M42 change ideas - Winter Patch 1.2 / 1.3 / 1.4

Seems you haven't been playing but:

-OKW Rak is the only AT gun with 0.85 RA. Rest have 1.0 and USF 1.25
-OKW crew (MG/ISG included) for some reason are using Volks instead of "OKW crew"
This is the damage per model:
OKW: 1.93 / 4.94
SU: 0.29 / 1.32
OH: 0.18 / 3.40
USF: 0.67 / 2.41
UKF: 1.02 / 2.03

dont really give a rats backside about its RA cuz from gameplay experience it has the worst survivability out of all the AT guns. And whats so good about its damage per model? you want to go attack a rifleman squad with your rekketen?

isnt tier 1 suppose to be like a risk reward tier, you go for it to have better AI at the cost of AT. If soviets need AT, then do what ostheer does and tech up. It stupid enough that penals are getting some form of AT and now people want a buffed m-42 in it lol.

dont really give a rats backside about its RA cuz from gameplay experience it has the worst survivability out of all the AT guns. And whats so good about its damage per model? you want to go attack a rifleman squad with your rekketen?

isnt tier 1 suppose to be like a risk reward tier, you go for it to have better AI at the cost of AT. If soviets need AT, then do what ostheer does and tech up. It stupid enough that penals are getting some form of AT and now people want a buffed m-42 in it lol.

Yep.

Not to mention with its rocket projectile it hits the ground in probably 60% of its shots.

dont really give a rats backside about its RA cuz from gameplay experience it has the worst survivability out of all the AT guns. And whats so good about its damage per model? you want to go attack a rifleman squad with your rekketen?

isnt tier 1 suppose to be like a risk reward tier, you go for it to have better AI at the cost of AT. If soviets need AT, then do what ostheer does and tech up. It stupid enough that penals are getting some form of AT and now people want a buffed m-42 in it lol.

People don't really want anyting overpowered. All they ask is a solid tier they can go for instead of maxim spammy T2. Right now soviets are absolutely only faction without any tech choices. I don't count T1 as a choice as it is too easily countered and nobody uses it seriously.

Isn't it better than zis-3 though?

ZiS-3 is 200 / 190 / 180 penetration and 160 damage, so no it's still not better than the ZiS-3. Not even better than the M1 57mm, which is the worst (penetration stats wise) of the 'main' AT Guns.

Why is access to one of the better AT guns in the game at T2 not enough? Please just stop this agenda of giving Soviets more and more AT.

I really feel like you guys are just f-ing with stuff just to f with stuff.

You see, the 2/3 of the Allies suffer from a strange design choice where their AT Guns are locked in one of two optional buildings. AT Guns are often vital to success, so you end up with a bit of a Hobson's choice where it's generally better to pick the building with the AT Gun or risk being at a disadvantage. Unless the other building ends up so overpowered that you can prevent your opponent from fielding armor, the building with the AT Gun will generally be favored.

The M-42 could be used as a stepping stone for Soviets going T1. It'll help keep light vehicles off their backs until they can field stronger counterparts to able to hold their own. It'll also reduce Penal spam, which in my opinion negates the need to field Conscripts and tech AT Grenades until much later into the game.

dont really give a rats backside about its RA cuz from gameplay experience it has the worst survivability out of all the AT guns. And whats so good about its damage per model? you want to go attack a rifleman squad with your rekketen?
isnt tier 1 suppose to be like a risk reward tier, you go for it to have better AI at the cost of AT. If soviets need AT, then do what ostheer does and tech up. It stupid enough that penals are getting some form of AT and now people want a buffed m-42 in it lol.

Fuckin A!
+1

Yep.
Not to mention with its rocket projectile it hits the ground in probably 60% of its shots.

+1

People don't really want anyting overpowered. All they ask is a solid tier they can go for instead of maxim spammy T2. Right now soviets are absolutely only faction without any tech choices. I don't count T1 as a choice as it is too easily countered and nobody uses it seriously.

Well thankfully YOU are not the 1 000s of other people that play this game.
I have one games with nothing but T1... And Im pretty retarted when it comes to SU

Why is access to one of the better AT guns in the game at T2 not enough? Please just stop this agenda of giving Soviets more and more AT.
I really feel like you guys are just f-ing with stuff just to f with stuff.
lol, play OKW much?

