Is the WC 51 overperforming ?

Teeeechnically, veteran squad leader provides much more, affecting 3 completely different squads and enhancing their strengths and giving them doctrinal abilities(repair on non engineers IS a doctrinal ability since day 1).

Availability is also factor on the impact of doctrinal ability and last time I've checked, people build noticeably more grens, PGs and pios over the course of single game then they build dodge trucks.

This thread is about WC51 try to stay on topic, if in your opinion VSL is op as an ability feel free to start a thread about it.

If in you opinion the WC51 is not OP feel free to explain why.

WC51 is simply OP.

Can you point a singular game from any game mode against human players that was won thanks to WC51 and extensive use of its abilities and not the unit riding its back?

I've seen countless games won thanks to 5 man grens.

Show Spoiler

In this thread there have been clear arguments why WC51 is OP even in first post of the thread.

Comparing units like 5 men grenadiers and Ostruppen with WC51 makes not sense, you can compare the abilities thou and that is what I compared.

If you do not like my arguments read the arguments others have already posted including OP.

WC51 is simply OP.

Quoted from you, you say the WC51 is OP and use the number of time it has been used during a tournament as an argument. By the same argument so are 5men grens.
You have no evidence that the WC51 is OP other than your vision of the unit. You can throw list every abilities it had, that doesn't make them an argument.

WC51 is OP regardless of the rest of commander[...]

The commander was the second pick with WC2019 and the WC51 the 3 most built vehicle (not counting the Ambulance) although doctrinal and most build doctrinal vehicle.

Quoted from you, you say the WC51 is OP and use the number of time it has been used during a tournament as an argument. By the same argument so are 5men grens.

The unit is OP but not because it has been used in a tournament, that is simply an indication and answer to those who claim that the commander is useless.

I am not sure why you keep bringing up the 5 men grenadiers, if in your opinion they are OP start a thread about. We can debate anything you like about them there but not in thread about a vehicle like the WC51.

You have no evidence that the WC51 is OP other than your vision of the unit. You can throw list every abilities it had, that doesn't make them an argument.

Well it is not just me saying that is Op, it is a large portion of people posting here (including at lest one allied biased user. see post 102)

I am not sure what qualifies as "evidence" in your eyes but the abilities the unit comes with is actually an argument.

This debate seem to have taken a slippery road which I am not willing to follow. Feel free to present any arguments why in your opinion it is not OP instead of playing the "you said" game.

The WC51 currently has:

- self repair with crew
- a decent HMG that is better than the kubel, can definetly 1v1 most german starting infantry w/o snares
- Can capture points(w/o infantry inside it)
- Mark target
- Arty barrage that can wreck pretty much anything
- for 200 mp available from the start, cheaper than the kubel(slightly)

And this is somehow no issue? Atleast the crew needs to go.

You are wasting your time with codguy mate. Usf could have a nuke that is automatically unlocked after 30 min of game time, destroying the enemy base and he'd make a thread saying it comes too late because usf is the weakest faction in every single way

I can understand that you're not willing to follow the road of bringing arguments to your claims.

He did make arguments.

The WC51 is either OP, in balanced state or UP. A lot of people have presented reasons for why it is OP, if you think it is in a balanced state, please present your counterarguments. That's what he's asking, and for that matter what I'd like to see to.

He did make arguments.

The WC51 is either OP, in balanced state or UP. A lot of people have presented reasons for why it is OP, if you think it is in a balanced state, please present your counterarguments. That's what he's asking, and for that matter what I'd like to see to.

So far his arguments are its OP because a bunch of people here on the forum, far for being representative of the player population, say so and also because on a tourney last year it has been used 3 times.

I let you rewind the post until my first comment where I give my arguments.

So far his arguments are its OP because a bunch of people here on the forum, far for being representative of the player population, say so and also because on a tourney last year it has been used 3 times.

I let you rewind the post until my first comment where I give my arguments.

