Profile of Hannibal

Just happened this morning.

As any experienced Axis player could tell you, you made several crucial mistakes:

- Maxim did not fire at max range
- You left the Maxim unsupported. Everyone knows that the Maxim reached its full potential only when there are at least 5 Cons around it
- There were no mines around to damage and more importantly suppress the Panzergrenadiers
- You used the Maxim against a unit that had light cover for a split second
- You used the Maxim against infantry
- You used the Maxim

Seriously mate, "Git gud", "L2P" and "dOn't bLamE tHe gAmE".
And, as Katitof always says in these situations: "The problem sits in front of the screen".

Also you could have merged into the Maxim afterwards. All your fault.



So, but now serioiusly:
Maxim is okay against open fields, but if there is any cover it becomes super janky. If units have light cover like in this video, you can basically already pack your MG and try to fall back. Against heavy cover, good lord. Unless your Maxim targets the one guy that might not be in cover at the time, then it's okay. This makes the Maxim sometimes very unreliable to use and is the source of a lot of frustration about this unit.

I think the Maxim should either get a more standardized design or maybe give it damage modifier against units in cover? If the problem is spammability, it could also do with higher suppression, with short setup but long tear down time. Would keep the role as an offensive MG, but flanking is way easier.
Currently the Maxim is not complete trash, but it has a very bad design. Especially in the late game when there is more cover available, it becomes very unreliable.

If the weapon is meant to be "anti garrison/structure tool" remove the stun to vehicle and move it Ro.E.

Sections already have grenades and it will increase the utility of Ro.E. It will also prevent the one unit smoke explosive combo.

If it is meant to be an AT weapon make it homing and revert the changes to damage/AOE profile (I would also replace the stun with weapon disable to avoid stun lock).

The whole point of the winter preview is to avoid "blindly "patching" a mechanic", so make the change in preview and see how it goes.

I agree with the argumentation, but still two points:
(I always assumed that the HGB is the same as or at least comparable to the satchel of Penals stat wise, but maybe I'm wrong)
- Stun on vehicles does not need to go. If enemy infantry comes so close to your vehicle and you park it on such a long fuse, it deserves some punishment
- If we put it on RE, only the anti garrison makes sense. Otherwise REs would have normal AT (80 dmg) grenade and the HGB (300 dmg?). I thought the AT satchel was designed for heavy damage, but a medium still needs 3 shots afterwards? REs would become a squad that could damage a vehicle past the 320 dmg mark. Also not sure if this could cause issues with PIATs, but on the other hand PIATs really need more play.

I don't think this will be a huge issue though.

This smoke/gammon combination comes into effect the earliest from minute 15-20 onwards. It could be teched earlier but at the price of delaying your tank which is not very likely to be done unless you have won anyways.

I think this is a risk the game can take. Let the patch go live like this and if there are any issues fix them afterwards. Better than now basically blindly rebalancing abilities that might not need balancing.

Guards have "Elite" PTRS that are much better than Penal PTRS when it comes to AI if I remember correctly. But I'm pretty sure it's nowhere near Mosin damage. It's an interesting idea but it really gives you no reason not to spam guards when they are already pretty good out the gate at AI since the LMG is usually an instant upgrade.

Pretty much. Guards PTRS have way higher accuracy, which gives them a fair chance to hit infantry models while AT performance is basically unchanged compared to normal PTRS.


I'm not sure where OP is going. If I understand it correctly he wants better AI on Guards "to bring them in line with shock troops"?
I think this is a bad idea. SOV already have shocks as elite AI infantry, why make another squad like that? Guards are a hybrid to push you through the early-mid game and can fight off even a Luchs. They save you from buying an AT gun. They even have decent stationary DPS when upgraded. Of course it's not the very top of AI performances, but it's not meant and designed that way, and their current design also works well. They have a decent nade and a semi-snare. They're alright.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I never played 1v1 personally), but the ideal Mobile Defence game looked like this:
1) hyperaggressive light vehicle play with flamer 251(s) (and maybe a 222) to cause severe pressure early game;
2) force Allies to respond with a light vehicle of their own (AEC/Stuart/T-70);
3) immediately counter that vehicle with a call-in (panic) Puma;
4) follow up with the techless Command P4 and finish the game with the huge resource lead caused by the above.

So no, with the Command Panzer IV now requiring tech, a large part of the excellent synergy that the doctrine had is gone. Replacing Panzer Tactician with the Stuka Smoke would further tone down the synergy with the flamer 251 (or 222s).

I genuinely think that with the changes to the Command P4 the Puma should now be balanced (I've always thought that it was the Command P4 and not the Puma that was the problem). However I think the main problem is that the Puma is such a valuable unit for Ostheer (as at 5 CP it was and still would be their only reliable counter to Allied LVs) that making it readily available at 5 CP again might risk Ostheer players overpicking MobiDef again. And people seem to be annoyed by overpopular doctrines more than anything imbalanced.

Yes, that's what I also meant. Although I forgot the Command P4. The whole doctrine was basically fail-safe. If you have a decent early game you can rush a Command P4, if you screw up your early game you have a panic Puma to even things out. An earlier Puma will just leave the early game safety. Might be okay, but it is very hard to judge if at all/how many problems this could cause.

Brits are basically the only faction that could do a somewhat similar build like that. Early flame UC (comes earlier but by far not as potent as the 251) plus AEC (Puma).