Fuck Oath
+2

Yep.
Not to mention with its rocket projectile it hits the ground in probably 60% of its shots.

Not saying that the Raketenwerfer is OP or in an ok shape, rather than the claim "it has an OP crew" it's true which you deem as trolling.

dont really give a rats backside about its RA cuz from gameplay experience it has the worst survivability out of all the AT guns. And whats so good about its damage per model? you want to go attack a rifleman squad with your rekketen?

RA is irrelevant against AoE. There's also probably the issue with the hitbox of other AT guns blocking some shots.
As i said before, i'm not here to discuss weapon perfomance rather than back up that the claim that OKW crews are "not working as intended" is true.
High damage per model means that if you flank an OKW support weapon with a lower model squad, engineer or inside a house, there are big chances that you are actually gonna lose the fight and that's inconsistent with the other 4 factions (unless you recrew the weapon with normal infantry)

isnt tier 1 suppose to be like a risk reward tier, you go for it to have better AI at the cost of AT. If soviets need AT, then do what ostheer does and tech up. It stupid enough that penals are getting some form of AT and now people want a buffed m-42 in it lol.

I've said this in other threads before. T1 high risk/high reward was a thing from the past.
This concept died when soviet sniper (good thing they remove sprint but some changes overall should had been done) and the M3 were nerfed either directly or indirectly (pfaust on Volks practically killed any viability). T1 was dead till they re introduced Penals into the meta. And spamming Penals is not high risk at all.

I'm in favor of a T1 been purely AI, problem is for it to be viable either ALL units must be good or one has to be OP. Introducing either PTRS/M42 solves the problem but that's a change in the design of the tier.

Why is there an obsession with putting anti tank in tier 1?

Is it too difficult to tech to tier 2 or call in a guard unit 6 minutes into the game?

Why is there an obsession with putting anti tank in tier 1?

Is it too difficult to tech to tier 2 or call in a guard unit 6 minutes into the game?

Both tiers should be viable without depending on the other to exist. Why go T1 if T2 is mandatory?

The only way T1 will overshadow T2 is if T1 is so overpowered you won't need an AT Gun.

I've said this in other threads before. T1 high risk/high reward was a thing from the past.
This concept died when soviet sniper (good thing they remove sprint but some changes overall should had been done) and the M3 were nerfed either directly or indirectly (pfaust on Volks practically killed any viability). T1 was dead till they re introduced Penals into the meta. And spamming Penals is not high risk at all.

I'm in favor of a T1 been purely AI, problem is for it to be viable either ALL units must be good or one has to be OP. Introducing either PTRS/M42 solves the problem but that's a change in the design of the tier.

It's not high risk because of Guards being able to bridge the gap to light vehicles (i.e. the first non-infantry thing to fight the increasingly powerful AI unit.) Penals compliment Guards well, but T2 still compliments itself AND Guards well.

Give Penals AT satchels. Make Satchels only usable after a 60 muni upgrade if necessary, or make Satchels unlock with AT nades or something.

At that point it is viable for the sniper team and the maxim to be swapped.

T1 maintains its AI focus while having a deterrent from being overrun by vehicles.
T2 supports conscript play while breaking the clear superiority over T1.

Penals and Maxims v snipers and mortars supporting cons. Think about it from an Axis perspective too: mortars counter maxims, but penals can beat grens. Against T2, grens can beat conscripts, but mg42s and snipers have natural counters available. Against OKW, a T1 maxim spam can hurt OKW starting out, but the Luchs becomes much more viable as a result of no quick ZiS. But a T2 start leaves indirect fire and snipers to contend with as OKW.

You see: actual gameplay. Choices that players can make that invites more cat-and-mouse build choices. Not: Build this unit until you get fuel for the first tank/vehicle. Which currently is how both T1 and T2 for soviets tend to exist.

I think it works better for 2v2s this way too.

PTRS Penals were a shit idea to begin with. There's no need to sub in an equally shitty idea in its place. They just need to know when an idea was bad and just remove it and move on.

You don't need a light vehicle hard counter in every single tier, come on people...

