Visually I think it looks great. Although I wonder how the passages would function as open cover... that's a ton of yellow cover spliced on over red cover.
The terrain doesn't quite look like yellow cover. Although I don't know if there are equivalent splats that don't make yellow cover.
I think it's worth noting that you can't really move from cover to cover under mortar fire auto attack.
Auto attacking mortars chase units wherever they go in sight and range. It's not like when a unit is attacked by a mortar they are always being barraged. Moving from a mortar shell over to cover doesn't do squat. UKF mortars chase grens around like nobodies business as long as they have sight.
I've constantly watched grens moving from cover when a mortar shell hits, then watched a trail of mortar blasts follow the grens to their new point of cover.
you seem to forgot the whole picture here. Gaurds cost more, and are less effective than live version. Penals are less effective than live version, okw got better healing while going for luchs, etc etc
Yes, this is true, but not my point.
My point is that when a guards commander is chosen there is little reason to get PTRS on penals. Even if both are weakened, it's not going to affect things like the viability of Guard Motor over other commanders. (I also believe the vast majority of instances of Guards being used is in conjunction with Guard Motor. 120mm mortars and self repair t34/85s attacking marked targets are no joke.)
M4c Shermans are such a lategame unit. Soviets are capable of getting a ton of fuel/map control early on that I've been finding it way easier to rush T4 and get T34s of either variety well before the CPs for M4C Shermans.
It's usually T34/85s because of Guard Motor though. I just haven't found the Lend Lease commander to synergize as well. I rarely need DSHk with Penals running around, at least against ostheer. Conscript repair's usefulness is kind of diminished unless I went T2.
Although I did get to use the M5 halftrack to get guards to a clutch VP in a game.
I think the 33% increase in damage at vet 2 on the LM is the real offender. That damage increase translates into AoE, into deflection damage, and into a less balanced game.
How can I counter ostheer sniper when he have 222 guarding my m20 and will have 2 paks once I get sherman ?
I feel like you're glossing over an entire games worth of decisions and engagements with that question. But I agree with you in the sense that the 222 has been balanced around no-one ever using the M20. I think the real issue though is with the 222, not the sniper or the M20. Making the M20 super capable of killing snipers won't help overall if it's still a throw against 222s. In fact, it just makes the 222 even more of a necessity for Ostheer.
Also m15 isn´t all that good on the move right now so I don´t know how can I counter his sniper + 222 combo.
Rifles, mortars, weapon rack. You're saying 'sniper + 222 combo' but I feel like there are MGs at work here. Otherwise I don't know how you're not dominating the map with rifles. You've got to keep in mind that USF T0 can handle anything Ostheer T0-T2 can field.
I think your mistake is going for LT tier. I think your opponents know you are testing LT tier and are adjusting their strategy accordingly. LT just doesn't offer enough to what USF needs. Again: USF T0 can handle anything Ostheer T0-T2 can field.
I'll note that while the USF mortar may now have shorter range, as a result its also more of a lure for the 222 and sniper to try and focus fire. Bait that 222 + sniper combo into your superior infantry forces. If the ostheer also has a mortar to counter your mortar, your opponent has no infantry.
But I agree that the 222 and the sniper are probably the two hardest units for USF T0 to handle. It would be nice for the M20 to be able to fill this role, but the current design of the 222 really doesn't account for the existence of non-Stuart vehicles from USF.
Ultimately: Take advantage of the fact that the 222 takes damage from small arms fire and take note that it's currently designed to hard counter light vehicles. (It's a bigger fuel investment too. You could probably tech nades safely without throwing off your fuel advantage.) The most effective usage of the LT tier in my experience has always been the M20 mine.
Even in vcoh USA had jeep whitch sucked against infantry, yet was able to kill the sniper with blink of your eye.
A sniper in cover could stand in front of a jeep, point blank, for a long arse time.
Jeeps (and motorbikes) revealed cloaked units. That was their function. Then pretty much any other unit shot the revealed sniper.
I fail to see how PTRS Penals overlap with guards anymore than half the other Commander call in units.
I don't think they do. I think they underlap.
I mean, do Penal PTRS affect the viability of pure AI penals into guards? I mean, at all?
Because that's been the problem, (and what the scope was to address). Penals being even more cover-busting short-range AI units with PPSh/Flamers doesn't make Guards at 2 CP any less viable with their free PTRS to save the day against axis attempts to counter.
Current iteration of penal changes may make other doctrines 'less' punishing, but it kinda makes the best/most meta doctrine a little bit better. IMO, PTRS penals is more of an invitation to use Guards than anything, because when is a 'downgrade' upgrade worthwhile in this game?
Guards have always been about their PTRS. The only times I've seen them actually be strong AI units is when they have no DP-28s and they've dropped all their PTRS. (No DP-28s so they can fire on the move. LMGs are mostly defensive weapons unless used en masse.)
For some reason I remember Penals having flamers and 3x PPSh and it was removed because it was considered way too powerful. I think that was combined with their old vet though.
You know, I do agree with the notion of T1 infantry benefiting from global upgrades though. I just don't think they should be conscript ones.
Penals starting with rifles, and upgrading to SVTs isn't a bad idea for a global upgrade. A single (or two) DP-28 isn't either. Grenades (and/or satchels) works too.
Soviets strength lie in their ability to spread out and capture the map. They use that early map control to be able to tech quickly. Since the only real side techs for Soviets are molotovs and AT nades, teching to T3 is the primary mission of Soviets.
The weakness of T1 is kind of the fact that it slows the rate that units hit the field due to otherwise fielding a particularly useful and capable t0 unit that scales well into at least 2 CPs.