It's easier to just refer to the unit itself.
Because micro light vehicles; that's confusing for the sake of confusing and adds another layer of characteristics which is not needed for the game or discussions. There is no need to attempt to categorise the light vehicles into smaller subsets. It'll go crazy and we'd end up with a category micro-light but player-micro-heavy vehicles doctorinal transport self-repair category and even more and as you cited some exceptions too. Also a WC51 cannot be categorised with an M20 or a 222. To make things worse, we could even start categorising infantry like Shocks and Pgrens with CQB and other CQC units.
All definitions are arbitrary. Units are just grouped by common traits that many of the community deem to be important. Brushing a category of like this makes no sense, since the category can make sense in context. Obviously it does not mean that creating more categories is benefitial, but again, context matters.
Those "micro lights" or "super lights" share a quite important trait: They are decently countered by small arms fire. If this is deemed important for the discussion, categorizing them makes sense. A T70 would be closer to mediums in that regard than to the M3, UC or WC51. So talking about "LVs" could just create more confusion. |
Are you trying to say anything in particular, or just wanted to repeat after me that its AT is weak already, but use more and different words for it?
Anything that uses something of higher caliber then small arms can deal with at "at that stage of the game" and unless it would be converted into a tankette, it will always be capable of dealing with vehicles it deals right now, because they are cardboard units.
No I said that the T70 has decent AT capabilities for it's timing. Especially regarding that it is supposed to be an absolute AI specialist.
SU-76 will never be replacement nor alternative for it, regardless what would be done to one or the other and the only possible way to touch T-70 would be to make sure 7th con is unlocked freely with T3 instead of T4.
I agree on that, although this would probably be the nail in the coffin for Penal builds unless those get a buff as well.
One could also think about creating better synergy between Penals and SU76. That way the SU76 could better fill the AT gap that SOV T1 builds have and maybe allow for build without back teching? I am not sure how this could be done though apart from some PGren-like combined arms aura. But also this would probably include major reworks since Penals and SU76 were designed to function independently of each other, plus it would not eliminate the current issues with the T70. It could somehow give the SU76 a niche again that sets it apart from the SU85. |
T-70 got 45 penetration.
It can't even scratch anything larger then Luchs and even Luchs takes ages to kill and its utterly roflstomped by puma.
Its PTRS on tracks in terms of AT.
No shit, AI specialist gets roflstomped by AT specialist.
The T70 has plenty of AT capability for its purpose and time window. That's part of the reason why the unit is such a no brainer for SOV.
Lago's proposal might be an idea, but touching SOV T3 in general is quite an issue. Nerf the T70 and something else needs to be buffed to compensate. Additionally, SOV can barely survive without LVs at the moment, at least in smaller modes. Optimal rework would basically also remove the strong need for an LV in the early mid game, but I am afraid this idea is quite far fetched. |
how about making the ml-20 fire shorter barrages(fewer shells), and reduce the cooldown?
because if you miss your intended target, you have shorter cooldown to try again somewhere else, instead of waiting 1min-ish for cooldown. keeping the dpm/dmg per hour? the same. making it a more versatile arty, right in between the b4 and lefh105?
I think this would make it hugely annoying to play against. These two units are meant to be area denial, forcing the players to really choose important targets. Against infantry the first 2-3 shells are all that matter, afterwards all squads will be gone one way or the other.
This would be a really huge buff to the unit because of that. These harassment tasks should be done by normal mortars that are more vulnerable and don't have as much alpha damage. |
how can it be worse than lefh when it makes 200dmg per shell and only one shell less? This is clearly better ...only one shell less is good compensated by 40 extra dmg per shell
i think the fact that allies have mobile arty and better sov commander is the reason that ml20 is not seen often...not that they are worse or something
No,
Ml20 deals 200 dmg per shot. And fires eight rounds. (one additional round when reaching vet one)
LeFH deals 160 dmg per shot. And fires 10 rounds. It also fires a bit faster(like 0.25 sec faster per shot)
Other than those, others are exactly the same.(including AOE)
LeFH counter barrage ability decreases scatter.
If MMX's sheet is correct, the ML20 is just straight up worse against infantry in basically every respect. The only part where it is better is the AoE from range 6 to 8 - by doing a whopping 10 damage instead of the 8 damage of the LeFH. In all other regards it's worse. I am not sure if it's a typo or not, but the sheet says ML20 mid range damage is 0,15 compared to 0,35 of the LeFH.
Don't forget also that the ML20 also fires more slowly by about half a second per shot (0,5 sec in my book), meaning the barrage times are roughly the same, but the LeFH gets 1-2 shells more.
So if the sheet is correct, the ML20 could excel against static structures with the higher base damage at vet 1, but that's about it. |
Sad but true. In fact in T3 or even low tiers SU-76 don't have place. I think even if it will be available in T0 it still the same. If pgrens were moved to T0 and this made them playable, SU-76 could be moved to T4 with some tweaks. At least in T4 you can find work for it.
PGrens are a completely different topic. They were moved to T0 and became viable not because they suddenly become a much much better unit, but because they just came sooner and you could fit them into the build order without needing to stall and potentially even forcefully retreating your pios to get the building up.
Moving the SU76 is not a great idea in my opinion unless you want a complete rework of SOV T4. This would force it to become a StuG-like unit and SU85 must then be reworked to work against heavy units only. That's quite a task at this stage of the game. |
|
Nope, these abbreviations are either gaming standard or just made up and have become standard in the community.
Most common ones are:
AT/AI: anti tank/anti infantry
LV: light vehicle
medium: medium tank
heavy: heavy tank
TD: tank destroyer
If there's people talking about specific infantry units, it's often easy to guess by context, but otherwise just ask here which ones confuse you. |
it is underperforming plain and simple.
(things OP missed:
range advantage
passenger can compared to UC where passenger can not shoot
Comes in the same commander slot as M3 )
While I agree, I think the last one is a commander issue and not one of the unit itself. |
I think the problem is less the total cost rather than the timing at which you have to expend those.
I know, but people keep repeating these "free officers" and "free grenades" phrases that are complete nonsense and try to use it as arguments how good they have to perform with their favourite faction (not saying that brick top did it here, but in general) to beat the OP enemy factions. |
Compared vs USA, Ost has to waste time building structures, and USA gets 'free' units as part of the tech up.
All Im trying to say is the factions are totally different and just because one gets free nade/snare as part of building their T1 building, doesnt mean others should (they get other bonuses instead).
The special USF structure is a different topic, but I just recommend you (and also Codguy who once again made this claim) to add up the costs for each faction.
No one is paying that much more than another faction. There is no "free" nade/snare/weapon upgrade, because for Axis this is priced into the teching, whereas Allied factions usually have side techs. These differences are good and part of the faction flavor, but overall factions pay pretty much the same in resources.
Interestingly however I have not heard yet that all factions except OST and UKF get a free fifth (and sixth) man because UKF has to pay for bolster.  |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
