sure the least flexible, least survivable AA does AA better than any other. We should definitely look into this more while complely ignoring the surrounding army and traits as well as the unit itself except exclusively its ability to do its only job.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
