reduce pop for soviet tanks and infantry
Posts: 255
Permanently BannedTHe Germans had better everything but they were outnumbered by the Russians. It should be taken in consideration.
So T34s should be easier spammable and not eat that much pop.
I sugguest the following changes:
T34/76 = 300mp, 80 fuel, 8 pop
T34/85 = 350mp, 120 fuel, 12 pop
SU85 = 330mp, 120 fuel, 13 pop
And reduce all infantry about 1 pop!
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
And it actually was similar to this two years ago. 80 FU T34, I think the pop was also lower in earlier builds of the game. I'm not sure when and why exactly it got changed, but I assume with the addition of OKW/USF/UKF a lot had to be rebalanced and this was probably one of the main causes.
Posts: 255
Permanently BannedSoviets defeated Axis in WW2. They had so many tanks, Hitler himself said they have crazy many tanks.
If u want to balance the game, let Axis have Superiority in quality, and Soviets in numbers.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
THe Germans had better everything but they were outnumbered by the Russians.
Boy you better have a citation for that.
Posts: 888
19 pop for a Churchill is stupid
18 pop for a Panther snd Comet is dumb
16 pop for Jackson and Firefly is also dumb
15 pop for a Jagpanzer IV is really dumb
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
I dont think it will break balance. Why would it break balance? Because soviet is a threat again to axis?
Soviets defeated Axis in WW2. They had so many tanks, Hitler himself said they have crazy many tanks.
If u want to balance the game, let Axis have Superiority in quality, and Soviets in numbers.
This was literally the game on release and it was AWFUL
Also the bolded statement is very much incorrect. The soviets did not single handedly defeat the axis. The allied powers + partisans + finland for a time did. As well as many other smaller nations.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
This was literally the game on release and it was AWFUL
You sure?
4 min 251 with more health then T34 at vet2?
Tiger ace?
First iteration ass grens?
Whole fucking march deployment patch?
Godlike HMG42?
Soviets had it pretty damn rough during first year.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
You sure?
4 min 251 with more health then T34 at vet2?
Tiger ace?
First iteration ass grens?
Whole fucking march deployment patch?
Godlike HMG42?
Soviets had it pretty damn rough during first year.
For every thing you mentioned, there was a soviet equivalent.
If we talk about teamgames over 2v2, thats a complete different story.
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
For every thing you mentioned, there was a soviet equivalent.
If we talk about teamgames over 2v2, thats a complete different story.
I miss putting snipers into Scout cars.
And then replacing them with guards when the scout car was built
And then losing because we couldn't annihilate the axis before 5 minutes and 'axis are supposed to win if they don't wipe'
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
You sure?
4 min 251 with more health then T34 at vet2?
Tiger ace?
First iteration ass grens?
Whole fucking march deployment patch?
Godlike HMG42?
Soviets had it pretty damn rough during first year.
Specifically what I mean was, it used to take like 4 t34/76s to kill a single P4. Which was awful.
Posts: 281
Posts: 255
Permanently BannedIs it made out of gold or why is it so expensive?
The tank is mediocre.
It is currently 240 fuel, 21 pop. Higher pop than Elephant tank, which is a monstrum.
Lower it to 200 fuel, 18 pop
Posts: 2358
Posts: 255
Permanently BannedPosts: 810
do not feed anymore
Posts: 888
Posts: 2358
...it's more to do with Axis just being way too cheap.
*laughs in Combat engineer
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
*laughs in Combat engineer
*reminds about the fact its a good for nothing unit, not having 42 sight range, importent in combat and with its key utility nerfed out of the game
Posts: 5279
*reminds about the fact its a good for nothing unit, not having 42 sight range, importent in combat and with its key utility nerfed out of the game
I think it would be neat if they got a small amount of armour. As one of the only 4 man Soviet squads and undeniably the worst combat unit in the game I think a wee bit of staying power would be really nice to offset the lack of anything of value they bring. Would help justify their reinforcement being higher than cons and promote actually reinforcing them vs merging too.
Nothing Huge but maybe like 1.1 just as a weee bump
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
I think it would be neat if they got a small amount of armour. As one of the only 4 man Soviet squads and undeniably the worst combat unit in the game I think a wee bit of staying power would be really nice to offset the lack of anything of value they bring. Would help justify their reinforcement being higher than cons and promote actually reinforcing them vs merging too.
Nothing Huge but maybe like 1.1 just as a weee bump
Their early performance is fine. Combat Engineers got Conscript Mosins last patch, giving them around 10% to 20% more dps at mid/long range.
They're actually slightly better per model than Conscripts before vet 1 (42,5 purchase cost with 1 RA versus 40 purchase cost with 1,09 RA). This allows making multiple Engineers in the early game without too many drawbacks (Brosras gets up to 3, for example). This is also why you shouldn't merge cons outside of combat situations.
A better change would be to give both Combat Engineers and Pioneers lower RA at vet 3, which Sappers/RET's/Sturms already get. Then they can keep some combat relevance later on.
Livestreams
1 | |||||
937 | |||||
11 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.939410.696+5
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
10 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Esco76747
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM