Stats from the WCS 2019

Ok again why nerf gren RD When they have negative win rate ?

And at the same time buff IS ?

The excuse that long range DPS with high durability is too strong doesn't make sense , unless u are made of pure bias

Can we start with 60TD -> 55TD & 70TD heavies -> 60TD heavies?
That should give Axis more breathing space late game,without having power creep.

As for T70, maybe give 222 AP rounds or upgradeable to a puma?

Conscript 7 man is too OP. Put them behind sand bags and Wehr is sol. Lmg grens cannot pen behind cover. Something about lmg is off. I dont know. It takes too long to aim/reload. Cannot chase. The only time lmg is good is somehow Sov just run into it, which top players easily avoid.

Ok again why nerf gren RD When they have negative win rate ?

Also, DR replaced RA to try and reduce random squad wipes from late-game explosions (iirc). Unless we're making Ost-Bolster a default option (non-doc), that DR needs to stay.

Can we start with 60TD -> 55TD & 70TD heavies -> 60TD heavies?
That should give Axis more breathing space late game,without having power creep.

As for T70, maybe give 222 AP rounds or upgradeable to a puma?

Conscript 7 man is too OP. Put them behind sand bags and Wehr is sol. Lmg grens cannot pen behind cover. Something about lmg is off. I dont know. It takes too long to aim/reload. Cannot chase. The only time lmg is good is somehow Sov just run into it, which top players easily avoid.

I agree with 60 -> 55, but 70 -> 60 really only effects 3 vehicles in the game (Ele, JT, ISU-152), all of which need that range because they don't have a turret and are incredibly slow. Currently, the Axis super-heavy TDs are only meta because they're needed to counter allied TDs; reducing the allied TD range would make other counters (Stugs, Panthers) more viable, which means other docs might be picked more.

As for grens, yea, the LMG42 has horrendous aim-time; you can see how bad it is when the LMG42-model needs to turn (it takes ages). Reducing that might help a fair bit (copy Brens or M1919s?), but also adding some sort of Vet 3 buff or T3 / T4 upgrade to improve damage vs. units in cover (similar, but to a lesser extent, than IR-STGs) might help, too.

Ok again why nerf gren RD When they have negative win rate ?

And at the same time buff IS ?

The excuse that long range DPS with high durability is too strong doesn't make sense , unless u are made of pure bias

- vs Ostheer vs OKW
Soviet 71.4% 54.2%
USF 54.5% 53.3%
UKF 40% no data



The low win rate in Ostheer is because the Soviet is too strong

Regardless of the win rate, ranged infantry should not have any damage reduction.

As for Tommy, you can see what I wrote above.


Gain too much MP swap when fighting a close-middle range infantry who using a low damage gun.

On the other hand, it is too vulnerable to Allied ranged infantry with high damage guns.

If the RA were high, it would have been consistent without this problem.

Why does Tommy have such an OP stat?

The tommy should also play the advanced AI-infantry of other factions in the late game.

Does the UKF have Pzgren? no
Does the UKF have obersoldaten? no

That's why Relic designed Tommy so
Of course, to be so strong, only the UKF should invest a lot of fuel in Tommy when other factions don't invest in infantry.
I think it's fair.

Is there any alternative in the UK now that Tommy is weak?
Adding units such as Pzgren and obersoldaten to UKF is a new balance problem and breaking individuality

Very simply, make Tommy play the same role as before.

The reason Tommy was OP was because the timing of the bolster upgrade was too fast.

Move the Bolster upgrade to the Company command post and delay the timing, so even Tommy from the previous stats won't matter much.

Imagine trying to justify Tommies before the nerf.

So are u saying removing RD would be a buff ?

Can we start with 60TD -> 55TD & 70TD heavies -> 60TD heavies?
That should give Axis more breathing space late game,without having power creep.

As for T70, maybe give 222 AP rounds or upgradeable to a puma?

Conscript 7 man is too OP. Put them behind sand bags and Wehr is sol. Lmg grens cannot pen behind cover. Something about lmg is off. I dont know. It takes too long to aim/reload. Cannot chase. The only time lmg is good is somehow Sov just run into it, which top players easily avoid.

It is very dangerous to nerf the range of the TD now that the heavy tanks are too strong.

Heavy tanks are strong when they can hit each other

what kind of TD can fight the heavy tanks while hitting each other?