Lets stop beating round the bush. after reading ur post, it seems your indirectly admitting the unit is OP but dont want it nerfed. You clearly want it to stay the way that it is because i believe you are simply biased.

If some people have a problem admitting this little truck is imbalanced, that tells a lot of where they come from. Another thing is unwillingness to change the vehicle. But not even seeing how OP it is just amazes me.

200mp for what is bundled in there is actually a joke and feels like a scam to anyone or anything competing against it MP-Wise.

Suggestion is easy: Take away the abilities, it´s already cheap. No reason to have the "gas gas gas" for free too. alteast 10-20 muni would be fair.

Doesnt make much sense to have a mark target ability on a vehicle to be honest.

So far his arguments are its OP because a bunch of people here on the forum, far for being representative of the player population, say so and also because on a tourney last year it has been used 3 times.

I let you rewind the post until my first comment where I give my arguments.

I will address your first then.

(1) Originally the mechanized company had the arty barrage as a unic ability and Mr.smith couldn't remove it because the commander has been sold with the feature.
Would you agree to see the TA remove from its commander after buying it? nop, so same for the arty barrage. Fortunately or unfornately, the ability can't be removed from the doctrine unless you give in exchange something better.

(2) About the WC51 raw performance, the unit is carrying the doctrine at the moment. You're only buying the Sherman 76 because you had a good start with the jeep, Cav Riflemen are only interesting because the WC51 is there to open the path.

(3) Is it too cheap? Well it's difficult to make it more expensive than a Kubel since it lacks of combat capability before upgrade.

(4) Remove the crew? Difficult to understand the reason why, we're not talking about the pershing which is unic or Calliope/Priest where the player could abuse it to spam them.

(5) Disable its loading function once upgraded? that's not a nerf for it but for the Cav Riflemen

(6) Reduce its raw dps performing stats? I don't see them overperforming, the .50 cost 45 munitions which delay CaptBAR or LtZook, that's a clear trade off.

(7) The WC51 is still vulnerable to anything having a gun and usually disapear once a 222, a luch or HTAA hit the field. You most likely have to build a new one to use the barrage ability so adding a 200mp cost to the barrage.

I numerically labeled each of your points, and I will try to distill the arguments.

1- People purchased a commander expecting it to have certain attributes, removing those attributes takes away pieces that customers paid for, the customers have a right to have what they paid for, therefore you can't take those pieces away without giving something equivalently broken.

I do not accept this argument at all. If something is overpowered in a game it needs to be nerfed or removed regardless of if people paid for it.

2- The WC51 is the only thing that makes the commander viable.

While I do agree a couples of the abilities are underwhelming, the rest are quite decent and none are useless. That you think the WC51 is the only thing that allows the 76mm sherman to be decent is quite telling. That you didn't mention combined arms as a strength of the commander is quite telling.

3. Since the WC51 lacks a weapon stock, its cost shouldn't be increased.

I don't see how this follows. The cost of a unit should be proportional to the utility it provides regardless of if it has a weapon or not. I am not necessarily advocating for an initial cost increase, but this is a poor argument.

4. Removing the crew doesn't make sense since the WC51 isn't on the same level as the Pershing, calliope or priest.

The overall power level is irrelevant to whether a specific combination of attributes and abilities is too strong for the relative cost. If the WC51 crew makes it too survivable then its too survivable regardless of how much weaker it is in absolute terms compared to the Pershing.

5. Removing the ability to carry troops would be a big nerf to cav riflemen.

This comes down to you believing cav riflemen are not viable without the WC51, to which I disagree. Removing troop transportation upon upgrade WOULD be a slight nerf to cav riflemen, but if the whole reason you intended to use the WC51 was as a glorified school bus for CQC troops, the weapon upgrade is going to give a proportionally small increase in DPS to what you use it for.

6. Spending munitions on an early upgrade delays officer weapon timing.

It doesn't delay it too much if at all, but even if it did it doesn't matter because if the upgrade is too powerful for cost then its too powerful for cost and its worth delaying the upgrades for other units due to its cost efficiency.

