2 BARs/Brens issue

Hi winter balance patch team, do you have any plan for fixing this issue ? riflemen and Inf sections shouldn't be able to have 2 BARs or Brens, this two guns are LMG and are very powerful. two or even three SMGs is acceptable but two LMG is ... too strong

Bars are not LMGs; they are like STGs, and PGrens/Stormtroopers get 4 of them. So, nope. Nevertheless, we have already nerfed the veterancy bonuses of Riflemen on WBP.

We have already limited Sappers from picking up 2 Bren guns.

Limiting Tommies from picking up Brens requires other types of changes to compensate for the complete lack of utility. Those changes have been deemed out-of-scope. So, not yet.

Bars are not LMGs; they are like STGs, and PGrens/Stormtroopers get 4 of them. So, nope. Nevertheless, we have already nerfed the veterancy bonuses of Riflemen on WBP.

We have already limited Sappers from picking up 2 Bren guns.

Limiting Tommies from picking up Brens requires other types of changes to compensate for the complete lack of utility. Those changes have been deemed out-of-scope. So, not yet.

they are like STGs ?!! BAR and Bren are Light Machine Guns

they are like STGs ?!! BAR and Bren are Light Machine Guns

Stat-wise they're pretty close to AR profiles just so they're not M1919 clones. They just deal more damage at range.

Of course the BAR is somewhat lowered by the fact most of the squads carrying it only get 30% accuracy vs 40% and you generally need two to fight effectively late game. One is alright, but it's not a god weapon.

BARs are like STGs. This means that it's not a weapon you can A-move your way to victory; though they are pretty good.

Do note that USF needs something that they can do better than the other factions in the late-game; especially now that we have lowered their early-game potency.

Brens are LMGs, true. However, not all LMGs are created equal, and the carrier also matters.
Brens on Tommies (cover penalties/Vet3 "Bonus"/no AT utility) are the least cost-efficient LMG in the game. We've already put a comparison up for you here:

https://www.coh2.org/topic/57858/relic-winter-balance-preview-v1-1-update/post/579117

Ok, if you say this weapons are balanced i accept that, you are best modders here

Limiting Tommies from picking up Brens requires other types of changes to compensate for the complete lack of utility. Those changes have been deemed out-of-scope. So, not yet.

aha.
So the reason why grenadier doesnt have 2 x lmg42 is that wehrmacht also has panzergren? rly?


I see the pros and contras of this double lmg/BAR thing...

yes, they kinda need it to deal with vet 5 squads and obers etc..

The problem is, a double lmg/BAR troup is as strong or even stronger than an obersoldaten squad. With bigger squads and lower mp cost. The only thing is the expensive ammmunition cost, but tbh: USF isnt dependant on ammo if the player is focusing on lmg (cheese), same for UKF kinda.

As soon as allies got indirect fire to stomp hmg, double LMG/BAR squads are unstoppable with inf, and thats stupid.


Just a crazy idea: When tommie squads are limited to 1 bren, how about giving them this sexy smoke nade from commandos? The one which gives them light cover but doesnt act as sightblocker. Would be awesome to see this! Players using the smoke for light cover in order to compensate the bren nerf (with cover bonus from tommie squad)

BARs are like STGs. This means that it's not a weapon you can A-move your way to victory; though they are pretty good.

Do note that USF needs something that they can do better than the other factions in the late-game; especially now that we have lowered their early-game potency.

Just imagine you got 5 man pgrens with all kind of nades. I mean your opponent got that shit to deal with that. Impossible? That's how USF extacly works dude. People are complaining about "powerfull" infantry of OKW (in fact, 5th vet volks with stg still get losing to 3rd vet cons with ppsh pretty bad, as well as 3rd vet rifles) and obers come to late with most shitty start ever (without 2nd vet and higher, they are only suppose to fight with cons without any weapons upgrade. C'mon, something needs to be done in this state.

playercard pls

Just imagine you got 5 man pgrens with all kind of nades. I mean your opponent got that shit to deal with that. Impossible? That's how USF extacly works dude. People are complaining about "powerfull" infantry of OKW (in fact, 5th vet volks with stg still get losing to 3rd vet cons with ppsh pretty bad, as well as 3rd vet rifles) and obers come to late with most shitty start ever (without 2nd vet and higher, they are only suppose to fight with cons without any weapons upgrade. C'mon, something needs to be done in this state.

