Those shells are not all that slow and you will lose engangement against any stug + infantry becaue if you move out of cover, lmg will kill you, if you stay in cover stug will kill you.
The reload time was nerfed and you can basically yolo with bazooka, oorah+AT nades and PIATs and finish it off. Its healthpoint was nerfed too.
Again, I´m not saing he is OP. I´m saing that he is too cost efficient and need price increase if we want to keep him in current state to prevent stug e spam into tiger (this is what were trying to prevent whole time)
Stug-E into tiger won't work this time around, they have no power against tanks now.
I disagree, I've used penals before they were buffed and my favourite thing about them was that they were a bunker / garrison erasure. Now that they're cheaper, you'll see them being used to deny buildings by simply erasing them.
The AT satchel not the regular one, your response makes no sense to what I said if you read past the first sentence.
Tried playing some games to use the new AT Satchel.
It REALLY should not require PTRS to use. First off, it makes it bleedingly obvious to the opponent which units to keep their distance from. Second, having to spend munitions to use munitions is a little annoying. They already have satchels, but need to spend munis on a big rifle so the satchel acts lands on the tank. It's neither intuitive nor functional with the requirements currently in place. (It makes losing a penal battalion with PTRS that much harder to recover from too.)
I understand the concern with Oorah and the AT Satchel, but I really don't think it's something to be too worried about. It doesn't break suppression or make them immune to it, which would be a more valid concern. Especially when they're lugging a PTRS symbol around it makes it even harder to get them into position or play any sort of mind game with your opponent.
Tried playing some games to use the new AT Satchel.
It REALLY should not require PTRS to use. First off, it makes it bleedingly obvious to the opponent which units to keep their distance from. Second, having to spend munitions to use munitions is a little annoying. They already have satchels, but need to spend munis on a big rifle so the satchel acts lands on the tank. It's neither intuitive nor functional with the requirements currently in place. (It makes losing a penal battalion with PTRS that much harder to recover from too.)
I understand the concern with Oorah and the AT Satchel, but I really don't think it's something to be too worried about. It doesn't break suppression or make them immune to it, which would be a more valid concern. Especially when they're lugging a PTRS symbol around it makes it even harder to get them into position or play any sort of mind game with your opponent.
Point of adding this change was giving weak PTRS penals in terms of AI something why one should use them in lategame. It wansn´t mean to be core ability for penals
But by that logic, the PTRS isn't a great option. It gets outclassed and doesn't scale well. As a result, I don't think it a great change to be considering for the game.
However, by your own description, if the AT Satchel is what lets the Penals scale well, what's the point of having the PTRS around at all? Why not stick with what might function best rather than what someone might intend initially? That's kind of the process of testing.
But by that logic, the PTRS isn't a great option. It gets outclassed and doesn't scale well. As a result, I don't think it a great change to be considering for the game.
However, by your own description, if the AT Satchel is what lets the Penals scale well, what's the point of having the PTRS around at all? Why not stick with what might function best rather than what someone might intend initially? That's kind of the process of testing.
penals got PTRS as last ditch emergency red button whitch you press when you get swarmed with lights and lack any other tool to deal with them, they were never mean to be worth upgrade in terms of AI.
Thats why penals with PTRS scale bad, they have bad AI at lvl3 and PTRS isn´t all that good against tanks. Thats why we implemented satchel, so if you was forced to go PTRS, you will get at least this little reward that keeps penals interesting lategame
penals got PTRS as last ditch emergency red button whitch you press when you get swarmed with lights and lack any other tool to deal with them, they were never mean to be worth upgrade in terms of AI.
Thats why penals with PTRS scale bad, they have bad AI at lvl3 and PTRS isn´t all that good against tanks. Thats why we implemented satchel, so if you was forced to go PTRS, you will get at least this little reward that keeps penals interesting lategame
And yes, that is the testing process that produced the AT Satchel.
This little reward that keeps penals interesting lategame is probably the best and most worthwhile change to the unit in the preview patch. That's the lesson that is important from this process.
It's an addition that the unit, the tier, and the faction, has needed since 2013.
Vanilla satchel has 340 damage
Vanilla satchel has 25% friendly fire modifier
Max friendly fire damage: 85
AT satchel has 240 damage
AT satchel has 50% friendly fire modifier
Max friendly fire damage: 120
....
This anti griefing measures that were put in sometime during the coh2 life cycle... for all weapons...
can they be removed? first of all, some axis indirect fire still does full FF damage while non of the allies and it simply does not make sense and tactics like using friendly katyusha barrage landing 2 feet away for advancing should not be viable.
1.2 patch stug e was tested against current patch stug e.
It was tested in these situations:
a) long range against squad of riflemen in cover (green, indestructable)
b) mid/close range (something between, more mid than short) against squad of riflemen in cover (green, indestructable)
c) long range against squad of riflemen in the open
d) mid/close range (something between, more mid than short) against riflemen in the open.
Each test was run 5 times (except 2 tests, because of mistake, they were run only 4 times, sry)
Here are averange values for each of those tests (minutes : seconds)
NOTE: Indestructalbe sandbags mean that stug will never destroy them and thus he will hit them more often and lose some of in real game DMG. We made tests with indesctructable to show you how he performs against covered squads.
Here are values
tested ground
1.2 patch stug e
normal stug e
long range in cover
45
2:09
mid range in cover
32
1:26
long range in the open
1:08
49
mid range in the open
40
41
Conclusion: New stug e is BETTER in every possible situation that can happen except against squads at long range without cover. But I think this 19 seconds difference can be easily offset by far better effect in cover.
I think this is not what we were trying to achieve. Instaed of nerfing stug e to make it less accesible, we made him even better against squads in cover, forcing all squads he fights to move in the open and die against other sources of fire. Only offset is his DPS at very long ranged against spaced squads (50%). At mid range this is removed and he performs as old stug e.
We didn´t test squads in housing because we lack time. Maybe next time, but because you buffed garrison damage as well, new one will perform here better as well- even bigger AOE is rather big buff against garrisons.
Sorry balance team, but this time you screwed it up
Once again I have to say increase stugs price to cca 90 fuel or nerf him. I think increasing his price will make him still useful, yet not being too cost efficient. He will have defined role (if you remove stun), will be useful and also costy
Big thank to "Be brave soviet fanboys" player for helping me test this sh*t.
Hector
PS: I post it here as well because not many players visit replay section. Discuss
M-42 AT gun needs to be put in t1. It would be such a great addition and alternative and keep penals as just a rifle squad that. They still pack a good punch without the flame upgrade.
RtN.Hector
Be brave soviet fanboys
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