7. The WC51 is squishy, and often dies once light vehicles hit the field. (this is an argument that implies the WC51 is balanced because it is squishy I assume?)

The Soviet M3 has a fuel cost, can't cap, can't self repair, has lower damage with its weapons, does not have a free engine boost, does not have an artillery barrage, does not have mark target, restricts soviets from getting AT guns/mortars/MGs until backtech, and can't be built right away. Yet the m3 also dies off around the same time as the WC51. Some, people even consider the M3, to be too strong against OKW, and if the m3 is too strong then think of how powerful the WC51 must be in comparison.



Look. I am not advocating for a specific change to the WC51, though I do have some ideas. I do however think the vehicle is overperforming and I do not think you have brought any convincing arguments against this yet.

Show Spoiler

You're full of assumption here.

1- I didn't see you a lot asking to remove the TA when is was OP, double standard?. Anyway the barrage is good but not OP, I pointed out that Relic never removed an iconic and "end-game" ability from a doctrine and probably vetoed its removal when Mr.Smith revamped the doctrine. Having it on the jeep is already a nerf compared with what it was before: You didn't need pay for a 200mp squishy unit to deliver it, you only needed vision and munition at that time.

2- I never say the WC51 is what make the doctrine fine, I said Cav and Sherman are mostly useful if you already made a good start - they are not units you built when you are on the backfoot.
Anyway you can make a good start without the WC51 and you can fail making a good start with the WC51.

3- How would you price a unit that can only cap & carry unit with such low HP pool? More than a kubel that can cap and fight? I don't see how you can consider it as a poor argument, atm the moment you want to increase its utility you simply pay for it.

4- Are people spamming the WC51? True question here because the maximum viable I've seen so far is 2 on a 1vs1 commented by Tightrope some months ago. And it was far from a one side match. So I fail to see how suddenly the crew feature becomes a problem here. Is it a problem in your mind because that's a feature that share USF vehicules except 3?

5- Removing the carrying ability is a nerf for Cav, not for the jeep. You're not nerfing the jeep here, what do you want me to say more? That's not going to stop making the jeep an interesting unit to build early game but less interesting to follow it with the Cav. That's not rocket science.

6- So when SPs have to spend munition for early healing that bad because it delays the first STG or mine, when ostheer has to spend munition for healing its bad because it delays the first LMG or mine but in the case of USF that's not really a delay. It is accessible later = Its a delay. Not rocket science here neither.

8- Put a riflesquad inside a un-upgunned WC51 and see how it performs, Hint: not really well for the investment. As far as I know the game you can't have a WC51 AND flamthrower (unless on teamgame with a given), the maximum you can have is Cav which come CP1, much more later than a M3 and you have to invest quite an amount of munition to make it works (.50 + Cav upgrade).

In easier terms, the WC51 becomes a real threat a bit before you can setup your first truck as OKW, that's call windows of opportunity and many units have it.

I don't see you complaining a lot about USF being helpless vs the 221 until it has a riflesquad hitting vet1 or Lieutnant with 1 zook or the M20. Probably because it is as much balanced as the WC51, first one cost fuel but comes fully equiped, the second need 45 munitions to have its gun. Same design different paths.

I think WC51 should be able carry two infantry units. It should also double the garrisoned infantry dps and give them body armour protection. Attacking with 1 squad is simply not enough and axis can put 2 squads into a halftrack. If axis can do that so should we. The passive healing should also apply because it's not fair axis have passive healing. And their vehicles have more armour so the crew is fine on WC51 as they have to repair faster.
Show Spoiler

I think WC51 should be able carry two infantry units. It should also double the garrisoned infantry dps and give them body armour protection. Attacking with 1 squad is simply not enough and axis can put 2 squads into a halftrack. If axis can do that so should we. The passive healing should also apply because it's not fair axis have passive healing.