Volks loose even at mid range against ppSh
Cons ?

Just imagine you got 5 man pgrens with all kind of nades. I mean your opponent got that shit to deal with that. Impossible? That's how USF extacly works dude. People are complaining about "powerfull" infantry of OKW (in fact, 5th vet volks with stg still get losing to 3rd vet cons with ppsh pretty bad, as well as 3rd vet rifles) and obers come to late with most shitty start ever (without 2nd vet and higher, they are only suppose to fight with cons without any weapons upgrade. C'mon, something needs to be done in this state.

+1

Just imagine you got 5 man pgrens with all kind of nades. I mean your opponent got that shit to deal with that. Impossible? That's how USF extacly works dude. People are complaining about "powerfull" infantry of OKW (in fact, 5th vet volks with stg still get losing to 3rd vet cons with ppsh pretty bad, as well as 3rd vet rifles) and obers come to late with most shitty start ever (without 2nd vet and higher, they are only suppose to fight with cons without any weapons upgrade. C'mon, something needs to be done in this state.

Every faction have some advantages (exept Ost, becose OKW do it all better, what OST have). Deal with it, this is not chess.


If the game benefit from the same infantry, no problem. Infantry may vary a color uniforms, but with same power. Shermans gets PzIV stats. E8 will be non-doc with Panther stats and price. Add some heavy USF TD with JagdTiger parametres.

Shermans gets PzIV stats. E8 will be non-doc with Panther stats and price. Add some heavy USF TD with JagdTiger parametres.

If they get the same costs, I would even be all for that. Considering the cost of the Ostheer Panzer IV in relation to its performance, the Sherman offers a much better deal (being almost as good at dealing with medium tanks, significantly better at dealing with infantry, and having duct tape right off the start). And seeing as the Ostheer Panther is not much better off, I also doubt that many players would be happy about the equalisation of the Easy 8.

Over the last year, we have seen the tank superiority (what was left of it) on the Axis side being obliterated, with nothing in the slightest being done to make up for it. The Sherman got multiple rounds of buffs without any cost increasements, and the British tanks have been punching significantly above their weight since release (for the most part, the Churchill is the overwhelming exception to that). Hell, even the Soviets saw some rework to their tanks (with the IS-2 in the end receiving the same frontal armour as the King Tiger, while Tiger I didn't see anything but nerfs). The claim that Axis tanks are a better investment for their cost is a pure lie at this point - and the only exception to that in the other direction is the StuG, which is kept in check by its numerous downsides.

If they get the same costs, I would even be all for that. Considering the cost of the Ostheer Panzer IV in relation to its performance, the Sherman offers a much better deal (being almost as good at dealing with medium tanks, significantly better at dealing with infantry, and having duct tape right off the start). And seeing as the Ostheer Panther is not much better off, I also doubt that many players would be happy about the equalisation of the Easy 8.

Over the last year, we have seen the tank superiority (what was left of it) on the Axis side being obliterated, with nothing in the slightest being done to make up for it. The Sherman got multiple rounds of buffs without any cost increasements, and the British tanks have been punching significantly above their weight since release (for the most part, the Churchill is the overwhelming exception to that). Hell, even the Soviets saw some rework to their tanks (with the IS-2 in the end receiving the same frontal armour as the King Tiger, while Tiger I didn't see anything but nerfs). The claim that Axis tanks are a better investment for their cost is a pure lie at this point - and the only exception to that in the other direction is the StuG, which is kept in check by its numerous downsides.

I welcome changes in price. Some units overperforming for they price, then it is a good price (fuel, manpower) increase. For example Cromwell need 10 fuel increase. But all need to understand that each side has a certain advantage.