Profile of Pip

I'd personally wager that it's an oversight but I'm not on the balance team so what do I know?

It's pretty clearly an oversight. There's 0 reason to believe that a squad being unable to replace a weapon of theirs is intentional.

You already have strumpioneer which have no movement penaltly for cut a point ot franking MG.

No movement penalty?

Powerful CQC weapons are weak at long range and that is a problem how?

Did certain someone spammed AGs and used them against rifles for long range cover to cover fights again?

SMGs had low effective range compared to rifles IRL too, and that is how you show it in game accurately AND balance friendly, by having them being ineffective at long range.

"game is balanced" is basically the problem here.

Actually read the post before commenting if you don't want to look stupid.

Nobody in this thread has suggested that SMGs being weak at long range is any sort of a problem.

What was said was that SMG DPS (With the strange exception of Pioneer/OST weapon crew MP40s and Royal Engineer Stens, who instead stop doing maximal damage at 8 units, which I assume is just intended to make them weaker) is the same between 0 and 10 range, whereas all other (non-LMG/"sniper") weapons continue to ramp in damage as you get closer to your target, stopping ramping at anywhere between 8 and 0 range.

As a result SMG infantry do not, in fact, want to be extremely close to their targets. They instead want to stand at precisely 10 range, as getting closer means you will take proportionally more damage, and standing any further means you will be doing less.


I'm not sure how this actually affects engagements in practice, and the alternatives would either to be that SMGs continue to ramp FURTHER as they get closer (likely reaching absurd levels of DPS), or to fall off sooner (Which would just weaken them), but the point is that you seriously need to work on your reading comprehension.

The scott can not hard counter an at gun, it has to fire from within range of the atgun. It can be done, but it's very dangerous. If you're outside the cone, it works great.

The Scott's barrage has a range of 80. It doesn't need to be within range of an AT gun to fire upon it.

Getting 20 pop of scotts (without pf)just to (hard) counter units of 5 to 8 pop a piece isent what id call balanced.

I personaly havent seen scotts when single or without pf do their job well. But i might just be watching the wrong games and suck at using it.

You're hardcountering MGs, other mortars, and AT guns, while also providing strong fire-support vs any other infantry.

It's 20 pop vs 21 pop (Assuming your opponent has two AT guns and one MG, which is fairly standard for Ostheer especially. This number rises if the opponent has any other team weapons.)

On top of this is the further utility vs infantry, though bothering to make a population-to-population comparison there is a bit pointless.

Part of what I'd consider the benefit over the Scott vs something like a Werfer, Katyusha, or Stuka is the constant pressure they create. Their barrage has less than half the cooldown of rocket artillery, and they can still contribute to a fight even when its on cooldown. People talk about the Scott as though it fires confetti for some reason, and I've never really understood why.