Profile of Hannibal

the numbers contradict each other.
first the numbers are lower than in the ffirst row then higher. That would mean the roundis not always better

Exactly this is what they say, and also what Vipper said.



Apart from that: If this discussion does not improve in the next posts, thread will be closed.

I'm against that change.
Blitzkrieg is a very good ability for both offense and defense and easy to use. Hull down is not, so thtis would be a decent nerf to OST tanks. Blitzkrieg also allows mediums to flank better and threaten TDs.

Seeing which route the once great "Total war" series has gone (taking out core factions from the games and reselling them as on-disk DLC while simultaneously now pumping out another shitty to mediocre game every year to milk the player base), I fear that CoH3 might go a similar way.

We've seen parts of this in CoH2 already. Factions that were batshit broken on release. Nobody with a bit of honesty at Relic could have looked at this and said "yep, that's a balanced state to start with and we can sort out the rest later".
The factions were planned to be OP to give incentive to buy them if you want to continue to have fun in one of your favourite games. Also it is questionable if a couple of units is really worth the price they are asking for at release. In my opinion it is not. Other games release whole DLCs with story, characters, items and even cinematic cut scenes for similar prices. And then there's the ingame store where you can buy skins (maybe forgivable), but also commanders which make up a huge part of the meta. Most of them were also broken at release to make people buy them.

I'm sure that there are many people at Relic that are passionate about the franchise and want to produce a good game, but I assume that the corporate pressure from Sega will be too much.


I'm not sure if I want to see CoH3 released. If this game is a shitty DLC festival, then our playerbase will be split even further and we will end up with basically two unplayable games.

Sure this is specific to the MG42? I thought all MGs have their gunner in the front unless closeby cover (or sometimes janky algorithm) sends the other crew members to a spot in front of the MG.

Changing it could be quite a buff for MGs, not sure if that is needed in general. Assuming that it can be changed by the balance team at all.

I also sometimes felt that the crew should protect them more, but then again - logically thinking - no sane person would send his units in front of the own MG, that would just get them killed. Also the attackers would likely focus the gunner first.
So if there really is a need for rebalancing, I think there should be a way to do it without breaking the authenticity.

I'm not sure about the current balance of PTRS cons, but ehat the commander does is that it adds to your options. Like Ppsh upgrade, like the big T34 tank or the OKW P4 variant for OST.
There are also commander slots that give you a straight up better unit, but adding a decent alternativ is in my opinion thr best design