The TD has a low sight, so the player must send infantries forward to gain sight

But now that the heavy tank is strong, the infantry sent to the front will die faster than before, and the non-heavy tank side will continue to send the infantry forward to gain visibility.

Which means you have to keep burning MPs to hit the heavy tank.

if you lower the TD's range here, the infantry will continue to die, and the TD will also be easier to enter the range, making it easier to destroy.

How can the one without the heavy tank beat the one with the heavy tank?

If the cost of destroying a heavy tank is more than the cost of producing a heavy tank, is that a counter?

So are u saying removing RD would be a buff ?

Not a buff

it Is "normalize" for to be consistent

Grenadier needs no buffs or nerfs

Weak to explosives is not only grenadier, but all infantries are the same. Except soviet infantry

Go ask to Stalin about why there are 6-man squad

It's just an advantage of the Soviet

Ok let's normalize 5 men gren

Ok let's normalize 5 men gren

The reason grenadier is 4 man-squad is because they fight with the support of ostheer's strong weapon team

Ostheer is defensive and combination faction

Unit pools and tier configurations are all made for it

Take advantage of the faction's strong point and overcome its shortcomings.

That's the RTS and that's what you have to do


You can't complain that you can't fight like any other faction

If you want to fight like other faction, you should play other faction

It is very dangerous to nerf the range of the TD now that the heavy tanks are too strong.

...

How can the one without the heavy tank beat the one with the heavy tank?

If the cost of destroying a heavy tank is more than the cost of producing a heavy tank, is that a counter?

Heavy tanks would still have only 40-45 range; 10-15 less than the range-reduced TDs. This wouldn't really change anything provided you micro the TDs well enough. It really just decreases the margin of error for those TDs, to make them a bit less trivial to use.

Not a buff

it Is "normalize" for to be consistent

Grenadier needs no buffs or nerfs

Weak to explosives is not only grenadier, but all infantries are the same. Except soviet infantry

Go ask to Stalin about why there are 6-man squad

It's just an advantage of the Soviet

Except they do. Grens were in a horrible state before the DR-change, since they were not only the smallest mainline squad in late game, but also the most expensive to reinforce. Changing RA to DR means that they take globally less damage, so they're less susceptible to late-game explosions. Yes, other squads are susceptible to explosives as well, but at 5-6 models, they have 20-40% MORE total HP. 7-man cons have 75% more HP.

If we changed it back to RA, Grens would need to be changed to both a 5-model squad, and a 27-28mp per model squad to stay competitive.


If we're talking about actually normalizing infantry, we should look at reinforce costs as well as weapon slots.

Heavy tanks would still have only 40-45 range; 10-15 less than the range-reduced TDs. This wouldn't really change anything provided you micro the TDs well enough. It really just decreases the margin of error for those TDs, to make them a bit less trivial to use.

And what do you do with vehicles which are balanced around having 50 range? Also those same heavies unlock 50 range at vet 2.

This change will never be applied, because then you need to start adjusting the whole vehicle ecosystem. I'll even argue that 5 range increments on vehicles is bad, cause it feels like there's basically no difference at all. It's basically there to give the vehicle with advantage the first shot but not necessarily to play around been able to shoot without retaliation.

And what do you do with vehicles which are balanced around having 50 range? Also those same heavies unlock 50 range at vet 2.

This change will never be applied, because then you need to start adjusting the whole vehicle ecosystem. I'll even argue that 5 range increments on vehicles is bad, cause it feels like there's basically no difference at all. It's basically there to give the vehicle with advantage the first shot but not necessarily to play around been able to shoot without retaliation.

Vehicles at 45-50 wouldn't be changed, so that match-up would stay exactly the same. Vehicles that were at 60 would now be at 55, which is still 5 more range, as you said.

As for 5-range increments being 'bad on vehicles', I disagree with that. Firstly, if 5 range increments feels like basically no difference at all, then -5 range on 60TDs should feel 'like no difference at all'. Secondly, the Rak43 ATG was recently buffed by exactly 5 range, to (coincidentally) 55 range - exactly where the new TDs would be, and by the same difference some are asking for. Thirdly, there's currently several vehicles balanced around the '5-range increment' at 45-range: Tiger, Tiger Ace, KT, Comet and Pershing. It's also important to note that the last 3 (KT, Comet, Pershing) do not gain any range with vet, meaning they are permanently at 45 range.

