Winter balance (1/2020) feedback - Ostheer

So are we gonna see a faster shell speed for Brum? The polls show that the majority of voters are in favour of a faster shell speed. https://www.coh2.org/topic/103804/brummbar-shell-speed

It's 55:45. All that says it's it's controversial.

Treating such a small majority as some sort of mandate would be very silly indeed.

As far as i understand it, an LMG42 was kind of a relic back in ww2 and this is somehow emulated by its performance, conscripts with one could wreak havok at vet3 with it.

I don’t think it was a relic, the ‘42’ means it is a 1942 design. Unless I’m mistaken it was based on the mg34 (1934 design) but had a simplified mechanism (no burst shot option?) and was pressed rather than cast making it easier to make and more reliable. It’s design is the basis for many modern mg’s. Irrelevant to the topic I know

Well if you buff their near DPS it doesn’t synergies well with the mg42, and buffing their long range DPS leads to blobs
It has been suggested to let them fire the LMG on the move at 25% accuracy or something but allied players freak out because they think all moving LMGs are Obers, even though they aren’t.

Freaking out is understandable since the same will happen if anyone suggest Tommy fire bren on the move :v

Grens don't need their DPS increased; at vet 3, they're already incredibly powerful. The problem is that they're currently "glass cannons" in mid/late game, due to their squad size and awful spacing problems. Losing 2 models basically forces a retreat, and that's really easy to do when things like the Scott can do that in 2 shots (while moving).

Really, grens just need some form of Vet 3 "explosion resistance".

Similarly, firing on the move would be insanely overpowered, considering the LMG42's weapon profile. Right now, their main downside is that they have to stay still do really do anything (part of the problem above), but that also means that Allied units can easily escape their long-range DPS.

If adjustments are made to the LMG42, their setup and rotation speed needs to be drastically improved. Double-Bren Infantry sections are effective because while they can't fire on the move, they can stutter-step effectively. Grens simply can't do this, and they're also vulnerable to "flanking", since the LMG model takes ages to turn.

As far as i understand it, an LMG42 was kind of a relic back in ww2 and this is somehow emulated by its performance, conscripts with one could wreak havok at vet3 with it.

I don’t think it was a relic, the ‘42’ means it is a 1942 design. Unless I’m mistaken it was based on the mg34 (1934 design) but had a simplified mechanism (no burst shot option?) and was pressed rather than cast making it easier to make and more reliable. It’s design is the basis for many modern mg’s. Irrelevant to the topic I know

Yea, the MG42 was actually quite 'modern' for its time, and by no means a "relic". Array is also correct in noting that the '42 was designed to be the "budget" replacement for the '34, which was much more complicated and expensive. However, the '34 had a single-shot mode (not burst), which was removed on the '42 (fully automatic only).

Post war, a lot of its designs were copied into other MGs, and the original MG42 was adjusted to fit the standard NATO round, and remains in service today as the MG3 (although its being replaced by the MG4 and MG5).

It's 55:45. All that says it's it's controversial.

Treating such a small majority as some sort of mandate would be very silly indeed.

Am I allowed to make a recent politics joke? We're so close to the ratio.

Really, grens just need some form of Vet 3 "explosion resistance".

Hmm, you're behind.

Show Spoiler

Hmm, you're behind.

Show Spoiler

I'm aware of that change, however units like the Scott can still 1-shot multiple models from 80 range, with a reload of around 3.6 seconds.

The reason I suggested specifically "explosion resistance" is because ideally I'd like to add another 10% to 20% DR, but have it only affect explosions, and not small arms.

I'm aware of that change, however units like the Scott can still 1-shot multiple models from 80 range, with a reload of around 3.6 seconds.

The reason I suggested specifically "explosion resistance" is because ideally I'd like to add another 10% to 20% DR, but have it only affect explosions, and not small arms.

I've suggested this before and said it could be a passive bonus at t4 or a vet bonus and call it "flak jackets" or something. I believe someone said that you can't set resistance to explosive weapons in general, only regular received damage modifiers

But they also thought call-in cooldowns starting on death was impossible and SneakEye (i think?) figured out a way around that

I've suggested this before and said it could be a passive bonus at t4 or a vet bonus and call it "flak jackets" or something. I believe someone said that you can't set resistance to explosive weapons in general, only regular received damage modifiers

But they also thought call-in cooldowns starting on death was impossible and SneakEye (i think?) figured out a way around that

Yea, it's likely impossible to do it via damage type. I supposed the "flak jacket" upgrade (or however its implemented) could increase the DR much more, and then increase RA to compensate.