Please add a /s or some people might actually think you are being serious and will demand this change to happen

Show Spoiler

So first off. You may notice that I only have 490 posts total. I was a long time lurker and I don't even think I was posting during the hayday of the TA. I am also not saying that the barrage or the WC51 is OP on its own. Obers are not powerful on their own without the LMG34. Its the combination of tools and assets.

2)
"about the WC51 raw performance, the unit is carrying the doctrine at the moment. You're only buying the Sherman 76 because you had a good start with the jeep, Cav Riflemen are only interesting because the WC51 is there to open the path."

Didn't you type this? Because it sure looks to me like you said the unit is carrying the doctrine, as in its the thing that makes the doctrine viable. If that isn't what you meant, you need to work on your communication skills.

3)
A unit can be overpowered or broken without needing a weapon. Remember the old infrared halftrack? Just because a unit doesn't have a weapon, doesn't meant isn't more(or less) powerful then one that does.

4)
People do not need to "spam" a unit for a unit to be over performing. I already used the infrared halftrack as an example, nobody buys more then 1 of them at the same time.
But if you mean spam as in "Does this unit see frequent use", then the counter example that Katitof likes to use a lot is the DSKH MG which was overperforming for a long time, but wasn't used much.

5)
So I actually said it would be a slight indirect nerf to cav riflemen in my original post. But that aside, my point was that Cav riflemen don't need the WC51 to be viable, and the nerf itself isn't that big if you are planning on using your WC51 to primarily be a chase down unit utilizing Cav rifles.

8)
Well I can tell you that a stock riflesquad(or stock cav riflesquad) in a stock WC51 does a lot more damage then a stock combat engineer in an M3.
However my point here wasn't necessarily regarding the combat performance of the vehicle with a unit inside, but rather comparing the scalability vs cost of the M3 and the WC51. The WC51 scales far far fare better then the M3, despite the M3 having a fuel cost attached and requiring tech to even build.

Show Spoiler

You're full of assumption here.

1- I didn't see you a lot asking to remove the TA when is was OP, double standard?. Anyway the barrage is good but not OP, I pointed out that Relic never removed an iconic and "end-game" ability from a doctrine and probably vetoed its removal when Mr.Smith revamped the doctrine. Having it on the jeep is already a nerf compared with what it was before: You didn't need pay for a 200mp squishy unit to deliver it, you only needed vision and munition at that time.

...

Your assumption is simply wrong.

The 155 barrage was removed in the early stages of testing and Relic did not veto anything.

Show Spoiler

155 Barrage on the WC51 is a nerf for the barrage for the reasons I explained above, not a buff for the Jeep. The jeep gain nothing from having the barrage tied to it but the barrage can't be fire if you don't have the jeep in range. Now maybe you didn't know that before its revamp the barrage were a unique ability fire on sight.

Carrying =! OP, as I said Cav and Sherman really shine if you're already on a good spot and are less appealing as comeback units due to their own nature. Position that a well handled Jeep can brings you. But I have yet to see match sealed by a commonly used jeep. Even in tournament it didn't happened.

Next tell me how a unit that can cap and carry a squad is OP as much as a unit that can sit on the backline and reveal half of the map? (on top of being bugged and permanently revealing units).

Finally I'll be glad if you show us tests between a un-upgunned jeep carrying a squad of riflemen and a M3 carrying a squad of Penal to see which one deal more damage.
Or a squad of RE vs CE on their respective vehicle because I don't really see any reason to compare riflemen vs CE.

Show Spoiler

155 Barrage on the WC51 is a nerf for the barrage for the reasons I explained above, not a buff for the Jeep. The jeep gain nothing from having the barrage tied to it but the barrage can't be fire if you don't have the jeep in range. Now maybe you didn't know that before its revamp the barrage were a unique ability fire on sight.

Carrying =! OP, as I said Cav and Sherman really shine if you're already on a good spot and are less appealing as comeback units due to their own nature. Position that a well handled Jeep can brings you. But I have yet to see match sealed by a commonly used jeep. Even in tournament it didn't happened.