Lastly, this really wouldn't change that much in the vehicle ecosystem. With the current "10 range increments", we have a bunch of vehicles with 60 range that out-range a bunch of vehicles at 50 range. Lowering those 60TDs to 55, still means they'll out-range those 50-range vehicles - there's just a smaller margin for error.

So in current meta heavy tanks feel so hard to counter that top players feel the need to rush them every game just so they dont get completly shutdown by enemy heavy tank.

Your solution: lets nerf counters to heavy tanks.

Can i ask what is it supposed to achieve?

Another solution would be to give a huge cooldown to call in heavy tanks, of about 10 minutes after your heavy is decrewed or destroyed, so that losing a heavy doesn’t mean you can immediately replace it with another one. CP requirements should then be increased to 12-14 CP and possibly price increased.

TDs could then be balanced to 55 range with cost increase, and medium tanks could get smaller target sizes. This way everyone has a defined role:

Heavy tanks: Expensive and very late to arrive, very durable and strong vs infantry and armour, but low mobility and availability
Medium tank destroyers: Premium accuracy and pen at a high cost, meant to zone out enemy armour from range
Medium tanks: Low target size but low armour, mobile and can work well vs infantry and work the flanks
Light TDs: Premium 60 range, low pen, high rof, can function in multiple roles (Su76 barrage, Puma aimed shot and recon, AEC tread shot and command vehicle)

So in current meta heavy tanks feel so hard to counter that top players feel the need to rush them every game just so they dont get completly shutdown by enemy heavy tank.

Your solution: lets nerf counters to heavy tanks.

Can i ask what is it supposed to achieve?

I never said we shouldn't nerf heavy tanks. I'm just saying that if we do nerf them (we should), TDs, especially 60range ones, need to nerfed too, so that heavies don't become entirely useless. Also, reducing the strength of 60-range TDs means that mediums might become viable again.

Heavy tanks: Expensive and very late to arrive, very durable and strong vs infantry and armour, but low mobility and availability
Medium tank destroyers: Premium accuracy and pen at a high cost, meant to zone out enemy armour from range
Medium tanks: Low target size but low armour, mobile and can work well vs infantry and work the flanks
Light TDs: Premium 60 range, low pen, high rof, can function in multiple roles (Su76 barrage, Puma aimed shot and recon, AEC tread shot and command vehicle)

I like the idea, but a distinction needs to made between turreted medium TDs (FF, M36, Panther), and case-mate TDs (JP4, Stug). They have very different rolls (defensive vs. offensive), and would likely need to be adjusted to better suit them (likely smaller target size on casemates).

Also, light TDs having 60 range could cause some issues if their pen is high enough (return of mass Su76). If other TDs were going down to 55, I wouldn't want to see light TDs having more than 55 range, either.

Medium tanks will be viable again after these retarded changes to heavy tanks from last patch get reverted. Just as it used to be. With 60 range TDs in game, just as before.

...

Well ideally I’d like the Su76 to get free barrages back at the cost of even more pen and damage, which imo would lead to it receiving an actual role to fill. People would say that this would lead to mass su76 barraging, but this can be solved by all su76s sharing a global cooldown for barrages.

I do agree about casemates and the Firefly which are defense focused needing different attributes to the offensively minded Panther and Jackson, so I would agree if they were balanced differently, trading range and pen for accuracy on the move, mobility and HP.

Medium tanks will be viable again after these retarded changes to heavy tanks from last patch get reverted. Just as it used to be. With 60 range TDs in game, just as before.

Before the heavy change in the recent patch, no one went heavies because they came so late that the enemy would always have a ton of TDs, making them nonviable, just like mediums were. The only viable play back then was either rushing a medium and hoping it paid for itself before 60-range TDs showed up, or simply rushing 60-range TDs (or panthers) yourself.

It was only in rare fuel-starved games where mediums really had any lasting impact.

If by rushing medium you mean going light vehicle into medium tank, then yes.

That part about heavy tanks being unviable is complete bullcrap. The meta last patch was stalling for heavy tanks. If you didnt notice you are posting in thread about 1v1 tournament.

Nobody ever is going straight into TD in 1v1 unless they are losing game hard already and need to counter enemy armor.