The issue with Ostheer Tech 4.

Before starting I would like to explain that I will be using the following numbering:
T0 for base building for all factions and thus the numbering will be come different, resource will presented as Manpower(MP)/Fuel(FU)/Munition(MU)

Imo Ostheer T4 is simply not worth it. This primary a diversity issue but also in some extent a balance issue.

Tech cost faction and what comes with it:

USF
Show Spoiler
Total 790/265


WEHR
Show Spoiler
Total 750/250/60 (edited)

Soviet
Show Spoiler
Total 910/225

OKW
Show Spoiler
Total 1060/260

UKF
Show Spoiler
Total 920/255

From this numbers one can see that Ostheer T4 (if one does not skip a building) requires almost the same as unlocking every tech for other factions.

To make thing worse:
1) Teching is linear and is rather difficult to skip building.
2) Other factions can choose if and when they want tech specifics upgrades and buildings
3) Ostheer T4 provides 2 very expensive specialized vehicles and player have to chose one of them in most cases.
4) Unlike (and similar to Soviets) UKF or OKW or USF (T0+3 Tiers) do not get any bonuses for unlocking T4 although it a higher Tier than other faction.
5) Allied TD are very effective at hitting and penetrating both vehicles from Ostheer T4 even at ranges 60.

Suggestions that might help not all them need to be implemented:

Tone down all TDs by making heavy TD more inaccurate especially at range 60 and medium TDs (Su-76/Stug) less chance to penetrate heavily armored vehicles. Also lowering damage of all stock TDs to 160. (If KT becomes an issue some TDs could get bonuses against it.)

Give some bonuses for building all Tier (maybe a 5 entity for an Ostheer infantry)

Allow Ostheer to have the option to go only T3 or T4 by swapping Ostwind with Brumbar. Both units will have to adjusted (Brumbar probably more expensive but better frontal armor for less lethality)(Ostwind either cheaper or far more efficient).

Make a multi-role main battle tank available in T4. This can be achieved by either giving a tank gun to the Panther and making the doctrinal Tiger more of TD or by making Tiger stock and Panther doctrinal.

Give Panther AP/HE switchable rounds.


(credits to Firespark for tech cost info)

1. Your starting mp was 440 when I last time played. Which is extra squad after tier1.
2. Even idiots not building tiers 3 and 4 toghether. You can skip t3 without losing in army composition. You would stiill have every unit type your oponent has and more if t4 is chosen. So minus 260/75 to your price tag revealing that t4 is cheap as shit considering heavy units it unlocks.

570/215 !!! That is real price tag of this t4. So whine is about how cheapness is expensive.

Yeah, have fun trying to win against Sherman's, Cromwells and T-34s with only PaKs and Panzerschrecks, I'm sure that's going to work just fine. And send me your replays of pulling that off against a noteworthy opponent…

Yeah, have fun trying to win against Sherman's, Cromwells and T-34s with only PaKs and Panzerschrecks, I'm sure that's going to work just fine. And send me your replays of pulling that off against a noteworthy opponent…

Dont Feed aaa, really.

Actually Brits can't skip tiers, and neither can the Soviets skip T3 and go directly to Tier 4.

@OP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29Mg6Gfh9Co

That's the type of balance threads which are perhaps meant to be rightful, but in the end fails badly because countless elements (e.g. type and cost of units, and their impact, and that Soviets have T1&T2 as one tier, various unlocks and strategies, commanders, and other countless things) were not included to provide a rather biased description of a something being OP/UP. Grass is always greener elsewhere, if you look at your field with sunglasses on. Just accept the asymmetrical design; if you don't like how OST's Tiers are, play a different faction.


The problem of OST T4 is not T4 itself, it is the Panther that is UP. That's all.

T4 is a bonus tier suited to be played with Commanders not having the Tiger.

As JohnSmith said, the problem is not the T4 but the panther.

T4, like the entire Ostheer lategame, is dictated by allied army composition.

Most Allied players expect Axis to try and use their heaviest tanks in some fashion. And for Brits and USF countering axis heavies is identical to countering axis mediums. As a result, T4 is usually only worth it for a panzerwerfer or two to barrage mounting ATGs and AT infantry blobs.

t4 cost 200/50 not 260/75 and t3 is 240/60 for wher. So if you skip t3, but build everything else t4 is only 190.

ost t4 needs a generalist tank. Panther is too AT focused and Brumbar is too AI focused and having 1 of each is 300+ feul, on top of the costs of teching to t4.

t4 cost 200/50 not 260/75 and t3 is 240/60 for wher. So if you skip t3, but build everything else t4 is only 190.

thanks for reading and for the useful input guess the place I took the numbers from was not updated since the July 21 Update patch (which is totally my fault since I should had doubled checked), I will update as soon as possible.

ost t4 needs a generalist tank. Panther is too AT focused and Brumbar is too AI focused and having 1 of each is 300+ feul, on top of the costs of teching to t4.

