The game covers a large area of time, if it was 1944 to 1945 one would not see KV-2 as Soviet unit.
Soviets and Ostheer are 1943-1944 based on unit selection and uniforms. For example the T-34-76 Model of 1943 is still their mainstay tank, but doctrines offer T-34-85 Model of 1944 and IS-2 Model of 1944, however the SU-100 is absent. Ostheer are using early-war uniforms and civilian coats in winter maps (to showcase the shortage of uniforms), and also have SdKfz 222's, Model G Panzer IV's, Model A Panthers, and Tiger I's.
USF and OKW are firmly late 1944 to early 1945, being explicitly based on the forces present for the Ardennes Counteroffensive, whilst the British Forces are based on the 1945 judging by the inclusion of the the Comet Tank which did not see action until the final months of the war; although it can also be noted that the Mk III helmet is suspiciously absent from UKF.
I don't necessarily agree with the term historical accuracy, as it carries the connotation that everything needs to be exact. However, I do agree that the game is less and less historically authentic. I think many balance changes, while good, are done in a way that gradually moves away from historical authenticity.
I am not necessarily upset at the balance team because they're still doing their best to keep the game alive, but I do wish some of the changes were a bit more nuanced and giving more attention to historical backing.
I really really dislike, for example, the addition of the Soviet M2HB in the next patch as it feels like a change for the sake of change, fulfilling basically the same role as DShK with a token buff to its arc. However, my biggest issue is that this also ignores the fact that the M2 .50cals the Soviets received were not infantry variants, but rather vehicle mounted varieties on tanks and halftracks. Instead, the Lend-Lease doctrine could have gotten something far more unique, interesting, and authentic, such as a DShK-armed Universal Carrier. If the balance team insists on sticking to the arbitrary requirement of 'no cross-faction vehicles,' (which IMO is a terrible precedent to set for any potential future updates) I'd rather have the doctrine's DShK remain as-is instead of swapping it out for a 'Lend-Lease .50' that isn't actually faithful to history.
"Balance comes before history" should never be an argument for ahistorical changes because there are always alternative methods that can satisfy BOTH historical authenticity AND gameplay balance.
I'm with you on that, I do think the team should avoid outright inventing things that did not exist. On the other hand it's probably too late for that because we already have Stun and Incendiary Stielhandgranate's which are both absolute fiction. |
And slowly becomes just a "flavoured" WW2 RTS game.
The latest balance patch did something more than just "balance" the game.
It implemented a number of changes that are completely against historical authenticity.
G43 rifle (while being similar to a sniper rifle thus good from a distance) gets changed to being good mid to close range. Really?
USF ambulance now takes 2 Panzer shots to kill. Its a car, not an armoured vehicle and even so in real life, if a tank would shoot an ambulance it would go boom with one shot.
I am playing this game because it is the most tactical and strategical RTS out there but also because it is a WW2 themed.
All these changes and more are turning the game away from a WW2 game and into becoming a custom RTS with a whiff of WW2.
I wonder if the magnificent balance team members have any clue or idea of the history of WW2 and the actual weapons, artilery and warfare being used.
This is a weird post because it ignores the fact that the G43 is a Semi-Automatic Rifle and it's profile being similar to the M1 Garand (except much stronger due to it being a limited upgrade) is perfectly realistic. Sniper G43's were less common than Sniper Kar 98k's, but the prized sniping rifle were actually Scoped Mosin-Nagants.
Also funny that you don't mention the Kubelwagen being able to survive a hit from an IS-2.
I would agree that there's been too many tonal shifts in the name of balance, the worst offender will and always will be the penal battalions being an elite unit with the best equipment available.
For me the biggest irk is that the PPSh is less common than the MP40 and Sturmgewehr, when in reality it was the produced more than every other SMG combined, and that's not counting the PPD and PPS which they also produced in considerable numbers. If we wanted to be Authentic, Soviets would have a squad of troops with a full compliment of PPSh's as a default unit. |
That, however does not alter my view that the soviet are I'll equipped to fight heavy TDs as their doctrinal options become fewer and less reliable
I can't help but feel frustration seeing my T-34 bounce shots off the back of an Elefant at 10 range. Discounting Ram+Offmap, discounting SU-85 (which cannot fight an Elefant), discounting AT Guns (which will be vulnerable to capture since you're wheeling them up to the enemy's front line), I'm at a loss as to what the appropriate course of action is. I've expressed this before and have yet to receive an answer from anybody. |
Technically volksgrenadiers are the precursor to the volkssturm. It wouldn't be a reliable military unit without some hardened veterans in the mix.
Think partisans but retreating at the first chance they get.
The only similarities between the Volksgrenadier and Volkssturm are the word "Volk" and the fact that they were lower quality than what was previously established. Volksgrenadiers were still a professional military formation with standardized uniforms and equipment and staffed with trained soldiers. Volkssturm were a militia with no standardized uniforms or equipment and staffed with untrained civilians. |
For best results, always use KV-2s in pairs, as the name of the tank suggests, you're supposed to use 2.
2 really isn't enough, if one was destroyed then they only had one left, that's not nearly enough. Gotta hand it to them though, the ISU-152 really corrected the problem. |
Would be cool, but would also overlap with Osttruppen a lot. I guess that's not a big deal if they're in different doctrines. It could make use of mixed models like weapon crew, male partisan, and grenadier. |
Precision strike was an issue on mortars and B4 mostly. On Katyusha and ML it was kinda niche on it's use because you sacrificed general firepower for single barrage/shell, with the Katyusha been much better at squad wiping.
Outside of sniping rocket artillery i'm curious if you can reliable 1 shot ALL AT guns + MGs with the usage of it.
An ML-20 with Precision Barrage could decrew team weapons without warning, that was very worth doing over a single inaccurate barrage that might miss the target and let them escape. There's a reason it fell out of favor after Precision Barrage was removed. Now it's OKW that has the 'delete weapon crew' unit, but it's more difficult to use. |
Encirclement doctrine actually works? Consider me impressed. I assumed it would be ridiculously difficult to actually pull off a complete cutoff behind enemy lines and hold it long enough to make a difference. |
Soviets were stripped of their Precision Barrage on all artillery for a reason, and this just seems like Precision Barrage with extra steps. |
For the B-4, I think we could consider other alternative ways of using it. Perhaps if it kept the single shot, but either came paired with an Artillery Officer; or a unit like the M3 Scout Car; that had the ability to call for a precision barrage on target. It gives the choice between firing one shot from the meme cannon with full scatter anywhere on the map, or firing a more precise shot that must be called in by a unit within 30-40 range of the target. |