An example of a decent 3v3, 4v4 map would be Whiteball Express imho. There is enough room to allow flanks against enemy rocket arty and enough room so that howitzers and rocket arty barrages have to be aimed a bit more thoughtfully and not just in a general high traffic area. Sadly the base sectors are a bit too far from the VPs which makes forward HQ a must-have and the map lacks cutoffs which limits tactical depth. Other than that this is one of the few teamgame maps on which indirect fire is not OP.
If opponent can field multiple rocket arty pieces, the game was not equal and you were losing long before 1st one arrived most likely.
This is not true for teamgames in which AT saturation can be high enough that building just another tank gives no real benefit. Then you build rocket arty, wipe AT and inf and even though the enemy has 400FU in the back, he has no MP to build new squads or reinforce. Rzhev winter in 3v3 or Crossing in the Woods in 2v2 are perfect examples of maps in which rocket arty dominates. This forces western allied factions to go Royal Arty (Sexton) or Infantry Company (Priest doc) 4/5 times on these maps, just as SOV and OST are 4/5 times expected to field ISU and Elefant on them. Imho map design doesn't match the gamemode. Crossing in the Woods should not be a 2v2 map and Rzhev Winter could be a 2v2 map instead of 3v3, it would be far from great, but still better than Rails and Metal, etc.
I think the ISU-152 could do with a rear armor nerf from 155 to 110 (same as Elefant/Jagdtiger) so that it's more vulnerable to flanking Panzer IVs. And then remove the IL-2 bombing run from the commander together with removing the Stuka Dive Bomb from Jaeger Armor.
I totally agree with putting best teamgame commanders back in line with others. Is there any chance that while the 70 range TD doctrines are getting equalized Breakthrough commander ultra half map arty would also be moved to another commander and replaced with something else like mortar HT? Mortar HT would help all the Mechanized mains to bring indirect fire especially against mortar pit and wouldn't be a half map wiper like it's now. I think this is a fair move considering ISU commander losing IL2 and Elefant commander losing Stuka dive bombing. Former Breakthrough arty could be moved then to Feuersturm, or moved to Scavenge doc and Scavenge arty moved to Feuersturm or sth.
Don't get me wrong, I am against an open trade sending MP/MU/FU to teammates, but the discussed abilities mostly have cooldown and are not commonly available and don't have the flexibility to break the game in my opinion. The most they have ever impacted the game was when the heavy was 9CP or sth and you could roll Tiger Ace 13 min in the game due to friendly airdrops.
The issue for me is more that you can transfer mun from SOV to other factions that are usually more muni starved.
Well, OST doctrines allow it to airdrop what I think is 150 MU or 50FU for 200MP with some commanders. These resources can be picked up by OKW too. SOV can also airdrop fuel for an ally. Some resource transfer methods have always been in the game.
Also every SVT crate transfered to an ally is 2 less mines planted by SOV and USF buying 1 BAR is worse upgrade than equipping Cons with 4 SVTs, so it seems fair enough for me.
Pick the top one. He looks at the horizon with worry of Germany being swarmed by allied armies. The bottom one has 80 IQ crosseye stare. Actually I think I like the bottom one too.
People keep repeating that ISU-152 can bounce but seem to ignore that even when it bounce it does damage. It actually has one of the highest deflection damage in game.
It does 120 damage on deflection up to 162 with "mark vehicle".
People don't mention 120 damage after 10s reload because it's not very good performance for a 260FU vehicle.
If you make calliope like other rocket arty then give it a price of other rocket arty, vet requirements of other rocket arty and vet bonuses of other rocket arty. Cooldown is ridiculous even when vetted.
I personally find calliope HP and armour not necessary as it functions just like Katy and Katy doesn't need these extravagant features, after all it's a backline unit and should not engage in direct combat anyway. If Katy is a must in teamgames and works fine with its 160 HP and low armour then Calliope is trading useful features (lethality) for less useful ones (survivability). After all people build Calliopes to kill stuff with them from afar and not to sit safe in base waiting ~50% longer than other arty pieces to barrage cuz vet is trash.
Lowering armour and health too much would be so highly unrealistic that it's a no go anyway. It already is 3-shot to kill, so 1 less shot needed compared to other shermans. It also costs more than the M4A3 sherman.
In teamgames try to avoid situations in which you fight engagements with 2 players simultaneously. It is impossible for 1 person to win 2 seperate engagements each being attended by an opponent. You're at disadvantage and it's easy to lose units this way.
Both units are too strong. Sturmtiger was played by Stuve in UTT2 and got to vet5. They are both excellent at getting rid of enemy AT guns and MGs. They have a bit different playstyle but both can wipe squads with a single shot. One does it from out of sight and has stupid autonade throw, the other goes in close and gives you a choice of staying and dying or going home. You can't nerf one without nerfing the other.
Its weird thinking that a Brummbar does the job of killing infantry better than a SturmTiger. I always feel bad when teammate picks a ST over any other units, feels like trolling almost.
Brummbar can't drive frontally to 2 ATGs and kill one, ST can.
Relic Entertainment
Reto.GarGamel 
°NOOBMarkov.- 