The problem is that no one will want to go T1 now that penals are much weaker. Combine that with the lack of AT in the tier then whats the point? Most people will prefer cons with maxims + guards since it is much safer, can do the anti inf role just fine and and gives you a counter to light vehicles and even mediums with the zis in tier 2.

However going T1+T2 is rarely ever viable since spending 320 manpower will set you back a long way especially since going T1 in the first place already forces you to sacrifice some map control and time.

The reason why soviet T1 has been the meta for the last 6 months is because penals were OP and they complemented well with guards that could solve your lack of AT problems and still dominate axis infantry. But if ptrs penals are added or even the m42 AT gun then players are no longer shoehorned into the same boring strategy. The last thing you want is T1 becoming the old cheese tier that people rarely ever used, consistency and more viable strategies is whats needed.

The problem is that no one will want to go T1 now that penals are much weaker. Combine that with the lack of AT in the tier then whats the point? Most people will prefer cons with maxims + guards since it is much safer, can do the anti inf role just fine and and gives you a counter to light vehicles and even mediums with the zis in tier 2.

However going T1+T2 is rarely ever viable since spending 320 manpower will set you back a long way especially since going T1 in the first place already forces you to sacrifice some map control and time.

The reason why soviet T1 has been the meta for the last 6 months is because penals were OP and they complemented well with guards that could solve your lack of AT problems and still dominate axis infantry. But if ptrs penals are added or even the m42 AT gun then players are no longer shoehorned into the same boring strategy. The last thing you want is T1 becoming the old cheese tier that people rarely ever used, consistency and more viable strategies is whats needed.

I don´t understand why u want force people to go for T-1. They can build T-1 strategies arround commanders. There are plenty of early AT options for soviets. PTRS for penals it´s just not a good idea in my opinion. Penals should be strong and only AI squad and I´m sure that people will still build T-1. I´m not sure if PTRS penals will help to change boring stategies.

I'd totally love the little AT gun in tier 1, for a few reasons.

• It would actually appear in games, instead of being in unused commanders.
  
• Said unused commanders could get something else, to make them less meh.*
  
• It encourages combined arms instead of spam. Seriously, PTRS penals sound like soviet panzergrens.
  
• (If they gave it decent anti-infantry) that would actually be realistic. It's usefulness against infantry and light vehicles was why they kept the 45 around the whole war. Relic is honestly truer to the source material for their space-fantasy game series than friggin' WWII.
  
  

*then we could argue for weeks over what those things should be!

OP, srsly?
You want an AT gun in tier 1 that has both AI and AT?


+1


+1.
Have tried, didnt like, dont want to see PTRS penals


Wut?
Conspam is countered by 2 MG's.
Said 2 MG's get raped by clown car strafing and penal or engy flamer


+1
It's already turning into a clusterf*ck


+1 on all sentences


RIP historical accuracy... No AT gun in the world can fire canister shot...

Scratch the canister round then, wasn't my idea anyhow.

Scratch the canister round then, wasn't my idea anyhow.

Wikipedia article for the M42 says it had canister.

RIP historical accuracy... No AT gun in the world can fire canister shot...

No, they can. USh-243 shell with grapeshot Sch-240 (right) everything historically

AI Penals, M-42 with small vet ability bonus and put PTRS Cons in Urban and Defensive doctrines /done

I don´t understand why u want force people to go for T-1. They can build T-1 strategies arround commanders. There are plenty of early AT options for soviets. PTRS for penals it´s just not a good idea in my opinion. Penals should be strong and only AI squad and I´m sure that people will still build T-1. I´m not sure if PTRS penals will help to change boring stategies.

I'm not saying people should be forced to go t1, just making the point that players will have more options and t1 would be more attractive if ptrs penals or m42 was added. I agree that penals should get an AI upgrade of some sort if a player would prefer to have them in a solely AI role since svts alone don't really cut it. Maybe a 4x ppsh upgrade or 1 dp28 at a certain level of verterancy.

Ontopic:

Keep in mind the following:
- AT guns are meant to be a sustainable cost-efficient way to counter vehicles
- Even if an AT gun crew gets wiped you can recrew the gun for a bit of MP cost (reinforcing the squad)

1. Due to how things work, no matter how we change things, recrewing an abandoned M-42 will still cost 120 MP/6 popcap to operate.

For comparison, a Zis-3 gun would require 120 MP/9 popcap to operate.

