Pioneers after early game

What if OST T4 building provides vet1 to all squads. Like what wermacht had in CoH1 as vet techs.

Coupled with that, pio vet1 could be changed to +10% dmg reduction. Med kids are not worth it.

Two birds w/ one stone. A worthy T4 buff+Pio late game presence

That's a tricky dog because then vet 2 is closer and vet 3 as well. Bought vet as a whole is not ideal. I'd sooner (personally) for t4 to give ost infantry a 10% damage reduction independent of vet, and might as well throw them skirts on their tanks as well. Replace vet 2 with something else (maybe + range for the stug?) this improves ost infantry when they need it most and makes t4 attractive even with a t3 build

Skirts on tanks upon building T4 soundsinteresting...

Could it be implemented?

...

The reason I dont consider pios comparable in recon is due to how powerful their spotting actually is. While it no doubt can help an MG spot an incoming blob a little earlier, 42 range is insufficient to provide much beyond that. Compare it to the M3A1 with 50 base spotting range, vet 3 M5 with 45.5, su85 with 75 on focus sight, recon T70 with base 52.5, hell even tracking su76/su85/zis/isu is 49... that 42 sight range isnt looking so good beyond spotting for your mgs.

It's not that having 7 extra sight range is bad, far from it. But the application for it is more limited then it would appear at first glance.


Lastly regarding combat engineers, just compare them in terms of cost effectiveness to conscripts. At vet 0, combat engineers on a per model basis are actually stronger then conscripts as they have 9% lower recieved accuracy then cons while only costing 5% more to reinforce. In terms of recruiting, they are a mere 6% higher cost per model.

On a per model basis, a vet 3 combat engineer with no upgrades is the rough equivalent of a vet 2 con. Pretty good for a spammable cheap to replace engineer unit. Obviously the correct squad ratio is 3 CE vs 2 conscripts- 510mp vs 480mp.

The reason I dont consider pios comparable in recon is due to how powerful their spotting actually is. While it no doubt can help an MG spot an incoming blob a little earlier, 42 range is insufficient to provide much beyond that. Compare it to the M3A1 with 50 base spotting range, vet 3 M5 with 45.5, su85 with 75 on focus sight, recon T70 with base 52.5, hell even tracking su76/su85/zis/isu is 49... that 42 sight range isnt looking so good beyond spotting for your mgs.

It's not that having 7 extra sight range is bad, far from it. But the application for it is more limited then it would appear at first glance.


Lastly regarding combat engineers, just compare them in terms of cost effectiveness to conscripts. At vet 0, combat engineers on a per model basis are actually stronger then conscripts as they have 9% lower recieved accuracy then cons while only costing 5% more to reinforce. In terms of recruiting, they are a mere 6% higher cost per model.

On a per model basis, a vet 3 combat engineer with no upgrades is the rough equivalent of a vet 2 con. Pretty good for a spammable cheap to replace engineer unit. Obviously the correct squad ratio is 3 CE vs 2 conscripts- 510mp vs 480mp.

The power of the spotting is tough to gauge but definitely a powerful boon. Late game when (not if) you lose team weapons that extra sight is just amazing. And late game when you are repairing and an enemy dives you get that little extra time to react. It's not a lot objectively but it's effect I would argue is cumulative. Its like any Intel bonus. It's impossible to tell exactly how much it helps because it helps even when you are not aware of it. Kinda like the old radio silence. How the hell do you tell if it made a difference or was a waste?

As for CE being a half decent fighter is fine imo simple due to the fact they don't really do anything else for you. I know names are names but they ARE called combat engineers. Previously both parts of the name was a joke, now just the ending.

Skirts on tanks upon building T4 soundsinteresting...

Could it be implemented?

So 15muni cheaper medkits was OP but this is fine?

So 15muni cheaper medkits was OP but this is fine?

I think you can get both without a doubt.

Wait. Do i really need to evaluate the balance aspect of every single statement made? Does everyone do the same?

BTW i was being sarcastic about the 15mun med kits. My bad, i know

I think you can get both without a doubt.

Wait. Do i really need to evaluate the balance aspect of every single statement made? Does everyone do the same?

BTW i was being sarcastic about the 15mun med kits. My bad, i know

lol I thought you were serious

If you are suggesting a change to be actually implemented in the game, you should think about the like-hood of it been able to go through and the balance repercussions.

If not it's like saying i want a Hotchkiss

...
If not it's like saying i want a Hotchkiss

But i really want a Hotchkiss... :C
(Even knowing its technically impossible to add them to the game)

Or at least i could use a real Hotchkiss for Airsoft matches (wild off-topic, i know, sry)
*I'll ban myself now

What if OST T4 building provides vet1 to all squads. Like what wermacht had in CoH1 as vet techs.

