Profile of Hannibal

The fuel caches cost 250 mp for an output of 3 fuel per min if I am not mistaken
and
for ammo caches cost 250 mp for an output of 7 ammo per min.



So say I want to get extra manpower by trading fuel. I trade 3 fuel effectively gives me around 83 manpower.

Trading 7 ammo should give me something like 35 manpower

I'd say the ratio is more like 2MP for 1 mun. This goes for stuff like mines (usually 30 mun for 2 models, which usually range between 50-60 MP), the Soviet flare trap (10 mun for 25-30 MP). A goliath should cause a squad wipe (100 mun for ~240-280 MP), otherwise it's usually not worth it. Grenades etc should also cause at least two models dropped directly or by pushing the enemy out of cover. That's at least the ratios that I calculate with.
Fuel is very hard to nail down, as you don't use it for utility but buy units. difficult to say. Gut feeling tells me that it's somewhere at 3:1, maybe 4:1. That would be the ratio of MP to fuel in tank pricing. However, if you think that you can salvage a Kübel for 5 fuel...

ober LMG is a much better upgrade than worse g43 and 1 more men, just for comparison, g 43 for green cost 45 mun and are better than pfusi and the cons upgrade give cd bonus in cover, bonus experience and reduced reinforce cost for 50 mun, u would have a point if the upgraed was soo good that it justified the base cost in mp, it is not

again they literally are 1 more men and worse g 43 for 90 muni


i think that was the point for the mod team, a substitute for volks , right now they cost too much for their dps , either reduced price or increase dps , if they want to make them different just copy paste rifle garand


and again the logic of being eraly so they need to be bad is stupid, do ass green, pathfinder and ass eng perform as bad a pfusi cause they come early ? they are not elite units, they are worse penals

While I'm not sure if the Panzerfusilier design is perfect, they are a very good unit. They come out slightly worse than Volksgrenadiere, but scale way better with their upgrades while also giving the option for an early AT nade. They're cheaper to reinforce than Riflemen (which you compared them to), and also they have six men.

In your comparison with Grenadiere, you're also neglecting that they have a higher health pool. Grenadiere have 4*80/0,91 = ~351 effective health, Panzerfusiliere have 6*80/1(is that correct? not quite sure) = 480 health, so about a third more while Grenadiere do "only" 10-20% more damage with the upgrade, depending on the range. Also the DPS dropoff with model loss is less on Panzerfusiliere due to the squad size.
It is debatable if this justifies the 45 mun that you pay, but with the upgrade they are very cost effective. Also, few other factions can generade such a big one the move wipe potential as OKW with G43 Panzerfusiliere.

And to your point if scaling and utility should be considered for pricing: Yes, they should. This was also the reason why Conscripts were pretty shitty for the last years, because they were "versatile". Which they are. The problem is that you need to pay extra for that versatility, which caused a ton of other issues.
You also defended the Volks vs Riflemen balance in a previous discussion because you could bar up Riflemen which would help in the long run. So in other discussions you also added the perspective of scaling to unit performance and cost.

Bazooka Range seems like shit at first since it doesn't even affect the Elite Bazookas (it only affects the standard ones), and only grants a measly 5% range increase at that (for a total of 36.75 range, 35*1.05), but because of how the range stats work with bazooka, to my knowledge it will also essentially increase the accuracy and penetration of the bazooka all the way out to its new max range (albeit by a factor of only 5% still), which could conceivably come in handy. It also makes it a little easier to kill vehicles trying to escape, but the bazooka is trash at killing stuff anyway so meh.

I don't know the bulletin in the attribute editor, but range increase does not necessarily also increase the accuracy. In the editor, there is a "far range" and a "max range" attribute. For most weapons the variables have the same value, but from my understanding if the max range is greater than the far range, accuracy etc will be the same as far range.