Yea, it's likely impossible to do it via damage type. I supposed the "flak jacket" upgrade (or however its implemented) could increase the DR much more, and then increase RA to compensate.

Maybe it could be done through the crit system? IDK

Maybe it could be done through the crit system? IDK

I don't think the problem is related to crits. For example, the Scott does 100 damage, which means even with Vet 3 Grens -20% DR, it's still doing 80 damage, which is a full model's HP (80).

One solution might be, as I suggested before, adjusting the DR and RA together. For example, increasing the DR to -30%, but adding 15% increased RA at vet 3 should give grens the same amount of effective HP against small arms, but it would increase their effective HP against explosions (and all other non-direct hits) to 114.

That's just an example, and I think it might be a bit much (456hp effective), but the core idea might be viable.

Personally I feel like Grenadiers should be more expensive (300MP) but start with the Damage Reduction built into the squad as opposed to having to wait until Vet 3.

I've suggested this before and said it could be a passive bonus at t4 or a vet bonus and call it "flak jackets" or something. I believe someone said that you can't set resistance to explosive weapons in general, only regular received damage modifiers

But they also thought call-in cooldowns starting on death was impossible and SneakEye (i think?) figured out a way around that

While its true that you can't specifically set resistance to explosive weapons, You could achieve the same effect by creating a new armor class. So by giving Grenadiers this new armor class, you could set a Katsuya for example to do 100% of its normal damage to everything else and then do only 80% of the damage to the new armor class that was created.

How annoying is that grens cannot build sandbags and when pios build it and use barbed wire behind, your opponent still gets green cover.
Will this basic and important thing ever fixed?!

How annoying is that grens cannot build sandbags and when pios build it and use barbed wire behind, your opponent still gets green cover.
Will this basic and important thing ever fixed?!

That's the same for every sandbag tbh. You need 2 deep wire to deny cover of a sandbag, but make sure to not trap your engineers.

That's the same for every sandbag tbh. You need 2 deep wire to deny cover of a sandbag, but make sure to not trap your engineers.

I have been there...

Back to the thread.
Grens shouldnt have sbags imo and im kind of against the reinforce cost reduction too. The grens are meant to be rather expensive and reliable instead of disposable. IMO the change was made lookin at G43 grens because they simply go full balls deep push and of course they will lose models on the way.

If the buff was meant to G43 then simply buff G43 and separetely buff non-upgraded grens

I have been there...

Back to the thread.
Grens shouldnt have sbags imo and im kind of against the reinforce cost reduction too. The grens are meant to be rather expensive and reliable instead of disposable. IMO the change was made lookin at G43 grens because they simply go full balls deep push and of course they will lose models on the way.

If the buff was meant to G43 then simply buff G43 and separetely buff non-upgraded grens

what about a +25% moving acc buff on their kars when they upgrade with g43's, i'm pretty sure rifles/penals can plink off models behind cover while they charge in this could help.

I will just give hmg42 faster setup time at vet2. This will act as wehr combine arms tactics.

Right now hmg42 falls way off against vetted and upgraded allies infantry.

Just like pak40 slight buff, wehr need to returns to its theme of support weapons.

I will just give hmg42 faster setup time at vet2. This will act as wehr combine arms tactics.

Right now hmg42 falls way off against vetted and upgraded allies infantry.

Just like pak40 slight buff, wehr need to returns to its theme of support weapons.

Wher team weapons are already solid. They already do their job excelently.
They should have a weakness.
A very good supression platform wich is the mg42 with apinc rounds as vet also being very mobile for just 260mp in t0. The maxim in its olden days got nerfed for that very reason.
A price increase for the pack and mg42 will be needed imo or a nerf elsewhere on these units is needed.

Allies inf cost more. So that is no problem they do better then grens. Pgrens arive a lot earlier now and their lv,s come very quickly and one got a buff that was not warrented imo.

Better team weapons vs better and more expensive inf balances out in the end imo.

Tiger -Tiger ACE

Show Spoiler

1) Nice to see that AOE has been toned down, as I have pointed out, but will require testing to see if it ok now.

2) Simply removing vet bonus is also a step in the wrong directions especially for these type of unit that should get good vet bonuses replace with faster turret rotation or +5 sight bonus or longer duration for "Blitzkrieg Tactics"

Puma
Show Spoiler
Nice to see that my suggestion about the Puma is being tested.