Coupled with that, pio vet1 could be changed to +10% dmg reduction. Med kids are not worth it.

Two birds w/ one stone. A worthy T4 buff+Pio late game presence

Free vet is always bad idea, it doesn't matter what form it comes with.

Free vet is always bad idea, it doesn't matter what form it comes with.

What about shared vet?

What about shared vet?

I've already suggested that for pios and CEs number of times, even at expense of increasing their vet requirement.

The reason I dont consider pios comparable in recon is due to how powerful their spotting actually is. While it no doubt can help an MG spot an incoming blob a little earlier, 42 range is insufficient to provide much beyond that. Compare it to the M3A1 with 50 base spotting range, vet 3 M5 with 45.5, su85 with 75 on focus sight, recon T70 with base 52.5, hell even tracking su76/su85/zis/isu is 49... that 42 sight range isnt looking so good beyond spotting for your mgs.

It's not that having 7 extra sight range is bad, far from it. But the application for it is more limited then it would appear at first glance.


Lastly regarding combat engineers, just compare them in terms of cost effectiveness to conscripts. At vet 0, combat engineers on a per model basis are actually stronger then conscripts as they have 9% lower recieved accuracy then cons while only costing 5% more to reinforce. In terms of recruiting, they are a mere 6% higher cost per model.

On a per model basis, a vet 3 combat engineer with no upgrades is the rough equivalent of a vet 2 con. Pretty good for a spammable cheap to replace engineer unit. Obviously the correct squad ratio is 3 CE vs 2 conscripts- 510mp vs 480mp.

I didn't even consider the m3 and m5 in terms of longer vision ranges. this is mostly because the m3 usualy just gets destroyed within the first few minutes of the game and i never noticed, my bad. The m5 i usualy just keep it behind my army for aa when i get it. Because when it comes out there is ample aa and its a 2 shot vehicle.

again i agree that combat engineer fight better overall and are priced extremely well. They do just that. When a ce's is wiped and replaced they will melt away and vet up very slowly. not as slowly as pio's, but pio,s ime dont need to go fighting as much and get wiped less because of this. again in my experience.
In utility pio,s have an egde bigger then ce's combat potential. In no small part because of the extra vision, that should not be overlooked.

i like to see something done with the vet for pio,s but nothing else really. shared vet comes to mind or vet gain buff/vet level reduction at bp3/t4. Their utility is to great to become cheaper imho.

Pios should get five men. Recrewing weapons could be used in different ways (grabbing two weapons even if you lose the squad) and support for armor while not overly increasing combat power.

Soviets otoh could simultaneously use a 't2` to their healing, increasing the head count of their medics.

Pios should get five men. Recrewing weapons could be used in different ways (grabbing two weapons even if you lose the squad) and support for armor while not overly increasing combat power.

Soviets otoh could simultaneously use a 't2` to their healing, increasing the head count of their medics.

Or it should be finally possible to recrew with 2 men for ost.

just make pios become non veterant 5men squad at vet3 (maybe same with the grens but not sure bout it) or added to t4 tech

just make pios become non veterant 5men squad at vet3 (maybe same with the grens but not sure bout it) or added to t4 tech

No more copy pasting extra men with vet or tech from other factions. Ost has a doctrine for this. Unless cons get svt stock same with ce's. But then its just more mirroring the factions.
So no i dont think ost needs that.

Pio's are fine. Cost preformance wise grens are as well.

No more copy pasting extra men with vet or tech from other factions. Ost has a doctrine for this. Unless cons get svt stock same with ce's. But then its just more mirroring the factions.
So no i dont think ost needs that.

Pio's are fine. Cost preformance wise grens are as well.

why the fuck are you talking about svts?
why is this copypasta from other factions?
tell me one usage that pios have now in late game
doctrine gives 5men veterant squad of grens, not normal 5th man
pios cost 200+25mp to reinforce, CE 170+21 and are better

why the fuck are you talking about svts?
why is this copypasta from other factions?
tell me one usage that pios have now in late game
doctrine gives 5men veterant squad of grens, not normal 5th man
pios cost 200+25mp to reinforce, CE 170+21 and are better

Ce's while slightly better fighting and are cheaper to buy get outdone by pio's in all other engineering/supporting aspects. And pio's are a real threat up close, more then ce's are at range.
Ce's are cheaper for a reason for the thousenth time. And pio,s have more healing reinforcing options available then ce's ever will. Because of this and the fact that ost dont need them up front means they get wiped less. Making the 170/21 vs 200/25 argumant a bit silly.

Soviets dont get ai upgrades and nades by design. This means soviet inf is more durable but far less wipey then ost.

Ost have 5th or 6 man only via doctrines by design. Meaning less durable inf and recrewing team weapons is a bit harder. But they will wipe more then soviets.

> Giving CEs SVTs

OMEGALUL