Long story short:
I assume that you only get a accuracy buff if the bulletin modifies the far range. If it modifies the max range, probably not. I have not tested this, just my thoughts. Testing it would also be a huge pain in the ass.

Cons get suppressed with the first burst pinned in the second. Shocks don't. If OKW is freely blobbing and rushing you after early game then something is wrong.

SOV has the Katyusha, doctrinal napalm,doctrinal shocks to face the blob and send in the nuclear nade, fear propaganda bullshit etc.
USF has Scott,Pack Howi, doctrinal CalliOP
UKF has Centaur strafe,doctrinal Land Matress etc.

Even with valiant assault the blob have to stop to shoot. You got your window of opportunity.

Shocks can also get supressed really quickly. Nobody doubted that a sprint would not be of use. But apart from that that still does not nullify my argument that they can't frontally wipe an MG, since they need to close in first.
Also blobbing is a viable tactic from low to high rank matchups, your argument is pretty pointless and not backed up.

Honestly, I already covered most of this, so I'll just make a short version:
Mortars/howitzer won't work against fast moving infantry, rocket artillery is a real gamble and luck based, Scott micro intensive when you need your eye on your infantry.
This leaves us with Shocks for SOV, not sure if they will work reliably though. They can soak a lot of damage, but you need damage dealers in the back to deal with the enemy infantry. Also I do hope that you see a design issue with the fact that your opponent's commander pick forces you to counterpick a very specific strategy. And good luck if you already locked in a commander as SOV by the second CP.
USF has basically no real counter.
UKF has Centaur with the risk of getting snared and killed by OKW P4. I hope that land matress was a joke.

The "window of opportunity" is usually shorter than the time you need to land your artillery. This means that you need to rely on your opponent's mistakes rather than outplaying him.

and i know u are fan boy ,no need to hide it i mean u literally said "There are more and similar abilities in other factions ("For mother Russia" for example), but I'm not sure if the buffs are comparable. Also, these abilities tend to share the same fate that Valiant Assault had - that is being stuck in bad commanders. But unlike Valiant Assault, I don't think that the commanders get a significant buff."

and u ddin0t even ever us the ability as u didn't know they can't shoot and sprint

yesterday i got called an allied fan boy by an axis fan boy

how can i be both ?

we never see the air bone commander for okw, but se did see the b4 commander in tournaments, it has good roster of kv 1(which is getting buffed, and is already a mini Churchill), recon, shoock troops
and the very situational b4(for 1vs1 for team game is very good)

airborne has defensive fort , stuka smoke, falls (still a jk not even worth comparing to shock) and stuka support

The B4 strat is super cheesy and you know that. The B4 commander itself is average and not part of the current meta. And the reason that we did not see the Luftwaffe commander is due to the fact that first it's average at best at the moment (but might come back into the meta with the new patch), and second that there was the almighty Spec Ops doctrine that was picked almost every time in the tournament. Overwatch is also a good commander that did not get picked, that does not make Overwatch bad. It just means that Spec Ops is better. Same thing might also have happened to the B4 commander.
The fact that I did not focus on it is because I don't own it, so it's hard to judge. Also the KV1 buff does not directly target the B4 commander. It could be back into the meta as a side effect, but the Fallschirmjäger rework is way more likely to give the respective commander more survivability.

Spring on a squad that doesn't even get suppressed in many occasions or has a smoke with armor will always run down the MG. No you do not always need the long range DPS. If that is the case why bother using Falls when you can do better with Obers.

That's missing the point. The reason that Fallschirmjäger get reworked is that Obersoldaten are usually the better choice. I'm talking about problems that might come up after the patch, when Falls will likely be better or have their own niche.
Also sprinting does not reduce suppression. You can flank more easily, but the main problem is that the OKW blob runs frontally into your MG and kills the gunner, which is your MG gone. Shocks can't do that, they need to run around the MG which gives you a few more seconds to react. Shocks also can't snare, so you could drive a vehicle very close to push the models around and deal more damage.