First thing that came to mind from that mortars in trenches getting extra range was: I'm gonna ruin some UKF players day.
Test two vet1 mortars with counterbarrage active in trenches against one UKF mortarpit and post results.
Profile of oootto92
Post History of oootto92
Thread: Just more Ideas8 Sep 2020, 09:50 AM
Thread: Sander's personal balance changes6 Sep 2020, 15:14 PM
6 Sep 2020, 12:45 PMUnit G17
Well first off personal opinion has little validity behind it if you do not even show playercard or hold active rank according to this site. You also are plain wrong in many ways: Soviet has the access to most diverse units early on. Ironically enough they do not get punished for this the same way ostheer does.
I clearly went through the flow of 1v1 game if one would choose to play ostheer without current meta call in units. Even though you have limited 1v1 experience in form of only 24 games played you should understand why this is unbalanced. There is no need for mortar or sniper in current meta within the first 4-5 minutes so that variety you claim that balances out being handicapped in map presence and arguable poor performance of grens does not happen.
If your claim of ostheer having such great team weapons is true then wouldn't this change actually nerf them in teamgames? From your teamgame perspective with this change HMG would be few seconds later and gren a bit sooner, for those who want to go for HMG.
As it stands in the current 1v1 meta people are desperate to fix this early weakness by using ostruppen and assault grenadiers. With this change the builds incorporating HMGs would change very little but in addison we could also allow another competitive option for those who do not want to go HMG first in and make grenadiers meta mainline again without touching the unit. As they should be.
Thread: Sander's personal balance changes6 Sep 2020, 10:38 AM
I appreciate the effort of removing the fuel cost of ostheer t1 in order to make grenadiers more appealing choice, but I think that there is more drastic action that is damn overdue. And no I'm not gonna cry about changing them, I've come to terms that they are considered taboo and relic would rather change 4 factions mainline to balance the game rather than one:
Moving grenadiers to t0 and MG42 to T1.
Ostheer is currently "forced" into using MG42 by design should you go for your mainline infantry. This means that the first thing you do as ostheer compared to any other faction that goes mainline is that you start building T1. You are from the start punished for going grenadiers as you immediately fall behind in map presence. The mg42 build time is also slower compared to other t0 units which again puts you behind in map presence.
Sure mg42 is great but if you want it to actively be used to its full potential it requires support in form of vision from pioneer to possibly get that early suppression and force retreat that you need. This is reduced from your capping potential. In addition to this versing USF or SOV you KNOW that they have the potential to flank & spank that MG if left alone, so you cannot use it for capping as effectively. The opponent can choose to try and hunt your mg after hitting that 2nd RM or 3rd con which means that by the time your 2nd gren rolls out those two grens and pio have to be close to your precious mg.
If you choose not to go mg42 not only are you being punished for having dead idle time not building early unit or you are left with a non-combat support unit in form of pioneer. You again also lose the time of having to build T1.
IF you really want to make grenadiers more appealing choice without modifying the unit you NEED to have them in T0. This would put ostheer to level playing field in competitive setting where early game is everything and can snowball you one way or another.
I would really like to hear especially from sanders perspective on why this structural reversion shouldn't be introduced. If we want to make grenadiers into more competitive option without changing them as a unit, I cannot come up with any logical arguments as to why this change should not be gone through with.
Thread: Sander's personal balance changes3 Sep 2020, 15:20 PM
Now when pesky axis fanboy cries about shit grens have been silenced via formation pseudobuff and the 5men grens are nerfed you still are left with ostruppen as a competent option for mainline infantry in 1v1. I suggest removing the faust from ostruppen in order to achieve the wanted death of this faction in this mode.
PS. Love the 10mp increase for infantry sections. You seem to have pinpointed the exact balance issue when it comes to this mainline.
Thread: State of OKW in the meta 1 Sep 2020, 18:44 PM
OK hows this idea for quicker Obers:
Split the current total schwer cost into two steps:
1. Step is to unlock the schwer tier in your hq which unlocks building obers from HQ and allows you to place down schwer
2. Tier is just to deploy the schwer. The gun is ready to shoot and you are able to build panzers from get go. This would also mean removing the useless panzer authorization upgrade.
The Tank timings stay the exact same but you can get obers much more quickly.
Thread: Current state of an AEC1 Sep 2020, 13:45 PM
I hate how the new AEC got it's AI damage buffed making it no brainer jack of all trades in 1v1 instead of its supposed role of grade-A early AT that can scale to the late game. The reason for AI as far as I remember was need to be able to chase snipers but it should have been done by just implementing heavier antisniper modifiers instead of giving it vastly improved all around AI.
Thread: give the okw a sniper22 Aug 2020, 20:01 PM
Tbh it would be refreshing to see some a 3CP sniper for OKW and USF attached to otherwise really shitty commander with pseudo buffs on april 1st.
Thread: give the okw a sniper21 Aug 2020, 22:28 PM
21 Aug 2020, 21:36 PMÆgion
Personally, I say remove and replace all one man snipers.
2 man snipers ?
Thread: Why should a Panzer IV be able to take on a Jackson?13 Aug 2020, 07:39 AM
12 Aug 2020, 20:54 PMSander93
Ah I had understood that damage/reload time would be balanced so that mediums would be 3 hit for Jacksons and increased reload time would have benefited p4s so that they could play around the longer reload time for their advantage. I think this would be a great change if they would somehow introduce the m10 as a default vehicle and put Jackson behind some extra major tier and balance that out. But without this kind of compensation I find it hard to justify why Jackson should be nerfed against medium tanks. But that being said not every faction have the same structure and some have weaknesses and strengths that are necessary for balance. Jacksons should still dominate mediums in able hands if this change would be introduced.
Thread: Luchs II, why should you use it?12 Aug 2020, 17:39 PM
Luchs is lean mean AI DPS machine that OKW needs to match the AI of the two western factions mainline infantry after early game. It justification to volks being damage sponges so using luchs in tandem with them is a great synergy. But because the 3v3 and 4v4 are higher tempo luchs gets quickly out ATd out of effectivity which is why OKW players usually opt for stuka zu fus instead.
In: OKW Strategies
Ladders Top 10