Thus, even if we go for a crappy-for-crap's-sake design, we can't circumvent that part. (Yes, we can give a reduced reinforcement cost for crew, but that might lead to recrew-with-shock-troops cheese).

2. If penetration is bad, there will be no way for the M-42 to gain vet from attacking vehicles in the late game. Thus it will suffer the same fate as the soviet mortar; if its vet is wiped, it won't be worth to replace it.

3. Regarding anti-infantry

You have to keep in mind that Soviets can also get the Zis-3 gun that has an expensive, but decent barrage ability.

- Giving M42 direct-fire anti-infantry (T70-like) might be problematic depending on the map and obstacles available. The performance of the gun might range from terrible (hills etc) to OP in closed space maps. Unlike T-70, M42 is not mobile enough to manoeuvre

- Giving it Focused Fire (i.e., turning it into a short-duration sniper) might end up being a bit cheesy (e.g., using it to snipe MG teams, or even snipe the sniper). This is not a bad idea per se, however it requires care given that it hurts low-member squads the most

- Canister shot seems like an OK proposition. It can combine the best of both worlds outlined above, but also the worst of either of them. At the very least it costs munitions but doesn't guarantee kills, which is fine in my books.

Offtopic:

Why is access to one of the better AT guns in the game at T2 not enough? Please just stop this agenda of giving Soviets more and more AT.

I really feel like you guys are just f-ing with stuff just to f with stuff.

Even when the units within T1 have not been changed multiple times, T1 has changed a lot. That's mostly indirectly, due to the other factions changing.

You are entitled to your opinion that we should be ashamed of ourselves for even considering giving comparable AT options to both tiers, and experimenting with that in a balance preview mod. However, no matter how hard I try to scan your comments for useful feedback, all I see is ranting.

What is your proposed solution to the T1 problem?

In the most recent history, Soviet T1 has been through 3 different iterations
- Current iteration, where you have Flamer Penals, and Flamer Penals are really really worth it. Especially if you have guards/ your teammate can provide AT
- 1-year+ ago, when Luchs was locked behind T4, and 222 had 240HP with a need-to-buy autocannon upgrade. This meant that there was no light vehicle threat to worry about.
- Pre-buff Penals, where Soviets had to worry about 320HP auto-cannon 222 and T2 Luchs. That was a ~6-month period when Soviet T1 was not seen-of or heard-of.

Assuming it's heresy to give T1 access to even soft-AT options, which one of the forementioned iterations would you consider closer to "the spirit of T1".

Thanks.

AI Penals, M-42 with small vet ability bonus and put PTRS Cons in Urban and Defensive doctrines /done

So not only we don't fix AI penals, we also give them AT support to hard counter their half-assed counters like 222 and luchs. Great philosophy.

The problem is that no one will want to go T1 now that penals are much weaker. Combine that with the lack of AT in the tier then whats the point?

Slightly weaker, but still a lot stronger than grens, volks and Spios.

Not saying that the Raketenwerfer is OP or in an ok shape, rather than the claim "it has an OP crew" it's true which you deem as trolling.



RA is irrelevant against AoE. There's also probably the issue with the hitbox of other AT guns blocking some shots.

Other AT guns enjoy the benefit of green cover. Green cover is not useless against AOE units.And using Raketen43s performance as an argument to buff a perfectly balanced unit is close to trolling.

What is your proposed solution to the T1 problem?

In the most recent history, Soviet T1 has been through 3 different iterations
- Current iteration, where you have Flamer Penals, and Flamer Penals are really really worth it. Especially if you have guards/ your teammate can provide AT
- 1-year+ ago, when Luchs was locked behind T4, and 222 had 240HP with a need-to-buy autocannon upgrade. This meant that there was no light vehicle threat to worry about.
- Pre-buff Penals, where Soviets had to worry about 320HP auto-cannon 222 and T2 Luchs. That was a ~6-month period when Soviet T1 was not seen-of or heard-of.

Assuming it's heresy to give T1 access to even soft-AT options, which one of the forementioned iterations would you consider closer to "the spirit of T1".

Thanks.

Nerf penals accuracy and leave it at that. There is no problem with the tier, and the 222 is not the spammable monster people like you made it out to be.