THAT right there is the issue.
Go to reality for a second. A T-34/85 getting behind a Tiger is an instant dead Tiger. No ifs or buts. Dead. Kaput.
Go to steel division 2, which is quite realistic in its portrayal of distances, flanking, combat capabilities etc. As long as you can pen a heavy tank, you can kill it as easily as a medium tank.
No go to coh2. You can pen the heavy tank as much as a medium tank, you can even get behind it, but none of that matters because of the gargantual health given to heavy tanks.
This is the root of the issue for me. Heavies got armour nerfs, but they have so much health to compensate that flanking them is not viable because they would take 6-7 shots from a medium tank to die, which gives plenty of time to bring help, shoot it back, have it miss shots while chasing etc.
This is not going to be popular, but I'd like to see Heavies trade health for front armour (and a subsequent nerf to repair rate to prevent faster repairs) in order to make flanking much more viable and lethal.
So far, all your ideas have been so on point, this one especially.
I would also love to see heavies trade HP for armour
"but these guys stick out like a sore thumb"
Honestly, this sums it up perfectly, they're not particularly bad looking, just stand out.
I see your point, but there is some basic rules, which all commanders should follow. It's about good UI support, which was brand identity of vCoH. No matter when they were created.
P.S. If smartphone remain the same, then the quality of both pictures should be near by the same.
Who tf cares if the portraits dont look 100% like the 2013 commanders
In my opinion, the new commander portrait's do not reflect the look of the other portraits and stand out to the point of making it look like a mod is being used and not in a good way.
In your opinion, should they be changed?
use the pak 40 skin with slight modifications and call it pak 38 reduce pen, give first strike bonus , done
That's a new asset.
Currently, it feels like Panthers, Jacksons and Fireflys make any mediums useless as soon as they hit the field
Also, who though giving a TD, the Panther, anti-infantry capability was a smart idea?
I think 60 range should be reserved for anti tank guns and casemate tanks. I think it could be interesting if Panthers had less HP, and the same range as Mediums (40) instead of the 50 it is currently, and if Jacksons and Fireflies have 50 range instead of 60.
And as I said above, I think the Panther’s Anti infantry needs to be nerfed, as it is a tank destroyer. If I could, i’d nerf its coaxial MG and remove the Pintle MG upgrade, and reduce its cost accordingly.
Except it has less sight and range that all other TD's.
If you give it sight and range, then it can lose 100% of its AI.
Without parachuting paratroopers just reconnaissance platoon. They do not have intelligence bulletins?
Can we call this commander - Airborne? No skin, no parachute animation, from the airborne theme here only the retreat point which is called the airborne retreat point. Total disappointment, I didn’t want to see such an airborne commander since 2014.
Yeah, Calling this doctrine airborne is stupid. Get rid of the planes on paras give them a call in off map naval barrage and rename to Naval Infantry (Your text..
I thought SU85 and FF are ok TD, no need nerf.
Jackson is overperforming for its costs though, speed accuracy pen damage and 2click self repair.
We can start by making Usf crew repair 75% slower, and see how. 2 click repair without using resources and popcap, needs to do worse in today patched games.
I say the reason why many feel allies TD are too strong, is what are supporting them now. Thats why i suggest to try redistribute Panther armor. At least it bridged a gap between Allies med and AI heavies. Clearer distinction in units tier.
Now that Ostwind and Stug got some buff.
I know doing this armor thing seems a big change, but i think its not if you go down the numbers.
Focus on panther's ahistorical role as a TD in this game, as Axis doesn't have a TD. (Don't make me laugh by mentioning JPIV)
Raketenwerfer needs to be changed as we all know. It play a better supportive role rather a sneaky backstabber, meaning has to get closer due to its range and sneak cuz of camo.
Which we all know is a disturbing feature and it should be changed.
Remove Camo and Retreat completely and make the range the same as any other. Rak should be 5 man and should be able to move faster as passive ability than any other AT gun. Since it is vulnerable, that is why it should be 5 man, to give a little edge. No abilities. Just has the passive to move faster. Although it is the most vulernable AT gun as it is currently but it should be not made too weak its survivability as it currently is. That is why 5 man is enough.
Currently on both sides, allies and axis it is frustrating. Please change it.
OKW has no proper mobile infantryAT unit. Sturmpio with 1 Pzshrek is lackluster for 70 ammo which is a lot. It is not worth it and if anything it should be improved. They should be able to get 2 Pzshrek and each costing 60 ammo. Why should it be 70 ammo. It is a lot just for one only that proves with little effect.
Every faction has proper AT mobile infantry unit and OKW with the worst. What is the definition of proper mobile infantry AT unit is the following. Has high Vehicle Damage per second and has has snares in addition. Sturmpio with one Pzshrek has the lowest Vehicle overall damage and no snares.
It would make more sense if they had 2 instead. 1 Makes no sense and it is useless.
If it should remain 1 Pzshrek than I suggest Volksgrenadiers to get it instead but locks their STG upgrade if the AT upgrade is acquired. Because factions such as USF and UKF can have a unit Royale Engineers with 2 AT plus snare and Riflemen with 2 AT with snare. That is my point.
To sum this up. Rak should be locked in the beginning and becomes only available after 1 base built.
Volks can use Pzfaust in the beginning like Wehr does. So now not only the MG is locked as it currently is and now Rak.