Next tell me how a unit that can cap and carry a squad is OP as much as a unit that can sit on the backline and reveal half of the map? (on top of being bugged and permanently revealing units).

Finally I'll be glad if you show us tests between a un-upgunned jeep carrying a squad of riflemen and a M3 carrying a squad of Penal to see which one deal more damage.
Or a squad of RE vs CE on their respective vehicle because I don't really see any reason to compare riflemen vs CE.

1) I am not arguing that barrage on the jeep is weaker then barrage as a one click ability, it isn't on its own. Also saying the jeep gets nothing from it is ludicrous, as an example(not as the only use) the jeep doesn't do well against garrisoned units but drop a barrage and you've cleared the garrison. This is something the jeep couldn't do previously.

2) Nowhere in either of my posts do I say that carrying a commander inherently makes a unit or ability OP. I just disagree that the WC51 is the only thing that makes the commander viable, which is exactly what "carrying" implies.

If what you meant is that all the abilities are useful and the WC51 just happens to be the most interesting or flavorful, then I misread you.

3) My argument was that units don't need to have a weapon to be powerful or OP, not that the infrared halftrack is more or less powerful then the WC51. OKW trucks were broken at one point and they have never had a weapon. My point was that the utility of the unit should determine the cost and damage output is only a portion of that.

4) Penals have a better damage profile at most ranges then riflemen so it's not surprising that penals have better damage output then rifles. However, the typical M3 build usually has your m3 coming out around the time you have 60 munitions for your flamethrower upgrade so you pop the combat engineer you want to upgrade inside it. That's why I made the comparison. If you want to compare cav rifles in a WC51 to flamethrower combat engineers in an M3 then go for it. I am using practical examples not one for one closest equivalent units.
As a side note, combat engineers do better in a vehicle then RE because RE have huge on the move penalties. Comparing them however is not useful as nobody with any sense puts NONbazooka RE in a WC51.

1) I am not arguing that barrage on the jeep is weaker then barrage as a one click ability, it isn't on its own. Also saying the jeep gets nothing from it is ludicrous, as an example(not as the only use) the jeep doesn't do well against garrisoned units but drop a barrage and you've cleared the garrison. This is something the jeep couldn't do previously.

2) Nowhere in either of my posts do I say that carrying a commander inherently makes a unit or ability OP. I just disagree that the WC51 is the only thing that makes the commander viable, which is exactly what "carrying" implies.

If what you meant is that all the abilities are useful and the WC51 just happens to be the most interesting or flavorful, then I misread you.

3) My argument was that units don't need to have a weapon to be powerful or OP, not that the infrared halftrack is more or less powerful then the WC51. OKW trucks were broken at one point and they have never had a weapon. My point was that the utility of the unit should determine the cost and damage output is only a portion of that.

4) Penals have a better damage profile at most ranges then riflemen so it's not surprising that penals have better damage output then rifles. However, the typical M3 build usually has your m3 coming out around the time you have 60 munitions for your flamethrower upgrade so you pop the combat engineer you want to upgrade inside it. That's why I made the comparison. If you want to compare cav rifles in a WC51 to flamethrower combat engineers in an M3 then go for it. I am using practical examples not one for one closest equivalent units.
As a side note, combat engineers do better in a vehicle then RE because RE have huge on the move penalties. Comparing them however is not useful as nobody with any sense puts NONbazooka RE in a WC51.

You could always drop a barrage wherever (on sight) you wanted before it was tied to the jeep. I repeat myself but being tied to the jeep is a nerf for the barrage, not a buff for the jeep.

Yeah your right there is not need to carry a weapon to be broken, anyway doesn't change the idea that a player barely build more than 1 effective jeep per match (not counting the ones you build late game for the barrage) and so I fail to see how the crew mecanic is being abused to the point of being a problem on its own.

I'm pretty sure a M3+CE flamer will deal more damage than a WC51+RM, even with the .50 but I can be wrong, someone need to do the test. Only scenario where maybe that wouldn't be the case is on red cover.