Profile of Imagelessbean

Pak is nice because of fire rate. As it vets it can easily pick off tanks.

Zis is still useful, but annoyingly slow fire rate and so vulnerable.

Pupchen is pretty sweet, I always steal those, but would build 40's if I could in OKW.

American AT-gun I don't understand. Long range but no penetration, small crew, munitions abilities you have to pop just to bring it up to other guns, and unlocked in a tier with light and medium AT already.

Is the M-42 seriously on here?

I actually think the sniper-balance is pretty good at the moment.
Soviet sniper has slower rof, but according to the smaller squad sizes the ostheer, he has a similiar impact against Herman infantry squad. In my opinion he also has a better survivability (yes also with the 82 HP of the OH-Sniper) and he is better at counter-sniping. To bad he is in T1^^ But hey I like penals..

Large sections of this discussion have already pointed out that the OH sniper is and will be shooting at 4 man squads in many cases. So the smaller squads is no longer an excuse.

Arguably the Ost sniper is now more survivable except in sniper duals because his health is in one model. Both soviet models can be killed by a single AoE explosion from a mortar while the Ost sniper cannot and also survives a direct rocket hit from a Katy.

Part of the issue is how OKW scales in larger team games. In larger team games OKW trucks are basically off limits because of the forces needed to muster to bring them down. They represent little to no risk, and by the time they are vulnerable the player should already have the units they need from them.

Conversion abilities are, again, fair in lower player count games, but as Australian has pointed out even in 2v2 they begin to get pretty ugly. In larger games you dump the munitions into upgrades and then convert all to fuel. At this point you play like a slightly handicapped Wehr, but with far better vehicles.

The ultra heavies are also of limited importance in smaller games, but as the game grows these units can enter the field sooner and have better protection so represent lower risks. They also turn the battle into an attrition battle that the Allies can only afford to play once. If I lose all my tanks trying to flank a JT and it survives with a sliver of health the game is over. I can continue to play, but I cannot ever have a chance to build up enough forces again to challenge the JT. Keep in mind these pushes are harder in larger games where more players mean that the battle lines are more static than in 1v1's. This is compounded by the fact that OKW has a native heavy tank that all other factions either have to go to commanders for or don't even have. In larger games these tanks are too low a risk and bleed mp quickly. Even if not built they represent a threat that requires large investments in AT. For instance, as American I need to maintain 2 Jacksons on the field by the late game at all times to control heavy pushes. That is quite a bit of MP and fuel that is not shooting infantry.

OKW as a faction is poorly conceptualized. As a player I pay a fee to have an amazing late game by having lower income throughout the game. But these incomes are only really felt in 1v1 games, by the time you get to 4v4 you almost can't even tell because the OKW tech tree is so strong and cache support. Balance for OKW will be very difficult to manage at all levels simultaneously and I look forward to seeing Relic's plan with the Brits coming. I assume patch notes will drop early again.

It doesn't have any area denial outside of the Flak HQ. Compared to Ostheer which has bunkers and good MG's and minefields. Soviets have plentiful explosives to deny points and the maxim is finally a good MG.



Except with veterancy it still can't take on any other MG in the game 1 on 1. Be it without vet or with veterancy. The reason why the popular suggestion is to raise the cost and buff it is that it wouldn't be spammable and it would actually do what it's supposed to do. In 4's it might be fine but in 1's and 2's it sucks that you can't rely on it at all. And it doesn't help 1 of the doctrines it's stuck in (Luftwaffe) is shit.

I don't know why you insist on belittling my experience. If you think 4v4 has a longer early game than 1v1 and 2v2 then I think you need to play more 4v4. While I may not have as much experience in smaller games I certainly cannot be said not to play in them routinely. Numerous people have already pointed out why a serious buff right now is dangerous unless other things happen.

You don't need to rely on it because your tech tree already offers you everything you need to win. It only adds flavor to the faction. I find the MG34 quite useful in a narrow window. I would like to see things changed to offer it more room to work.

Last thing, if you want to counter MG's with MG's be my guest, but I would really recommend looking into your tech tree for another option besides it costs less than all other MG's in the game (especially including tech costs). Using the MG34 to slug it out with another MG is definitely trouble.

As a reminder the Maxim (and of course .50) have tech costs which are not inconsiderable, while the MG34 has none. Until such time as I can build Maxims and .50's at 1 cp without tech the cost of the MG34 should remain.

In its current format the MG34 is fine, if you are willing to change the way the MG34 is built and the faction slightly we can talk about changes.

I want to reiterate for 210 mp in a faction that rarely lacks mp you can have a suppression platform at no tech cost, instantly, and salvage the gun if you lose the crew for fuel. It also comes with 5 possible levels of vet and a good vet one ability.