Lie. brumbbar just beat up any medium tank head on.

and to anyone that will be a denier...

•  
  

  0

  VS

  Zero

  (◣╬◢) ♠ Yoker ♣

  Trolling brits

  by: zerocoh map: Faymonville Approach

  12

  -

I think T4 for Ostheer is pretty optional. You can play the game and be successful with T3, even T2 but if you secure enough fuel, panther brumm and panzerwerfer (which doesn't werf panzers btw) are powerful tools to seal the deal.

My own personal opinion on the matter, I think that whatever changes to T3/T4 should achieve the following goals:
- At the end of the day, all factions converge to the same power level by the end of the match (equal does not mean same)
- Ostheer should be given the opportunity to tech both T3 and T4 (i.e., not get burried in Crushwell/SU76 spam)
- Ostheer should be required to tech both buildings by the end of the match (i.e., Stug spam shouldn't scale so well); i.e., should not remain an optional upgrade

To achieve all of this, I think the best option would be:
- Make it actually, practically feasible for OST to choose which tier they want to go for first (T3/T4)
- Reduce the distance between T3/T4, so that OST doesn't become "trapped" in the wrong tier
- (obviously) readjust the strengths/weakenesses of the units therein, so that each tier has a soft weakness to something (to make both tiers necessary by the end) e.g., spamming Stug's shouldn't hardcounter heavies, and spamming Panthers shouldn't hardcounter TD's
- Optionally, reduce the timing until the first "shock" unit for OST can come out. That way, OST gets to experience one part of the game where it is the allies that have to anticipate the move (which is the inverse of the light-vehicle phase).

Currently, T4 is a very bad option to go for (Brummbar's great but expensive, Panzerwerfer is too niche and Panther is utterly useless). Thus, T3 is an one-way. Then, since OST gets hounded so hard by SU76/Crushwell, it tends to stay there.

The current choice of T3/T4 units make it so that T3 is a generalist tier, mostly suited for cautions defensive play, whereas (an idealized) T4 is for breakthrough units. If everything else fails, we can always reshuffle units in tiers a bit.

Regarding teching cost comparisons:
- I think you shouldn't be including the FRP upgrade for OKW. It is entirely optional, and in many modes this is skipped. Otherwise you also have to include the forward assembly/FRP thingy for UKF.
- The other thing about teching costs is that certain teching paths are almost never picked. For instance very few people research all 3 USF tiers.
- Certain optional upgrades are also very often skipped, or left for the very end (after all units have been unlocked). Mills bomb is a good example of a never-buy upgrade.
- The rest of the UKF upgrades come down to style, but it's a 50% split between infantry upgrades and a fast Cromwell. A good reason for that is that those optional upgrades cost way too much manpower, whereas the direct skip-everything tech costs way too little manpower

Why bother arguing. This game is half assed anyways. In all aspects.

Regarding teching cost comparisons:
- I think you shouldn't be including the FRP upgrade for OKW. It is entirely optional, and in many modes this is skipped. Otherwise you also have to include the forward assembly/FRP thingy for UKF.
- The other thing about teching costs is that certain teching paths are almost never picked. For instance very few people research all 3 USF tiers.
- Certain optional upgrades are also very often skipped, or left for the very end (after all units have been unlocked). Mills bomb is a good example of a never-buy upgrade.
- The rest of the UKF upgrades come down to style, but it's a 50% split between infantry upgrades and a fast Cromwell. A good reason for that is that those optional upgrades cost way too much manpower, whereas the direct skip-everything tech costs way too little manpower

The information was not presented as viable tech paths but as the total tech cost of each faction.

This also highlights that Ostheer tech is both linear and has to practically unlock everything while gaining to little for doing so.

OKW FRP was included because the USF Major provides the same.

UKF Forward Assembly (250MP) was not included because it act as Ostheer reinforcement bunker+USF weapon racks+Artillery call-in+Garrison for emplacement and needs to be upgrade to FRP (200MP), and in my opinion would confuse things.

The information was not presented as viable tech paths but as the total tech cost of each faction.

This also highlights that Ostheer tech is both linear and has to practically unlock everything while gaining to little for doing so.

OKW FRP was included because the USF Major provides the same.

UKF Forward Assembly (250MP) was not included because it act as Ostheer reinforcement bunker+USF weapon racks+Artillery call-in+Garrison for emplacement and needs to be upgrade to FRP (200MP), and in my opinion would confuse things.

As pointed out by myself and others, it is pointless to consider the total cost of tech paths if at the very end the units are useless. In addition, as Mr.Smith underlines, it is very easy otherwise to provide non-objective data (e.g. total tech costs vs viable tech costs) to force a biased perspective on the balance of both sides. One techs to obtain units and combat advantages, and not to merely complete a tech tree. Otherwise, you could easily say that a KT costs over 500 fuel, and thus should behave like 500 fuel unit.